The latest issue of Entertainment Weekly really ticked me off. No, not because it had four variant covers. I have a subscription, so the variant cover thing didn't really affect me that much.
No, it's the coverage of the forthcoming San Diego Comic-Con that did it.
It started with the title "Geek Revival". EW has been covering Comic-Con for several years now and has alway found a way to work the word "geek" into its articles somewhere.
Geek is a word, like certain other epithets, that I could refer to myself as one and it would be fine, I could refer to my like minded friends as such and it would be okay, but if the uninitiated says it, it is insulting and offensive.
The repeated use of the word by EW when it covers Comic-Con and other comic related news items strikes me that they think covering Comic-Con is beneath them. That they would wish anything but to associated with those freaky, costume wearing weirdos who like comics, anime and sci-fi.
But then, I rethought. Maybe I was being too harsh. EW does give comics a lot of page space. As a matter of fact, the Books section in this very issue leds off with a full page review of comic writer Warren Ellis' new novel.
But then, I read the first paragraph:
"Cannes has Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie on the Croisette. Sundance has Robert Redford on the slopes. And Comic-Con? It's got Klingons in Renaissance costumes running around downtown San Diego."
This is especially annoying when the list, later in the article, that Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Edward Norton and Judd Apatow will be there. Sure, those guys aren't Bradgelina-type famous or as legendary as Redford, but they are nothing to sneeze at either. Yes, there will be Klingons and Stormtroopers. But there are some freaky people at Cannes too. Usually, they are brought over by Troma or Porn companies, but still. The point EW was trying to make is that Cannes and Sundance are classy and cool, Comic-Con is dorky and silly.
Let's talk about the title of the print article, by looking up the meaning of the word "revival" as it appears on Encarta.
| re·viv·al [ ri vv'l ] (plural re·viv·als) |
| noun |
| Definition: |
| 1. renewal of interest: a renewal of interest in something that results in its becoming popular once more |
| 2. new production: a new production of a play or opera that has not been performed recently |
| 3. process of reviving somebody: the process of bringing somebody back to life, consciousness, or full strength |
| 4. recovery: the recovering of life, consciousness, or full strength |
| 5. religion renewed religious interest: a new interest in religion, or the reawakening of such interest |
| 6. christianity evangelical Christian meeting: a meeting or a series of meetings of evangelical Christians intended to awaken religious fervor in those who attend |
| 7. law reestablishing of legal validity: the renewal of the validity of a contract or the effect of a judicial decision |
Now, I don't know which definition EW is working under. Some might say number 6, which doesn't really apply but kinda sorta fits. But the tagline to the print article leads me to believe that it means definition number one:
"EW scopes out Comic-Con, the convention that's suddenly bringing Hollywood to its knees."
Suddenly? Suddenly? You've been covering the convention in one form or another for at least 5 years? What is the statute of limitations on the word "suddenly"? It's got to be under five years.
Pop culture has been taken over by the "geeks" for years and years. They haven't gone away and come back. And it doesn't need to awaken any sort of fervor. They have been responsible for the movie success of Kevin Smith and Judd Apatow, the popularity of sci-fi and superhero fare in the movies and TV and made Harry Potter a worldwide phenomenon.
Don't believe me? Look at this year's spate of movie releases. You have Transformers for the toy "geeks", Spider-Man 3, Ghost Rider, 300, and Fantastic Four: The Rise of the Silver Surfer for comic "geeks", Shrek the Third and Ratatouille for the Animation "geeks" and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix for the Harry Potter "geeks". And so on and so on. This year could be the biggest grossing year in the history of movies, thanks mainly to "geek" films.
But EW is trying to make it seem like it just happened and it is just a temporary stage. The latter might be true, but the previous isn't.
They quote Brad Meltzer, who shall now be referred to as the self-hating geek, to put a negative spin on it:
''It's the golden age of geekdom,'' says frequent Comic-Con conventioneer Brad Meltzer, a novelist and comics writer. ''Hollywood has figured out the location of the supergeek clubhouse. They've jimmied the locks, moved in, and spruced the place up. And we're sort of sadly and pathetically okay with it, because they bring lots of hot actresses and nice film clips.''
On the surface, that seems to be some strained wit and fairly innocuous. But what is Meltzer really saying? He's saying that Hollywood is the dominant form of art and comic fans are submissive and at the whim of Hollywood bigwigs. When, really, it's closer to the other way around. Hollywood is coming to Comic-Con because of the power genre fans have to make or break a movie. Therefore, Hollywood is coming to the "supergeek clubhouse" humbly and submissively, presenting offerings that they hope the genre fans will like and enjoy and tell their friends about.
While EW seems clueless to this, Hollywood producers and directors are not:
"''We premiered a special trailer we had prepared,'' says director Zack Snyder. ''The crowd demanded that we reshow it — three times. After Comic-Con, 300 changed its place in the collective consciousness and in geekdom in general.'' Says Murphy, ''You go to Comic-Con, tell a roomful of fans what your movie is going to be, and you end up not only reaching them but 500 Internet reporters as well.'' Adds a studio exec, ''I'd much rather spend money on Comic-Con than on a splashy premiere the day before my movie opens.''"
EW seems to think that San Diego Comic-Con is a small fringe of geeks and is amazed that Hollywood will kowtow to it. But Comic-Con is a small microcasm representing a real, large and valid sub-culture. One that EW will one day be forced to respect. After all, their coverage has grown from a small blurb to a one page article to two pages leading off the "News and Notes" section. In a few years, the Comic-Con will probably be a cover story in a few years. But EW will probably still call us geeks.
To read the article online, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment