LA Times (6/25/08): “Hancock, Obama and the summer of heroes”
Interesting read from “Rachael Abramowitz, delving into the onslaught of superhero movies this summer, then considering the Obama phenomenon in that context. Some experts weigh in on why superheroes are so popular in today’s cultural climate:
Author Peter Biskind, who’s written books about movies and culture in the ’50s, ’70s, and ’90s, assures me that superheroes return with bad times. Superman reached iconic status during World War II. The gas crisis and economic malaise of the Carter years begat Superman again — with the Christopher Reeve incarnation. And now, well, given the sub-prime mortgage crisis, the morass in Iraq and oil prices, we need Superman, Batman, Spider-Man and Iron Man, all at once.
Some suggest that the wave of superhero movies is due largely to technological advances in digital filmmaking:
Basinger notes that the recent wave of superheroes is in part driven by the technological revolution in movie making. “When I was little, a superhero movie was either a B-movie, or a serial. You couldn’t do it right. You didn’t have the special effects. You didn’t have the CGI. In my day, George Reeves was Superman. You could see the wires holding him up and his leotard was baggy. As kids, we found that a hoot. Now it’s different. You can make the comic book work come to life.”
Screenwriter Akiva Goldsman weighs in about Hollywood’s changing take on superheroes:
Akiva Goldsman, the Oscar-winning writer who produced “Hancock” along with action maestro Michael Mann (“Heat,” “Miami Vice”), points out that the psychology of Hollywood’s superheroes has actually deepened of late. “Our view of heroes is evolving. They used to be pretty two-dimensional, and just good guys or gals. Now they seem to be human beings that have stumbled and have to find their way again. We want our heroes a little more moody. We want our heroes to struggle a little more and earn the chance to be righteous, and not just imagine it’s a birthright.”
But leave it to another screenwriter David Koepp to have the final word on the subject:
As screenwriter David Koepp (“Spider-Man,” “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”) notes: “Hollywood is only obsessed with superheroes because audiences seem to be. As soon as audiences are not, Hollywood will scrape them off their shoe.”
I’m curious to see Hancock. Certainly I’m intrigued to watch a darkly comedic take on a deeply flawed superhero Protagonist, but I’m also interested to check out the audience’s reaction to Hancock’s flawed superhero efforts, such as saving a beached whale by flinging it out to sea, only to smash into a boat and sink it. Is that just a cinematic joke or does it represent a kind of ‘deconstructionist’ take on the superhero genre, where the filmmakers are winking at the viewer: hey, we all know what superheroes can do, we’ve seen everything, now let’s have a bit of fun with it. Like the movie Scream (1996) played around with the ‘rules’ of horror movies, characters even talking about these conventions within the film, does Hancock represent the next spiral in Hollywood’s evolution of the superhero genre?