The Ordinary World:
Jones is introduced attempting to retrieve a valuable Idol from an ancient, booby trapped ruin. He retrieves the Idol but has it stolen shortly after by Dr. Rene Belloq, leading the local Hovitos tribe. He narrowly escapes with his life and expresses his that he is still upset at the loss of the statue to his Archeology class. In some ways, this is also the “Road Back” from a previous adventure and establishes Indy as already being a hero while many other narratives develop the hero along the way.
The Call to Adventure:
This occurs when two army officers approach Indy and his friend Marcus, stating that the Nazi’s have discovered the possbile location of the Ark of the Covenant which holds great power. However, the only way to find it is with the Staff of Ra.
Refusal of the Call:
There isn’t really a refusal of the call, probably due to the fact that Indy is already an established hero figure.
Meeting with the Mentor:
In this film, Indy doesn’t meet with a mentor, possibly due to the fact that he is already an established hero doesn’t need someone to guide him on his adventure.
Crossing the Threshold and Tests, Allies and Enemies:
These two events occur simultaneously. Indy travels to Nepal with Marcus hoping to meet his old teacher/friend Abner Ravenwood to try and seek out the Staff of Ra. He is followed by a Nazi agent by the name of Toht. He travels to Abner’s daughter, Marion’s bar, who also happens to be Indy’s ex. He reveals that he needs the headpiece of the Staff of Ra and she reluctantly gives it to him after she is promised $3,000 and more on their return. It is at this point where Nazi soldiers enter the bar and a fight ensues. Afterwards, Indy and Marion travel to Egypt to meet with one of Indy’s friends, Sallah who is known as one of the country’s most renowned excavators.
The Ordeal:
Indy actually goes through two ordeals in the film. The ordeal consists of Indy believing that Marion has died after being attacked by Arabs and Nazis. There is no reward after the ordeal as Indy drowns his sorrows in alcohol.
The Approach:
Indy infiltrates the Nazi digsite and uses the headpiece of the Staff of Ra to find the location of the Well of Souls, the area where the Ark of the covenant is buried. He finds Marion tied up. He realizes he can’t free her without revealing his location.
The Ordeal and The Reward:
Later, he leads a digging party of his own into the Well of Souls which is filled with snakes, something that Indy despises. Indy and Sallah eventually retrieve the Ark but Indy is sealed in the hole where they found it by Belloq and Toht. Marion is also thrown into the hole do die and the Nazis flee with the Ark. The hero loses the treasure but is driven to retrieve it.
The Road Back:
Indy is driven to retrieve the Ark and escapes the chamber with Marion and a fight ensues on a plane between Indy, Marion and Nazi soldiers. The plane explodes but Indy and Marion are able to escape.
The Resurrection:
Indy and Marrion are eventually captured by a Nazi submarine and taken to a ritual site atop a mountain. At this point Indy and Marion are tied up and forced to watch as the Nazis open the Ark and attempt to harness its power. Indy orders Marion to close her eyes as the spirits are freed from the Ark, resulting in all the Nazi’s dying while Indy and Marion survive, although gravely weakened.
Return with the Elixir:
At this point in the story, Indy is changed by the events of his adventure, however, he was never able to retrieve the Ark as it was taken by the government and sealed in a warehouse containing several other similar crates.
Comparison Point One: The World’s End as a homage to The War of the Worlds
These two end scenes are quite similar, as the invading aliens are defeated, but the Earth has suffered because of it. In The War of the Worlds, cities around the world are destroyed by the aliens, but The World’s End takes this idea further and completely destroys all form of civilisation. However, it does it in a way that is a homage to The War of the Worlds, as audiences who are familiar with the genre of science-fiction would recognise the similarities between the endings of these two films.
Title Screen:
To what extent have modern science fiction films changed since the birth of the genre, shown with The War of the Worlds (dir. Byron Haskin, 1953) and The World’s End (dir. Edgar Wright, 2013)?
