Chapter 19 Would you take your child to see this film? The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie Peter Krämer One sunny afternoon in August 1994, I was watching the big summer movie of thai year, True Lies, with a friend in Munich, anil in the midst ol all the magnificent mayhem on tin- screen, he suddenly turned round to me and said: 'Wouldn't family therapy be much cheaper?1 What he referred to is the peculiar raison d'etre for the action In this biggest and most expensive (»fall action movies: the hero and his wife have to learn to understand, and interact with, each other in a new way so as to revue their marriage, and once this is achieved the action-hero has to i»o through the motions all over again to overcome the alienation of his «laughter. Il was both annoying and strangely touching to realize that the spectacular attractions brought to the screen with the help of a reputed production budget of SI20 million was ultimately geared to the completion ol the simple dramatic feat of turning mumm) and daddy and child into a happy family again. Therapy would indeed have been cheaper. Vet, buying a ticket to sec the family drama played out on the big screen is, of coui^e, cheaper still, and in response to my friend's comment I wondered whether a trip to the cinema wouldn't have made the True I les family just as happy as all the adventure they got involved in. It also occurred to me that, by offering itself to the audience as a substitute for the adventures undertaken by the family on the screen, this was perhaps what the him was trying to tell us, if it «as trying to tell us anything« all: Enliven your lamilv life goto the movies together once in a while. Maybe, then, mv friend anil I became so self-conscious about, and frustrated with, the film's machinations and our own position as spectators precisel) because we had left our families behind and thus had already failed to heed the advice True Lies was giving us. In this chapter, I shall argue that the obsessive concern of many of Hollywood's biggest blockbusters with family issues indicates (hat they attempt to broaden their appeal beyond the core audience ol teenagers an.I young adults to reach the tamily audience; that is, small groups ol parents and children going to the movies together. Hence, ni.inv of today's action-adventure movies are, In fact, lamilv films. At the same time, the traditional Children's or family film has been upgraded The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 295 with a heavj injection ol spectacular adventure to appeal to teenagers ami young adults as well as children and their parents. These two developments have resulted in a group of films which I would like to call family adventure movies. Il is im «mlention that family adventure movies are the most successful production trend in American cinema since the late 1970s. 1 shall suggest that thcTrtdluraTwork that the films' narratives perform to reconcile family members with each other on the screen translates into a kind of social work performed by the films on the familial units in the auditorium, creating shared experiences and opening up channels of communication. My discussion will focus on a number ol massive box office hits, combining textual analysis with a discussion of the films' marketing ,in*l reception. The key lilms are the top five entries in Variety's list ol all-time box-office hits, as of February 1996: li.T. The Extra Terrestrial (1982), Jurassic Park (1993), rorrest Gump (1994). Star Wars (1977) and The lion King (1994).' Before embarking on my discussion of lamilv adventure movies, however, I wish to indicate how it intersects with sonic- of the key concerns of academic criticism of contemporary Hollywood. Fathers and sons in contemporary Hollywood criticism Families and familial relations, most notably those between lathers and sons, figure largely in academic criticism ol contemporary Hollywood cinema, especially «here the work of Hollywood's most successful filmmakers George Lucas and Steven Spielberg is concerned. For Robin Wood, for example, the 'I in as Spielberg Syndrome' affecting most American films since the mid 1970s is constituted by a tw ist on tli»- traditional category of the children's film, resulting in children's films conceived and marketed largely lor adults films that construct the adult spectator as a child, or, more precisely, as a childish adult, an adult who would like- to be a child." The address of spectators in the- auditorium as children is complemented by die 'Restoration of the Father' within the narratives on the screen, which Wood sees as 'the dominant project . . . ol the contemporary Hollywood ciiu-ma, a veritable thematic metasystém embracing all the available genres and all the current cycles." The films' stories frequently focus on prob lemalie father figures whose authority is initially being questioned, yet who will eventually 'be accepted and venerated', and on the 'Ocdipal trajectory' ol the young male hero who has to work through his problematic relationship with the father, learning to accept his power and to identify with him. so that 'be will one dav in his turn become the father'.'' The male spectator is invited to adopt the position of the young male hero, regressing to childhood and submitting CO the power of the father in the story at the same time as he submits to the power ol the spectacle and narrative drive of the film itself, 'totally passive, ready to be 296 Audience, address and ideology taken by the hand and led slep by step through tin- narrative to participate emotionally in its reassuringly reactionary conclusion'.' Wood's Forceful analysis is representative of an important strand in contemporary Hollywood criticism,' Yet, unlike many other writers, Wood makes explicit the set of assumptions about audience composition, audience response and the quality of cinema-going experiences which underpin his work as well as that of other critics. Most importantly, Wood states that today's movie audience is largely made up of adult* in search of regressive pleasures, implying that actual children constitute a negligible segment of this audience. Second, he claims that the audience is dominated by men who arc- 'all loo ready to accept the films' imitation to infantile regression', whereas women are easily alienated from the experience on offer due to the films' patriarchal agenda. Thus, while men 'generally love E.T., women generally don't'. Third, Wood distinguishes between 'the energetic, inquiring and often profoundly skeptical mind' possessed by 'real' ciini 'uncor-rupteď children, and the infantile mind set contemporary Hollywood encourages in its adult spectators.1" While he admits that he enjoys 'being reconstructed as a child, surrendering to the reactivation of a set of values and structures mv adult self has long since repudiated', he can distance himself from this pleasurable