This paper will apply a politically oriented description-critique paradigm developed from the works of Whitehall and Grewell that offers a way to examine works of popular culture, particularly Mars-based science fiction films. Because of the unique nature of these films, primarily which they are set in a future and distant world, they allow us to explore the socio-political landscape in which they were created from a remove that does not exist in“real-world” based works. Specifically we will be examining the governing power (in any particular Mars-based science fiction film) that might be either wielded by business interests or governmental interests. Although it is possible to have both a strong government and a strong business in a society, in many Mars-based science fiction films, government and business seem to represent two sides of a continuum. The stronger the business power structure in the film, the weaker the governmental power structure, and vice-versa.
　　Keywords: science fiction, Mars, political structure, governmental power, Geoffrey Whitehall, Gary Grewell, colonization, film
　　 Introduction
　　It is becoming more clear—as we journey through the flat world of the 21st century—that as we have more contact with those who are different than “us” in society, we also have new and different expectations when communicating and dealing with this “other” entity (Friedman, 2005). Of course, this other entity could be coming from outside our societies, our ethnicities, or our religious and philosophical mindset. In the 1950s, the “other” could have been anyone who was not a WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant). “We/us”were WASPs and the “other” was not WASPs. Now, it can be argued that “we/us” could perhaps be more inclusive of other increasingly prominent American cultures and ethnicities. Certainly it can be argued that African American and Hispanic cultures are in the process of “becoming us”. The newer version of the“other” can be seen as coming from the Middle East, China, or India, to name but a few. Weldes, in the book To Seek Out New Worlds: Exploring Links Between Science Fiction and World Politics (2003), pointed out that science fiction, “through strategies like extrapolation and estrangement, helps us to transcend our mundane environment” (p. 1). That transcendence of the environment, coupled with distancing-critiquing function of science fiction can allow us to critique ourselves and our expectations in our interactions with“the other”. This paper will apply a politically oriented description-critique paradigm developed from the works of Whitehall (2003) and Grewell (2001) that offers a way to examine works of popular culture, particularly Mars-based science fiction films.
　　 Methodological Perspective
　　As we look at our behavior in science fiction films, we (the contemporary viewing audience) are constantly being told—through modeling behavior embedded in the plot of the film—of what to expect of ourselves, of what to expect of an alien/other, and what we might expect from interactions with the alien/other. Expectations of what is appropriate and what is important with regard to human/alien communication are dependent, to a large degree, on the philosophical outlook of the author and the dominant political mindset of the era in which the film is made (Schatz, 1981). In terms of story/film content, our study of Mars-based, science fiction films will focus on the relationships between business and government. Specifically we will be examining the governing power (in any particular Mars-based science fiction film) that might be either wielded by business interests or governmental interests. Although it is possible to have both a strong government and a strong business in a society, in many Mars-based science fiction films, government and business seem to represent two sides of a continuum. The stronger the business power structure in the film, the weaker the governmental power structure, and vice-versa.
　　In using the term business, we mean to discuss the amount of corporate-related business or political power that a corporate entity has in any particular movie. In our use of the term politics, we mean the running of, the management of, and the electing of Earth and Mars-based governmental authorities/entities. These governmental authorities could take the form of an overriding governmental body—such as “Earth-Gov” (in Babylon 5 (1994)), a form of local government on Mars (as in The Martian Chronicles (1980)), or some sort of solar-system space-based alliance. The treatment of Martian citizens and workers from mundane things, such as their access to water and electricity, to their treatment in the workplace (in terms of their rights to secure a living wage that is fair and safe) all fall under the heading of politics.
　　In addition to the above points of focus, the paradigm for our study of Mars-based science fiction films will also examine 1950s-current Mars-based, science fiction films thru the paradigm of both critique and description, pulling from especially from the work Geoffrey Whitehall and Gary Grewell.
　　Grewell analyzes the concept of colonization in a descriptive way in his analysis of the idea of colonization in science fiction literature and media. And certainly, politics also deals with the concept of colonization. We might only think of the concept of politics as it relates to colonization in Mars films when we think of films might that portray the struggles of Martian colonists (who are former Earthers) as they struggle against an Earth-bound government (or business) that refuses to grant their independence. The television show Babylon 5 portrays a situation like this, as does the film Total Recall (1990). Grewell also observed that the act of colonization occurs from the first moment a band of explorers (or even just one—as in Robinson Crusoe on Mars Babylon-5) sets forth to explore, then domesticate, and then ultimately fight for the right to exist on Mars.
　　Whitehall, in his article “The Problem of the ‘World and Beyond’” (2003), critiqued the ways in which science fiction films deal with the “alien/other” on three different levels. How we deal with “the other”—the aliens that we find in particular Mars-based science fiction films—is also a question that relates to and touches upon the concept of politics. According to Whitehall, there are three basic directions that an encounter between Earthers and “the other/aliens” might take. One direction a Mars-based science fiction film could take is that the Earth-based government could assertively (yet somewhat invisibly) manage the relationship with the aliens. Whitehall points out that many—if not most—science fiction films use this dynamic, with the benevolent, Earth-based government gently controlling relationships with Alien cultures, all the while managing the relationship with benevolent-yet-firm human guidance. Another direction a film could take would be to portray the relations (and potential conflict of relations) between us and the Martians/others in an ironic light—in which some of our values might be questioned. Here, Whitehall discusses the functions of satire and irony in Starship Troopers. Finally, Whitehall argues that—although it is rare—a true understanding between us and alien cultures is at least possible. Indeed, citing Ray Bradbury’s The Martian Chronicles, Whitehall argues that it is possible that humans might, indeed, truly transcend humanity and become “the other”. Ultimately we are going to look at the sub-genre of “we go to Mars” science fiction films to see if they might offer a critique of our encounter with “the other/Martians” or to see if they offer a description of who we think we are, or who we might desire to be.
