![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
davywavyEvery generation grows up convinced that the entertainment when they were children was the best ever, and kids today - tsk! - they just dont' know what they're missing. Obviously, most generations are wrong in this belief as it has been established as scientific fact that kids entertainment was best in the 1980's when I was growing up, and all the other, lesser, decades just don't have a patch on it.
Anyway, I recently picked up a box set of Knight Rider because I loved it when I was about ten. The gripping adventures of a man and his cybernetic, artificially intelligent robot car who drove around together solving crimes and bringing criminals who operate above the law to justice. What could be more wholesome than that?
I hadn't seen an episode in maybe twenty years and it's nice to have a bit of nostaligia when I get home from work now and again, but as I've watched my way through the first few eopisodes something has dawned on me which I just never realised when I was younger. You see, as I watch it I realise that it isn't just a simple gripping adventure story. It's the story of a love affair between a man with his shirt open to his navel and his big, black, sleek, powerful, but curiously camp car. To be blunt, it is really quite incredibly homoerotic. I didn't pick up on that when I was ten.
Take the episode I watched last night as an example. Kitt (the supercar) was stolen by a villain who removed the AI CPU from the car and dropped it in the middle of nowhere. Michael (the hero) found the CPU (containing KITT's personality) simply by following his instincts. As he said; "I just had this feeling of his presense", and the two then spent most of the episode driving around in an ancient jalopy arguing like an old married couple.
Eventually, the villains were defeated, the chassis recovered and KITT's mind put back in. To celebrate their reunion, Michael and Kitt went for a drive and the episode ended with this exchange:
Michael (pressing hard on the accelerator): "C'mon, Kitt! Let's open you up and see what we can do!"
Kitt: "Oooh, Michael, that feels good. Faster!"
I'm just surprised that the titles didn't roll over a shot of them driving into a tunnel.
The things is, all the episodes are like this. If you look for it, they're crammed with innuendo. It is, to coin a phrase, eye-opening. And the more I think about it, this sort of thing was everywhere in the films and TV I liked as a kid, and I just never noticed. I mean, everyone knows that Top Gun is about the passionate affair between Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer, but what about The A-Team? Four rough, tough single men who live together in a van and vie for Hannibal's attention in a grim 'daddy'bear' relationship. Predator? A bunch of heavy-muscled single men being picked off one at a time by an 'invisible killer'. Rambo? A muscular, shirtless single man who'll do anything for a man in uniform as they're the only people who understand him. And don't even get me started on He-Man and the Masters of the Universe. I'll tell you what - if I'd realised all this when I was fifteen it'd've completely changed my perceptions of television. I wonder just how much of this was deliberate, or whether the entire 1980's were just inadvertantly spectacularly camp. But what do I know? So, a poll.
[Poll #1520661]
*Does anyone actually know what a Semiotic is? For all I know it might be a type of fish.
Anyway, I recently picked up a box set of Knight Rider because I loved it when I was about ten. The gripping adventures of a man and his cybernetic, artificially intelligent robot car who drove around together solving crimes and bringing criminals who operate above the law to justice. What could be more wholesome than that?
I hadn't seen an episode in maybe twenty years and it's nice to have a bit of nostaligia when I get home from work now and again, but as I've watched my way through the first few eopisodes something has dawned on me which I just never realised when I was younger. You see, as I watch it I realise that it isn't just a simple gripping adventure story. It's the story of a love affair between a man with his shirt open to his navel and his big, black, sleek, powerful, but curiously camp car. To be blunt, it is really quite incredibly homoerotic. I didn't pick up on that when I was ten.
Take the episode I watched last night as an example. Kitt (the supercar) was stolen by a villain who removed the AI CPU from the car and dropped it in the middle of nowhere. Michael (the hero) found the CPU (containing KITT's personality) simply by following his instincts. As he said; "I just had this feeling of his presense", and the two then spent most of the episode driving around in an ancient jalopy arguing like an old married couple.
Eventually, the villains were defeated, the chassis recovered and KITT's mind put back in. To celebrate their reunion, Michael and Kitt went for a drive and the episode ended with this exchange:
Michael (pressing hard on the accelerator): "C'mon, Kitt! Let's open you up and see what we can do!"
Kitt: "Oooh, Michael, that feels good. Faster!"
I'm just surprised that the titles didn't roll over a shot of them driving into a tunnel.