experience and critically evaluate it as 'extremely reactionary, as all mindless and automatic pleasure tends to be'." Using Wood's assumptions and claims as a point of departure, I am now going to take a look at family adventure minies and their audiences, paying particular attention to the presence of children in the cinema auditorium, to the determining effect that gender may have on audience responses and to my own cinematic pleasures as well as those ol others. Parents, children and critics at the movies At first sight, The Lion King confirms the critique of contemporary MolIvwood put Forward by Wood and other critics. The film tells the story of a young boy (the lion cub Simba) who wants to be king, a position currently held by his father. When his lather is killed by Simba's jealous uncle, the boy is made to believe that he is responsible for the killing. Me runs away from home and lives a life of forgetful hedonism, until he is encouraged to confront the past, learns the truth, overcomes the villainous uncle and finally assumes the position of his dead father, thus completing his 'Ocdipal trajectory'. The press book for the film explains that Simba realizes that bis lather's spirit liyes on in him and thai he must accept the responsibility of his destined rolc.Vj--Mnd Disney studio head Jeffrey Katzcnbcrg described the film as 'a love story between a father and son" concerning 'the responsibility we have as torchbearers from one generation to the next'." This would seem to suggest, in the terms of Wood's analysis, that the film offers adult males the opportunity to regress into a replay of their own Oedipal trajectories. The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 297 However, a look at actual audience composition and response complicates this conclusion. When I went to see, The Lion King, I found myscll surrounded by hordes of children with adults in tow, As the only adult not accompanied by a child, I felt like an outsider and intruder. It seemed to me lhal 1 looked decidedly suspicious, as if I had the worst possible- reasons for mingling with all these kids in the darkened movie theatre. I almost feared thai I would be refused entry, yet once inside I soon forgot about my dubious status and lost mvself in the film. Instead ol feeling distanced from the children around me, in a very real sense I became one ol them, perhaps recovering tlie sense of magic which had infused the fairytales my mother read to me when 1 was a child, and the first films 1 ever saw at the cinema with her. Memorably, these early cinema experiences included Disney's The Jungle Book (1967), the story of an orphan boy who has to leave the people who have loved and nurtured him like parents. The Jungle Book is very much a story of separation and loss, told from a child's point ol view, as is The Lion King lor a substantial part of its duration. Coming out (íl the cinema. The Lion King partly felt like a rcvisitation of that crucial earlier movie experience, and my status as a lone adult contrasted sharplv not only with the groups of parents and children leaving the cinema with me, but also with the memory of ^oing to the cinema with my mother. This added another layer to the experience of separation and loss that The Lion King had played upon. I ike Robin Wood, then, I admit to die pleasures of "being reconstructed as .1 child'. However, 1 don't think that these pleasures arc in any way 'automatic' and 'mindless'. Instead they are likely to be bracketed by reflections on one's present status as an adult and one's relationship to children, as well as on memories of past moviegoing experiences as a child and the relationship with one's parents. Furthermore, even when the films' stories concentrate on the relationship between fathers and sons, mothers are likely to have a prominent role, taking children by the hand both in the movie theatre in the present and in memories ol the past. On and off the screen, rivalry and identification with the father is only part of the (Oedipal) story." Finally, the onscreen representation of childhood, like the offscreen memories of childhood which are being evoked, is by no means idealized. Far from being depicted as a paradisical state, characterized by endless pleasure, straightforward wish-fulfil m en t and irresponsibility, childhood emerges as a difficult phase indeed. Ate circling to Wood the appeal of contemporary Hollywood's regressive Ian tasies is 'the urge to evade responsibility - responsibility for actions, decisions, thought, responsibility for changing things: children do not have to be responsible, there are older people to look after them.'1' The Lion King, however, shows exactly the reverse. Here, the child feels responsible for something he hasn't done, and the guilt arising from this keeps him in a slate of suspended maturation. I here is a 298 Audience, address and ideology hint that in Simha's mini), the killing of his father is connected to his impatient declaration 'I jus! can't wait to be king' towards the beginning * »ľ the him, implying as ii does the death of the present king. Thus, the death of the father is an implied wish come true. Simba's transformation later in die film is based On his ability to gain a realistic view i>l the relationship between his wishes, thoughts and actions, on the one hand, and developments in the world around him, on the other hand. Tliis allows him to understand what he is, and is not, responsible for, The 'escapist' experience thai contemporary Hollywood is said to offer its audiences (equivalent to Simba's years of suspended maturation), then, is precisely what The i Lion King reflects upon, examining the psychological causes of the need to escape from responsibility (here identified as an overwhelming and misguided sense of responsibility) and highlighting the need to overcome the escapist condition. So far, my analysis has approached The Lion Kinq from an adult point of view, but most of what I have said about the ways in which the film tries to affect audiences also applies to the children in the audience. However, what is perceived by an adult as a fantastic evocation of past experiences is more likely to be seen bv a child as a realistic extension of everyday feelings and experiences. Indeed, in a critical attack on I )isney 's animated features, focusing on The Hon Kinq, Matt Roth accuses Disney of a kind ol emotional hyperrealism 'that obsessive plumbing of horrors more real to children than death: parental loss, withdrawal of love, exile from family and friends, and blame lor unintended acts of destruction.'17 Roth sees this as an attempt 'to induce (emotional trauma) in young children" so as to Open them up for the reassuring 'fascist' principles Disney 'feels it must implant in each new generation'.15 While I disagree with his conclusion. Roth's description of the severity and realism of Disney's treatment of childhood