　　Not every film will touch upon every area of business, politics, or international (human/other) relations. But every film will at least deal with the political concept of colonization. In sum, we will examine the role of business, government, foreign relations, and the concept of colonization in Mars-based science fiction films from the 1950s to the present. Particular attention will be paid to the expanding role of business and to the dynamics of the roles of government and business within post 1970s Mars-based science fiction films.
　　 Application
　　In his inaugural speech in 1981, President Reagan—in an attempt to find the source of malaise within society—famously labeled government as the problem. Indeed, Reagan seemed to be tapping into a national consensus that because of the failure of government in both Vietnam and in Watergate, that government as an institution had failed. Films, books, and television shows of the 1970s also reflected a growing disenchantment and distrust toward the institutions of government. Mars-based science fiction films from the 1970s were no exception. In Capricorn One (1977), the director of NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) will break any law and perform any crime in order to save his manned-Mars project. His actions include lying, obfuscating, kidnapping, and finally the killing of the NASA/Mars-mission astronauts. The message was clear: Government was not to be trusted. As President Reagan said, “Government is the problem”. But representations of the role of government in Mars-based science fictions films were not always negative.
　　 The Films of the 1950s
　　Rocketship X-M. Rocketship X-M (1950) is a particularly fascinating film, especially in terms of the way its functions within popular culture. The film tells the story of a spaceship (Rocketship X-M), which is originally headed to the moon. A meteor shower forces the ship to veer off course and sends the explorers on a heading towards Mars.
　　In Rocketship X-M, the government is shown to be somewhat oppressive (using control over the news media), but generally effective. This is unlike the way the functions of the U.S. government are portrayed in Destination Moon (1950), which premiered in the same year as Rocketship X-M. In Destination Moon, which was scripted by the conservative-minded Robert Heinlein, the government is shown to be basically incapable of sending a manned expedition to the Moon (Booker, 2001). In Heinlein’s script, only the brilliant, sharpened, and non-bureaucracy-oriented men of big American business are shown to be capable of mounting a space expedition (Booker, 2001). For several decades after Destination Moon, most of the organizations supporting, funding, and running space missions are almost always part of the federal government. By the late 1980s, however, that began to change, as big corporations were shown to be increasingly involved in Mars movie expeditions.
　　Rocketship X-M’s explorers begin their mission with the desire to colonize and dominate the moon. Indeed, the moon represented a somewhat combative form of colonization, as the crew was trying to establish “control world peace”, while gaining superiority over a “foreign power” (Rocketship X-M) on the moon. But a leftward turn (after the encounter with the meteor shower) takes the crew to Mars, where the nature of the journey becomes explorative. The lesson learned from the Martians (from the demise of their society through weapons of mass destruction) allows the would-be colonizers to learn from the Martians. In this way, the contact with the“other”/Martians allows for a critique of the dominant, pro-military, and pro-atomic weapons thinking of the early 1950s. The science fiction films of the 1950s which dared to critique official policy in this way were few and far between. Notable exceptions include It Came From Outer Space (1953) and The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951).
　　In the resolution of the Rocketship X-M, the remaining crew perishes as the ship enters the Earth’s atmosphere. The ship’s pilot (Floyd Graham) and the crew’s fuel scientist (Dr. Van Horne) developed feelings for each other during the return trip from Mars. As the ship breaks up in the atmosphere, Graham and Van Horne embrace as explorers and lovers, and this embrace seems to reaffirm the pacifistic, non-militaristic lessons learned from their trip to Mars. Upon hearing of their heroic sacrifice (as they were determined to let Earth know the lessons learned from Mars), the America’s space commander/general affirms that mankind will continue to explore.
　　The Angry Red Planet. Although it edges into the horror end of the horror-science fiction continuum (as defined by Sobchack, 1999), The Angry Red Planet (1959) managed to squeeze in some interesting political and social ideas among its uneven special effects and plodding direction. In terms of the presence of“government/politics” or big business themes in the film, the effect is largely neutral. The mission (as is the case in most “We go to Mars”, 1950s science fiction films) is supported by the government and the role of business is not seen in the film. The crew has a lack of focus with regard to their mission, and this is seen in the lack of intensity in the crew’s “exploration” of the red planet. Warren (2010) noted this as he mentioned, “At no time does there seem to be any rationale for their wanderings” (p. 44). Interestingly, the intelligent Martians—and there are plenty of examples of man-eating, non-intelligent, and angry red fauna—reveal that they consider attempts to explore the planet by the humans to be some sort of prelude to an invasion. Although the attempts of the astronauts to discover the red planet never go beyond the explorative category, the Martians who have monitored mankind’s long and conquest-oriented history interpret the human’s mission to the planet as invasive and combative. The Martian’s spokesman tells the people of earth (through a recorded message), to“go now [and] warn mankind not to return unbidden. When we consider man mature, the planet Mars will call her sister Earth” (Warren, 2010, p. 46).
　　Interestingly, the action in the film contradicts the threatening Martian message, as the human explorers are mainly shown first to be rather unfocused and foray-seeking explorers, who then have to fight for their survival. Warren (2010) pointed out that, because the explorers in The Angry Red Planet do not behave in“destructive” or “ill-considered ways”, the effect is that the Martians are threatening “to no good end” (p. 46). One could argue that, because the Martians know human history so well (e.g., they have monitored all of our history), they know that the journey from collecting specimens, to trading for tracts of land and to finding oneself on Martian “reservations” is a short trip indeed. The Martians have watched Little Big Man (1970), and they have learned.
　　The contact with the civilized Martian/other is brief in The Angry Red Planet. The crew’s scientist/professor says he senses a “controlling presence” (Warren, 2010, p. 45) on the planet, and the mission’s female scientist, Iris, briefly sees an intelligent Martian. The intelligent Martian’s voice gives the above-mentioned warning to humankind at the end of the film. The effect of this message is that the Martians have seen how we treat “the other” throughout history and they want none of that. In The Angry Red Planet, it is “the other” who is critiquing us, and we have been judged unworthy of interspecies contact. If only the Native Americans had possessed such power.
