Monday, August 31, 2015

Men in High Places


What a surprise--Duchovny's good buddies Ridley Scott and Frank Spotnitz are busy censoring yet another Philip K. Dick story into a Mercer-free special effects blurb where Indiana Jones fights imaginary national socialists in a future world in which Buster Friendly is the good guy--not only the good guy, but a good guy whose goodness is so sacrosanct it isn't even mentioned.

George Lucas used Harrison Ford to racially slur nips, sand niggers, and krauts throughout his Star Wars product--no surprise there. He lifted the plot and characters straight out of Akira Kurosawa's work, while switching in villains of all the appropriate bugbear ethnic groups to replace the vengeful samurai of Kurosawa, who had individualistic, human motivations, rather than mere ethnic loyalties and tendencies. Lucas' act was no minor plagiarism, in the "all artists borrow" or "inspired by" bullshit sense that Hollywood has (necessarily) done so much to attempt to legitimize, but rather, a complete and essential lift of elements: plot; characters; setting; even pacing, style, and camera positioning. And once he'd robbed the Japanese--like so many "Polish" Chosen transforming Masamune Shirow's work into Keanu Reeves' quest for Zion--added special effects, paid some techs in LA to build him a death star, and touched the whole thing up with the nastiest, most racist elements of Herzl's anti-Arab WW2 propaganda, and FDR's anti-Japanese and anti-Hun propaganda from the same era. What makes it so ironic is that the thieving scum Lucas, in order to insult East Asian and Central European cultures, couldn't even write his own filthy slurs: he had to steal a Japanese person's (Kurosawa's) and a European person's (Mitchell) work to do it. Lucas was cunning enough to realize the financial benefits he could gain through his racist filth, but he wasn't intelligent enough, or decent enough, to write his own story--he could only rip off work that had originated from the very bloodlines he was now insulting. In a rather bland way, it's ironic that, without the passion, creativity, and sense of purpose found in the very peoples Lucas robbed, Lucas could never have cobbled together his billion-dollar product cursing those same peoples.

The despicable thief ripped off The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly for his cantina scenes, and The Searchers with some Zionist anti-Arab, anti-black films for his battle with the "sand people"--a racism he didn't even have to disguise, in the late seventies, and then the 2001-ish New American Century, when the first segments of each trilogy were released...with propitious good sociocultural timing, considering the upcoming Iran-Iraq Wars, and then the new invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, with the corresponding slaughter of subhuman sand people in robes needing to occur far, far away. Lucas' plagiarism here was quite appropriate, as, in stealing from early-twentieth-century westerns, Lucas was only exploiting his Hollywood kin's anti-Amerindian plots in order to encourage fresh white armies to rape and slaughter a different variety of desert people.

The pillaging of Philip K. Dick's work is different, but not entirely so. As we saw in Blade Runner, certain financial elements were interested in turning a Gnostic movie--about the dangers of the Rosen company's crypto-humans, the triumph of Mercer, and the hideousness of Buster Friendly's Hollywood--into a wretched morass of special effects, where the big bad guy is an assertive blond Aryan pulled straight out of a stormtrooper uniform. The clever inbreds even changed the name of the android company from "Rosen" to "Tyrell," which is so fricking hilarious--if Dick were alive today, he could surely appreciate how clever the Nazis of the Ashen River were to pin the whole parasitism on the Norse.

(I mean, seriously, for deep readers of the book--how meta is that? In 2015, the Rosen Corporation not only develops the Nexus 13 units so that they can pass Voigt-Kampff, it also changes its name and deletes all prior records of its own existence, so that earlier Nexus 6s can appear to be the last remaining problem needing to be crushed. Dick could certainly nod along at the way the "android" mind worked in fabricating and carrying out such a plan of disappearing among the unwitting denizens of future California. And if you've researched the financial sources for Charlemagne's genocide of the Central European peoples, crushing Gnosticism and Thor-related culture in service of the Constantinian version of the desert god of death and elitism, and if you read the link on Tyrell as a surname origin, David Peoples'--he was the screenwriter for Blade Runner-- choice of "Tyrell" to replace "Rosen" can be viewed in another deliciously evil light.)

