As sad as it might be, I have watched all 6 of the Fast and Furious movies in the series and was excited to see yet again the new one. The death of Paul Walker is the second ironic death of a big name actor right after a new film is coming out in the last 5 years. The first actor was Heath Ledger, who played the role of the lunatic villain known as The Joker. This horrifying villain on screen seemed that he could only be this crazy on some kind of drug, and of course the actor’s death was due to a drug overdose. It is strange to see another tragedy occur when it was known that Paul Walker died in a car crash, but to be crude and honest, I couldn’t help but make jokes about the irony of it.
As the article states, Walker had felt trapped by his roles in action films and wanted to become more of an actor, which he demonstrated in soon to be new releases, “Hours” and “Brick Mansion”. Both of these films and “Fast and Furious 7” discuss what is the right way to continue to go forward with these movies without offending the image of Walker’s death. Each has its different way of going about it, and I understand it is a business, but no where in the article did it even discuss the sadness of this man’s crash. These companies talk about honoring him correctly, and yet all they care about is making money and trying to look as polite as possible while they exploit his final films.
Regardless of how far each company wants to take it, it definitely isn’t the right move to shy away from the topic entirely as if nothing happened. When “The Dark Knight” was released Heath Ledger, dressed as The Joker, was a star part of each commercial being marketed. Although that is a very strong way to do it, that is certainly addressing the fact and letting people know he is a big part of the movie and there is nothing wrong with going to see it just because he passed away. Universal is taking the complete opposite approach and is still set up to have at least another “Fast and Furious” movie after this one. That really shows little class in a company that is very financially stable and isn’t in dire need of another film. There is no good way to have the next film. Will they have his character killed off? No, that would be in pour taste. So a new actor to continue his role? No, in 1937 when MGM used a stunt double for the rest of the movie when Jean Harlow died there was a huge amount of bad publicity. I understand that businesses are meant to generate money, but at what cost? Businesses are run by people, so how is it practical that human interests and behavior can be completely over looked?
My question to readers is this: Rather than trying to find the best way to honor his memory in his newest films, why don’t these companies try to honor the person’s death, instead of the character’s death?
This man was a father, not just a movie star. A daughter now no longer has a dad.
(link to website):
http://global.factiva.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/ga/default.aspx?imt=2&ao=14&aod=1811683
I really liked the point you made about honoring the death of the person, not the death of a character who was played by the deceased.
I do sympathize with the movie industry to an extent, however sick and twisted that may sound though. In the end it is still a business and as the old adage goes “The show must go on”. But to the extent where every other article that I see online or in newspapers or magazines is about what Hollywood and the producers are going to do about Walker’s unfinished films is pushing it. Producers are poring over how to “honor” him via the films but are simultaneously scrambling over how to alter the script and storyline and the most efficient way to conserve money with the unexpected departing of a central character.
This article (Jake, I wasn’t able to view the link to the NYT article so this link may be a repeat-http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/business/media/paul-walkers-death-complicates-fast-furious-7-filming.html) summarizes the point I am trying to make. It talks about the various challenges producers are facing; from the cast to the character to marketing and this quote by marketing consultant Dennis Rice, sums it all up quite nicely; “As horrible as his death was, there is a business investment to protect.”
I understand, but I just wish that these people would put aside their profit-seeking venture for a while and give this man a proper farewell; without any talk of this money-grabbing nonsense.
Jake, you bring up some solid points. This conflict is not new to the world but it is still relevant. Taking the macro perspective on the issue, it seems to be a confrontation between ethics and profit. What I find interesting about this struggle is that ethics is largely variable depending on the consumer base. Since Universal Pictures consumers are predominantly American, it is naive of them to capitalize on Walker’s death beyond the next movie. However, they might, to milk that presumable 10% of Americans who are not totally disgusted with the idea. I think what we’ll come to realize in these next 4 years is that this world is run by money and it is the pursuit of the dollar that makes man savage. Heck, Paul Walker’s death affected the Porsche market. Check it out: http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/PAH3:GR
Look at November 20, see the slight drop? Not saying this is a direct reason but there could be a correlation. This whole world is fueled by money. Not to overly pessimistic, dead or alive, someone is always making something.
I like how you focused on the tragic aspect of Walker’s death. Through your post, more people may acknowledge his death and the people left behind, instead of the films he starred in. I also like your last rhetorical remark, “why don’t these companies try to honor the person’s death, instead of the character’s death?” I personally never watched the Fast and Furious movie series (I have heard of good reviews on them though), yet it still makes me sad that the future of this series is unknown. I wonder how Universal Studios will handle the rest of the series, not to mention the Fast & Furious 7- which was already in production.
