The Metamorphosis of Spielberg
As the definition says, icons are a representative symbol of something, something that is meaningful enough to a culture to need a popular figure to symbolize it. As a modern icon, Steven Spielberg has reached his “ubiquitous hand [into] our contemporary culture” (Friedman, 4), placing his influence on several mediums while retaining a huge audience. In our ever-increasing entertainment-driven culture, his iconic status is different: he is the auteur, the puppet-master, the “man behind the curtain”; he is not a face slapped onto a message, he is the singular embodiment of that message. While his early work succumbed to being trivial, sensational popcorn, his later work spearheads complex human dilemmas with a sense of experience. Through films like “Jaws,” “Schindler's List,” and “Saving Private Ryan,” Steven Spielberg transformed not only the process of filmmaking, but his very identity by maturing as a director and realizing his true potential.
Though relatively unknown in the years leading up to “Jaws,” Steven Spielberg finally emerged with almost instantaneous fame upon its release. The film was a huge success: it became the highest grossing film of all time, and single-handedly doubled the stock of MCA, Universal Studios' owner (Norris, 43). Spielberg transformed the gentle sea into a region of terror, collectively frightening all of America. The film concerns a small beach town that is plagued by repeated shark attacks, and the call of duty of a select few to end its suffering. The introduction of these characters brings an immediate recognition to moviegoers as the hunter archetype is fulfilled. The hunter is called upon to take on a rival nemesis, believing this is for the good of his tribe, and leaving his familiar territory (Frentz and Hocker 18). Spielberg's use of this common myth was no accident: the popularity of the film was dependent on the use of familiarity and realism, allowing the audience to connect to the characters as they dealt with the outside threat of a shark. His characters “become almost monomaniacal, driven by a singular goal that comes to define their lives” (Friedman, 6), something that the average person could hope to aspire to be.
Steven Spielberg's subject matter, at this point, was not the epitome of thought-provoking filmmaking. His early films, such as “Jaws,” “replicate and combine previously successful narratives...that can be summed up and sold in a single sentence” (Norris, 45). “Jaws” lacked serious metaphor, and when a critic could make a point for one, it was back to resorting to “us vs. them” techniques that were abundant in the Cold War era. While serious discussion about the film was mostly devoid in its early years, time has allowed a deeper reflection to process the film on a grander scale. The film resorts to exploitation commonly seen in thrillers. Using music filled with suspense and mystery heightened what was happening on the screen, elevating the situation and intensifying the drama. Spielberg himself admits the score by John Williams was integral to the movie's success (Morris, 46). Although showing great talent in technical filmmaking, Spielberg ultimately “substitutes spectacle for substance and emotion for depth” (Friedman, 2). The film lacks greater meaning, and ultimately fails in bringing thought to an already played-out concept.
Despite its shallow waters, “Jaws” brought Steven Spielberg to near-icon status, a remarkable feet consider this was most of America's first exposure to his work. The respect garnered from the movie gave Spielberg a never-before-seen pedestal on which to further promote himself in the industry. He was given ultimate freedom in making some of his next films like “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” and “E.T..” His stories continued to instill a sense of wonder and fascination into the American consciousness that delved into issues “not only with American cinema but with larger issues in American culture” (Friedman, 5). As his audience grew, so did his ability to influence other areas of the entertainment industry. He began producing at an enormous rate, almost always earning the title of “executive producer,” allowing him to determine the direction of the projects. He came to embody the deepest values and desires of his audience as his recognition grew at a staggering rate (Maasik and Solomon 722). Because the audience could identify with his characters, they could also identify with him as a filmmaker.
Spielberg's popularity was hardly universal. Though he could generate huge profits, the critical film community saw through his shallow spectacles. The elite crowd made claims that such a staggering popularity could not coexist with true artistic merit (Curran); he was a mere mainstream flash-in-the-pan who could please audiences but not inspire them. “Spielbergian” came to mean a form of storytelling dealing exclusively with white, suburban, middle-class values – as so many of his films were about white suburbia - that appealed to masses. While almost everything he touched turned to blockbuster gold, the “auteur” Steven Spielberg had not yet emerged.