experiences would seem to be apt.I5 II screen representations can be seen in terms of emotional realism rather than fantasy, it is also possible to approach the social and psychological experiences of audiences through observation rather than psychoanalytic theoreti/ation. This allows, among oilier things, for a far less deterministic view of the role of gender in the shaping ol audience responses. Discussions of male-centred films such as The Lion King and E.T. with students, for example, do not confirm Wood's contention that male responses in these films and their male protagonists are stronger and more positive, whereas females arc easily alienated from the films' oedipal concerns. As with The Lion King, at first sight E. T. would seem to be a perfect example for Wood's critique. The film tells the story of a 10 year-old boy whose parents have recently separated. Elliott misses his father, perhaps also resenting him for going away. When he befriends an alien creature who hides in his shed, the alien comes to serve as both a kid brother aiu\ a wise old man, an ideal vet temporary father figure, who eventually has to leave the boy who loves him. In the heartbreaking yet reassuring farewell scene at the end of the film, E.T. tells the boy The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 299 that he will always be with him, right there in his head. Now, far from rejecting the film for its ocdipality, female students tend to be more willing than males to shed the tears the film works so hard to provoke, and to talk about this emotional experience in class. Furthermore, while all students freely admit to having wept when ihev first saw the film as children (often during one of their first ever visits to the cinema), they are somewhat surprised and puzzled by the fact that the film slill has the power to move them. Thus, students' responses and reflections are influenced by their assumptions about what is, or is not, an appropriate emotional response in terms of both sex and age, rather than by the force of same-sex identification with screen characters. When asked about the significance of the protagonists sex. students suggested that the fact that Elliott is male, and E.T. appears to be male as well, adds to the drama. They argued that females are much more open to intimate friendships and shared emotional experiences, whereas boys have to work much harder at them. The intimate bond which is being established between Elliott and E.T, and Elliott's extreme expressions of grief and jubilation, especially in the scene in which the alien first dies ami then comes back to life, are all the more dramatic and effective for the difficulties usually encountered by boys in handling their emotions. To take this line of argument further, it is possible to say that, rather than constructing their spectators as male, films like £, 7". are in effect working to 'feminize* both their young male protagonists and their male audiences; that is, to allow them to experience and freely express emotions (in tlie darkness and anonymity of the movie theatre) in a way which is usually considered to be typically female/' At the same time, it is true thai female spectators are encouraged to identify with the voting male hero rather than with the film's female characters. Elliott's mother, recently abandoned bv her husband and struggling to earn a living and raise three kids all on her own, is a sympathetic character, especially for adult female spectators, and Elliott's little sister Gertie gets a chance to teach E. T. to speak and to dress him up in women's clothes. Yet, the narrative is determined to a large extent by Elliott's inquisitive mind, ingenuity ami decisive action, which establishes him as the main point of identification. In an essav on the problems of writing women's history. Sue Zschoehe regrets 'the poverty of imagination that characterizes the stories told about women's lives', which may make it necessary for women to identify with great men in order to experience vicarious heroic action. The example she gives concerns her daughter, who developed an obsession with E.T. at the age of 3, watching die film over and over again. The little girl soon became quite convinced that she really would find E.T. herself, and at that point she 'announced that henceforth and forevcrmore, she was to be called Elliot'." While Zschoehe sees this as a svmptom of a male-oriented culture unwilling to grant heroic status to women, the anecdote also illustrates the openness of films such as t.'[. for cross-sex 300 Audience, address and ideology identification." What both girls and boys arc encouraged to identify with is not so much a clearly gendered character than a child figure who combines masculine and feminine traits (heroism and empathy, stoicism and expressiveness) in the same way thai it combines traits usually associated with children (an active imagination and a willingness to believe in the impossible), with a strong sense »I responsibility lor, and active commitment to, the welfare «ľ another being which is surprisingly mature. By transcending culturally encoded dualities of sex ami age. the child figure in £.7. and The Lion King is turned into an idealized point of identification for both males and females, children and adults/'* This identification is further enhanced through the parallels between the qualities displayed by the child on the screen and the conditions of spectatorship in the auditorium. For example, Elliott's ability tu empathize with E.T. mirrors the audience's need to empathize with Elliott, which is a precondition for their enjoyment of the film. Also, Elliott's willingness to believe in the existence nf í . I. corresponds to the audience's necessary suspension of disbelief with respect to the film they are watching, his expressions of grief and joy arc echoed by those provoked in the auditorium, and his final farewell to E.T. (the film's very last shot is a close-up of Elliott's composed face staring into space) prefigures the audience's farewell to £.7!, the movie. This farewell results in a return to reality after the excitement of fantastic adventure, which allowed both Elliott and the audience to deal with issues and emotions that are part and parcel of everyday life yet are difficult to deal with there. The film's locus on the proble matic relationship between children and adults is closely connected tu the immediate concerns of the família] units of parents and children making up a large proportion of the audience. The narrative importance of divorce in /: I would seem to conned directly with the social reality of divorce or dysfunctional family life affecting many people in the auditorium, in the same way ili.ii the death ol the lather in The Lion King laps directly into children's fears. Furthermore, in both films the central male child is integrated into a group of people ol different sex and age