ACUMEN
Friday, December 12, 2008 • Page C7
Style over substance key in modern cinema Digital effects too often used to mask lack of story
S
By Sam Watermeier
tanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey” is now our reality. As that film predicted, the savagery of man has evolved into the savagery of technology. Filmmakers especially are becoming slaves to it as they rely more and more on special effects to reach their audiences. Look at “Transformers.” The entire film revolves around robots--cold, calculating machines. The humans are an afterthought and they are merely supporting characters. In fact, as the film progresses, the humans become less lifelike and more blindly obedient to the technology around them just like today’s filmmakers. This is eerily similar to “2001” because the characters in that film were also flat in comparison to the nefarious master computer HAL. Kubrick’s 1968 film was supposed to be a warning for not only Hollywood but mankind. Sadly, now
40 years later, Hollywood is embracing style over substance more than ever. However, there is still hope. Here are some tips for recovering the humanity in movies… Stop making motion capture films- I am addressing this directly to Robert Zemeckis whose last two films (“The Polar Express,” “Beowulf”) were completely computer generated even though they were human dramas. The fact that he utilized digitalized versions of such fine actors (Tom Hanks, Ray Winstone) and digitally created all of their surroundings is embarrassing. The “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, a larger production than all of Zemeckis’ films combined, told its epic, fantasy story with all live actors and mostly real locations. Therefore, who is Zemeckis trying to impress exactly? He needs to understand that the emotion in his latest films will always seem artificial. There is an agenda behind his new, computer-based filmmaking that audiences can see right through, thus ruining the magic of movies. “Special effects without a story is a pretty boring thing”- It is ironic that George Lucas said this considering he only makes films these days to exploit new technology. He was the one that even tried to convince Spielberg to go digital for “Indiana Jones 4.” Anyway, filmmakers like Lucas need to stop basing their films around special effects.
2001: A space Odyssey (1968) The polar express (2004)
Audiences may go to movies for the spectacle, but they ultimately stay for the drama between the characters. This is the problem with the new “Star Wars” films- the story and characters are secondary to the spaceships and light sabers. Stop relying on visual effects- In “The Dark Knight,” a large truck literally somersaults through the air without any help from computer-generated technology. Take note, Michael Bay and George Lucas. Practical stunts are still an option. Take advantage of them. I realize I sound like a gigantic film snob in this article. However, don’t get me wrong, I love big event films as much as the next guy. I will be the first in line to see “Star Trek” and I will always crave spectacle. However, when style gets in the way of story, I have a problem. So, I ask (no, beg) readers to stop seeing films like “Transformers” (if that can even be called a film) and “10,000 B.C.” (Wait, did anyone even see that besides me?) These films simply, sadly encourage style triumphing over substance. I’d like to live in a world where special effects are not the number one priority and movies are not thought of as products before art. Readers like you can make that dream a reality. Sam Watermeier is a reporter for the HiLite. E-mail him at swatermeier@hilite.org.
transformers (2007)
The DARK KNIGHT (2008) yahoo! movies / photos
Music industry has history of change, development Eye of the Beholder By Renny Logan “Tin Pan Alley,” located in New York’s Union Square, served as the small beginning for the music industry. The name derived from the endless clatter of out-of-tune pianos as songwriters worked away at writing the next hit. As populations grew between 1860 and 1900 and communication improved, this small time alley became a big start. Traveling troupes and vaudeville gave Tin Pan Alley a means to introduce the music being composed to the public. Before today’s bands, songwriters composed music for anyone to play, making money from the sheet music sold. In households,
playing piano passed the time and provided entertainment. Like any other industry, that of music has grown and undergone many changes. Recording which began in 1894, didn’t officially establish itself as an industry until 1914. Soon, however, radio became its rival, competing with its scheduled programming and live broadcasts. As a result, record sales plummeted through the end of the 1920s. Then in 1917, the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) won its first case for royalties. Before this, no regulations forced radio to pay fines for using songs owned by Tin Pan Alley songwriters or the ASCAP. Now, radio had to pay royalties to the owner each time it played a song. While this might have helped Tin Pan Alley and the ASCAP for a short time, the damage had already been done. Soon, the film-making industry, located on the west coast, moved in. Since its start with silent films, the industry had always used popular music to attract audiences. And now that the music industry was down on profits, the filmmaking industry began purchasing publishing houses, which then moved to the west coast. Today, the industry continues to fluctuate. From records to cassettes to CDs to mp3s, the form changes and the style
may be new, but music is as loved as ever. Still, have all these changes been for the better? The music industry, like its best melodies, transitions fluidly. It has kept pace with society and stayed up-to-date. But there’s a nagging nostalgia about the way music used to be. As a 21st century kid, I don’t know first-hand what it was like to be there and to experience the changes. However, even now there’s a detachment from performer to audience that began with the radio. I didn’t have to live through it to know that. Of course today, you can go to a concert to feel connected… from across 20 rows of seats. There’s no intimacy. Even after radio was big, listeners wanted to feel a certain closeness to the performer. In the 1940s, Frank Sinatra was loved for his smooth, conversational voice. Sure, the quality of his voice was amazing, but listeners truly listened for the way he sang: as if he was speaking privately, individually to each member of the audience, across the airwaves. Today, we don’t have many Sinatras. Now more than ever, performers are detached in more ways than one. They have become intangible and larger than life with their extravagance. Renny Logan is a writing coach for the HiLite. Contact her at rlogan@hilite.org.