Star Wars, therefore, was the result of
Lucas having learnt that cynically calculated positivity could produce big
aesthetic breakthroughs. He duly approached the film in the spirit of filling
the lacunae whereby “Disney had abdicated its reign over the children’s market,
and nothing had replaced it.” His goal was thus to reactivate the sort of
affect that old-fashioned pirate and western matinee films used to produce –
creating a one-dimensional spectacle that would “reintroduce a kind of basic
morality. Everybody’s forgetting to tell ‘Hey, this is right and this is wrong.’”
The problem is that this sort of thing isn’t as easy to fake as Lucas thinks.
The history of American film is filled with artists like Walt Disney, Robert
Flaherty, Frank Capra, and Clarence Brown, whose own sensibilities pretty much
matched the warm-and-fuzzy-inner-child glow of their films. And the more
generic old kiddie matinees were, by and large, made by journeymen whose
imaginations presumably didn’t stretch much further than the complacent
products they were making. For a more cerebral artist like Lucas, however,
so filled with formalist ambitions and ideas, preaching a faith that you don’t
really believe is always going to create a lot of evasions and suppressions
that will inevitably return in all kinds of nasty forms. Hence, the sadism to
come.
This is
only the set-up, however, for the later scene where Jabba drops Luke into the
rancor pit, and one his porcine Gammorean guards, Jubnuk, accidently falls in
too. The first few moments down there, accordingly, are devoted to Jubnuk’s
pathetic attempts to get back up the drop shaft, and his plaintive squeals.
These switch to shrieks of terror as the grille is raised and the rancor
emerges and makes straight for him. Lucas makes sure the ensuing shot is held
for long enough that we really get to savour the spectacle of Jubnuk being
hoisted screaming up to the rancor’s mouth and devoured in one huge chomp.
Meanwhile, a few yards away, Luke seems no more concerned than if a twig or an
icicle had been broken.
After Return of the Jedi, Lucas was pretty
much finished as an original filmmaker, his subsequent projects adding nothing
to his original achievement with the Star
Wars trilogy. Howard the Duck would
prove totally unwatchable; and Willow,
while not nearly as bad, now in the age of Peter Jackson, seems more of
historical interest – for introducing audiences to the digital morph – than
something one watches for real entertainment. The Star Wars prequel trilogy would vastly expand the
imaginative/spectacular horizons of the original trilogy, but it would all be
on such a grand, de-personalized scale that the sadistic frissons of the first
films would not be recaptured. After this, therefore, it fell to Spielberg
alone to continue the evolution of the trend they had initiated, and Jurassic Park would be one of the most
significant milestones in this regard.
By the mid-1990s, in the wake of Jurassic Park, a new generation of blockbuster filmmakers had emerged – Roland Emmerich, Michael Bay, and Stephen Sommers being among its most prominent members – who had absorbed the lessons of Lucas and Spielberg’s kind of calculated sadism, and were raring to try it out for themselves. Emmerich’s 1992 film Universal Soldier – about Vietnam casualties being resurrected as genetically enhanced super-soldiers – doesn’t quite follow the pattern strictly, insofar as its sadism isn’t of the foreshadowing type discussed hitherto. What it does instead is have its hero and villain kill each other within the first five minutes, as a way of setting up a rationale whereby since they’re already sort of “dead” anyway, they and their fellow “Uni-Sols” can be abused and re-killed to absolutely any extent whatsoever throughout the course of the film.
The Rock nonetheless works brilliantly as a film, however, because Bay actually knows what he’s doing. The aesthetic of blockbuster sadism described here only goes horribly wrong when a film is helmed by a horrifically clueless director who has no idea how things actually signify or win empathy from the audience. And this brings us to Deep Rising and Stephen Sommers – the future dubious auteur of The Mummy, The Mummy Returns, Van Helsing, and G.I. Joe: Rise of the Cobra. With all of those films, however, he would obey the corporate Hollywood diktat to always neuter things for the PG-13 rating. With Deep Rising, however, he was allowed to embrace the R, and all the sadism that allows. The result is what is, without a doubt, the most horrible and repulsive film I have ever seen produced on a mainstream blockbuster scale.
The basic plot involves a luxury liner attacked by an absurd deep-sea octopus monster whose tentacles double as innumerable mouths and throats. Described as “some kind of strange off-shoot of the Archaea Ottoia family,” the creature, we are told, does not “eat” people. “No, they drink you. They drink you alive. Sucking all the fluids out of the body before excreting the skeletal remains.” This is the key bit of foreshadowing exposition, and if this sounds to you like it would be intensely, horrifically, agonizingly painful, the film makes clear in no uncertain terms that you’re right. There’s one particularly horrific sequence where we see the “heroes” (none of the character are really prepossessing or sympathetic) shoot open one of the Ottoia tentacles, only to see it spill out one of their previously-devoured comrades, who is now, thanks to CGI, partially-digested but still alive, and obviously in the most acute agony possible. In supplying a large cast just to have the maximum number of victims for this established fate, this film’s sadism is some of the purest I’ve ever seen.
All this would still be potentially workable if Sommers possessed a competent understanding of screen presence. Alas, he doesn’t, and in casting Kevin J. O’Connor as the insufferable “Joey Pantucci,” Sommers creates the most vivid example I’ve ever seen of what might be called the MUCHAS (Mind-bendingly, Unwatchably Creepy, Hateful, Annoying Sidekick) character. Seriously – every moment this guy is onscreen, there is only one candidate a viewer can possibly be thinking of for who needs to be drunk by the Ottoia tentacles next. And yet Sommers persists in the delusion that he’s somehow funny and likeable, and wins viewer empathy. This reaches an absurd peak at the end of the second act when, trapped by one the tentacle-maws, one of the (actually empathy-winning) mercenary-villains uses his last bullet trying to kill MUCHAS instead of sparing himself a gruesome and horrible death. Of course it doesn’t work and MUCHAS just does some more stupid “WTF?” mugging. Badly done sadism of this sort works very differently than the competently-done kind: namely, the latter plays on your humane impulses, while the former simply turns you into a sadist yourself. Watching Return of the Jedi, I always wish I could save Oola and Jubnuk, and watching Jurassic Park, I almost never find myself cheering for the raptors to eviscerate and devour Lex and Tim. Remembering Deep Rising, however, beyond wanting to see MUCHAS get half-drunk, regurgitated, and then drunk again, my only thought is that, for using the character the way he did, I wouldn’t feed Stephen Sommers to the Ottoia even if I could. It would be too good for him.