who share many of his experiences and, to a greater or lesser extent, participate in his hemic action, also joining him in the film's concluding scene. Elliott is joined in his adventures by, and through them is finally united with, his siblings, his brother's friends and eventually even bis mother and 'Keys', the scientist. Simba is helped along throughout the film, and joined in the final tableau, by his father's adviser Zazu, the wise old man Rafild, his irresponsible, hedonistic jungle friends Timon and Pumbaa, and his girlfriend Nala. Identification with the heroic male child, then, also means vicarious participation in group experiences and efforts, which again mirrors the very conditions of cinema spectatorship. Crucially, the group that is being assembled at the end of these films is, just like the target audience, a mixture of men and women, children and adults. At the centre of this group is the family unit, yet the group extends The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 301 well beyond this unit to include people who have bonded with members of the central family in the course of the adventures depicted in the film. Not only do the films work to strengthen the bonds between family members, then, but they also incorporate these families into a wider community, both on the screen and in the auditorium." All of this is perhaps not too surprising in the light ot the fact that both The Lion King and E.T. arc effectively children's films, a rather loose, yet easily identifiable category defined by the films' primary appeal to children, which is usually achieved through child and/or animal protagonists. It could he argued, then, that commercially successful children's films will tend to surround their young protagonists with adults so as to represent on the screen the very adults who are expected to accompanv children to the cinema, and who are thus offered two points of entry into the film's narrative scenarios a regressive identification with the child protagonist and a mature identification with one of the adults. Having said this, most of the above analysis of The lion King and E.T. would also seem to apply to action-adventure films which do not centre on child protagonists and are not primarily aimed at children. .Siur Wars is a striking example. Marketing research before the film's release in May 1977 showed that on the basis of the film's title and a brief description of its story and main attractions, interest in Star Wars was highest among young men, whereas women and older people (including parents) were put off by the film's generic classification, science-fiction, which was associated with technology and the lack of a human dimension."'' The original advertising campaign, which emphasized the film's mythic and epic qualities, its fantasy and romanticism to overcome the resistance of female and mature cinemagoers, was directed primarily at 12- to 24-year-olds and secondarily at 25- to 35-year-olds. Following the enormously successful release of the film, subsequent advertising campaigns (or re releases in the summer of 1978 and 1979 were aimed primarily at people over 35. According to media analyst Olen J. Earnest, the theme of these later campaigns 'was a reminder to older moviegoers of the fun of die Saturday matinee, Errol Flynn swashbuckling entertainment experiences of their younger movie going days - or how to be a kid again for two hours'. While childhood was a central concern in the marketing and reception of Star Wars, there was little consideration of actual children. Nevertheless, the film operates verv much like the children's films discussed earlier. After its action-packed opening, Star Wars focuses for quite some time on the interaction and misadventures of the two robot characters 3-CPO and R2-D2, a rather childish comic duo, not that lar removed Irom young Simba and Nala, or Timon and Pumbaa, or the children in E.T. The film then shifts focus to its teenage hero, Luke Skywalker, an orphan who lives and works on the farm of his aunt and uncle, wishing to leave this humble existence behind to join a military academy and 302 Audience, address and ideology become a warrior like his lather. His wish is fulfilled under tragic circumstances, when his foster parents are killed, which allows, and indeed forces him to go off to save the princess and the known universe from domination bv the evil empire. In his adventures, he is accompanied and supported by a substitute father (Obi-Wan Kenobi), a kitid of older brother (Han Solo) and a young woman (Princess Leia) who he never quite gets romantically involved with, as well as assorted creatures and robots, most of whom are assembled in the concluding tableau of the film. This tableau emphasizes heroic group effort and community spirit rather than individual heroism and romantic coupling, and includes a lina! turn bv the main protagonists towards the camera and the applause of the assembled rebel forces, mirroring quite precisely the cinema audience's (hoped for) response to the film itself. In the sequels The Empire Strikes Back (1980) and Return ofthejedi (1983), the familial configurations become even more central and literal. The villain (Darth Vailer) turns out to be Luke's father, and the princess his sister. Widi the continuing support of two substitute fathers (Obi Wan-Kenobi and Yoda), Luke finally confronts his real lather, and mobilizes the remnants of Vader's paternal feelings to turn him against his master, the evil emperor. By killing the emperor, Luke's father redeems himself. The trilogy's final tableau again features a celebration, assembling Luke and his companions as well as a cross-section of friendly alien creatures for a party. At the very end, a thoughtful Luke encounters the spirits of his three fathers (presented through superimposition), who are dead, yet who will remain with him forever precisely as projections (much like die film itself)- Again, as in The Lion King and £.7!, the young male protagonist is incorporated into a community, which has been brought together more closely by the film's adventures, and is overseen by the spirits of dead or absent fathers. Again, the audience is invited to see itself on the screen - men and women, children and adults, celebrating the end of the adventure (which has been a wish come true) and also saying an emotional farewell (to fadiers and to the film itself). Given all the similarities with children's films such as The lion Kina and E.T., it is not surprising to find out that, despite the initial marketing focus on teenagers and voung adults, in the long run Slot Wars has been recognized .