　　Conquest of Space. A gold-standard for colonizing plots (along with twisted familial relationships) is the aptly-named Conquest of Space (1955). Although a lot of attention is placed on the film’s orbital-launch-platform space-station (which is called the “wheel”), the true goal of the film’s space mission is that of exploring the Moon, until the destination changes to Mars.
　　The force behind this change of destinations is the mission’s (and the film’s) governing body, the Supreme International Space Authority. Although the Moon would be a strategic target in terms of “controlling space”, the Space Authority feels that Mars has the raw materials that Earth most needs. It is interesting to note that even the name of the film’s governing body, the Supreme International Space Authority evokes the specter of the what Eisenhower (1961) would five years later call “the military-industrial complex” (sec. IV, para. 5). Adam Knee (as cited in Noonan, 2005, p. 50) identified the fear of the military industrial complex as one of the important and identifiable social tensions in 1950s science fiction films.
　　Interestingly, the regular crew/dock-workers of the space station (and the potential astronauts) are furious at this change of destinations. In the wheel’s mess hall, the regular crew must now come to attention when the selected astronaut crew enters. The regular crew-workers of the wheel now mock the “select” crew, and the“select” crew, in turn, calls the regular workers “peasants” (Haskin, 1955). Indeed, the men who build the space traveling ship are shown to be more blue-collar than astronaut. They just want to punch their time-cards and go home. The idea of union dock workers in space—not completely affected by starry-eyed notions of discovery—is reminiscent of Grewell’s (2001) speculation that “Some select few working and middle class people will have access to space—as food servers, maids, receptionists, etc.” (p. 38).
　　All of the men (both the space station support crew and the astronauts) are said to be “volunteers” who serve on the space-station/wheel, but in reality, they are treated much more like conscripted privates. The mission commander’s son is one such volunteer (who would like to see his wife and children on Earth), but in reality, he cannot leave the space station. He is a true conscript. Stress eats away at the son.
　　In terms of questions regarding the concept of colonization, a Japanese astronaut mentions that he has a good reason for going to Mars. The Japanese astronaut states that just as Japan needed resources following WWII (World War II), the world will soon need to appropriate Mars’ resources.
　　But—as mentioned earlier—as the ship nears Mars, the commander begins to feverishly wonder if God had ever intended for Man to explore space. The commander now wonders if he and the ship’s crew are invaders of God’s Heavens rather than space explorers. In seeking to reassure him, his son goes straight to the colonial-combative mode, telling his father that the universe “is here for man to conquer” (Haskin, 1955; Grewell, 2001, p. 5).
　　Unfortunately, the mission commander/father, still obsessed with the idea that Man must not invade Space, attempts to crash the ship upon landing on Mars. As Warren (2010) said of the commander/father’s logic, “If Man was meant to go into Space, [God] would have given us built-in rockets” (p. 157). Ironically, for all talk of aggressively colonizing Mars, the crew does not do an effective job of exploring the planet. Fortunately, there is a snowfall and after the snow melts, life is discovered. The discovery of Life (and with it perhaps the idea that Mars can at least be domesticated) animates the crew and they are able to return home.
　　There is not a large, corporate/business presence in Conquest of Space, but—as mentioned above—the government presence in the film evokes feelings of the Cold War/military industrial complex. The government is overbearing and somewhat dictatorial and yet all who serve in the governmental space organization are shown to be volunteers. As Althusser would say, the men are in the grips of the process of “interpellation”(Barry, 2002, p. 165). The men seem to think they are free to choose, when in reality their choices are forced upon them.
　　Two fascinating tentacles tether Conquest of Space, to two later Mars-based productions, both in different ways. The idea of “dock workers in space” (which spans the idea of both government and corporate involvement in society), is dealt with in fascinating ways in the TV series, Babylon 5. In addition, the presence of an implied corporate influence in Conquest of Space (via the “military-industrial complex) is similar to the implied corporate presence (in addition to the strong and overt government presence) in the Roger Corman film, Battle Beyond the Sun (1959).
　　Corporate Presence
　　Babylon 5. We will discuss the developments surrounding the Babylon 5 television series first. Babylon 5’s plotline parallels developments in recent American history in that corporations became much more prominent in 1980s, “Reaganomics-influenced”, American life. The Martian colony, as depicted in Babylon 5, desires freedom from the unified Earth government, or “Earthgov”. The colonists have used both non-violent and violent methods to protest to Earthgov. Suppression of the rebellion has been both non-violent and violent, as both diplomatic and military efforts have been used to manage the rebellion. It is important to note that the colonists on Mars came from Earth, although new generations of colonists are being born on Mars. In political-colonization terms, “combative” means are being used to fight not Martians, but fully domesticated colonists (Grewell, 2001).
　　The “other” presence on Mars is also a transplant. Just as the humans in Babylon 5 are not native to Mars, neither is the menacing “other”/alien presence that is discovered on the planet. The alien on the planet is the incubating hulk of a buried “Shadow” creature. The “Shadows” are one of the oldest creatures in Babylon 5’s universe, and (for most of the series) it is shown that the Shadows’ strongest desire is to control and enslave all free species (Straczynski, 1994). Thus it is only natural that co-existence with this alien cannot be tolerated. Just as the survival of the alien/other bugs in Starship Troopers (1997) cannot be tolerated—“It’s either them or us!”—so too must the “Shadows” be destroyed in Babylon 5 (Whitehall, 2003).
　　The corporate presence on Mars is also strongly felt in Babylon 5. One of the solar system’s largest corporations is headquartered there, and it is partially controlled by an enigmatic billionaire—William Edgars. Using his money and political clout, Edgars is slowly taking control of the political situation on Earth. Workers and day-laborers on Mars are shown to be not well represented by unions and thus more vulnerable to corporate and state violence than workers elsewhere. The series presents the plight of Martian workers and “average citizens” in a sympathetic light. It is implied that conditions will improve when the Mars colony gains its independence and can establish its own central government (Straczynski, 1994). Interestingly, space-dock workers on the Babylon-5 space station were able to negotiate improvements in their pay and working conditions in a collective bargaining agreement with Earthgov. It seems that workers on Mars are struggling(with Edgar’s industries) to achieve those same basic rights.
