CULTURE

Deepfake George Lucas Is More Convincing Than Actual George Lucas

Baudrillard was right, and I have lost all sense of what's real.

George LucasLACMA: Art and Film Gala, Los Angeles, USA - 03 Nov 2018

Photo by Matt Baron/Shutterstock

A video purporting to show George Lucas camping out for the premiere of Rise of Skywalker was unleashed upon the world yesterday, and has thrown reality into turmoil.

We have been warned that Deepfakes have the potential to undermine democracy by casting doubt on the veracity of video evidence. If the alleged "pee tape" came out tomorrow, is there any doubt that Donald Trump and his defenders would shout fake? Even if the footage was clear and unmistakable, the existence of technology that can seamlessly meld a famous face onto a stranger's speech and mannerisms can throw any video into contention. But this new George Lucas video has done something much deeper, and much more troubling.

George Lucas Camps Out & Reacts to Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker - Deepfake Sagawww.youtube.com

Having watched George Lucas being sarcastic and self-aggrandizing in a bad George Lucas wig and a cheap fat suit, I don't know if I believe in the real George Lucas anymore. You can tell me that it's actually an actor and impersonator named Josh Robert Thompson, but when he rolls his eyes at Baby Yoda with perfect contempt, I know that he's the real deal. The essence of George Lucas lives in this video more purely than any footage of the man himself, and I am no longer convinced that George "it's like poetry" Lucas was ever anything other than a character embodied by Josh Robert Thompson.

He seems certain that American culture leaving him behind can only be a damning sign for society. Couple that with the sigh of a disaffected boomer billionaire—pining for Woodstock while he contemplates buying a movie theater to simplify his schedule—and you have enacted George Lucas' entire being since 2005. Skywalker Ranch has been officially relocated to the Uncanny Valley, and I'm now convinced that the original George Lucas, in all his pompous glory, was the first CGI creation of Industrial Light & Magic.

If you haven't watched the video yet, save yourself from the existential dread. It's too late for me. The map has subsumed the territory. All that remains is the simulacrum, and I am left to wonder, if George Lucas is nothing more than this basic character study in a beard and glasses, who actually created Star Wars? I do not have the answer, but If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably Hatsune Miku.

CULTURE

Did Billy Dee Williams Really Come Out as Gender Fluid?

The man who made Lando Calrissian a household name may not be a "man" after all

Billy Dee Williams'Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker' film premiere, Arrivals, Los Angeles, USA - 16 Dec 2019

Photo by Matt Baron/Shutterstock

Billy Dee Williams is a sex symbol.

The deep silky tones of his voice. The sly smile that invites you to be as comfortable and cool as he is. He has sexual chemistry with literally everyone, literally all the time.

So when Donald Glover took over the iconic role of Lando Calrissian—essentially playing a younger version of Williams for Solo: A Star Wars Story—it should hardly have been surprising to anyone that Glover and the film's writers would refer to Lando as pansexual. And yet, it did. Just as people of a certain stripe will find cause for outrage in women being allowed to bust ghosts and hypersexualized videogame characters wearing slightly more clothing than they used to, Twitter commentators began attacking this addition to a classic character that they had rigidly defined according to their own narrow views.

According to them, both Billy Dee Williams and Lando Calrissian were consummate cis, hetero, norm-conforming, masculine males. Look at his jawline! Look at his mustache! Look at the way he flirts with Leia! This is a man's man who drinks malt liquor, objectifies women, and makes capes look badass. According to this assessment, the suggestion that Lando Calrissian could even be attracted to anyone outside of the traditional, heteronormative structure of romance was an affront to manhood itself. Anyone that cool and manly could only be into women, and pretending otherwise could only be a part of the SJW attack on civilization.

Those same commentators must be having some complicated feelings today, with the news that Billy Dee Williams, at the age of 82, is not at all hung up on these old ideas. In a recent interview with Esquire, Williams—who is reprising his role as Han Solo's frenemy in the upcoming film, Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker—refers to himself/herself with both sets of the traditional gender pronouns, saying, "I think of myself as a relatively colorful character who doesn't take himself or herself too seriously." In case there was any question about the sincerity of that usage, Williams followed up with some clarification, "And you see I say 'himself' and 'herself,' because I also see myself as feminine as well as masculine… I'm a very soft person. I'm not afraid to show that side of myself."

Many outlets are reporting this as a straightforward story of the actor "coming out" as "gender fluid." While that's an understandable interpretation of events, Williams does not actually use that term within the interview, which begs the question of what it really means to be gender fluid. If you relate to traits of both the traditionally masculine and the traditionally feminine role—e.g. you are biologically male, but value your feminine side—does that mean you're gender fluid? Does it require a direct declaration of a fluid identity? Or regular use of pronouns other than the one you were assigned at birth?

I don't have an answer, because I don't believe there is one answer. Coming to terms with the fact that gender is largely a social construct means coming to terms with the fact that the definitions of terms around gender are subject to societal standards and norms that are currently—if not permanently—in flux. I personally think many in the media have jumped the gun in declaring Williams to be gender fluid without getting direct confirmation that he/she defines himself/herself in those specific terms. But what's way more important than knowing exactly how to navigate new questions and concerns about gender as culture changes is recognizing the problems with the old strictures—problems which Williams' interview highlights beautifully.

Put simply, there are no superficial signifiers that define who a person is supposed to be. Just because Billy Dee Williams projects a public persona that conforms to traditional ideas of masculinity doesn't mean that he/she is beholden to the rigid role that entails. In Williams' own words, "I never tried to be anything except myself." If even someone who seems to have such a natural aptitude for the gruff, cool confidence of old-school masculinity can—at the age of 82—recognize that aspects of his/her identity fall outside the prescribed norms of manhood, then we should all feel a little freer to question the roles that are set out for us.

If all that means for you is letting yourself cry when Sam Smith comes on the radio, changing up your grooming habits, or expanding your wardrobe to include some badass capes, that's great. And if it means using a different pronoun, a different name, or taking more permanent measures to match your gender presentation to your gender identity, then maybe a figure like Billy Dee Williams referring to herself as feminine can help give you some license to defy expectations.