«- a film for the whole family.. In an interview on the occasion of the enormously successful release of the Star liars special edition in February 1997, Twentieth Century Fox chairman Torn Sherak cited surveys which showed that one-third of the audience for this latest rc-rclease were families." I his emphasis on the family is also at the very heart of both the marketing ami the narrative of Jurassic Park (1993). However, while the film's multimedia marketing and merchandising campaign was largely based on the apparently irresistible appeal of dinosaurs to children, and its world premiere took place in the White House in aid of the Children's Defence Fund, reviewers warned parents that die The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 303 film may be too scary for preteenage children, and Spielberg declared that he ' wouldn't let his own children, all under the age of 10, see die film. Such public concern only served to foreground and intensify Jurassic Park's special relationship with children and their families, which is explicitly addressed in the film itself. After its briel action-packed opening sequence, familial concerns are raised with a reference to the fact that Hammond, the amusement park's owner, has a daughter who is going through a divorce, which later justifies the presence of his grandchildren Tim and Alexis in the park (the mother needs some time on her own to work things out). The scientist couple (Alan Grant anil Fllic Saddler) is then introduced in a scene which focuses on a child who is mysteriously present at the site of their latest archaeological dig. The boy is not impressed by all the talk about dinosaurs, until Grant turns to him, describing, and partly enacting, in great and gruesome detail, what velociraptors would do to him, if he ever encountered them (namely slice him open and start eating him while he's still alive). The film here quite sell-consciously sends a warning signal to the children in the auditorium, preparing them for the violence to come, much of which is directed against Hammond's grandchildren. The scene continues with a conversation between Grant and Saddler about his dislike of children and her wish to have children of her own. While this wish is not granted in the film, the subsequent adventure in Jurassic Park forces Grant to protect Tim and Alexia and encourages him to form a strong emotional bond with them, so that in the final tableau in the helicopter which takes them away from die island, the children happily rest in his arms, with a smiling Saddler looking on. Not coincidentally, this development is paralleled in one of the dinosaur subplots. Despite the fact that all the genetically engineered dinosaurs in Jurassic Park arc female, they do eventually reproduce (after some of them spontaneously change sex), because, as the chaos theoretician Malcolm says: 'Life cannot be contained. . . . Lile finds a way.' Both in Grant and in the dinosaurs, reproductive and familial instincts cannot be suppressed. Jurassic Park also trontains the most extensive reflections on its own Status as family entertain tuen t of all the films discussed so far. When he first appears at Grant and Saddler's dig, Hammond (played by film director Richard Attenborough) says about his amusement park, which carries die same title as the film: 'Our attractions will drive kids out of their minds. And not just kids — everyone!' In the park's main building, which is filled with merchandise prominently leaturing die film's logo, Hammond describes the difference between Jurassic: Park and other amusement parks in terms not dissimilar to the publicity surrounding the film's computer generated images which literally brought dinosaurs to life on the screen: 'I'm not talking just about rides, you know. Everybody has rides. No, we have made living biological attractions, so astounding that they'll capture the imagination of the entire planet.' When the corporate lawyer talks about the enormous fees people will be willing to pay for entry into die park, Hammond 304 Audience, address and ideology says thai I he park is 'not only Tor the super-rich, everyone in the world has the right to enjoy these animals'. And when his grandchildren arrive, Hammond tells his companions thai now they are going to 'spend a little time with our target audience'. Thus, the. film cle.irlv spells out what kind oľ entertainment it is meant to he: Jurassic Park oilers an exciting, almost life-like adventure, which is affordable for everyone and appeals first and foremost to children hut is also attractive for teenagers and adults. In response to possible accusations that its attractions are either too mechanical, lacking a human dimension, or too frightening for kids, the film tells a little morality tale. Hammond is made to realize that he's gone too far with his park: 'With this place, I wanted to show them [his audience] something that wasn't an illusion, something that was real.' Ellie Saddler replies that Hammond's idea of total control over bis creation was an illusion, and that what matters much more than such control 'is the people we love'. At the heart of popular entertainment, then, is not technological power and control but love, both lor the characters in the fictions and for the people in the auditorium. As in the other films discussed so far, Jurassic Park's final tableau depicts the strong emotional bond which has been forged between the visitors to Jurassic Park, mirroring the bond which the adventure of the film is meant to have forged among members of the cinema audience. The discussion of these lour films has demonstrated diat in contemporary Hollywood cinema, there is indeed a ..»mergence of the children's/family film and the action-adventure movie resulting in what I have called family-ad ven t u re movies. These films jrc: imbued with sentimentality, spectacle and a sense of i. wonder, telling stories about the pain and lunging caused bv dysfunctional or incomplete lailiilies (usually with absent or dead lathers), about childish wishes and nightmares magically coming true and the responsibilities that go along With this, about the power ol shared adventures to unite the young male protagonist with other members ol his family and a community bevond the boundaries of the family, and about the irrevocability of loss and separation (the family remains incomplete, the lather does not return). Indeed by foregrounding the cinematic spectacle ol special effects and precisely choreographed action, ami by constantly referring to their own status as cinematic entertainment for a captive audience, these films offer themselves as a temporary relief from the real-life problems which their stories focus on but can never solve. I lere, the young male protagonists, and the groups they are part of, serve as ideal representatives of a receptive audience, and the films' sensuous rides and magical transformations provide fleeting moments ol unselfconscious happiness lor this audience, which, like the group in the films' final tableau, eventually will have to leave the film adventure behind and re-enter the more mundane world of problematic social relationships and painful feelings. In