　　Battle Beyond the Sun. Earth-based corporations (as such) are either non-existent (with the notable exception of the Heinlein-written Destination Moon), or nearly non-existent in 1960s “we-go-to-Mars” science fiction films. One interesting exception is Roger Corman’s Battle Beyond the Sun, which—under the surface—shows a sinister (and perhaps corporately influenced) side to the explorers from “North Hemis”. This sinister side of the “North Hemis” explorers is shown through an overly competitive personality on the part of the lead astronaut from “North Hemis”—perhaps reflecting an overly-developed sense of corporate greed. Admittedly, when considering the origins of the film, it is hard not to read the idea of “corporate greed” in Battle Beyond the Sun. Battle Beyond the Sun was a Russian-made film (entitled “Nebo zoyvot”) that was originally meant to be a critique of the ways in which American interests will stop at nothing in order to defeat the Russians in a future “space race” to Mars (DVD Savant). The “space race” of the 1960s between the USSR(Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) and the United States was heating up in the early 1960s and the Russian producers used this subject as a point of departure for the film’s story and theme. The “American mindset” (as seen through the ways in which the American astronauts were originally presented in the film) has a strong corporate/Capitalistic tinge to it. Roger Corman purchased the rights to the film in 1962. He decided to add monsters to the story and take the political/moral lessons and themes out of the film (DVD Savant).
　　The taint of “corporate greed” still comes through even after Corman took the USSR and the United States out of the movie and replaced them with the countries of “North Hemis” and “South Hemis”. Interestingly, it is the astronauts from “North Hemis” (or the nation of the Northern hemisphere) that are shown to be greedy and absorbed with competition. Usually, in depictions of the globe (even in space-dramas set in the future), we would identify ourselves/American/heroes/protagonists as coming from North America. Instead, Corman shows that the honest, humble, and peace-loving heroes of the film hail from South Hemis—in real, contemporary, and 1960s American life, the southern hemisphere might be viewed as being populated with peoples and societies which come from the category of “other”. In Battle Beyond the Sun, our heroes come from the southern hemisphere. In any event, the honest and focused astronauts of South Hemis have to rescue the greedy and glory-seeking astronauts of North Hemis when they wreck their ship in a vain attempt to beat the South Hemis astronauts to Mars.
　　The rescue mission results in the crash-landing on a Martian moon. After battling monsters, which were not in the original Russian version of the film, the ship is allowed to take off and return to Earth. The monsters the crew battles are some of the most anatomically interesting monsters ever created for general, horror/science fiction Saturday-afternoon matinee audiences. They resemble human genitalia with teeth. In the film, the monsters convulse and consume each other while a trapped, nearby South Hemis astronaut watches in horror. It is possible that we may be making too much of this, but if the representations of the monsters are extended to the symbolic level, Corman seems to be saying that there will never be any sort of peaceful consummation between the US and the USSR. On the other hand, Corman could have simply decided to create the most anatomically provocative monster suits that he could get away with in a grade-B and general audience science fiction film.
　　Films of the 1990s-2000s
　　Mission to Mars. Although corporate interests dominate more recent films (starting with Total Recall), an exception to the completely corporately-funded and corporate-venture-on-Mars film is Mission to Mars (2000). Produced in the last years of the Clinton administration, Mission to Mars shows two manned Mars landings, although events on both landings go disastrously wrong. After successfully landing on Mars, an attack by an unknown force all but wipes out the first expedition. A strong and financially secure version of NASA then mounts a rescue mission. The landing for the rescue goes awry, resulting in the death of the rescue mission’s commander. The remaining crew members link up and discover the still (mechanically) active and ancient remains of a Martian society. Even though the repairs to one of the NASA rockets are successful (allowing the crews to escape), one crew member decides to activate the ancient Martian spaceship, in the hopes that he may be taken to the aliens’ home planet.
　　Interestingly, the Martians in Mission to Mars are “us”. Millions of years ago, as the Martians were being forced to evacuate Mars, the remaining Martians decided to seed nearby planets with their DNA(Deoxyribonucleic acid). Earth, of course, was one such planet. Thus Martian DNA is actually human DNA and that DNA became Homo Sapiens. So in returning to the home planet (of the Martians who were forced to evacuate Mars), the crew member is joining with others like us. Seen in this light, the human colonization of Mars would be perfectly natural, as the film postulates that humans are the rightful inheritors of the planet.
　　Earth-based societal events (and the environmental events that are causing them) are of a much more dire nature in both Red Planet (2000) and Escape From Mars (1999). Whereas the Earth-based scenes in Mission to Mars reflect a world that is free of environmental problems and depicts a strong and beneficent NASA (and Earth government), the “Earths” of both Red Planet and Escape From Mars are both populated with problems, overpopulated, in fact. In Red Planet, overpopulation and pollution have led Earth scientists to the de facto colonization of Mars. Indeed, the terra-forming of Mars (via the seeding of the planet with oxygen-creating materials) is shown to be underway as the film begins. And while there are some general discussions amongst the crew over the existence of God—as the crew lands on Mars—there is almost no discussion with regard to Man’s seemingly “natural” right to terra-form, “own”, and colonize Mars. The organizing power behind the mission is shown to be strictly governmental in nature. After landing on Mars, Red Planet’s crew returns with a dangerous Martian organism that eats blood, but farts oxygen (This dangerous life form can be used on either Mars or Earth to help repair the planet’s atmosphere—as long as there are plenty of band aids present!).
