Reliving the Twentieth Century in HD

One of the common
quips about the movie industry is that it’s all descended into sequels and
remakes. 
Yet paradoxically, this is what
audiences continue to go to.
  Studios
bank on known “intellectual properties,” and on a kind of product cycle that
keeps certain stories refreshed in the home video market.
  The film industry since the turn of the
centur
y has increasingly embraced the remake trend so much that they’ve even
shied away from calling them “remakes” and instead coined the trendier
communication age term “reboot,” which likens the products of the culture
industry to computer programs, the old stories somehow reduced to marketing
appeal, the ones and zeroes translating to big box office dollars.


But the biggest
films, the tent pole productions which devour the budget and resources of
Hollywood, are basically all familiar. 
Everything from the 1980s and 1990s has returned.  Star Wars, Star Trek, The Alien, Terminator,
Predator, Ghostbusters, Jurassic Park, Planet of the Apes, Mad Max, It, Blade
Runner, and all those familiar superhero and comic book IPs are all back,
Spider-man remarkably remade 3 times in the last 15 years.
  On TV, X-Files has returned, even sitcoms
like Full House, Rosanne, along with even Twin Peaks, perhaps the least likely
revival.
  We’re in the grip of a
retromania.
  The past is in some ways is
culturally no longer past, or rather, the recent past and the present have been
culturally blended so that things twenty years ago don’t even seem like they
were twenty years ago.
 



In his book
“Ghosts of My Life: Writings on Depression, Hauntology and Lost Futures,” Mark
Fisher makes the case that our sense of cultural time has stalled since around
the late 1990s, where the culture industry entered into a perpetual present
where the production of the present was indistinguishable from the past and by
doing so erased the future. 
Fisher’s
example is the music industry, pointing out that there have not been new
musical forms or sounds since the 1990s.
 
Music in 2017 sounds no different than music in 1997.  If a hit song from 2017 was somehow
transmitted back in time to 1997, it would likely pass as something
current
then.
  In fact, it would probably use
samples of music composed in the 1990s.
 
By contrast, music from 1994 has a quality so different than 1974 that
it would sound new and
alien.
  Rather the
ubiquitous sounds of a hit makers like Adele, Vampire Weekend, Arcade Fire, and
the Arctic Monkeys and so forth have a sound familiar to the 1960s, 70s and
80s.
  The retro quality of the present is
so familiar that the term retro has no significance.
  Retro is rather the norm because there is
basically nothing new being made.
  On the
radio, we can recognize a sound of the 1970s or 80s or 90s.
  Is there a sound of the 00s or 10s?  People in the 1980s would have never imagined
that folks in the 2010s would be listening to music indistinguishable from the
1980s.
  What will folks living in the
2030s listen to?
  That old twentieth
century sound?



As Fisher says,
what we are really doing is re-living the 20th century in high definition. 
While the forms of music and film has not
changed, the ubiquitous availability of media on everything from smart tvs to
smart phones has kept the near past in suspended animation, available at the
swipe of a finger.
  We keep hearing about
next new thing with a snazzy nicknames – 3D, 4K, OLED, UHD, VR, 5G – but the
media played on all this stuff is all retro.
 
We no longer even have a vision of the future.  Things that are futuristic too belong to the
past – like Blade Runner, Tron, Robocop, the music of Vangelis, Wendy Carlos
and Kraftwerk.
  Futurism is an activity
of the past, and tragically spells out our inability to imagine our own future
from a culture disjointed from cultural time.



I’m hard pressed
to think of a major film franchise that is really new. 
Is there a popular film franchise newer than The Bourne movies or The Matrix?  Which, by the way, is also
being brought back by Warner Brothers.
 
No word yet on the casting of Keanu Reeves, which through CGI, they can
make look twenty years younger.
  This is
the most recent plundering of the late twentieth century – making still living
actors like Sigourney Weaver and Robert DeNiro look younger, as if they can go
back and fill in gaps in their film cannon – the eighties films they never got
to.
 



That’s a big
theme of all of the reboots – filling in the gaps with prequels and “stand
alones,” to tell the stories before, between and after the narratives of the
original films. 
Star Wars is
particularly guilty of this, its revival “The Force Awakens” is an overhyped
almost a precise remake of the original film.
  
It’s out of a side quest that “Rogue One” was made.  Next up is a film about young Han Solo.  As for Alien, Ridley Scott has busied himself
by making a series of films to purge the secret origins out of the mysterious
creature.
  What once was an enigma of
pure chest-popping id has now been explained away in Alien: Covenant.
  Same with Planet of the Apes prequels to
explain away how the apes grew intelligent and took over.
  The mysterious and enigmatic parts of the
science fiction that provoked our imaginations it seems writers are racing to
fill in, give them explanations.
 


But we somehow
don’t buy into it – the remakes taking up the crumbs of cultural memory,
overshadowed by the original. 
We watch
remakes and reboots somehow conditionally, somehow knowing “yeah, I know it’s a
remake, but …” or, the common refrain, “they did a good job (at imitating the
original ballyhooed classic).”
  Despite
lacking the mystique of the original productions, still we try to spackle in
the past.



It seems that
that’s a big part of it. 
Since there is
no cultural present, since we are frozen in a timeless presence, we occupy
ourselves with filling in the gaps of the imagined cultural past.
  This is the mystique of a musical form like
vaporware, or synthwave – the sound of the eighties that sounds more eighties
than the eighties.
  It’s a key part of
Stranger Things, the hit Netflix show that is so full of 1980s film homages of
our saturated media memory that its sole purpose is to fill in our the cultural
gaps, aptly described as the collaboration that Steven Spielberg and Stephen
King never made.
  As King said himself in
a tweet, “it’s like watching Stephen King’s greatest hits.”



These popular forms
can be very good but what is tragic about the situation is there is nothing
new. 
Where is the new Star Wars?  We are haunted by the absence of the new, by
the inability to imagine futures in our society or our fictions, Groundhog
day’d and trapped in a cultural interregnum, a time out of joint.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s