Professor Tiger
SOAN 281
4 April 2012
The Production of Celebrity: Will Smith
In the early 1990s, Will Smith and his manager James Lassiter evaluated a list of the
top-ten highest grossing films of all time. At this critical point in his career, Smith was on the
cusp of stardom. He garnered popular acclaim as both a hip-hop artist and achieved success as
the leading male actor on the television sitcom The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. Given his growing
popularity, Smith strongly wanted to transition from the small screen to the big screen. On the
verge of entering the movie industry, both he and his agent understood how crucial crafting
Smith’s image would be in shaping his young career. Despite his growing fame and easily
marketable personality, it was Smith and Lassiter’s understanding of consumer culture, as
articulated by both Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno, that contributed most significantly
to Smith’s unbelievable celebrity status. In the case of Smith, he not only understood the same
ideological perspective as Horkheimer and Adorno regarding the culture industry, but he also
successfully applied the fundamental beliefs set forth by both authors in laying the foundation
for his own monumental fame. In “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception,”
Horkheimer and Adorno address how the entertainment industry creates a consumer culture
that builds its enjoyment around what it is directed to want. Using the tools of capitalism
associated with large studio companies and advertising firms, Horkheimer and Adorno also
propose how mechanical reproduction makes possible the construction and reinforcement of
celebrity. Likewise, Smith and his agent developed a clever approach following these basic
tenets when deciding to treat his future career strictly as a business, focus on consumer culture,
and ultimately expand his celebrity on a worldwide scale.
When Smith and Lassiter sat down to chart out a future business career, they alluded to
Horkheimer and Adorno’s belief that mechanical reproduction dominated both the film
industry and capitalist society. Smith understood that studying the trends of the film industry
would reveal which types of films were in high demand and how the economic gains further
incentivized their mechanical reproduction. During their meeting in the early 1990s, Smith and
Lassiter examined the list of the top-ten highest grossing films of all time and said “ ‘O.K.,
what are the patterns? We realized that 10 out of 10 had special effects. Nine out of 10 had
special effects with creatures. Eight out of 10 had special effects with creatures and a love
story.”1 In turn, Smith and Lassiter found that the mechanical reproduction of certain themes
and plots provided an age-old secret to producing movies of high economic value. Although
“mechanical production and reproduction [of similar content] promises that nothing changes,
and nothing unsuitable will appear,” (134) Horkheimer and Adorno add that the economic
incentive to reproduce the same material continues to exist because “any additions to the wellproven culture inventory are too much of a speculation” (134). There is inherently too much
risk in producing a film that stretches the boundaries of popular culture. As a result, Smith and
his agent in large part purposefully chose pragmatism over passion when it came to both
making movies and money. Aside from Smith’s first attempt at film, an independent titled Six
Degrees of Separation, his next five movies were Bad Boys, Independence Day, Men in Black,
Enemy of the State, and Wild Wild West. All five were action films that included special effects,
creatures, a love story, or a combination of these elements. Following Smith’s analysis of the
highest grossing movies of all time, it comes as no surprise that all five were blockbusters,
1
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
profited far beyond their budgets, and each made millions of dollars.2 At the time of its release,
Independence Day happened to become the second highest grossing film of all time.3 Due to
the success of these films, Horkheimer and Adorno allege “that because millions participate in
it, certain reproduction processes are necessary that inevitably require identical needs in
innumerable places to be satisfied with identical goods” (121). As a result, the prevalence of
mechanical reproduction in the film industry becomes more common as do sequels. This is
none more so evident than Will Smith taking part in Bad Boys II, Men in Black II, Men in Black
III, and the rumored Independence Day II.4 Building upon Horkheimer and Adorno’s assertion
that “movies and radio need no longer pretend to be art. The truth that they are just business is
made into an ideology in order to justify the rubbish they deliberately produce” (121), Smith
chose to perfectly craft his career around blockbuster movies, rather than stretch himself as an
actor with more challenging and less lucrative independent films.
As Smith and Lassiter made the decision to transition to film, they fully understood how
Horkheimer and Adorno’s focus on consumer culture could enhance Smith’s value as a
product, broaden his marketability to a wider audience, and allow them to capitalize on his
newfound celebrity. Horkheimer and Adorno make a case that “consumers appear as statistics
on research organization charts, and are divided by income groups into red, green, and blue
areas; the technique that is used for any type of propaganda” (123). Likewise, Smith followed
this line of thinking when " ‘every Monday morning, we sit down [and ask]--'O.K., what
happened this weekend, and what are the things that resemble things that have happened the
last 10, 20, 30 weekends?' "5 Smith and Lassiter not only embrace the mechanical reproduction
2
“Will Smith – IMDb.” IMDB.
"Independence Day.” Box Office Mojo.
4
Eisenberg, Eric. “Independence Day 2 Won’t Be Made Any Time Soon, But It Is Happening.” Cinema Blend.