　　Escape From Mars. The crew of Escape From Mars faces some late-20th century cultural stresses in the form of dwindling resources and an overly budget-cutting guiding organization (the “consortium”). The film reflects the tension of trying to achieve an admirable goal, that of landing on Mars, while also bringing back tangible and potentially valuable rocks and minerals from Mars, all in an era of declining resources. The consortium in this film seems to represent what former Speaker of the House and science fiction writer Newt Gingrich holds up as an ideal in a science fiction film (Disch, 1998). The consortium represents business, which Gingrich believes has inherently less bureaucracy than does government. “One of the major reasons that the spirit of adventure has gone out of space exploration is that we have allowed bureaucracies to dominate too many of our scientific adventures” (Gingrich, as cited in Disch, 1998, p. 179). If you were to ask any of the harried flight controllers in Escape From Mars, they would say there was adventure aplenty, especially in the form of shoddily constructed corporate-supplied equipment. The mission control technicians in Escape From Mars are forced to worry about “the consortium” using out-of-date computers in mission control. Nonetheless, the film attempts to resolve the tensions of declining resources and increased corporate demands by demonstrating (in the resolution of the film) that mission success (and perhaps societal success) is indeed possible. After landing on Mars (after undergoing a period in which the ship and crew physically and psychologically unravels), the crew manages to pull together and repair the ship. The rejuvenated crew also discovers a form of life on Mars. In terms of the colonization-quotient in Escape From Mars, it is only when the crew decides to move into the explorative mode that life is discovered and that they have the will to go on(Grewell, 2001). It is implied that future missions will further domesticate Mars.
　　In sum, in Escape From Mars a financial consortium runs the government and NASA. The consortium hopes that the return on its investments (and future colonization) will be met through the discoveries of precious elements on Mars. After the ship finally blasts off from Mars, the captain mentions that she now views as home, and that this is but “the first step” in reaching Heaven. These lines reflect a definite and domesticative stance. Hopefully, despite demands from the consortium, a more combative stance (with both the Martians and with other civilizations) can be avoided.
　　Of course, the gold standard for corporate-themed and man-on-Mars films is Paul Verhoven’s Total Recall.
　　Extreme corporatism in Total Recall. In Total Recall, the process of colonization is well under way. There are people who have lived on the Red Planet for years, even generations of children who have been born there. The movie actually begins on Earth, with Douglas Quaid watching a news broadcast about the current events on Mars, the discovery of ancient Martian artifacts and civil uprising against the major corporation that controls the planet. Mars is, in fact, overseen not by a standard government, but by a corporation that mines tribinium, an obviously valuable element.
　　The person in charge of running things is not a politician. Cohaagen is a corporate villain who is known for selling cheap air domes to the general populace, the common workers who do the mining. These domes allow in large amounts of radiation and cause mutations in the colonists who live in them. Financial gain is more important than the genetic damage caused by the dangerous conditions he is creating. The workers are then looked down upon for bearing the marks of corporate greed. When the mutants assist Quato, their psychic leader, and Quaid, a man who may or may not exist outside of the mind of his alter-ego Hauser, Cohaagen has the air shut off in Sector G, planning to allow the people to die as a “lesson to the others”.
　　The corporate entity uses thugs and machines to keep the common man, the mutants, under control. Much like the strikebreakers of the early 20th century, the company’s henchmen will do whatever it takes to control the workers. They chase Quaid from Earth to Mars and through the back alleys of the slums. They threaten and beat women, children, anyone who gets in their way, and shoot a helpless mutant so that he cannot reveal the secrets of the artifacts. They even go so far as to use greedy mutants, who lie about having children, to win the confidence of Quaid and Melina as they struggle to use the artifacts of the original Martians to preserve the lives of the new Martians, the colonists.
　　It is only by destroying Cohaagen, the figurehead of the corporation, and activating the ancient artifact, that the people of Mars will be able to live a healthy and normal life. Cohaagen is exposed to the unaltered atmosphere of Mars and dies of decompression. Quaid and Melina, on the other hand, are saved by the creation of a new atmosphere and thus a new world on Mars. As the new world is created, the power of the corporation is destroyed. They no longer control the air and therefore they no longer are able to control the people.
　　In contrast to the ancient Martians saving the colonists in Total Recall, the original inhabitants of Mars are far less friendly in The Ghosts of Mars (2001). In this film, which truly is a horror film set in the sci-fi genre, the colonists are infected by the spirits of the old Martians. As this happens, they then begin to self-mutilate and become blood-thirsty, killing anyone who is not infected. The contagion is carried on the wind and moves along the railway tracks from mining camp to mining camp. The new colonists are definitely no welcome and are forced to pay the ultimate price for their trespass upon the soil of Mars.
　　The situation on Mars is made more complex by the machinations of the corporate entity to which the ruling matriarchy answers. The company is concerned that word will get out that people are dying on Mars. They are worried that production will fall and people will lose confidence in the company. Again, this is an organization that definitely values profit over the lives and needs of its workers. The company deliberately obfuscates when signing people up for employment on Mars. As noted by Natasha Henstridge’s character Melanie Ballard, “What they don’t tell you when you sign up for a year is that it is two Earth years”.
　　A company that so blatantly misleads workers is not going to be happy if their productivity is negatively impacted by “troubles” on Mars. They do not even send investigators to determine the truth of the situation. Instead, they are worried about bringing a thief into the main city for punishment. If something is learned about the problems in the outer reaches of the colonies, that is, a happy accident. In one of the final scenes of the movie, the matriarchal tribunal that is listening to Ballard’s explanation of what happened scoffs at the idea they can tell their superiors what is occurring. Instead, they send Ballard to rest and seem to do nothing while their city is attacked by the rampaging Martians. The corporate structure is happy to exploit the workers but it is up to the workers to protect themselves.
　　A Call for Sanity: The Martian Chronicles Miniseries
　　Sandwiched between the extremes the big government missions to Mars of the 1950s and the powerful and Mars-based corporate consortiums of more recent films, is the cool and thoughtful sanity of The Martian Chronicles (1980).