terms of their marketing and their critical reception, the films are. widely understood as familial experiences, and they are best enjoyed as part of The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 305 a lamilv outing, or as an occasion to contemplate one's own place in familial >< < w$ networks, past and present. Vet, although they lend to ignore or marginalize romantic love and courtship, two of the most important concerns of the cinema's primary audience of teenagers and young adults, the films are able to please this constituency with their spectacle and emotional impact. The family-adventure movie and the family audience at the box office In the light of the ability of family-advent u re movies to appeal to all audience segments, it is not surprising to find that they dominate box-oŕhcc charts. Sixteen of the toj) twenty films in Variety's list of all-time top grossers can be identified as family-adventure movies (sec Appendix). While these films do not necessarily reproduce every aspect of the complex model developed in the previous section, they all share certain basic characteristics. They are intended, ^'\ manage, to appeal to all age groups, especially children and their parents, by combining spectacular, often fantastic or magical action with a highly emotional com ein with familial relationships, and also bv offering two distinct points of entry into the cinematic experiences they provide (childish delight and absorption on the one hand, adult self-awareness and nostalgia on the other band). These films are fairly evenly distributed across the period 1977-95, with most vcars (thirteen out of nineteen) seeing the release of one or two extremely successful family-adventure movies in late spring/early summer or in the second half of November. The US market share of each of these films in its year of release was about 5-10 percent, and in most cases these family-adventure movies grossed considerably more money 'han their nearest competitors. The most extreme example is £.71, which grossed more than twice as much as any other film released in 1982 and had a market share of over 10 per cent, which means that more than one out of every ten cinema tickets bought in the United Slates during that year «as for this one film. What does the market dominance of family-ad ven t u re films tell us about the cinemagoing habits and experiences of the American population? It is a well-known fact that the majority of frequent cinemagoers (that is those who go at least once a month) are young people, and that most cinema tickets are sold to people under iO." The vast majority (up to 80 per cent) of people over Í0 go to the cinema only rarely (that is between one and six times a year) or not at all; uiis is especially true of adults without children, 50 per cent of whom attend once a Mar or never, whereas for adults with children the figure is only about J5 per cent." This suggests that the American cinema audience is chiefly made up of voting cinemagoers who attend regularly and of lamilv units »"ho attend only on special occasions. These occasions would seem to be provided primarily DJ 306 Audience, address and ideology family adventure movies, which arc conveniently released in the run-up to, or during, school holidays. A release between the end ■>)" May and mid-July is tin-springboard for a long run during the summer holidays, and a November release is the ideal launching pad for a successful run during the Christmas season." There is considerable evidence, then, to suggest that ii is the rare holiday outings of groups of parents and children which, complement et I bv the core youth audience, turn a small number of family-adventure movies into supcrhits. These superhits provide the majority ol the American population who go to the movies very rarely with their only cinematic experiences, while also providing the Him industry with a considerable portion of its revenues from theatrical exhibition and related markets such as video, pay-TV and merchandising. Thus, family-adventure movies are central both to the economics of the American film industry and to the moviegoing experiences of the American public. Conclusion: the cultural and social work of Forrest Gump What, then, is the point of going to die cinema lor the vast audiences which family-adventure movies attract? By way of conclusion, I would like to indicate briefly how this question may be approached with reference to Forrest Gump." A starting point is provided by speculations about, and observations of, audience responses in the press. In liis/iarieiý review, for example, Todd McCarthy writes that fvTKSt Gump 'offers up a non-stop barrage of emotional and iconographic identification points that will make the postwar generation feel they're seeing dieir lives passing on screen.' v Martin Walker notes die special appeal of the film's version of history for thirty something and fortysomething adults: 'As the baby-boomers . , . pass through die decades and become parents, professors, senior managers and even president, they feel the need for some discrete (sit) but deliberate revisionism ol their pasts.' ** He goes on to argue that die film achieves this by being multifaceted and quite open to a variety of political readings, with both liberal and conservative critics attacking the film, and with both political camps also celebrating it, In Time magazine. Richard Corliss examines the movie crowds themselves: 'You see ihem - folks of all ages ami both sexes - floating out of the movie theater on waves of honorable sentiment/ Having 'completed an upbeat encounter session with America's recent past' and an 'emotional journey', each audience segment takes something different away from the experience: 'For younger viewers . . . Forrest Gump serves as a gentle introduction to the '60s. . . . And to those who raged, suffered or sinned through that insane decade, die movie offers absolution with a love pat.'17 These commentators all imply that the release of Forrest Gump became an occasion for baby-boomers to reflect on their generational identity and on the wider historical context for their individual biograph- The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 307 ies, as well as an opportunity to communicate these reflections and personal experiences to the younger generations. Indeed, a Gallup study showed diat the audience of Forrest Gump was dominated by older people: 40 per cent of the audience were 40—65 years old and i> per cent were in the 12 24 age range.B This suggests that the audience did indeed to a large extent consist of baby-boomers taking their children, both little kids and young adults, to share the experience of this film with them. The survey also registered unusually high approval ratings for torrcsi Gump among all audience segments. Both teenagers and old people, both men and women, both African-Americans and other ethnic groups