lauren@LBL-CSAM@vortex.UUCP (07/31/83)
From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@LBL-CSAM> "Wargames" and "GOR"??? How the hell did these two get together? Don't panic -- they're actually completely separate topics in this one message... Well, let's hear it for "Wargames"... "the topic that wouldn't die". I'd really like to keep political-science discussion out of here, so I'll make this as brief as possible. In theory, we may have the ability to instantly stop the nuclear arms race and destroy *all* such weapons. In practice, however, a variety of forces over which we have imperfect or no controls prevent the former from occurring quickly, and will almost certainly prevent the latter from taking place at all. My "health" analogy, while imperfect (what analogy is really perfect?) is still valid. There are some aspects of health which we can take great strides toward controlling (as individuals and as groups). There are other aspects that we do not truly understand, and various environmental forces (many of which are man/woman-made) which affect our health in manners we might not even suspect and in many cases cannot effectively control as individuals. There are definite steps we can take toward preventing a nuclear war and towards reducing the number of nuclear weapons "floating" around. However, I do not consider simplistic "slogans" such as that presented by "Wargames" to be part of the solution. Yeah, I know, "Wargames" wasn't trying to give a message, "Wargames" was supposed to be entertainment, etc., etc. Whatever it was supposed to be, many people interpreted it as a "message" film. Further discussions about this on POLI-SCI, please! It was pointed out that I haven't panned the James Bond films (which I generally like, especially the earlier ones) and such recent commercial tripe as "Flashdance". Films where the motivation and relationship to reality are completely clear do not require my critical attention in the same manner as "Wargames". I trust the paid film reviewers to deal with the "easy" movies. "Wargames", however, was another matter, since it became obvious that many people in the population at large were largely *believing* that stuff! The wire service articles, interviews with NORAD officials, and similar recent events made it clear that many persons simply did not have the backround knowledge to separate the fantasy from reality in that film. Anyone who claims that "Wargames" wasn't a "message" film (several messages, in fact) must be kidding. There's nothing wrong with messages -- but when a film attempts to accomplish this through playing on people's ignorance of "the way things work", I get a bit steamed. There was none of this in the Bond flicks or in "Flashdance" for that matter -- they were/are strictly entertainment and clearly such. One final point. I have absolutely nothing against films which are purely entertainment, or even against films that primarily exist simply to make money (most of them fall into the latter catagory, one way or the other -- or so the producers hope). I've worked in "Hollywood" before, and I've consulted on both science-fiction and non-science-fiction films. I'm not ignorant of the motivations behind the people producing films today. My only real concern with "Wargames" has been the way it, perhaps even unconsciously, attempted to lay out its message via a series of fantasies that many people were not in a position to view as such. --Laur... What? I can't hear you! OH! What about GOR? Oh yes, my Subject line... Well, all I wanted to say is that hearing about the SCA splinter group which is "roughly" based on elements of the GOR series confirms my deepest fears. This comes on the heels of my recently noticing a copy of John (GOR) Norman's "Imaginative Sex" laying on a bed in a film I saw on a commercial cable service. I fear that the "Goreans" are already amongst us. Where will it all lead? How will it all end? Back to the digital limbo with you all! --Lauren--
dwex@wxlvax.UUCP (David Wexelblat) (08/02/83)
Wake up, Lauren!!! Did you ever hear of "Jaws", "Towering Inferno",
"The Amityville Horror", etc., etc....? All of these were movies that all
of us "rational" people didn't believe as far as we could throw them. But
then how do you explain the sudden rash of sharks scares on our nation's
beaches, the haunted house flurry (that one even made "That's Incredible"),
and all the other related tripe? Movies that are designed to be unbelievable
always attract a lot of attention. That's what the producer had in mind. If
he can keep enough people confused, then he has a hook for a sequel (you have
heard of JAWS 3-D, haven't you). I think that WARGAMES was done the way it
was so that it would have exactly the effect that it did. They wanted people
to ask questions. If they had come out and said "Nuclear war is stupid" in
so many words, it probably would have been ignored. The easiest way to
convince someone of something is to get them interested enough to do a little
research. WARGAMES certainly got a lot of people digging.
'Nuff already
David Wexelblat
...decvax!ittvax!wxlvax!dwex
P.S. Of course they were out to make money. With the amount they spent on
it, they would have been stupid not to!