“Schindler's List” is a true story about Oskar Schindler, a capitalistic Nazi who, during the Holocaust, employs Jews in a factory to save them from being shipped to concentration camps. The movie was an emotionally bleak three-hour experience, shot entirely in black-and-white, that was Hollywood's first real attempt at telling a story about the Holocaust. As a Jewish filmmaker, Steven Spielberg felt a duty to make the film, realizing it might not ever be made if his name was not attached to the project. He had long grown up feeling a sense of exclusion and isolation from his peers for being Jewish, feelings that resonate in several of his films. The role of “Schindler's List” in his life was to force him to “relive the various anti-Semitic slights and outright attacks he suffered growing up as part of a Jewish family” (Friedman, 303). This film was his chance to look inside himself and discover a story he had been waiting to tell, a story that reflected his life, that he could express with passion and true commitment. Of the film, Spielberg said “everything I have done up 'till now has really been in preparation for Schindler...I had to grow into that” (Jackson). The effort put into “Schindler's List” is the culmination of a career waiting to tell its most important story.
Spielberg seized the opportunity of “Schindler's List” and made the most important American rendition of the Holocaust. One effect he hoped the film would have was the introduction of the Holocaust to a generation that was unaware of its existence. His efforts promoted the teaching of the Holocaust in schools across the country. The redemption of Schindler “paralleled Spielberg's transformation from shallow crowd-pleaser to serious Jewish artist” (Morris, 215). He had finally announced himself as the auteur that was always there, revealing a sense of awareness and exploration of deeper themes that had always been within his reach. This landmark film solidified Spielberg's role as an icon. He left the cheap thrills and pure sensationalism behind, and instead, embraced themes of oppression and racism. He became a hero to the Jewish community as he went back to his roots to explore the events in history that had great impact on his life. Spielberg also stayed true to his artistic style by using the “everyman” character of Oskar Schindler, a comon archetype he frequently uses (Jackson). Winning not only Best Director but also Best Picture, “Schindler's List” was the ultimate artistic endeavor that truly revealed Steven Spielberg as a serious storyteller.
Spielberg knew his next major directorial effort would deal with World War II, the event he calls the most important of the 20th century. “Saving Private Ryan” became the next milestone of his career. The war epic told the story of a mother who lost three sons to the same war, while a small platoon is sent to retrieve her fourth son, hoping to spare her total loss. The film was told through a veil of utter realism: hand-held cameras were used to show “the action...through the eyes of scared young men” (Jackson), putting the audience right in the middle of the war. The characters resonated as real people to the audience, so when one was killed, it felt deeply personal. The opening scene at the Invasion of Normandy put veterans to tears, and displayed some of the most brutally real war scenes ever filmed. Again, with his blockbuster touch, Spielberg made a heavy subject appeal to a mass audience. He was able to interest the American people in a bleak time in its history, while still calling it entertainment. Spielberg's war epic showed critics that the intensity of “Schindler's List” was not a flash-in-the-pan occurrence; his films were to be taken seriously and truly considered as milestones in American filmmaking.
The transformation of Steven Spielberg from standard blockbuster director to serious cinematic artist shows the maturing of a truly remarkable icon. But just as interesting is the transformation of the American moviegoer, who showed that despite the heavy subject matter, they could follow Spielberg into whatever uncharted territory he explored next. While Spielberg's iconic status stems from America's “nature as a consumer culture” (Maasik and Solomon 727), he has also immersed himself into our collective social and political culture. Using events like the Holocaust and World War II, Spielberg has tackled issues like racism, identity, oppression, terrorism, class and technology. He makes entertaining works of art with a conscious backdrop of awareness that is saying something about our past, present and future. Steven Spielberg has single-handedly changed the concept of “popular” in our popular culture, raising his relevance as an icon to a level that no one has come close to reaching.