highly recommended this film. In fact, despite severe criticism of the film's sexism and racism, Forrest Gump received a considerably higher approval rating from women than it did from men, and even a slightly higher rating from African-Americans than it did from non-black*. Again, this confirms the impression that Forrest Gump became an occasion lor sell-reflection and communication across the boundaries of age, sex and ethnicity. As with other family-adventure films, the social work that Forrest Gump performs on die familial units in die auditorium derives from the cultural work it performs on the families on the screen (moving Forrest Gump from the position ol the child in one single-parent family mother and son - to the position of parent in another: father and son). As I have argued throughout this chapter, this mirroring relationship is the basis for the significance and success of family adventure films. Thus, in order to get the point of these films, fully to experience and appreciate what they are trying to do, it may indeed be necessary for audience members, including critics, to take a child along to the cinema, or to be taken along a.-> a child, or at least to be willing to contemplate one's place in families pasl and present. Appendix: Twenty top grossers at the North-American box office According to I eonard Klady, '"Apollo" launched on all-time b.o. list' (rbrietj, 26 February 1996, p. 46). This list is based on ticket sales in North America (including Canada) for the original release and subsequent reissues. It is not adjusted lor inflation. Box-office figures are rounded. Where the exact release date could not l>e obtained, I have given the date of the film's review in liinm, which usually appears within days of the film's release. Family-adventure movies appear in bold. 1 E.T.- The Extra Terrestrial (released 11 June 1982) S400 million 2 Jurassic Park (released 10 June 1993) SÍ57 million 1 Forrest Gump (released 6 July 1994) S330 million 4 Star Wars (released 25 May 1977) SÍ22 million 5 The Lion King (release«! 15 June 1994) 5313 million 308 Audience, address and ideology 6 Home Alone (released 16 November 1990) $286 million 7 Return OJTheJedi (released 25 May 1983) $264 million 8 Jam (released 20 June 1975) $260 million 9 Batman (released 2 June 1989) S251 million 10 Raiders Oj The Lout Ark (released 2 June 1981) S242 million I I Ohostbusters (1984; reviewed on 6 June) $239 million 12 Beverfy Hills Cop (1984; reviewed on 28 November) $235 million 1Í The Empire Strikes Back (released 21 May 1980) $223 million 14 Mrs Doubtflre (released 24 November 1993) $219 million 15 Ghost (released I 3 July 1990) S 218 million 16 Aladdin (released 11 November 1992) $2l7million 17 Back To The future (1985; reviewed on 26 June) $208 million 18 Terminator 2: Judgment Dav (released 5 July 1991) $205 million 19 Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade (released 24 May 1989) $197 million 20 Gone With The Wind (1939) S192 million Notes I Cf. Jose Arroyo. 'Cameron and the oomJc', Sight and Sound, vol. 4, no. 9 (September 1994), pp. 26-8. ľ li' using ilit term 'prodiici on trend' rather than 'genn ' For th( classification offiln -. I Follow Tino Balio's example. Production trends can be identified by both textual features (such as story, iconography and forms of spectacle) and cxtratextual features (such as target audience, release pattern, budget, cultural status and key personnel). Sec Tino Balio, Grand Design: Hollywood as a Modern Business Enterprise. 1930-1939 (Berkeley: University <>( California Press, I99S), Chapter 7. 1 Leonard Klady. '"Apollo" launched on all-time b.o. list', Variety, 26 February 1996, p. 46. See Appendix I. 4 Robin Wood, Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), pp. 162-3. 5 Ibid., p. 172. 6 Robin Wood. ''80s Hollywood: dominant tendencies', CiaeActiont, no. I (Spring 1985), p. 3. 7 Ibid., p. 5. 8 This critical tradition extends from Steve Neale, 'Hollywood strikes back: special .Ileus in recent American cinema', Screen, vol. 21, no. 3 (1980), pp. 101 5. to Sarah Harwood, family Fiction*: Representations of the Family In 1980s Hollywood Cinema (London: Macmillan, 1997). Cf. Andrew Gordon, 'Science fiction and fantasy film criticism: the case of Lucas and Spielberg', Journal of the fantastic in the Ans, vol. 2, no. 2(1989). pp. 80-94. 9 Wood.-'80s Hollywood', p. 5. 10 Ibid. p. 5. I Wood, Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan, p. 164. 12) Walt Disney Pictures Fact Sheet, The lion King microfiche. British Film Institute tlil I j Press material circulated by distributors is worth studying because its státemčlíETíňd é The cultural and social work of the family-adventure movie 309 their wav into a wide range of publications, thus shaping the expectations of prospective film audiences, I ( Katzenberg quoted in J. Hoberman. 'The mouse roars', Village Voice, 21 June 1994. p. 45. 14 Wood sees the 'txpulston of the mother' as one of the key aspects of contemporary 1 lollywood cinema: 'once the Oedipal trajectory lias been completed and the identification with the lather achieved, she is entirely dispensable and something oľ an encumbrance' ("80s Hollywood*, p. i). 1 5 Wood, Hollywood From Vietnam to Reagan, p. 165. 16 Similarly. Home Alone (1990, no. 6 in the Variaj list of all time box office hits) focuses on the problematic status of childish wishes and wish-fulfilment fantasies, that is on the pleasures and terrors of wishes (apparently) coming true. This is highlighted in the press book: 'Once little Kevin comes to terms with this scary reality, that his family is reallv gone (something he wished for in a fit ol anger the previous night), he must fend for himself in the everyday chores of housekeeping" (Home Alone microfiche, BFI). 17 Matt Roth, 'The lion King: a short history of Disney-fascism', Jump Ctít, no. 40, p. 15. 15 Ibid., pp. 15, 18. 19 Again, there are parallels with Home Alone. The press book quote* director Chris Columbus who described the film as 'a combination ol kids' fears and fantasies of being left home alone'. Despite its excessive comic spectacle, several British critics welcomed the film as a realistic alternative to 'machine-tooled fantasies in plastic and rubber' such as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990); see, for example, Geofl Brown, 'Fxploitation with a human face'. The Times, 20 December 1990, p. 17. Interestingly, the press book also quotes Catherine O'Hara, who plays the modier, saying that she "liked the idea that a good, normal kind of family, good parents, could make such a stupid mistake' (Home Alone microfiche, BFI). The film deals extensively with the mother's feelings of guilt and her desperate attempt to get back to her son. 20 Cf. Sue Harper and Vincent Porter, 'Moved to tears: weeping in the cinema in postwar Britain'. Screen, vol. 37. no. 2 (Summer 1996), pp. 152—73. and Steve Neale. 