Movies

The summer of ’82 changed sci-fi cinema forever

BBG News

As someone who grew up in the golden age of cinema, I wholeheartedly agree with Chris Nashawaty’s perspective on the summer movie landscape of the past and its stark contrast to the present day. Having lived through the era when movies were original, thought-provoking, and not just disposable entertainment, I can’t help but feel a sense of nostalgia and longing for those days.

In the past, not too long ago and certainly not in a distant galaxy, the summer movie scene wasn’t filled with disposable fantasy and sci-fi blockbusters. Studios and distributors hadn’t yet learned to focus solely on these genres. As Chris Nashawaty explains in his new book “The Future Was Now,” we were once captivated, captivated, and amused. Today, however, we are repeatedly subjected to mind-numbing spectacles and infantilizing entertainment.

Nashawaty’s book focuses on a particular time frame, the summer of 1982, which he believes was a creative peak and final hurrah for science fiction as thought-provoking and innovative popular entertainment. Intrigued by the unexpected success and profit of “Star Wars” (1977), film executives pondered how they could replicate or at least duplicate its financial success.

Just as executives in the previous decade were attracted to the profitable films “Easy Rider,” “Bonnie and Clyde,” and “The Graduate,” this group aimed to invest their time and money into movies that would resonate with younger audiences, despite the fact that this generation appeared to be more drawn to adventure than radical change.

In Nashawaty’s words, “The issue was that all film studios seemed to draw the same conclusion at the same moment in time.” The article titled “The Future Was Now” recounts the production and release of eight films categorized as science fiction. These movies, namely “Blade Runner,” “Conan the Barbarian,” “E.T. the Extraterrestrial,” “Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior,” “Poltergeist,” “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,” “The Thing,” and “Tron,” hit theaters within a two-month span. Each film battled for viewers’ attention and wallets, resulting in an overwhelming amount of options. This situation proved unsustainable. What lesson did studios take away from this experience?

As a longtime film enthusiast with a soft spot for science fiction, I find “The Future Was Now” to be an intriguing read. The book offers a captivating exploration of the lives of Steven Spielberg and the pivotal moment in his career when he had two groundbreaking projects on the brink of production: the heartwarming “E.T.” and the bone-chilling “Poltergeist.”

The Directors Guild of America strictly forbade directors from working on two films simultaneously. Consequently, Spielberg needed to select another director for “Poltergeist.” He opted for Tobe Hooper, who had previously gained a reputation for horror with “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.” However, according to various reports, Spielberg ended up exerting significant control over the production of “Poltergeist,” effectively directing the film alongside Hooper.

In true detail, similar to the rest of the text, this episode is meticulously covered. Nashawaty had the opportunity to interview numerous individuals mentioned in the piece, among them being Spielberg.

I must admit, not every movie released during the summer of 1982 was a success. Some talented directors unfortunately faced severe consequences as a result of being involved in what became known as the “eight-movie pileup.”

After the huge achievement of directing “Alien” in space horror genre, Ridley Scott encountered conflicts. Harrison Ford, his leading actor in “Blade Runner,” butted heads with him. His crew labeled him as a tyrant, while executive producers seized control during post-production. Feeling discouraged, Scott temporarily left filmmaking to return to his advertising profession.

Simultaneously, John Carpenter experienced greater setbacks when “The Thing” received apathy from viewers and harsh criticism from critics. Consequently, Universal terminated his multi-picture agreement, leaving a lasting impact on his career that didn’t fully bounce back. In an interview with Nashawaty, he shared, “I was treated as if I were insignificant.”

As a movie buff, I’ve found “The Future Was Now” to be an intriguing exploration of eight different films. However, at times, the abundance of material can feel overwhelming. Since this analysis encompasses multiple movies, it’s natural that some aspects may not receive the full attention they deserve.

The author is not only an exceptional reporter, but also a deep and insightful film critic. However, the fast-paced nature of the book does not fully capture this talent. I yearned for a peek into Nashawaty’s thoughts as he watches these movies. While this may not have been the main focus of the book, including more of his personal perspective would have added value to the reading experience.

In summary, there are not many books that explore movie themes extensively nowadays. “The Future Was Now” is a valuable new addition to this category. The narrative beneath the surface details the commercialization and marketing of fandom culture, with both its allures and drawbacks (an intriguing topic for another book).

In the summer of ’82 for Nashawaty, marked a pivotal point – following the explosive success of “Star Wars” and preceding the production of blockbusters as mass-produced commodities. He expresses: “By the break of the ’90s, instead of ushering in a promising era of science fiction and fantasy films, Hollywood created a pop culture monster that would eventually consume itself and stunt its audience’s growth.” The repercussions continue to play out on the big screen today.

Chris Vognar is a freelance culture writer.

Read More

2024-07-26 14:04

Previous post Graziano Di Prima ‘is under medical supervision and being monitored hourly’ after being axed from Strictly following Zara McDermott abuse allegations
Next post Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver Remasters Seemingly Outed by Comic-Con Statue