Introduction:
Byron Haskin’s 1953 film The War of the Worlds and Edgar Wright’s 2013 The World’s End are both distinctive science-fiction films. They are incredibly recognisable, from the classical Martians in The War of the Worlds, to the well-known actors that appear in The World’s End. These films have been chosen as they were made in contrasting eras of the sci-fi genre, so the development of the genre can be clearly seen. It can be argued that The World’s End is inspired by The War of the Worlds, as many similar aspects can be seen in the two. Haskin’s film follows Forrester and Sylvia as they hide from the invading Martians, who destroy countless cities across the world. After many futile attempts to kill the Martians, they eventually die due to the bacteria in the Earth’s atmosphere. The World’s End also features an alien invasion, but a different narrative, as a group of friends; Gary, Peter, Oliver, Steven and Andy, revisit their hometown for a pub crawl, only to discover that nearly everyone in the town has been replaced by androids. The group attempt to blend in with the blanks, but are discovered and persuade them to leave Earth. As the blanks leave, they trigger an electromagnetic pulse that sends the Earth back to the Dark Ages.
Comparison Point One – Genre:
The War of the Worlds and The World’s End are both very different interpretations of the sci-fi genre. These films can be looked at in terms of Steve Neale’s ideas of repetition and difference, where he states that genre is understood by an audience as being made up of traditional elements, combined with new ones to create variation. (on-screen quote: “[genres are] dominated by repetition, but they are also marked fundamentally by difference, variation, and change.” Steven Neale, Film and Theory: An Anthology [2000]). Variation makes film more appealing for audiences, as each film from a particular genre will be different, rather than every film having similar narratives and becoming predictable and boring. (on screen quote: “repetition is important … variation and difference are crucial” Steven Neale, Film and Theory: An Anthology [2000]). In The War of the Worlds, many classic elements of sci-fi can be seen; an alien invasion, an scientific element, and the eventual victory of the protagonists. This repetition of the genre makes it instantly recognisable as sci-fi for modern day audiences, and lets people know what to expect from the film. As The War of the Worlds was based off the 1898 novel by HG Welles, a lot of the narrative is classic, as there wasn’t a lot of other works at the time. There isn’t a lot of variation from typical sci-fi, as this film could be considered to be in the experimental stage of its cycle. This idea comes from Christian Metz, who states that all genres go through four stages in a cycle: the experimental stage (where conventions are established), the classic stage (where conventions become iconic), the parody stage (where conventions are mocked), and the deconstruction stage (where rules and broken). (on screen quote: “The laws of genre are derived from earlier examples of that genre” Christian Metz, Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema [1974]). The World’s End also has a lot of the same elements of sci-fi as The War of the Worlds, despite the fact that it was made 60 years later. The aliens, the conflict and the idea of advanced technology make the audience aware that this is a sci-fi film. However, this film comes at the deconstruction stage of the genre, so there are a lot of aspects that make it unique. There are some examples of variation from classic sci-fi, for example when the protagonists don’t completely win at the end of the film. The blanks leave Earth, but leave it ruined. The World’s End is also combined with the comedy genre, which makes it more appealing for audiences, and reflects the deconstructive nature of the film. At the time that The War of the Worlds was released, sci-fi was still relatively new to audiences, and the film experimented with the genre. The plot tends to focus around the military and defeating the Martians through war strategies, so at this point the sci-fi genre was merged with the war genre to expand its audience. This could also relate to the context of the film, as it was released after two world wars, and there was the threat of nuclear attack in America from the Cold War. The Martians could have been a metaphorical representation of the threat of attack from others. On the other hand, the blanks from The World’s End could be representing the threat of attack from people you know, similar to modern day terrorist threats. This shows how genre evolves with time, and keeps current to modern day events. This keeps the films relevant and the audiences interested.
