In the upcoming July release of the new movie,
Catwoman, Halle Berry plays the title Jekyll-and-Hyde role, whose character is split between a shy, retiring graphic designer and an untamed, feline superhero. Naturally, the superhero is sexy and sleek, while the mild-mannered designer ("Patience" is her name) is a submissive loner who comes alive only after sundown: she's a study in black leather and curly claws with deep, red lips to match her rich, croony baritone. As a superhero she is agile; as a designer, aloof. The superhero is keen and cunning, while the designer is timid and apologetic "mal dans sa peau," ("sick in her [own] skin") according to the French version of the Warner Brothers website.
And so it is that God (or at least Warner Brothers) gives with one hand and takes with the other: think of
Clark Kent on antidepressants, with smaller shoulders and better cleavage. The superhero, let it be said, is not the designer, any more than The Man of Steel was a newspaper reporter. Faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings at a single bound of course, Clark Kent
was a newspaper reporter, he just never rescued anyone until he stepped into that phone booth, transforming his boxy, bespectacled persona into the world's mightiest superhero.
It looks like Hollywood has yet again dramatized a profession that in truth, is better characterized by toiling into the wee hours. (I, for one, have never known a journalist who ended his reporting day at 5pm any more than I know any graphic designers who are nine-to-fivers.) Does "graphic designer" as a character type suggest a kind of banal anonymity, a chameleonlike identity? Or is it just an amorphous character type: in other words, just as "graphic designer" may be the antidote to superhero, is it also the opposite of
villain?Not that any of this is likely to have an impact at the box office, mind you. In the meantime, we should welcome the opportunity for our profession to be represented on the big screen. Or should we? Personally, I can imagine better personifications, on the screen and elsewhere: maybe we'll see this when William Gibson's
Pattern Recognition comes to the screen. In this novel, Gibson's enigmatic heroine, Cayce Pollard, inhabits a world of action and intrigue, where dare I say it her nomadic forays in modern consumer culture meet with unprecedented bouts of hacking, sabotage and terror. As far I can tell from reading the book, our heroine has a rather exciting time of it, all without leaping from tall buildings in a single bound. Even more than this, as a so-called "cool hunter" she's keen and cunning in a manner perhaps more intellectually suited to, say, reality.
But then again: when did we ever go to the movies for a dose of reality?
For those on the edge of their seats, we'll know in a year or so, when
Pattern Recognition comes to the big screen. Peter Weir will direct. And who knows: maybe Halle Berry will star? Warner Brothers is releasing this film also, leading the dreamer in me to wonder if design has more of a future in Hollywood than any of us ever dared consider. Meanwhile, my inner pragmatist (or maybe it's my inner Rodney Dangerfield) says that the problem with our profession isn't that design isn't taken seriously, it's that we're not getting a cut at the box office. So long as designers continue to inspire big-screen characterizations, there may be quite a brilliant future for us after all.
Comments [22]
The characters' professions serve only as a shell for something else and are rarely developed beyond a sketch. That "graphic designer" should be chosen as the alter-ego for Catwoman proves either that we're on the public radar screen, or that Hollywood is scraping the bottom of the barrel (not Vet, not Lawyer, not Writer, not Photographer, not Video Store Clerk ... hmmm, what about Designer?).
Welcome to Hollywood, everyone--now can you just whip me up a little something today, tweak that logo and enhance that photo? Cuz ... isn't that how Catwoman did it?
06.11.04
12:28
hope pattern recognition is treated sensitively-the notion of whole/broken in the book is beautiful.
06.11.04
01:45
Whatever the form of work being depicted, films that make the details of ordinary labour part of their texture are often compelling. The concern they show for everyday experience makes them the antithesis of Hollywood pap, which usually treats work simply as a way of "typing" people - as will likely prove to be the case with Catwoman. I'm thinking of the oil rig scenes in Five Easy Pieces; the car factory in Blue Collar; a picture-framer's working day in The American Friend (the Wim Wenders version); the life of a bee-keeper in Ulee's Gold - you really learn about a way of life here. A huge part of the fascination of Girl with a Pearl Earring is the picture it gives you of 17th-century Dutch domestic toil, whether it's tending house, or crushing and mixing a painter's pigments.
In the hands of a sensitive film-maker, a graphic designer's working life, as backdrop to some inner struggle or external crisis, could be made just as interesting, especially if the film was set in pre-digital times. A little-seen film version of Orwell's Keep the Aspidistra Flying included some good 1930s ad agency scenes. Far from Heaven, a movie that dripped DESIGN from every lush celluloid pore, had some lovely hints of 1950s advertising and corporate identity.
Has anyone optioned Chip Kidd's The Cheese Monkeys yet? (So long as Ron Howard doesn't get it.)
06.11.04
02:30
Rick, I have often wondered the same thing about Cheese Monkeys. Maybe someone can convince David Lynch to direct it. The ending is ambiguous enough to be one of his films. Of course I don't even know if he would work on a project that he didn't write himself. How about another Jonze/Kaufman collaboration. They would certainly put a unique spin on it.
06.11.04
04:16
06.11.04
05:20
In Alain de Botton's books, the object of the protagonist's affection, and subject of the author's reflections on the nature of love, is often a young female graphic designer (and he does use the preferred nomenclature).
And let's not forget Leonardo DiCaprio's portrayal of Frank Abagnale, Jr., in 'Catch Me if You Can', which is probably the sexiest representation of any profession one could ask for. DeCaprio works his own long hours, busting out old school graphic moves to get ladies, money, and status, and even goes to jail for it. In real life (according to the endnotes of the movie, anyway) Abagnale's design skills and experience eventually got him out of jail to work for the FBI, and landed him consulting positions for Fortune 500 companies as a check designer).
