The Art of Commercialization

Paper by Michael Gonzalez. Viewed on DVD.

Who could forget the sense of wonder and awe the first time they watched Jurassic Park (1993), or the terror and fear after seeing Jaws (1975)? Many of Spielberg’s movies have imprinted a lasting effect on audiences around the world, but some critics say that effect has been a negative one (Mott, Cheryl). Spielberg takes the classic Hollywood format and tells a great story, but his films are often found to be empty in meaning and void of depth. “You won’t learn the transcendent beauty of a Stan Brakhage film from ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’” (Kohn). Spielberg’s status as a great director, however, is undisputed, and has several traits that distinguish him as quite the auteur. Most identifiably are his thematic inclusions of trying to return “home,” with lead roles being often being performed by children. These traits assist Spielberg’s vision in his movies to emotionally connect with his audience, rather than think (Tomasula). Due to Spielberg’s success in the film industry, mainstream American cinema returned to the days of Hollywood’s Golden Age, ending the reign of risky, creative cinema, and transitioned film from a form of art into a commercial product.

The most blatant indication of this is Spielberg’s inclusion of product placement in his films. Spielberg is notorious for product placement, and essentially was the first to establish it in major films. One defense for product placement is that it immerses the audience deeper into the film and makes the movie seem more real, in the sense that it takes place in our own world. A much more likely reason for any director to purposefully add product placement is the revenue that it would rake in from advertisers on a major motion picture. Reeses and Coca Cola are both prominently displayed in E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial (1982), seen throughout the movie in multiple areas, Star Wars action figures are played with by Elliott as he shows them off to E.T., and another Star Wars costume stands out when E.T. recognizes Yoda, supposedly as one of his alien neighbors. Empire of the Sun (1987) is a little less obvious with its product placement, but it still exists. A running gag in the movie is set up where one character asks another if they want a Hershey’s bar, and if the response is an affirmative, the instigator responds with, “So do I kid. You got one?” A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (2001), takes place in a not too distant future, and doesn’t have any glaringly obvious signs of product placement, as they would stick out too much in a world where Coca Cola or Mercedes Benz might not exist anymore. Though, another form of capitilzing on popular brands is used, as actor Haley Joel Osment, nominated and winner of countless awards for his roles in both The Sixth Sense (1999) and Pay it Forward (2000), is the only person Spielberg is interested in casting for the lead role of David. This brings up another sense of Spielberg’s style in his movies: casting well established actors.

Spielberg became so popular and so wealthy that he had the budget and influence to cast any actors he wanted for his films. However, a good portion of his films included casts of young children. E.T. (1982) has a young Henry Thomas and Drew Barrymore, virtual unknowns at the time of filming. Empire of the Sun (1987) had a young Christian Bale performing, who auditioned against 4000 other child actors. He was most likely only cast due to Spielberg’s wife, at the time, recommending him based on her experiences with him in a television movie (Wikipedia). Haley Joel Osment is an exception in this list with his performance in A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (2001) as he had already proven himself as a good actor, but Drew Barrrymore and Christian Bale went on to become famous actors after their debut performances in Spielberg’s films. Either Spielberg knows how to pick actors, aside from existing popularity, or he knows how to work with children, as well as the camera, to display an actor in an amazing light.

Spielberg is criticized for lacking creativity, but what he does do, in the classical Hollywood sense, he does with brilliance. His genius is perfecting the Golden Age formula by knowing how to tell the story, and how to involve the audience on a level that will make the film memorable (Rowley). Films like Hitchcock’s Rear Window (1954) and Psycho (1960) followed the same classical Hollywood format, but Hitchock is able to connect to his audience through psychological means. Intense moments of silence, unknown dangers clearly present but not seen, and diegetic sound to keep the audience feeling a sense of realism aid Hitchcock’s thrillers in keeping the audience on the edge of their seats. Hitchcock made you think during the movie, and left you thinking after it as well. If thinking and feeling were antonyms, Spielberg would be Hitchock’s opposite.