The things is, all the episodes are like this. If you look for it, they're crammed with innuendo. It is, to coin a phrase, eye-opening. And the more I think about it, this sort of thing was everywhere in the films and TV I liked as a kid, and I just never noticed. I mean, everyone knows that Top Gun is about the passionate affair between Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer, but what about The A-Team? Four rough, tough single men who live together in a van and vie for Hannibal's attention in a grim 'daddy'bear' relationship. Predator? A bunch of heavy-muscled single men being picked off one at a time by an 'invisible killer'. Rambo? A muscular, shirtless single man who'll do anything for a man in uniform as they're the only people who understand him. And don't even get me started on He-Man and the Masters of the Universe. I'll tell you what - if I'd realised all this when I was fifteen it'd've completely changed my perceptions of television. I wonder just how much of this was deliberate, or whether the entire 1980's were just inadvertantly spectacularly camp. But what do I know? So, a poll.
[Poll #1520661]
*Does anyone actually know what a Semiotic is? For all I know it might be a type of fish.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 11:08 am (UTC)*Not like that
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:38 pm (UTC)snicker.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 02:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 11:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:40 pm (UTC)Oh, I'm onto a loser here.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 11:34 am (UTC)The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-03 11:39 am (UTC)Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-03 11:42 am (UTC)I'm not sure that explains the Chuckle brothers though. Or David Hasslehof. Maybe you need better gaydar?!
*ooer
Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-03 11:44 am (UTC)Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-03 11:54 am (UTC)I once got swore at by a Chuckle Brother at Butlins. I caught him having a fag* behind the stage. True story!
* I CAN'T HELP IT
Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-04 12:35 am (UTC)Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-04 12:34 am (UTC)No, they're not. One of them even had a reputation for sleeping with some of the fans mothers - and got caught out by the tabloid media a few year back for it.
They're both (afaik) straight, happily married and have a variety of kids.
Re: The eighties were camp?
Date: 2010-02-04 02:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 02:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 11:54 am (UTC)Are you aware of He-man's personal angst as expressed in song? (http://www.whoomp.com/funny-videos/he-man-does-4nonblondes.html).
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 11:59 am (UTC)I leave that sort of thing to other people!
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:06 pm (UTC)(hits IMDB)
It was an actual TV show from last year. Jesus. I notice he got a tonne of work after that, so I guess he didn't need to do it. Maybe it was just suitcase of money in exchange for a couple of days voicework. Still... weird.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:24 pm (UTC)It must've been one hell of a Zeitgeist they were capturing.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:25 pm (UTC)I know. Isn't it awesome.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:44 pm (UTC)There's a bit in the trailer for Iron Man 2 where it's ruled that the authorities can't force Tony Stark to hand over the Iron man suit, and he stands up, turns to the court spectators and announces how he's successfully privatised world peace. I bloody love that line.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:45 pm (UTC)They're all about the individual taking responsibility for their world they live in rather than abrogating it to the state. Naturally, I find myself cheering at such sentiments :)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 01:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:12 pm (UTC)The study of semiotics is all about recognising and analysing 'things' that signify, identify or suggest something - white hats for good guys, black hats for bad - that kind of thing.
As for the 80's, its an amazing thing - the overwhelming urge for ostenatious, showy displays of power (particularly through the male focus) were all the rage. To have acknowledge the homosexual connotations would have ruined everything - the semiotics of 'manly power' at the time were extremely close to the semiotics of 'as gay as Freddie Mecury wrestling Elton John in a vat of baby oil'. I think a lot of programs tried to power through by being 'more macho' - after all, if we give the oiled, muscly man a huge machine gun, it won't be gay...
I also think that a lot of people in the industry used the opportunity to put in as many obvious homoerotic references as humanly possible to see if anyone twigged, but no-one seemed to.
Looking back at it now, many of the Macho trappings of the 80's have lost their 'I am powerful' associations, and so two men wearing nothing but towels playing volleyball and slapping each other on the back simply says 'homoerotic flirting' rather than 'struggle for dominance'.
Oh.. and you should probably add Thundercats to the list - He-Man may have become powerful when he drew his sword, but Lion-o's got Bigger when he held it...
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:29 pm (UTC)Well, actually it's a t-shirt which is too small to fit over my belly, but the general concept is the same.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 08:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 02:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 02:52 am (UTC)The Bourne Referendum: a physically intense young man can't remember who he is, on the run from government assassins, and discovers...he's gay! Denouement will have to be a Dance Off to Cher, of course. ;-)
CORRECTION
Date: 2010-02-04 06:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 09:11 pm (UTC)