No, ‘Independence Day’ was not your generation’s ‘Star Wars’

No, ‘Independence Day’ was not your generation’s ‘Star Wars’ June 24, 2016

MSDINDA FE014

So, there’s not a review here for this week’s big release, “Independence Day: Resurgence.” In an odd move for a summer blockbuster, Fox declined to screen the film for critics (although they did apparently invite some to see it opening day). Usually, a lack of pre-release screenings indicates a bomb, but oddly enough the reviews from those who have seen it have been more lukewarm than hostile. Like I said, an odd move.

I’m sure I’ll eventually get around to seeing it, but probably not until next weekend at the very earliest (it’s perhaps more fitting to see an “Independence Day” movie on Independence Day weekend anyway). I’m not in a hurry. I’ve never believed that “Independence Day” (or, ID4, as we called it in my day) needed a sequel. I never needed know what happened to the characters played by Will Smith, Bill Pullman or Jeff Goldblum after the film (and those characters were so thinly drawn anyway that I have always just referred to them as Will Smith, Bill Pullman and Jeff Goldblum). And none of the trailers convinced me that this was going to be a must-see event.

“ID4” was a huge hit in 1996. I was just about to enter my senior year of high school when it was released, and I’m sure I saw it two or three times in the theater; when we eventually purchased it, I nearly wore the VHS out. For a movie that featured the destruction of half the world, it was bright and funny. It was proof that Will Smith could take the charisma that had fueled his rap and TV careers and translate it to the big screen. And it was a testament to the power of marketing — the moment that Super Bowl ad played, millions of tickets were guaranteed (I remember seeing a similar trailers, and the audience erupted in applause).

https://youtu.be/1ZvsxNJsF1k

But there really hasn’t been much of a lasting impact to “Independence Day,” unless you consider the way that it challenged every single blockbuster to up the ante on world destruction. It took 20 years to make a sequel. There’s been no television series, no cartoon and, aside from some follow-up novels, no real effort to extend its place in pop culture. Before the sequel was announced, it looked like the film’s legacy would be as the quintessential ’90s blockbuster, a fun but disposable product of its time. And because “Independence Day” was less a sci-fi epic than a disaster movie with aliens, it didn’t really set up a followup. Continuing the story would probably be like trying to reignite the Towering Inferno or tipping Poseidon back over (oops). Which, by the way, is perfectly fine. Not everything needs a sequel, and sometimes a fun film is just a fun film.

To some people, though, it’s something more. Earlier today, Dave Chen — co-host of “The /Filmcast” and director of the documentary “The Primary Instinct“— tweeted the following, which included an email from one of his podcast listeners (warning for the sensitive: language…oh, and minor spoilers, I guess):

Like I said, I haven’t seen “Independence Day: Resurgence,” so I don’t know whether the e-mailer’s rage is justified. But there’s a line in there that made me do a double-take.

For someone born in 1985 that never got to experience the first Star Wars trilogy in theaters, Independence Day WAS my Star Wars.

Now granted, the e-mailer doesn’t come right out and call “Independence Day” the “Star Wars” of his generation; he says it was his “Star Wars.” And maybe it was. I don’t know his experience in the theater; maybe it changed his life in the same way that “Star Wars” changed other people’s and opened his eyes to what cinema was capable of. Maybe it was the movie that made him fall in love with movies. It’s entirely possible; I have a belief that every movie is someone’s favorite movie. Heck, I learned one of my most important lessons about film criticism from “Hotel for Dogs.”

But this email isn’t the first person I’ve heard make the “Independence Day”/”Star Wars” comparison. And as someone only slightly older than the people making those claims, I have only one reaction.

No, “Independence Day” is not your generation’s “Star Wars.” And if it is, your generation got the shaft.

Like I said, “Independence Day” is a fun movie. I enjoyed it the last time I watched it (it has been several years, most likely more than a decade). But let’s not mistake it for great. It’s over-long. It’s cheesy. Its computer virus resolution is one of the flat-out dumbest ways that a movie has ever destroyed a threat. As a way to kill a few hours on a hot summer night, it was perfectly serviceable. As the defining film of a generation? You can do a lot better.

It wasn’t a high watermark in effects the way “Star Wars” was; in fact, part of the charm of “Independence Day” was that its major scenes of destruction used models along with CG, something that was refreshing in the early days when really bad CG looked really bad. But even if it were renowned for its effects, nothing in it topped what “Jurassic Park” did just three years earlier. And “Jurassic Park,” which holds up extremely well nearly 25 years later, had characters we loved, sustained moments of tension and stuck with you after the credits rolled; there’s a reason why people lined up for “Jurassic World,” even after two wretched sequels. And if you were a bit too young when “Jurassic Park” came out, “The Matrix” was just three years after “Independence Day.” And that truly was that generation’s “Star Wars.” It had revolutionary visual effects, created a world that audiences immersed themselves in, and changed what we wanted from our sci-fi movies. It had a bigger impact than the actual “Star Wars” movie that came out that very same year! And I’d also note that for some people, the 1997 “Star Wars” trilogy re-release was their generation’s “Star Wars”; for me, it was the first time I saw all the movies — and in the theater, no less.

Honestly, as much as I enjoy “Independence Day,” that film is eclipsed in pretty much every possible classification for that decade. Best disaster movie? Sorry, that’s “Titanic.” Best sci-fi? The aforementioned “The Matrix.” Best destruction of New York? I might have to hand that to “Armageddon.” Best alien invasion movie? Have you seen “Mars Attacks”? Best Will Smith film? Nope, that’s “Men in Black.” The only possible list it might top is best Judd Hirsch movie of the 1990s, and that’s because I’m not counting his cameo in “Man on the Moon.” The ’90s weren’t exactly a watershed decade in cinema, but come on; don’t sell your generation short.

Where “Independence Day” was akin to being the “Star Wars” of the 1990s is in the way it changed blockbuster culture. It turned the summer season into a marketing machine, selling films on moments instead of stories. Few people probably remember that “Independence Day” also features a subplot about Randy Quaid as a crop duster or a trip to Area 51; what they remember is that it’s the movie where aliens blew the White House up. It changed the trailer game, giving great power to Super Bowl weekend. It raised the bar on destroying world landmarks on screen — to top it, Michael Bay had to show people falling from the Chrysler Building in “Armagedon” and then Roland Emmerich just had to up and destroy the whole thing in “2012.” But I don’t even want to give it that much credit here; Hollywood was heading that way already. And, like “Star Wars,” “Independence Day” gets flack for everything it caused while, in the end, it’s actually not a bad movie.

But it’s not great. It’s not special. It’s just a fun blockbuster that you loved as a teenager. Many films had a much bigger impact on that generation. Claim those films.

Listen, I’ve written a lot more about this than I should have. I didn’t intend to write more than 1,000 words about “Independence Day.” And it’s a silly argument to get in, a weird way to fill some space. But Fox, this is what happens when you don’t let us see and write about your movies, I guess.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!