　　The Martian Chronicles television miniseries is one of the few television or film productions from the 1970s that deals with the concept of humans going to Mars. Although much research has been undertaken with regard to The Martian Chronicles book, little has been done with regard to the television miniseries. The theme of colonization as a moral concept was explored in Ray Bradbury’s 1950 book, The Martian Chronicles, and the TV miniseries deals with this concept as well. Indeed, the idea of colonization as a theme to be explored, and certainly the examination of colonization as a moral concept is almost unique to this particular “Man goes to Mars” film. For the purposes of this study, we will examine the miniseries adaptation of the book and the historical time-period in which it was produced.
　　The three-part TV miniseries was produced for NBC (National Broadcasting Company) in Britain and was adapted by noted science fiction author Richard Matheson. Upon landing on Mars, astronaut Spender is completely taken with (or perhaps even absorbed by) the purity and beauty of the remains of an ancient Martian civilization. Spender is part of the third team of astronauts sent to the red planet. The commander of the mission—astronaut Wilder—had sent Spender out to investigate the Martian cites and look for signs of life. Upon returning, Spender reports of finding beautiful Martian cites. Some cites are very old and lifeless, but in some cities, Martian life and culture appears to have been thriving as recently as one month ago. Spender reports that chicken pox (brought by the astronauts in the first two missions) has ultimately wiped out the Martian race, much in the same way that diseases from Europe—brought by colonizers and conquerors in the 1500s—infected and weakened entire populations of North and South American Indians. When Spender sees his callous fellow crewmates littering the Martian landscape with their wine bottles and human refuse, he leaves the group and seemingly joins with the spirit of the now-dead Martian civilization.
　　Indeed, when thinking about the miniseries with the concept of colonization in mind, several exchanges—primarily between astronaut Spender and the mission commander, astronaut Wilder—come to mind. Even before leaving for Mars, astronaut Spender expresses doubts about the overall intent of the mission. In a scene in which the famous Martian, triple-lens/TV-camera-device (from the 1952 version of The War of the Worlds) can be seen in the background, Spender tells Wilder that it would be wrong to colonize Mars. Wilder asks, “What’s wrong with colonization?” (Anderson, 1980). When Spender responds that there could be life on Mars, Wilder acknowledges that, “That could [indeed] change everything” (Anderson, 1980). Spencer, though, is still shown to have concerns over the idea of human colonization of the planet.
　　After landing on the planet and subsequently discovering that the Martians had died of chicken pox, Spender tells Wilder that he is ashamed that an Earth-based virus has wiped out the Martians. Spender goes onto say that it will be impossible for mankind to do anything but destroy what is left of Mars. Spender tells Wilder that, “No matter how hard we try to touch Mars, we won’t be able to really touch it. That will make us angry and we’ll just rip it up and ruin it—like we ruined Earth” (Anderson, 1980). According to Spender, any peaceful domestication that the humans might have in mind will ultimately result in the destruction of the Martian civilization (Grewell, 2001).
　　After a week-long absence, Spender returns. He now views himself as a Martian who must violently protect his home and civilization from invasion and colonization. Spender kills most of his fellow astronauts before asking for a chance to meet with Wilder. He feels that Wilder is different than the others and is capable of understanding the Martian way of life. Spender tells Wilder that the Martian culture blended religion, art, and science, and that “The enjoyment of pure being was the key to the Martian way of life” (Anderson, 1980). In some respects (and in broad terms), what Spender says may reflect a late-20th century understanding of the values and philosophies of Native American cultures. Spender then runs off. He returns, wearing a Martian mask and holding a Martian weapon. When Spender fires the weapon at the remaining astronauts, Wilder is forced to kill him. It is at this point that Wilder first realizes that the colonization and domestication of Mars may turn violent. He fearfully asks, “Dear God, is this how it’s going to be?” (Anderson, 1980).
　　In terms of political and governmental themes, an interesting moment occurs in the second part of the miniseries, when the narrator intones that “transplanted technocrats” have come to Mars (Anderson, 1980). The government-oriented technocrats are on a mission to domesticate Mars. Using modular buildings and efficient construction techniques, the government-construction bureaucracy will “beat the Martian landscape into familiar [Earth-oriented] shapes and bludgeon away the strangeness” (Anderson, 1980).
　　Importantly, the theme of colonization is transformed into something different at the end of the miniseries. The impetus that drives the transformation of the colonization theme forward emanates from the actions of Colonel Wilder. After mass exodus on Mars and nuclear war on Earth have rendered both planets devoid or nearly devoid of life, Colonel Wilder seeks out the few remaining inhabitants of Mars. His last visit is with the only other living member of the third expedition to Mars, Sam Parkerhill. Parkerhill recently shot a Martian, who he thought was threatening him. Instead of retaliating, the remaining Martian gives Parkerhill a deed to one half of the planet. After giving Parkerhill the deed, the Martian infers that the human will need the land, as something disastrous will occur on Earth. And indeed, that very night, all life on Earth is completely extinguished in a war that had been building for months.
　　After leaving Parkerhill, Wilder, perhaps thinking what he and his family must do in this brave new world, returns to the original city that he, Spender, Parkerhill, and the original members of the third expedition to Mars had discovered. Wilder thinks of Spender’s transformative ideas toward the Martins as he wanders the ancient city. He is hoping to find, talk with, and learn from one of the few remaining Martians.
　　Suddenly, a Martian appears in the distance. He walks toward Wilder. Both men attempt to communicate in their native languages. After the Martian holds his hand toward Wilder’s mind, he is able to speak English. When they attempt to reach out and perhaps shake hands, their hands “pass through” each other. After some discussion, they realize that it is possible that neither human nor Martian exists in the same temporal plane. When Wilder points out that the Martian’s city is in ruins, the Martian replies that he sees his city as alive and vibrant. The Martian suggests that Wilder is perhaps seeing the future ruins of his own civilization. When Wilder acknowledges that the Martian could perhaps be correct, he begins to open his mind to new possibilities. When the Martian refers to his own planet as Tier, Wilder, realizing that Tier is the correct name for the planet, does likewise.