06.11.04
09:14
Cape Fear aside, for an accurate view of a 1970s art director that seems to ring as true for me as the oil riggers in Five Easy Pieces, check out Dustin Hoffman in Kramer Versus Kramer. The director, Robert Benton, started out as an art director at Esquire, so he knew what he was talking about. And the scene where the kid accidentally spills his drink on the 4x5 transparencies is, for me, more frightening than the shower scene in Psycho.
06.11.04
10:44
06.12.04
12:54
i loved ur previous article too.. (and the one b4 tat one too) haha
im a 18 yr old "graphic designer" ( as i wud like to call myself ).. just got into a design school (York University @ Toronto) and i am looking forward to it!..
It took me 2 years to convince my parents to let me go into Graphic Design.. they wanted me to to be a Doctor or a Lawyer or a Surgeon or am Enginner.. basically professions that have be proclaimed by the media (majority of which i think was movies)...
well now ive finally convinced them... and luckily i got into one of canada's best design schools too..
I REALLY REALLY HOPE Hollywood makes more movies wid GRAPHIC DESIGNERS as a profession for their lead male/female... it'll b amazing for everybody.. and our profession will finally be more acceptable in the society... just like doctors and lawyers ...
amen
06.12.04
03:32
"...why do we care if Hollywood recognizes what we do?"
I'm with you on that one Michaelhowever mild the case of recognition.
06.12.04
01:11
06.12.04
02:35
Are we our jobs?? And beside that - isn't it just a victory that a Graphic Designer is being played by a woman....
06.14.04
07:07
06.15.04
04:10
06.21.04
12:00
What I also haven't seen is many accurate depictions of male graphic designers. In "40 Days and 40 Nights" Josh Hartnett plays a web designer faced with the horrific challenge of not having sex for 40 days. (Apparently that deal also included not going to work in that time span) And in "What Women Want", Mel Gibsons character is a Creative Director, but his character is just chauvinistic enough to prove to the audience he's not too "Fruity."
But overall it is exciting to see the profession getting exposure. Maybe one day when I tell someone I'm a graphic designer, they'll know what that means, and recognize it as a valuable profession.
One last thing, as far as graphic design in Movies goes. There's this really funny scene in a very bad movie called "American Psycho" where the main character is intimidated by another man's business card and its design. Check that one out.
06.21.04
04:44
Hollywood's job is not to project the accurate or constructive portrayal of anybody. It's to make money creating fantasies for people to enjoy.
(I don't mean to sound condescending by saying this. I'm a huge film nerd -- like, I suspect, many who read Design Observer -- so I'm utterly under the spell of those fantasies too.)
That graphic designers should get a few nods in a few scripts doesn't necessarily say much about who we are, or even how people view us. It just means that a handy (if superficial) definition is helping studios sell that fantasy to the public.
I mean, let's face it: the movie industry has already begun typecasting the designer. A caricature is already emerging.
Need a character who's overly stylish, aloof, flighty, too creative to be an office drone, but not creative enough to be an off-the-grid boho artist? Introverted, talented, removed (but plugged in to the zeitgeist), perhaps a bit enigmatic, urbain but self-consciously gritty? Happy to sit in front of a computer monitor all day -- but with a sure wild streak that may come out after office hours?
It may not ring true for many of us, but it's practically in the Producers' Manual of Character Stereotypes: "Graphic Designer (see also: 'Employed Artist')," somewhere between "Architect" and "Rock Star, Aspiring."
Some professions seem to have enough intrinsic storytelling value that they're naturally brought to the screen, with at least some of the plot revolving around their jobs: soldiers, athletes, cops, scientists, writers, etc.
Most professions don't. It takes quite a movie to bring to life the work of actuaries, shoe salesmen, landscapers, mailmen, bank tellers, middle managers, garbagemen, record producers -- and, yes, graphic designers. C'est la vie.
It can, of course, be done. Who'd ever think the world of sham real-estate brokers would be so compelling until "Glengarry Glen Ross" came around? Or, as mentioned in previous posts, that the manipulation of graphic minutiae would be so intriguing, as it was in "Catch Me If You Can"?
But any influence Hollywood may have on the public's perception of graphic designers would probably be pretty marginal, and, most likely, not altogether positive. And certainly not accurate -- that's just too much to ask.
Some of my friends who are scientists (of the academic variety) cringe at -- or just try to ignore -- movie portrayals of their profession, which, despite the abundance of roles, are almost all laughably unrealistic and narrow. (They claim a notable exception is Jodie Foster's character in "Contact," solely because she has to beg for funding.)
And if you ever meet a pro bowler, don't ask their opinion of "Kingpin" -- a movie that apparently set the social status of their profession back about eight decades. Just mentioning that flick might cause the pro bowler to go into some sort of mad bowling rage and try to make a 7-10 split out of you.
Thus my scientist pals and the pro bowlers of the world might tell us to take solace in the fact Hollywood hasn't paid much attention to our field of work -- and hence isn't distorting it beyond recognition for everybody else.
Frankly, we might be better off.
06.21.04
06:14
06.28.04
12:17
06.28.04
09:22
06.28.04
09:42
06.28.04
07:34
06.29.04
01:35
The only good thing is that it would be hard to take this movie seriously. The characters are hardly developed and the plot is week. Luckily the movie didn't do to well and critics blasted it.
02.14.05
10:34