The Reality TV Paradox
Great documentaries are lucky documentaries. The greatness of such films
like “Hoop Dreams,” or the “Seven Up” series rely greatly on the unlikely
coincidences that somehow were recorded by a camera. Would anybody have cared
about the Rolling Stones documentary “Gimme Shelter,” if it did not just happen
to accidentally chronicle a murder at a rock concert? Would the mockumentary
“Borat” be as hilarious if Sacha Baron Cohen had not coincidentally hitchhiked
onto that particular RV filled with those particular outrageous frat boys?
Now at the same time imagine that you were a movie or television studio
that is attempting to create a documentary that will be predictably successful.
How can you produce a predictably successful product that relies on
coincidence? If you don’t do anything you are at the whim of fate and the
documentary will either be bad or good depending on what you so happen to
record. But if you do things to make sure that dramatic coincidences do occur,
you are essentially writing the documentary, which in essence makes it cease to
be a documentary. In the end, like much reality TV, you get a product that
lacks dramatic effect because unlike real documentaries it is untruthful and
manipulative and at the same time lacks the production value and
professionalism of a documentary that is sincerely untruthful and manipulative,
or in other words, a fictional movie.
I bring this up because, “The Hunger Games,” is a fictional movie about
a reality TV show, and as such piles on layers of almost absurd complexity on
how the characters are perceived depending on whether it is by us the movie
audience, or the TV audience in the movie. In other words, the underlying
emotions of a scene are generally undermined by the realization that it is all
an act. And how much can you care about a person (even if it was a life and
death situation) if you knew they were mugging at a camera at the same time?
I have given this movie three stars because I enjoyed it okay. But I want
it also to be known that I have never seen a movie quite like this one, and that
affirmation of originality should be seen as a sort of moral victory at least.
The story takes place in a future where the United States has split itself into
12 districts and hosts an annual game that pits two randomly selected teenagers
from each district into a fight to the death gladiatorial tournament. From
district 12, there comes the 18-year-old Katniss Everdeen (played here by the 25-year-old Jennifer Lawrence)
who volunteers for the tournament to save her 12-year-old sister from being
selected. Also selected from her district is Peeta Mellark (played by Josh
Hutcherson). They are whisked away from their poor coal-mining district to the
big city where they are mentored by Haymitch Abernathy (played by Woody
Harrellson) to be likable, because that is the best way to win these particular games. In other words, the games are not real. They are fake reality TV. Apparently a good old fight-to-the-death would not be predictably exciting enough. There is a whole behind the scenes room of
producers here who manipulate the games. This can be done by releasing forest fires or releasing lethal wild animals into the tournament space whenever they feel it will add some spice. The most blatant form of cheating is
to get sponsored. If you are “likable” enough, the head sponsors will send you a parachute containing a survival
kits that can give you an edge over the competition. In other words, the
“Hunger games” are bullshit. And to play into the whole “getting people to like
you” survival game, Katniss and Peeta pretend a romance. This is original in
that it is the central love story of the movie, and admittedly, I have never seen a
movie so willingly and transparently admit that its central love story is
contrived bullshit.
I suppose we are now at a point of idiotic media saturation where the
only way to seem truthful is to exert the highest amount of cynicism.
Everything about “The Hunger Games” is fake. The games are fake. The capital
city that the games take place is composed of fake 3D generated architecture. The
hairstyles and fashion of the inhabitants are grotesque, garish, and
nonsensically exaggerated. (Actually I would admit this is perhaps some of the
best effects of the movie. Whoever designed the costume and makeup had a field
day with this movie. It is done much better than the action and done so well,
that at least three quarters of this movie could be deemed a chick flick.)
Every other tribute in combat is a one-dimensional stereotype whether it is the
evil Cato (Big Evil Guy) or the innocent Rue (Small Innocent Girl). In
fact, the only distinguishable human being seems to be the main character,
Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence, who when you think about it, may
be the fakest character of all.
Oh boy, what did I mean by that? Well, Katniss is the type of person
that does not like to bend toward conformity or try to get people to like her.
She just wants to be herself. Now, whom does that remind you of? If you
said you and only you, you’re an idiot. That should remind you of everybody.
That description describes everybody. In fact, I would argue that Jennifer
Lawrence’s best acting asset is her ability to act blank slate and call it
individualism. This character has no foibles or eccentricities. It is just
Jennifer Lawrence in her plain/beautiful persona having strong feelings for her
family and a survival instinct. You would be hard-pressed to find a human being
with neither of those characteristics. Do you think it just may be the best
marketing ploy ever to take this one-size-fits-all persona and throw it into a
story with so much fakery that it seems real by comparison? It would appeal to
every person who feels that they are the only real person in a world of phonies
(which I would argue is a real cliché way to feel).
The phenomenal success of “The Hunger Games,” should lead to some
hilarious movie studio board meetings. I can just see it now: a bunch of middle
aged rich guys brainstorming on how they can capitalize on a trend based on the
utter distrust of manipulative media because it is ruled by a bunch of middle aged rich
guys bent on manipulating people for profit. Vampires were easy. Now I suppose we will have a slew of movies made expressly
for profit that aim to expose cliché and promote distrust in manipulative money-grubbing movies. It’s a
shame that irony can’t kill.
No comments:
Post a Comment