A bit of cultural theory
For the past two posts we’ve done a lot of brainwork heavy lifting. Visions of Saussure’s Sign and Barthes’ Cultural Myths dance in our heads. As a bit of a breather, this post will go to the movies. We’ll take a gander at a pair of 2022 blockbusters, namely, Top Gun: Maverick and Avatar: The Way of Water. Both films were nominated for the Best Picture award at the 2023 Oscars.
Of course, theory being what it is—it never rests—there will be some brainwork involved here, too. But it will come more in the form of brainteaser. That is, you’ll spot many elements of theory from our previous posts: battles for Signifieds, emptying of Signifiers, militarism, masculinity, money, oppressors being internalized, and the like. But this week’s analysis also anticipates what’s to come next week, when we resume our brief history of developments in critical and cultural theory starting in the 20th century. Next week, we’ll plunge ahead to discover what becomes of the Sign after the serenity and order of Structuralism...
So stay sharp. Head on a swivel. Danger looms.
Applying this bit of cultural theory
Maverick. What a stud. And what a boon for Naval recruiting...maybe. There seems to be an urban myth circulating that after the original Top Gun came out in 1986, Navy recruiting jumped by a whopping 500%. That factoid, like most factoids, wants inspection. But it does show what people are willing to believe about the impact of the movie. And there is no doubt that the Navy was and is very happy with both films. In return for the Navy granting these Hollywood projects access to bases, ships, and aircraft, each movie projects a very positive image of life in that branch of service. In the 1980s, the reputation of the US military in general needed serious mending after the trauma of the American War in Viet Nam. Currently, recruitment targets for all service branches remain difficult to attain. The happy publicity of pulse-pounding dogfights never hurts.
Regardless of the efficacy of these action movies as recruiting tools, what’s undeniable is their earning power. The domestic opening of Top Gun made over $8 million, and all releases worldwide to date have pulled in over $357 million. As for Top Gun: Maverick, its domestic opening brought in over $126 million, and so far, worldwide, all releases have earned almost $1.5 billion (Box Office Mojo). That’s a lot of fiscal popularity. Always a good question to ask is: What exactly is being bought?
I’ll argue the painfully obvious. What’s being bought most is Mav.
Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell (Tom Cruise) is 100% All-American warrior masculinity bad-boy packed into a multi-million dollar cockpit. His need for speed is so boundless that he’d rather push the envelope—that is, pilot jets death-defyingly until he crashes and burns—than climb the tedious ladder of naval rank or pursue anything resembling a regular life. As he emotionally tells his brother-in-arms/flyboy rival Admiral Tom “Iceman” Kazansky (Val Kilmer): “I’m a fighter pilot. Naval aviator. It’s not what I am, it’s who I am.”
Sentimental shivers go down our nationalistic spines.
Maverick is not just a member of the US military but wholly and solely its instrument. And we love him for it. That’s all this movie is about: loving Mav. He defies all pencil-necked officers who want to transition the Navy to lily-livered unmanned aircraft. He saves Goose’s cute little son, now all grown up, Lieutenant Bradley “Rooster” Bradshaw (Miles Teller). He earns some well-deserved R&R with suitably spunky gal, Penny Benjamin (Jennifer Connelly), who drives a cool car really fast. And, above all else, Mav shoots down everything he gets into his sights.
Including the Death Star.
Think about it. Isn’t that really the lone plotline in Top Gun: Maverick? Fly at breakneck speed down a long approach valley lined by lethal anti-aircraft weapons and defended by state-of-the-art jetfighters and, at the end of that suicidal canyon, make a one-in-a-million miracle shot (okay, two in this version) on a teeny-tiny little target in order to Destroy Evil.
Mav is Obi-Wan Kenobi to Rooster’s Luke Skywalker. At the vital moment when Luke is rocketing down the trench on the Death Star, Obi-Wan is in his head, telling the young pilot: “Use the Force, Luke. Let go. Luke, trust me.” At the vital moment when Rooster needs to get it in gear and rocket down the valley to make the second miracle shot, the advice Maverick gave him earlier in the movie is in his head: “Trust your instincts! Don’t think, just do. You think up there, you’re dead. Believe me.”
Ah, Heroism. Pass it on. But here’s the thing. In order for this kind of simple saga to work, not only do you need a marvelous Hero, but equally a despicable Enemy. If we want to feel very good about US, we need to feel delicious antipathy for THEM.
Good versus Evil. Am I right? What more do you need to know? That’s just how the world—hell, the Cosmos—works. End of story.
Yet who is the THEM in the Top Gun films? No idea. That’s left intentionally vague in both movies. Russia? China? Iran? North Korea? Yeah, sure. Why not? Take your pick. Who really cares? Just so long as Mav has plenty of THEM hostiles to shoot down. The Storm Troopers in Star Wars serve the same purpose. Faceless Bad Guys to dispatch with righteous clarity. We don’t really want to know too much about THEM. Not really. That would just make muddy water. All we require is a rival Evil to our undeniable Good.