　　Although Wilder has at last met a Martian and is open to the moment, he is still frustrated over the fact that it is a fleeting moment, an anomaly that is the result of a transitory moment in time. The Martian tells Wilder not to be despondent. That they still have this moment and are able to communicate and learn from one another. Wilder tells the Martian that he wants to learn the secret of the Martian way of life.
　　Whitehall views this encounter between Wilder and the Martian as a Deleuzean “Event”, an encounter that has transformative possibilities. Out of this, “The Event re-emerges so [both] Human and Martian become different” (Whitehall, 2003, p. 189). In the miniseries, the Martian goes onto explain to Wilder some of the tenets of the Martian way of life. The Martian tells Wilder that Martians seek to “make common cause with the forces of existence, and to hold that which lives in all reverence” (Anderson, 1980). The Martian also states that,“Life is given by the sovereign of the universe, and [that] it is to be savored… and respected” (Anderson, 1980). After their fleeting meeting, the series narrator intones that “Wilder leaves the Martian and leaves his dreams of sharing this new world with a race that had lived for eons” (Anderson, 1980). Visually, Wilder looks to be at peace, perhaps coming at last to a personal understanding of what it is to be human, or Martian, and how it is possible live peacefully on the planet. Perhaps the idea that he must become Martian—by giving up the idea that he is from Earth—is forming in his mind.
　　Interestingly, the next event mentioned in Whitehall’s analysis of the book, is also the next and final act of the miniseries. In the book, the two vignettes which Whitehall analyzes are widely separated and are parts of different stories (or chronicles) concerning Mars. In the final scene of the miniseries, Wilder gathers up his family and takes them on an outing. He tells them that they will meet Martians. The kids are bored, very few humans are left on Mars, and one can sense that the family (as well as Wilder himself) is desperately in need of a sense of direction.
　　For Wilder, that new direction is to become one with Mars. In order to do this, Wilder must become “the other”; he must take on the mask of the strange outsider who exists beyond societies limits. In order to do this, Wilder must take his family to a liminal space, to the ruins of the ancient Martian city that exists on the borders of both space and time. Whitehall (2003) wrote, “[T]here is now the possibility of becoming the Other. Humanity is becoming meaningless… but because of Bradbury’s politics of encounter, it is a positive, not negative change. Humanity’s loss is humanity’s gain” (p. 189).
　　Using the Martian canals, Wilder takes his family by boat to the ancient Martian city. After they set up camp, Wilder build a fire. Into the fire he tosses old, Earth-related, and once-important papers that had tethered him to his job and the family to Earth. Wilder seems to know that his family’s access into this liminal space—this place of Martian/Human betwixt and between—will be fully granted only when the documents that had grounded him to his previous existence are destroyed. Wilder watches his ties to the past disappear into the smoke. His son comes up to him and reminds him that they are supposed to meet some real Martians. Wilder smiles, and then takes his family to the edge of the canal. He points down and says, “There they are” (Anderson, 1980). The reflections in the rippling water stare and then nod and smile back.
　　Of these moments, Whitehall (2003) suggested that the burning of the documents in the fire represent a rejection of the limits of humanity and an “embrace of the limitless and beyond” (p. 190). Whitehall (2003) posited that now:
　　Instead of managing [the Other, as in Star Trek], or mobilizing the beyond to produce a sensible world [as in Starship Troopers], [that Wilder’s family] are willing to affirm that they exceed the category “human”, and [are willing] to embrace its meaninglessness as the virtual condition under which new and creative possibilities emerge. (p. 190)
　　Wilder is at peace at last, because the need, justification, and rationale for the ideal of colonization has not been defeated or submerged. Instead, the quest for colonization has been transcended. Rock Hudson played the part of Wilder in the mini-series. An amateur online reviewer asked why Hudson could not have lost just a little more weight for this important role. But let us look at this issue just a little differently: Rock Hudson—because of his middle-aged and somewhat portly self—helps us to feel more like him. And that is what makes the end of the film even more powerful; we have taken this journey, along with Wilder and his family. Perhaps it is possible for us, too, to embrace the Other, “and exceed the category human (Whitehall, 2003, p. 190).
　　In terms of societal stresses, the fact that the miniseries was made in the late 1970s seems to make perfect sense. At a time in which we (as a society) looked into the mirror and saw the twin spectres of Watergate and Vietnam, perhaps we could finally accept the idea that “the Other” (fully representing different values and ideals than our own), had not only something to say, but represented something we should become.
　　 Conclusions
　　One observation with regard to the effect of business can categorically be seen through our analysis of Mars-based science fiction films. That is, since 1992, Mars has been open for business. The presence of business as a moving force in Mars-film planetary affairs has grown tremendously since the mid-1990s. Similarly, the power of government as a controlling force in Martian affairs has declined. As mentioned above, Total Recall, Ghosts of Mars, and Escape From Mars address this changing government power/corporate power dynamic. Although several Mars-based science fiction films show the growth of the power of business, it is interesting to note that ultimately, very few films portray this as a positive or healthy development for Martian society.
　　It is more difficult to make broad generalizations regarding the concept of colonization. It would be an encouraging societal sign to report that an increasing number of recent we-go-to-Mars films are more sensitive to the issue of the colonization of Mars (Grewell, 2001). With regard to Mars-based science fiction films, The Martian Chronicles makes the strongest case for at least considering what we might be doing to a planet as we terra-form it, although more recent films such as Total Recall and Total Recall 2070 (1999) force us to examine the consequences of the effects of “combative” (Grewell, 2001, p. 28) colonialism.