5
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
3
they witness every weekend, but they also focus on how consumers respond to each film,
during each season, and around each holiday. In turn, they can more closely examine consumer
culture and premeditate the release of Smith’s movies at the optimum time. In one case, Smith
expresses this understanding when noticing that “summer movies are about things that happen,
and fall movies are about how people respond to things that happen.”6 Furthermore, Smith
finds that he has conditioned himself to develop “a youthful energy […] that fits during that
time of release and rejuvenation” around the July 4th weekend, which makes him more
accustomed to producing “things-that-happen” movies such as Independence Day.7 His
reflection proves that he is just as much an active participant, albeit a cunning one, as anyone in
this culture industry that dictates which themes and topics the audience should enjoy. In the
words of Horkheimer and Adorno, Smith believes that “not to conform means to be rendered
powerless, economically and therefore spiritually––to be ‘self-employed’ ” (133). He certainly
identifies with this concept economically since his uncanny ability to conform has not only kept
him employed, but has made him a highly desirable actor as well. Smith recognizes
Horkheimer and Adorno’s assertion, moreover, that “there is nothing left for the consumer to
classify. Producers have done it for him” (125). As a result, Smith’s close study of consumer
culture allows him to ascertain what the audience should already want, making his job to
provide an escape for the viewing public that much easier.
Applying the concepts set forth by Horkheimer and Adorno regarding consumer culture,
Smith continues to successfully produce his celebrity on a worldwide scale. Both he and his
agent are aware that constructing his image, advertising his product, and creating his brand are
paramount in delivering to the consumer a mechanical reproduction of what is repeatedly
6
7
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
desired. Horkheimer and Adorno concisely state, “the triumph of advertising in the culture
industry is that consumers feel compelled to buy and use its products even though they see
through them” (167). For this reason, Smith finds value in creating a personal image that is not
only reproduced film after film, but is also bought time after time. Whether he is portrayed as
an action star throughout his career, an amusing and lovable character in Hitch, or a devout
family man in The Pursuit of Happyness, the consuming public will always view Smith as a
very likeable “good-natured guy saving the rest of us from the trauma of aliens, robots, crooks
or poor dating habits.”8 As a result, Smith and his agent capitalize on his consistent image and
are able to successfully churn out economically profitable films that do not always abide to the
action, alien, love story formula. The Pursuit of Happyness, one of the few exceptions from
Smith’s action-packed blockbuster mold, achieved phenomenal success in the box office thanks
to his good-natured image and already distinguished celebrity. Smith reveals how critical his
image must have been given that " ‘Pursuit of Happyness is essentially a movie about a black
homeless guy who gets a job," he says. "There's nowhere near my fee for that movie. This thing
has to be under $50 million." [Yet] The downbeat Happyness surprised everyone, not least of
all Smith, by earning $305 million worldwide.”9 In turn, Smith continually reaps the benefits of
crafting an image that the consumer culture holds in high demand. The surprising success of
The Pursuit of Happyness, moreover, further proves Horkheimer and Adorno’s theory that
“marked differentiations such as those of A and B films, or of stories in magazines in different
price ranges, depend not so much on subject matter as on classifying, organizing, and labeling
consumers” (123). Perhaps once celebrity status has been achieved, economic success is more
contingent upon recognizing what Horkheimer and Adorno consider the consumer desires and
8
9
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine.
producing the very same consistent and likeable image the consumer has grown accustomed to
wanting.
Overall, Smith and Lassiter nearly crafted the ultimate movie celebrity by treating the
culture industry in much the same regard as Horkheimer and Adorno. Recognizing the
mechanical reproduction of the business, analyzing consumer culture, and crafting an image
that reflected their understanding of these elements allowed Smith to produce a celebrity unlike
any other. As a result, he has already helped generate over $5.7 billion in gross movie revenue
in his career.10 Despite his monumental fame, there remain purists who question at what point
will he challenge himself and chose art over commerce. It is rare that audiences will ever
witness him in a role contrary to his well-constructed image. He may not venture to portray an
evil character like Denzel Washington in Training Day or a bad husband in a damaging
relationship like Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road11, however, perhaps Smith did the
right thing in carefully crafting his image and choosing not to pursue such controversial, yet
critically acclaimed roles. Smith may not garner Oscar nominations year after year, yet he has
certainly made more money and achieved larger celebrity status. In turn, it appears that
Horkheimer and Adorno could not have been more correct in their belief that consistently
reproducing “the dominant forms of generality, into the language of music, painting, or words,
in the hope that it will be reconciled thus with the idea of true generality” (130) will contribute
to one’s worldwide celebrity status. Consumer culture strives for a generality in their
entertainment whose constant reproduction seemingly converts the inauthentic into the
authentic and provides a somewhat believable escape. Will Smith is this ever-moldable
10
11
“Will Smith – Box Office Data Movie Star.” The Numbers.
Simmons, Bill. “The Movie Star.” Grantland.
generality whose celebrity and success, as measured by net worth, shines brighter than any
other.
Works Cited
Eisenberg, Eric. “Independence Day 2 Won’t Be Made Any Time Soon, But It Is
Happening.” Cinema Blend, 14 Feb. 2011. Web. <http://www.cinemablend.com/new/In
dependence-Day-2-Won-t-Be-Made-Any-Time-Soon-But-It-Is-Happening-23158.html>.
Horkheimer, Max and Theodor Adorno. “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass
Deception.” Dialect of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum. 120-167. Print.
"Independence Day.” Box Office Mojo. Web. <http://www.boxofficemojo.com/m
ovies/?id=independence day.htm>.
Keegan, Rebecca Winters. “The Legend of Will Smith.” Time Magazine, 29 Nov. 2007.
Web. <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1689234,00.html>.
Simmons, Bill. “The Movie Star.” Grantland, 29 June 2012. Web.
<http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6716942/page/2/bill-simmons-ryan-reynolds-smithperception-success-hollywood>.
“Will Smith – Box Office Data Movie Star.” The Numbers. Web. <http://www.th enumbers.com/people/WSMIT.php>.
“Will Smith – IMDb.” IMDB. Web. <http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000226/>.