Minority Report was similarly stripped, but not so strikingly so as in Do Androids...-slash-Blade Runner, which saw its entire theme deleted and repackaged into the proletariat memory the very year that Philip K. Dick died. In short, they waited until he was no longer around to be asked what he thought the Friendly Friends had done to the final result. Kurosawa had the amazing grace and timeless patience to not give Lucas and Hollywood what those demons deserved, but Hollywood probably suspected that Dick wouldn't have been so kind.

As always, Harrison Ford is there to lend his talents to this racist plagiarism, playing the part of the Jewish hero who righteously murders various goy caricatures. The blatant, unapologetic racism of this type, prominent throughout Hollywood, Terra c. 1950-2100 C.E., will later be looked back upon in the same critical light as 1880 C.E. American minstrel shows.

It's telling that, in his later career, Ford did his part in trying to ramp up tensions again between the U.S. and Russia (Air Force One), portraying one of the only two remaining serious holdouts to the NATO/Africom global dictatorship as a cesspool of missing nukes and mindless extremists. Not only that, Ford also kicked the down dog again, justifying continued U.S. cooperation in maintaining the City of London's control over Ireland (Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger). Few actors have worked so hard to encourage racism, colonialism, war, and genocide, while simultaneously plagiarizing the personas of those very "rebels" who tried to resist them.

Again, it would seem ironic that Hollywood's racist, imperialist, financial elites would ape the character, and directly copy the dialogue, of Rhett Butler, a character who literally (1) defied international bankers by smuggling during the Civil War, (2) resisted federalist centralism, and (3) joined the Ku Klux Klan. To be blunt, why would a Jewish producer, a Jewish director, and a Jewish actor want to rip off Klansman Rhett Butler as a good guy? And yet, it happened. In their quest to encourage people to murder another million Arabs, even lionizing an anti-Manhattan Klansman is acceptable. Irony vanishes when we consider the acreative nature of these elites. For example, even decades after Lucas had heard the criticisms about his work, he remade portions of his second trilogy in Kurosawa's image, as though it would become a "homage," rather than plagiarism, if he kept doing it after he got caught. Perhaps aware of the potential for increased criticism, Lucas made up for this ongoing "borrowing" by adding in money-obsessed fish-people who spoke in FOB accents.

But hey, don't worry--there's always something, somewhere, to rip off. So "more" movies will continue to be made. Philip K. Dick spent decades trying to warn his people about the warmongering racists and their crypto-alien identities, and Kurosawa spent half a century trying to portray the unique beauties of his own culture. How terribly sad, how gruesome, it really is, to see, side by side, both the acknowledged, "based upon" plagiarism where the title is bought-out, and the unacknowledged, "inspired by" plagiarism where the title and "creator" are both changed.

Which one is worse? Is it fouler to steal from a dozen different creators, then sell their result as your own without admitting what you've done? Or is it fouler still to pretend you're simply advancing someone else's work from one medium to another, while hiring screenwriters to change the theme to something that better suits your political agenda? Kurosawa's work (along with Mitchell's and that of others) received no formal acknowledgement, and most people are either wholly unaware of the plagiarism, so dimly aware that they don't think it was anything more than "inspiration," or so thoroughly educated that they think no art is original anyway, so who cares? That's a low blow, certainly, but in Dick's case, the end-products bear his name and title, yet have been cleverly inverted to present a theme diametrically opposed to what he created.

If you're looking for a closer, and since we referred to Blade Runner herein, here's Sean Young--the white girl whom, in the movie, is physically overpowered into sexual contact by the heroic Harrison Ford--discussing how her father was shut out of Hollywood for attempting to tell the "Arab side of the story" to the media racists: Sean Young.