'Melodrama and tears', Screen vol. 27, no. 6 (November December 1986), pp. 6-22. ?l The relationship between traditional gender roles and emotional and physical excess on screen and in the auditorium has been explored by Linda Williams in Learning to scream1, SiflAt and Sound, vol. 1, no. 12(December 1994),pp. 14-17,and 'Film bodies: gender, genre and excess'. Film Quarterly, vol. 44, no. 4 (1991), pp. 2-13. See also Carol J. Clover, Men, Women and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Hom>r Film (London: BFI. 1992). 21 Sue Zschoche. 'ET., women's history, ami the problem of Elliot', American Studia, vol. J6, no. 2 (Fall 1995), p. 100. 2 í Interestingly, Zschoche notes that her daughter's next obsession were the Oz books, whose heroic central figure is 'a girl on a great quest* (ibid., p. 109). The popularity of these books and of other children's classics such as Lewis Carroll's Alice books indicate that there are powerful models for stories about girl adventurers, but these are largely ignored in contemporary popular culture. 24 The films could also be said actively to encourage identification across racial and ethnic boundaries. Alter all, the story of E.T. revolves around the possibility ot transcending such boundaries (here between human being and alien). While The Lion King has been attacked for being racist, critics have also pointed out 'just how black it is' 310 Audience, address and ideology (Hoherman, 'The mnii.se roars'), referring in particular to ihe range ol bLick voices featured in the film. 25 While Home Alone is largely centred on the actions of a single young male protagonist, it also is concerned both with the reunion of the family at the end of the dim and with the strengthening »I the protagonist's bond with other members of the suburban community, exemplified by the old neighbour, who, flue to the boy's intervention, is reunited with his own son in the final tableau. 26 Olen J. Earnest, 'Suir lián: A case study of motion picture marketing', Current Research m film, vol. 1 (1985), pp. I-1S. 11 Ibid., p. 17. 28 Quoted in Claudia I'uig, 'Star Wars makes a new killing at the bo* office', Guardian, 4 February 1997, p. 13. 29 As reported in the British press; see, lor example, Martin Walker, 'Fabulous beasts stumble to extinction in While Mouse', Guardian, 6 June 1993, P- 24; Phil Reeves, 'Dino-fevcr grips nation as cultural tyrant is horn'. Independent on Sunday, 18 June 1993, p. I 1; Jonathan Romncy, 'Toys for a movie brať, Guardian, 21 June 1991, Section ?, pp. 2 3. Cf. Henry Slu-eban, "Ihe fears of children', Sight and Sound, vol. 3, no. 7 (July 1993). p. 10. There was similar concern about The Lion King, especially about thi" lerrilying and potentially traumatizing impact of the scene in which the father dies. As reported in 'Hamlet with fur makes a box office killing', Daily Telegraph, 21 June 1994, p. 1 J, and James Bone, 'Critics fear Disney hit may disturb children'. The Time*, 22 June 1994, p. 6. JO These calculations are based on the box-office grosses in the films' year of release which are derived from Cobbett Steinberg, Reel Facts (New York: Vintage, 1981), pp. 444-5, and 'The 1980s; a reference guide to motion pictures, television. VCR, and cable', The Veim Light Imp, no. 27 (Spring 1991 >. p. 78. Overall annual box-office revenues are listed in "Ihe 1980s'; Joel W. finler, The Hollywood Slaty (London: Octopus, 1988), p. 288; Leonard Klady, 'Numbers game at showest', Variety, 10 March 1997, p. IS; and Ralf Ludemann, 'Pay-TV paves the way ahead.', Screen Unemotional, 24 January 1997, p. 74. The dominance of this production trend at the North American box office translates into success in other markets, with a small number of family-adventure films dominating the international theatrical and video market since the mid-1970s, each generating revenues in the region of SI-2 billion. See, lor example, the list of all-time international top grosser* in Variety, 1 June 1996, p. 70, and the list of all-time top sell-through videos in Adam Sandler. 'Bi/ ponders Oscar's effect on Gump viď, Variety, 24 April 1995, p. 7; also an Entertainment Weekly survey calculating total income generated from box-office admissions and video sales and rentals, which is reproduced in a supplement to the August 1994 issue of Empire magazine, entitled '101 things you never knew about the movies', p. 32. H This was hrst discovered when Hollywood started to do market research in the 1940s. The age distribution of the cinema audience was remarkably stable between the 1950s and the 1970s with about 75 per cent of all tickets bought by people under Í0. Vet since the 1980s this dominance ol young people has been decreasing (moving closer to the 50 per cent mark). See Thomas Dohcrly, Teenagers and Tetanies: The Juvenil nation of American Movies in ihe 1950s (Boston: Unwin llvman, I9S8), pp. 62-3, 1S7, 231; Garth Jovctt. Film: The Democratic Art (Boston: Little, Broun, 1976), pp. 476, 485; Justin Wyart, High Concept: Movies and Marketing in Hollynood (Austin: University of Texas Pre«, 1994), p. 178; 'Industry e. on. imJc review and audience profile'. The Movie The cultural and social work of the family-adventure niovie 311 Business Book, ed. Jason H. Squire (New York: fireside, 1992, 2nd edition), pp. 188-9. 12 'Industrv economic review', pp. Í89 90. í í Cf. John Izod, Hollywood and the box Office, IS9S-I9S6 (London: Macmillan, 1988), pp. 181-2. J4 Academic critics have taken issue with the history lessons the film provides, in partim lar with its marginali/ation and negative representation of women. African-Americans and the counterculture. See Thomas B. Byers, 'History re-membered: Forrest Gump, postfeminist masculinity, and the burial of the counterculture'. Modern Fiction Studies, vol. 42, no. 2 (Summer 1996), pp. 4 19-44; Fred Pfeil, White Guys: Studies in Postmodern Domination and Difference (London; Verso, 1995), pp. 251-7. A more sympathetic view is offered by Peter N. Chunio II. '"You've got to put the past behind you before you can move on": Forrest Gump and national reconciliation', fournal of Popular Film and Television vol. 23 (1995), pp. 2 7. 15 áriety, II July 1994. 16 Martin Walker, 'Making saccharine taste sour'. Sight and Sound, vol. 14, no. 10 (Odober 1994), p. 16. 17 Richard Corliss, 'The world according to Gump', Time, I August 1994, pp. 41 2. 18 Leonard Klady, 'B.O. bets on youth despite a solid spread', Variety. 10 April 1996, p. 14. 19 Ibid. 40 A more detailed study of how this might work in concrete terms could he modelled on sociological held work conducted at the site where the baby-boom hit Field of Dreami 11989) was shot. See Roger C. Aden. Rita L, Rahoi and Christina S. Beck, '"Dreams are born on places like this": the process of interpretive community formation at the Field of Dreams site'. Communication Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 4 (Fall 1995), pp. 368-SO.