Comparison Point Two – Homage/Pastiche:
The World’s End can be seen as a postmodern film, due to aspects of the film such as its hyperreality (when reality is exaggerated) and commodification (things can be bought or sold, which in this case refers to the actors). (on screen quote: “[hyperreality is] the meticulous reduplication of the real, preferably through another, reproductive medium, such as photography” Jean Baudrillard, Symbolic Exchange and Death [1976]). Postmodern films tend to blend different themes and tones, which can lead to homages or pastiches to previous films. Homage is a respectful reference to something else, while pastiche is imitating the style of another piece of work. The World’s End has many homages to other films, due to its postmodern nature. For example, there is a scene in the film when the characters have to prove to one another that they haven’t been replaced by blanks. This is very similar to a scene from John Carpenter’s 1982 film The Thing, where the characters also test one another to see if they’re infected. The style of the film could be seen as a pastiche of the work of Sam Raimi, like his zoom shots in the 2002 Spider-Man. On the other hand, The War of the Worlds is a modern film, as it has a serious tone and takes a scientific approach to the concept of an alien invasion. However, it can be argued that The War of the Worlds inspired The World’s End, as the narrative of the two films are quite similar. The World’s End could be a postmodern interpretation of The War of the Worlds, as there are a number of differences between the two. For example, the endings of the two films are similar, as the invading aliens are defeated, but the Earth has suffered. In The War of the Worlds, countless cities and people were destroyed by the Martians, but the film ends with a hopeful tone as it seems like life can return to moderately normal. The World’s End takes this idea further; the Earth is basically destroyed and civilisation is thrown into chaos. The film does also end on a happy note though, as all the protagonists are seen doing things that they like and are finding ways to survive.
Comparison Point Three – Hypereality vs Reality:
As mentioned, postmodern films tend to be hyperealistic, and The World’s End uses a lot of hypereality in its action scenes. In this scene when the main characters meet the blanks, comedy and fast-paced camera movements are used to give the scene a feeling of something not being quite right. This links in with the theme of the film, as Simon Pegg said the inspiration from the film came from “the notion of alienation from your hometown taken to its literal conclusion”. it is also presented as comical, with the repetition of Oliver’s “WTF” and Peter hiding in the toilet. The scene is also shot in one take, which means that a lot of rehearsal was needed in order to make sure that it ran smoothly. In a way, this also contributes the the hyperealistic feeling the scene has. Even the framing of the scene is hyperealistic, with the characters lining up to face each other and the way that each individual fight works around the others. The fast camera movements reflect the chaos of the scene, highlighting to the audience the confusion and panic that the protagonists are feeling in this moment. The multiple whip pans increase the pace of the scene, and work well to link each characters’ individually fight together. In contrast, The War of the Worlds has a higher sense of verisimilitude – minus the alien invasion. In this scene where Forrester first encounters the aliens, the characters behave much more rationally, with Forrester giving a scientific explanation for what’s happening. The camera is much steadier, giving the audience a clearer view of the action and suggesting that the characters are more level-headed than those from The World’s End. This is due to The War of the Worlds being a modern film, meaning it is more serious and presents one viewpoint, which in this case is Forrester’s, rather than the viewpoints from different characters like in the postmodern The World’s End.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the science-fiction genre has changed a lot since its creation. Films can be seen as more postmodern now, as aspects of postmodernism such as commodification and intertextuality are very appealing to audiences. Modernism may be not as interesting any more, as very serious narratives and scientific approaches could discourage some people from watching certain films.
This clip appears at around the 100/110 minute mark towards the end of the film, and is important because it appears at a time where Tree has gone through so much emotional and physical trauma throughout the film, that she has began to develop her personality and character arc.
This clips occurs slightly after the halfway point of the film, at around the 80 minute mark. Ripley discovers that Ash has tried to bring the Alien back, which is a significant turning point for the film but also shows the character as smart and resourceful. However, this is also juxtaposed by the fact that she is choked by Ash and saved by the male character of Parker. This is supported by the films social context because despite the growth of second wave feminism; there was still the common perception of women as meek and needing to be saved by men. This also ties into the common misconception around early examples of the ‘final girl’ before the 1980’s being a survivor opposed to a stand-alone final girl character typically because they are saved by male characters.
For example, Laurie Strode from Halloween (1978, John Carpenter) is often referred to as the first strong example of a final girl. However, many theorists actually debate this, because she is saved from Michael by Sam Loomis. Even Clover herself to coined them term, argues about the difficulty of distinguishing between a final girl and a female survivor character.
This scene is not the final showdown, and instead appears at around 50 minutes into the film where Tree finally thinks she has escaped her antagonist. This is important because it shows the continuous fight between the final girl and antagonist seen with the character type
This clip is found towards the end of the film, in the last remaining 10 minutes. It shows Ripley ‘surviving’ her antagonist – the alien. (Although we later found out that the alien survives and comes back for the sequel) This scene is important to use in my comparative study because it represents the typical final girl traits of defeating the antagonist and shows the elements of the feminist film theory