6 comments:

  1. Can I have some more deailed references/citations, except Kurosawa's stfff, I can't look up most of the mentioned sources just by a single name:(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The best way to learn about George Lucas--if you haven't already watched a few things, and then realized, "Holy crap, was this made before Star Wars? That's the exact same scene!"--is just to Google him. If you look up "Star wars stolen from Japan" or "Star Wars stolen from cowboy movies" you get way more stuff than I'm aware of myself.

      Here are some of the bigger ones:

      The Hidden Fortress is the Kurosawa film from which Lucas plagiarized most of the plot for A New Hope, and although Lucas didn't order Asian martial art choreography for the first trilogy, the hand-cutting-off lightsaber scenes are from Yojimbo.

      (Hidden Fortress is a little ponderous, but it has its charms, and the use of the peasants, rather than those stupid bleepy droids, as drivers of the plot, has an economic and social message that is completely lost when Lucas cheapens it by replacing them with "droids." Putting movies on fast-forward to dull western minds produced some admittedly cool battle scenes, but really had a negative impact on the people overall.)

      Check out The Guns of Navarone for where he got the Death Star gunner scenes, and The Fighting Devil Dogs for where he got:

      1) Emperor Palpatine's force lightning
      2) >50% of Darth Vader's costume
      3) The design for the Star Destroyers
      4) The design for the stormtroopers
      5) The positioning and camera-work for how the stormtroopers followed Vader around

      That one I didn't know of myself, and it extra offends me, because I really liked Star Destroyers when I was six years old. Ironic that Spaceballs was actually more original than the Star Wars it parodied.

      The Dam Busters is one I just recently looked over that shows how that idiotic attack on the Death Star in E4 (the "trench maneuvering" crap that made absolutely zero sense) was inserted because Lucas was trying to copy (yet another) a WW2 movie. And an old friend used to grumble that the Greedo v. Han shootout was robbed from a western, but I didn't believe it until I saw the clip from The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. It's vomit-inducing, just like if you watch Gone With the Wind and compare Butler to Solo.

      Delete
    2. Hmm, that's impressive. I did obsess over Star Wars when I was six, but never paid any attention to it ever since, so I had no idea so much was going on! Tarantino made his fame in the exact same way, but wasn't he upfront about it all along?

      I can't judge too harshly - I don't think I have an original thought of my own. Everything I say / write is a "homage" to someone before me, but hey, at least I'm not getting rich.

      Delete
  2. As a wise man who had no talent of his own once said,

    "Don't create! Regurgitate!"

    (It's true. I've heard it straight from the muzzle of some Producer in the movies books music paintings sculpture sales business.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heh...the one producer I know doesn't even bother with such questions. He just sits down and lets the better sales pitch convince him. I'm convinced that a good enough orator could convince him to buy the rights to "Hoover: The Vacuum Story."


      ...although, now that I type it, I could completely see Pixar making about a quarter billion dollars selling cute vacuum toys as stocking stuffers after a November release of a movie about a lost vacuum (a small one with a blue dust bag) searching for his mother (a larger vacuum with a pinkish dust bag and lipstick).

      Delete
  3. Past the post of modernism you find yourself and you think it should be about Hoover? That leads only to J Edgar and Herbert when not in a vacuum. Maybe Dyson. Then you get Freeman and all the STEMbiciles will worship whatever is produced. Besides, you need a 1,000 USD vacuum if you live in a fine large spacious roomy-with-rooms home if you didn't have the foresight to have a built-in vacuum installed when the plans were drawn up.

    Make it as random, and as square-peg-in-round-hole-enabled-with-blunt-force as possible and it will be lauded by all ages 0-35 as massively ironic and thus worthy of best (film/novel/graphic novel/instagram-comic-photo-series) of the century, if not for the 10 mins following a twitter broacast of the moment of publication.

    ReplyDelete