　　Can any generalizations be made with regard to our ability to embrace the “other” in science fiction films in which man journeys to Mars? Although there are certainly exceptions, it seems our ability to communicate with, deal with, or even embrace the “other”/Martians seems to be at least as much dependent on the worldview of the writer-director filmmaking team as it is on the prevailing, dominant, and ideological way of thinking which may hold sway in society at a given moment in time. Even so, is possible to perhaps make generalizations. The Martian Chronicles was adapted into a mini-series at a time in which society had witnessed the failures of government, but was still impressionable enough to learn from its mistakes. Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) and E.T. (1982) expressed similar themes with regard to embracing “the other” and these films were also embraced by audiences. It seemed as if we (as a society) were interested in what “the other” had to say, were interested in the “other’s” values, and felt we could learn from the experience of communication. However, by the mid-1980s, the nation began to celebrate its own values again. President Reagan proclaimed this time of national reaffirmation as “Morning in America”. Just as it seemed that it was necessary for America to expunge the collective guilt that emanated from the pasts of Vietnam and Watergate, it also seemed that it became necessary to ultimately redefine and banish the “other”, all in a vain attempt to delineate and celebrate our own culture. Only one we-go-to-Mars major feature film made since the mid-1980s features an encounter with an “other”/Martian that is celebrated in any way. That film is Mission to Mars. As of this writing, a new adaptation of The Martian Chronicles has been green-lighted by Paramount. How will we greet the Martians now? Will they be greeted at a Tea Party meeting? Will they asked to produce their Martian picture ID, or their space vehicle operator’s license, or interplanetary passport in order to attend? Or will they invite us to their join their Tea Party? Time will tell.
　　 References
　　Alland, W. (Producer). (1953). It came from outer space [Film]. United States: Universal International Pictures.
　　Anderson, M. (Director). (1980). The martian chronicles [Television series]. United States: NBC.
　　Barry, P. (2002). Beginning theory: An introduction to literary and cultural theory. Manchester, U.K.: Manchester University Press.
　　Booker, M. K. (2001). Monsters, mushroom clouds, and the cold war: American science fiction and the roots of postmodernism, 1946-1964. Westport, C.T.: Greenwood.
　　Booker, M. K. (2004). Science fiction television. Westport, C.T.: Praeger.
　　Booker, M. K. (2006). Alternate Americas: Science fiction film and American culture. Westport, C.T.: Praeger.
　　De Palma, B. (Director). (2000). Mission to mars [Film]. United States: Buena Vista.
　　Disch, T. M. (1998). The dreams our stuff is made of: How science fiction conquered the world. New York: Touchstone.
　　Eisenhower, D. (1961, Jan. 17). Farewell radio and television address to the American people. Address.
　　Fearnley, N. (Director). (1999). Escape from mars [Film]. United States: Credo.
　　Flores, D. (Director). (2005). Crimson force [Film]. United States: Sci-Fi Channel.
　　Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar.
　　Grewell, G. (2001). Colonizing the universe: Science fictions then, now, and in the (imagined) future. Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature, 55(2), 25-47.
　　Harrington, C. (Director). (1966). Queen of blood [Film]. United States: American International.
　　Haskin, B. (Director). (1955). Conquest of space [Film]. United States: Paramount.
　　Hewitt, D. L. (Director). (1965). Horrors of the red planet [Film]. United States: American General.
　　Hoffman, A. (Director). (2000). Red planet [Film]. United States: Warner Bros.
　　Karzhukov, M., Kozyr, A., & Coppola, F. F. (Directors). (1959). Battle beyond the sun [Film]. Soviet Union: Dovzenko.
　　King, S. (Producer), & Carpenter, J. (Director). (2001). The ghosts of mars [Film]. United States: Animationweks.
　　Lazarus, P. N. (Producer). (1977). Capricorn one [Film]. United Kingdom: ITC Entertainment.
　　Melchior, I. (Director). (1959). The angry red planet [Film]. United States: American International.
　　Monterastelli, A. (Creator). (1999). Total recall 2070 [Television series]. Canada: Alliance Atlantis Communications.
　　Neumann, K. (Director). (1950). Rocketship X-M [Film]. United States: Lippert Pictures.
　　Noonan, B. (2005). Women scientists in fifties science fiction films. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland.
　　Pal, G. (Producer). (1950). Destination moon [Film]. United States: George Pal Productions.
　　Penn, A. (Director). (1970). Little big man [Film]. United States: Cinema Center Films.
　　Pytka, J. (Director). (1984). Morning in America [Political ad.]. United States: Prod. Hal Riney.
　　Reagan, R. (1981, Jan. 20). Inaugural address. Address.
　　Schatz, T. (1981). Hollywood genres: Formulas, filmmaking, and the studio system. New York: Random.
　　Selander, L. (Director). (1951). Flight to mars [Film]. United States: Monogram.
　　Sobchack, V. (1999). Screening space: The American science fiction film. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
　　Spielberg, S. (Director). (1977). Close encounters of the third kind. United States: EMI Films.
　　Spielberg, S. (Director). (1982). E.T.(The extra-terrestrial) [Film]. United States: Amblin Entertainment.
　　Straczynski, J. M. (Producer). (1994). Babylon 5 [Television series]. United States: Warner Bros.
　　Verhoeven, P. (Director). (1990). Total recall [Film]. United States: TriStar Pictures.
　　Verhoeven, P. (Director). (1997). Starship troopers [Film]. United States: TriStar Pictures.
　　Vizzini, B. E. (2009). Cold war fears, cold war passions: Conservatives and liberals square off in 1950s science fiction. Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 26(1), 28-39.
　　Warren, B. (2010). Keep watching the skies!: American science fiction movies of the fifties. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland.
　　Weldes, J. (2003). Popular culture, science fiction, and world politics. In J. Weldes (Ed.), To seek out new worlds: Exploring links between science fiction and world politics (pp. 1-27). Gordonsville, V.A.: Palgrave.
　　Weldes, J. (Ed.). (2003). To seek out new worlds: Exploring links between science fiction and world politics. Gordonsville, V.A.: Palgrave.
　　Whitehall, G. (2003). The problem of the “world and beyond”. In J. Weldes (Ed.), To seek out new worlds: Exploring links between science fiction and world politics (pp. 169-193). Gordonsville, V.A.: Palgrave.