Spielberg doesn’t attempt to psyche you out. His films are designed to manipulate emotion, and on that level is how he connects to the audience and distances himself from the more scrupulous critics. Throughout E.T. (1982), we hear the same melody played several times, with different instruments or at different speeds, to convey a different feeling to sense. After ET is pronounced dead, and Elliott is talking to his fallen friend, the music is slow and quiet, but as Elliot walks away and notices the flower, a single flute plays the melody a little louder, to inspire a little hope. When Elliot runs back to ET, the music builds up, and when ET reveals he is alive, the music crescendos, emphasizing the astonishment with the same melody that was played throughout the scene. This melody is now known as the theme for E.T. (1982), and is not only a tool for emotion, but for promoting the movie itself. The repetition of the tune throughout the movie and emotional connections it makes allows audiences to identify the movie a lot easier. Spielberg does this in countless movies, including Jaws (1975), Close Encounters (1977), Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), and even Schindler’s List (1993).

Empire of the Sun (1987) starts off with the main character, Jim, singing in a choir of boys. Jim sings the solo of the Welsh song in its traditional Celtic language, Suo Gan, about a mother comforting her child. As Shanghai falls into war with Japan, Jim is separated from his parents, and goes on a journey of self and worldly discovery as he tries to survive without them. After Jim is placed in an internment camp, he witnesses three Japanese pilots performing their ceremony before flying on a mission. Inspired, Jim begins to sing, and the camera cuts to multiple characters that have gotten to know Jim in the camp. Their reactions of surprise are displayed on camera, as it cuts from one person to the next, including the Sargeant in charge of the camp, all who appear to be moved by the beauty of the song. The scene goes to show that multiple characters with different personalities, backgrounds, and affiliations, can all feel the same thing, and the emotion is conveyed to the audience. At the end of the film, Jim is in the care of the U.S. military, amongst other kids separated from their parents. Jim stands in the group of kids, waiting for their parents to find them, and Jim’s parents appear. For a moment, there is no recognition between parent and child, but when they do see who the other is, they embrace. The song plays in the background, releasing the audiences tension, effectively reducing any emotional defenses in the final moments of the film (Ballard).

A.I: Artificial Intelligence (2001), Empire of the Sun (1987), and E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial (1982) are all films about returning home. This is a popular theme in Spielberg’s films, most likely stemming from his youthful longing for his parents to return to their marriage. A.I. follows the “life” of a robot, coined “Mecha” in the film for “mechanical,” as he tries to become a real boy so his mother will love him. A little boy who just wants to be loved is the perfect plot for a Spielberg film, and yet the movie has a lot more depth than most other films of his. Incidentally, the film was initiated by Stanley Kubrick, the genius behind 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and passed onto Spielberg after Kubrick’s death. With a majority of the work accomplished, Spielberg cast roles and added his touch to the film. Both Kubrick and Spielberg experienced alienation in their young ages for being jewish, and so the film held a personal connection to both. While being rich with thought provoking ideas such as the ethical issue of loving an object created by man, the film can easily distract the lazy viewer with Spielberg’s flashy lights and “look at me” cinematography. The film was more of an homage to Kubrick rather than a representation of Spielberg’s work.

Spielberg’s films have been analyzed and reviewed more than anyone cares to admit. Calling him shallow is a shallow act in itself as it ignores the subtext and genius that underlies Spielberg’s motives behind a film. Critics no longer battle back and forth over the status of Spielberg’s quality as a director, and shy away from dropping his name in conversation. The quality that Spielberg achieves in his films is for the sake of commercialization, with easily identifiable traits and easy to identify with characters, but it makes for an entertaining movie. That entertainment can attract new lovers of cinema to the world, and be the guiding steps to a deeper world full of deeper meaning. Critics cursed Spielberg for his films, but they were good. The people that watch bad films are the ones who are going to watch Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) six times and call it a masterpiece anyways.

Bibliography

Mott, Donald R., and Cheryl M. Saunders. “Steven Spielberg.” Film Quaterly 40.4 (1987): 30-31. JSTOR. Web. 28 July 2012.
Foster, Dennis A. “J. G. Ballard’s Empire of the Senses: Perversion and the Failure of Authority.” PMLA 108.3 May (1993): 519-32. JSTOR. Web. 28 July 2012.
Kohn, Eric. “Critic’s Notebook: Putting Steven Spielberg on Trial.” Indiewire. Ed. Eric Kohn. N.p., 21 Dec. 2011. Web. 28 July 2012. .
Tomasulo, Frank P. “Citizen Spielberg and Directed by Steven Spielberg: Poetics of the Contemporary Hollywood Blockbuster.” Journal of Film and Video 63.4 (2011): 53-59. Project MUSE. Web. 28 July 2012.
Rowley, Stephen. “Clever Meets Stupid: Criticism, Theory, and Spielberg Apologists.” Senses of Cinema 47 (2008). Web. 28 July 2012.