First off I want to say that your observation regarding the irony of the deaths of the actors you mentioned is very astute. Heath Ledger absolutely looked like he was abusing drugs when in his character of The Joker, and Paul Walker died in a speeding sports car. Both of theses deaths are tragic, but eerily similar to the roles these men portrayed on camera.
The second topic you covered was how the studio will act following the aftermath of Paul Walker’s death. There is no easy way for a studio to go about conducting themselves, but absolutely agree with you that making money should not be at the top of the priority list. First and foremost, I hope Walker’s name is given an appropriate amount of recognition for his work. I also hope that even in a town as successful and profit-oriented as Hollywood, those in charge can remain classy.
Here is a link to a Paul Walker memorial soon to take place: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-paul-walker-tribute-sunday-20131207,0,373788.story#axzz2mtxXYBhE
You bring up a great argument about the entertainment business, in which sometimes they really do take advantage of peoples emotions. They say they wish to honor an actor and be respectful yet, they really follow the old motto “the show must go on.” Some skeptics feel that situations like this allow the entertainment industry to have good publicity. This though possible does not highlight the people who are truly hurt and suffer from such a loss. Such as, Paul Walker’s daughter. Yes art can be used to celebrate artist, but when the artist dies I feel one should always celebrate their life and not how their work will be affected in the future. Here is a similar occurrence: http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/212182/20110912/aussie-actor-liam-mcintyre-replaces-andy-whitfield-s-role-in-spartacus-photos.htm#.UqYOnKWE71o
I guess we have to see the whole thing from the perespective that the company doesnt really know Walker. For example when your friend experiences a death, but you dont know the person, you would technically have no reason for remorse because you dont have any connection to that person. You could be sad because your friend lost someone, but being sad directly because of that persons death does not make very logical sense. I think these companies see Walker in the same way because the ones who run them dont look at Walker as a personal friend or actor that brought them money, but an extension of the producer and movie theatres who create the revenue. By looking that him that way, theyd much rather use it to their advantage then to be creating publicity about someone they really didnt know. It may be wrong, and I think it is, but then again, at the end of the day, I can’t say I care so much because I dont know the guy. He couldve been a great person, but all I know him for are his movies, which didnt have an effect on me, and his death doesnt change any part of my life or those around me, so I see no reason for being in remorse or sad really. This sounds pretentious, but in my defense, why dont we care as much for our fallen soldiers as much as we care about this guy who made movies. As Jake said, Walker was a father, and now his daughter has no father. What about the countless other people who have done a lot more for our lives and country, and who have left behind more than just one daughter? This is my opinion so I dont really have an article to relate this too.
I agree with the points you make. Trying to market off of recently passed-away actors like Paul Walker in a massive commercial spectacular is insensitive. Can the families of the deceased even bear to watch their televisions when the person’s name graces the television every commercial break. These companies should be more mindful of the actor’s and actress’s family before they start running ad campaigns with the deceased being the center of publicity. I at least hope that these companies reach out to the families and ask for their consent.
You make very interesting points, especially when comparing Walker’s death to Ledger’s death. I am happy, though, that the company selling the Fast and Furious 6 dvd’s has decided to donate a percentage of sales to the charity that Walker had founded, as seen on commercials. While they are trying to make a profit, like you said, they are still trying to focus on Walker’s life as a person, not just an actor. In this sense, they are honoring his death, but I hope they also show this in the next movie. When first hearing of his death, I immediately thought they would have to kill off his character in the movie, because that seemed like the most logical thing to do. After reading your blog, now I hope they make a greater effort to stress the importance of his life and to honor his death properly.
The similarity between the roles Heath Ledger and Paul Walker played in their movies and their deaths is mind bottling. I agree with many points you brought up in this article. First off, dealing with this matter must be very difficult for the movie company. On one aspect, it wants to keep making a profit from the Fast and Furious series, but on another aspect, it must show respect to the death of the main character in the series. I think it would be best for the company to discontinue the movies because they would probably lose many viewers, such as all those who watched them only because they were Paul Walker fans. Also, I don’t think the company will be able to find someone to replace a character that has played in all seven movies. As Jake said, the movie company has definitely made enough profit out of the series and it would be best to show respect to Paul Walker by honoring his death instead of honoring the role he played in the movies.
Even online, many articles refer to Paul Walker’s death by mentioning the characters he played in movies. It’s interesting to see how people try to learn more about him by studying the roles he played in movies. One article says that it may be hard to watch “Fast and Furious” since he died in a car crush, but not as hard to watch “Hours” since he only appears in one building in the movie. This doesn’t make sense to me because it’s the same person in both movies and I’m sure for his family it would be just as hard to watch either. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/movies/hours-a-thriller-starring-paul-walker.html