Maverick embodies this upbeat formula. In fact, Maverick serves as a centerpiece for likely the favorite story Americans love to tell and to hear about ourselves. Namely, that we are a nation of noble underdogs, blameless and pure, special, Good Guys waging perpetual battle against the forces of formidable and appalling Bad Guys.
That’s who the Rebels are in EVERY Star Wars movie—over and over again. That’s what the price of a movie ticket buys you for both Top Gun films—a tall tale all for the love of Mav. It is worth pondering how the richest country that has ever existed on earth, one that currently spends more on its military than the next nine countries combined, sees its way clear to portray itself, over and over again, as that plucky and exceptional underdog.
So let’s ponder that. Let’s muddy the water. Jake Sully, you’re up.
First, the numbers. Worldwide earnings for Avatar since its release in 2009 are over $2.9 billion. The 2022 domestic release of Avatar: The Way of Water brought in revenue just shy of $135 million and, so far, worldwide profits stand at just over $2.2 billion and counting (Box Office Mojo). As my grandpa used to say, that’s a lot of spondoolie. The popularity and cultural influence of the franchise is gigantic already and just getting started. A total of four sequels are in the works with release dates scheduled through 2028. Even more Avatar films might follow these.
In this long-awaited first sequel, the story of Jake (Sam Worthington) picks up a number of years after the end of the original film. He and Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) have raised a lovely brood of hybrid offspring, now energetic teens and pre-teens, who love to bound around the deep forests of Pandora. In short, all is right with that moon.
Until the dreaded Sky People return.
Oh no! (we shudder). It’s THEM!
Oh shit...wait (we remember). It’s US!
Funny how in Mav movies we venerate and cheer-on the corporate militarism that underwrites and animates Captain Mitchell’s heroic exploits, yet in Jake movies we loathe and boo-hiss the corporate militarism that seeks to destroy the New Eden that Corporal Sully somehow has appointed himself to protect.
Hm, this might signal some kind of problem.
Moreover (and remember, in argument-speak, this means watch out), not only is the corporate militarism in Mav movies and Jake movies one and the same sociopolitical system, but the warrior masculinity that serves as the instrument and bludgeon for that military industrial complex is likewise identical in these films.
Mav may be a flyboy and Jake a Jarhead, but they are cut from the same Oorah cloth. Yet Mav fights for the ideology that puts the wind beneath his wings while Jake fights against that same ideology that wants to pave his paradise and put up a parking lot. So how can they both be movie heroes?
Damn good question. I’m certainly baffled. The lovely, pure-and-simple, definitive either/or of US versus THEM in the Top Gun world just got really messy and fuzzy in the Avatar world.
What’s a paying moviegoer to do???
We can rationalize, of course, that Jake has seen the light. Like the group of virtuous scientists in the first movie led by Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver), Jake comes to recognize the injustice being perpetrated on the indigenous population of Pandora. Heroically, he springs to the spirited defense of the Na’vi, now applying his Oorah warrior masculinity for a Good and Noble cause. Huzzah!
But who the hell asked him to? Certainly not the Na’vi.
Every human on Pandora is a colonizer, whether “good” scientist or “bad” corporate militarist. In the fictional universe of Avatar, by the middle of the 22nd century corporate militarism has fouled the Earth beyond habitation. As a result, humans are on the interstellar prowl for a new world to subdue and ruin. This sad fact makes Jake just another in the long line of White Saviors crowding western folklore, fiction, films, and real life. White Saviors who take it upon themselves to come to the rescue of non-white people suffering under circumstances caused by white people in the first place.
Oops.
We can rationalize, of course, that it’s Colonel Quaritch (Stephen Lang) who is the Oorah bad apple at the heart of all the trouble. He’s nothing short of a zealot in his corporate-military pursuits. In the first movie, Quaritch is hell-bent on bringing the “blue monkeys” to heel. In the second movie, Quaritch’s obsession—even when the corporation has turned him into a blue monkey himself—is to hunt down the insurgent Jake. Oh, we can so happily hate this vicious nut-job Quaritch!
Yet think about it. Doesn’t Mav display the same single-minded mission focus, the same blind devotion to duty as Quaritch? You bet your Oorah he does. So, once more, what we admire in Top Gun we revile in Avatar.
But wait...wait! Isn’t there a big difference between the self-seeking RDA Corporation mercenaries commanded by Quaritch compared to the nation-servicing Navy squadron commanded by Maverick? Jake says so himself at the outset of Avatar. In voiceover, he tells us about the RDA forces: “Back on Earth, these guys were army dogs. Marines. Fightin’ for freedom. But out here they’re just hired guns. Takin’ the money. Workin’ for the Company.” So doesn’t that make Quaritch a sell-out and Mav an icon?
Really? You want to go there?
The Marines certainly weren’t taking care of Jake’s spinal injury incurred in the line of his 22nd-century duty. Were they? That’s what forced Jake to go mercenary himself. And we certainly don’t take good enough care of our veterans when they return from their 21st-century duty. Do we? Even though we’re thanking them all the time for their service. And, ironically, since 9/11 almost half of all US Military spending has gone to PMCs (Private Military Contractors) of various kinds—to include plenty of combatants and “security services.” So, in practical terms, there isn’t much of a difference between mercenary and federal armed forces nowadays—other than the fact that contractors get paid far better.
Top all of this off with the fact that one of two primary messages in Department of Defense recruitment advertising—the other one being appeals to patriotism—is personal self-advancement. When it comes to recruiting an all-volunteer force, potential enlistees must be lured into service with promises of access to educational and job-training opportunities that otherwise wouldn’t be available to them or that they can’t afford. Just recently, after its worst recruiting year in decades (missing its goal by 25%), the Army went back to its old “Be All You Can Be” ad slogan. That branch is also offering cash bonuses and accelerated promotions to qualified enlistees.
If this isn’t mercenary, what is? Maybe an all-volunteer national force is just a polite way to say a mercenary corporate force.
When Jake and Quaritch square off for a climactic knife fight at the end of both movies, it’s nothing more than Jarhead-on-Jarhead violence. In spite of himself, the more Jake goes native the more he injects the practices of corporate militarism into Na’vi culture. (Not to mention his human DNA.) To fight the Sky People, Jake organizes the Omaticaya into combat units and quick-strike guerrilla teams—soldierly taskforces incorporating Sky People weapons, communications technology, and tactics. In Avatar: The Way of Water, Neytiri has to remind him that, “This is not a squad. It is a family,” meaning that Jake treats their children like a cadre of Marines, not kids.
In short, Neytiri should have plunked Jake with one of her long arrows back when she had the chance. But I guess we’re supposed to have faith that Eywa is working some kind of Master Plan in this Space Saga. If so, we’re going to have to wait a good while and pay a good amount in ticket prices to discover what She has in mind.
So what?
My son, who is quite brilliant if I do say so myself, characterizes the experience of watching Avatar movies as “cathartic self-loathing.” (Great phrase. I wish I’d come up with it.) By hating the Sky People, we procure a kind of purging and forgiveness for ourselves—that is, for being members of such a pack of ruthless ne’er-do-wells. At the same time, by loving and siding with Jake, we also get to imagine ourselves as gallant underdogs. As members of a hearty band—we happy few!—of rebels and resistance fighters doing battle with overwhelming Power. Boy, that sure feels nice. As a result, we get to walk out of the cinema feeling pretty good about ourselves—and convinced that the price of admission was well worth it.
Meantime, corporate militarism marches on. Very little disturbed by our personal, three-hour, popcorn-fueled mutiny.
We can be US and THEM at the same time? Wow. That sure seems like some linguistic and cultural magical thinking.
Stay tuned.
Readings of possible interest on Top Gun:
Mongilio, Heather. “Will ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ Boost Navy Recruiting? History Says Probably Not,” USNI News (U.S. Naval Institute, May 27, 2022, https://news.usni.org/2022/05/27/will-top-gun-maverick-boost-navy-recruiting-history-says-probably-not).
Rottenberg, Josh. “Who is the Enemy in ‘Top Gun: Maverick’? Let’s Investigate,” Los Angeles Times (May 27, 2022, https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2022-05-27/top-gun-maverick-enemy-explained).
Summers, William. “Maverick Top Gun Stat Turns Out to be a Real Goose,” AAP FactCheck (Australian Associated Press, June 14, 2022, https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/maverick-top-gun-stat-turns-out-to-be-a-real-goose/).
Readings of possible interest on US military spending and advertising:
Bynum, Russ. “‘Be All You Can Be’: Army brings back old ad slogan,” AP News (March 7, 2023, (https://apnews.com/article/army-chief-recruiting-be-all-you-can-be-f545cedba2a1e12ab0579aff1c3cbc89).
Knickmeyer, Ellen. “Study says nearly half of defense spending for 9/11 wars went to private contractors,” PBS News Hour (Sept. 13, 2021, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/study-says-nearly-half-of-defense-spending-for-9-11-wars-went-to-private-contractors).
Peter J. Peterson Foundation. “U.S. Defense Spending Compared to Other Countries,” (May 11, 2022, https://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0053_defense-comparison).
Readings of possible interest on Avatar:
Cole, Teju. “The White-Savior Industrial Complex,” The Atlantic (March 21, 2012; https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/the-white-savior-industrial-complex/254843/).
Combe, Kirk and Brenda Boyle. Masculinity and Monstrosity in Contemporary Hollywood Films, Palgrave Macmillan, 2013 (see in particular “Papa Dragons and Blue Monkey Mamas,” pp. 210-222, https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9781137359827; and, yes, this is shameless self-promotion).
Flashner, Graham. “Everything We Know About James Cameron’s Avatar Sequels,” Rotten Tomatoes (Dec. 18, 2022, https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/everything-we-know-about-james-camerons-avatar-sequels/).