Film Movements: A Political Perspective - Coursework Example

Film Movements: A Political Perspective By Film Movements: A Political Perspective Films have been the representatives of mass culture for quite a long time. It has evolved into an art form through a process that shows man’s development in the field of art and culture. There is always the complaint that fiction is larger than life. However, films only reflect society the way it is. They depict it the way it is. It is true that fact is stranger than fiction. Films reflect the aspirations and fears of man. Man can identify himself with characters in films. This text deals with film movements that have shaped the history of Hollywood in its course. It discusses two films and their representation being impacted by the prevalent social norms of their period. These movies make a comment on the society of the day. New Hollywood denotes the period between the late 1960s. A new generation of film makers emerged on the scene, which left their mark on almost every aspect of films. The studio system of Hollywood was also greatly influenced. In these films, the director had a pivotal role to play. This generation brought in new topics and styles that distinguished them from the earlier conventions of the studios. This period can be likened to the renaissance age in Europe. Nevertheless, these films were an integral part of the studio system. The changes in the economic sphere especially the recession and movies going bust at the box office were some of the factors that led to the changes in Hollywood. Younger movie makers who could take risks were given more control than was previously done. Hence, the studio control reduced gradually. Outdoor shoots became possible during this era. Similarly, editing was also a highlight in these movies. These films were known for political subjects that went against the establishment in the then US. Rock music and sexual freedom were other characteristics of the New Hollywood. These aspects were deemed as ‘counter-cultural’ by the studios. The film Hannah and Her Sisters by Woody Allen has women as the protagonists. However, a woman is depicted as an element of pleasure for the male and his gaze. Laura Mulvey confirms in her article, the Hollywood norm that men were actors and women were mere spectacles in films. Feminists opine that Hollywood portrays men as those looking and women as those being looked at. Doane states that women in Hollywood were simultaneously the commodity and its consumer, in that they were encouraged to take this oppressive stance against themselves. The male gaze is simultaneously an object and is also made fun of in the movie. While Elliot appreciates Lee’s beauty in the beginning, later on his desire for her is depicted in a mocking way, when he looks at her nude paintings. In spite of the fact that this is a female oriented film, it shows the male perspective of a woman and how women are related to them. In most other movies, women are the predominant objects, whereas men too are objects in this case. The difference is that men are the subject and women become the object of the desire here. Hannah is depicted as the paragon of virtue, a woman of perfection. However, this goes against the concept of the ‘New Woman’ who has her failings. Hannah shows her weaker side and it is then that she reconciles her marriage to Elliot. This strengthens Hollywood’s concept of romance, where the man is supposed to dominate the woman. The negative aspects of the New Woman have been relegated to the minor characters in the film. However, all female characters reiterate the cultural myth that love is exclusive in the film. It is usual in real life, to be honest by and large, but to suppress uncomfortable truths. This is reflected in the film and shows how deep rooted such a mentality is in society. The film stresses a bit too much on motherhood. Three of the second rung characters endorse the importance of being a mother in their lives. However, even the three principal characters do so. In spite of being interested in careers, they do prioritise motherhood. In this respect, the film endorses patriarchal values against which the feminist movement has been fighting all along. Hence, these three represent traditional women who year for a home and family as their primary goal in life. This is despite the fact that they are intellectually capable and have an interest in social issues. Hence, the happy ending signifies that older traditional values have been rediscovered, given that Hannah reconciles herself to her marriage, and given that Lee has ended her affair with Elliot. Hence, order seems to be restored. However, the issue of the magical pregnancy is left unresolved. The viewer of Hannah and Her Sisters may believe in miracles and be content with such an explanation (Loyo & Zaragoza, n.d.). However, this can also be interpreted as Allen’s critical comment on society in a covert manner. On the other end of the spectrum, the emphasis on traditional values in the film makes the final message a little vaguer (Ibid). An undercover cop has the job of solving gay murders happening in bars and cruising spots. The cop who has a girlfriend, puts on attire characteristic of gays viz. leather bands, vest etc. with tight jeans to look the part. This is done to merge in with the gay community. He visits gay bars and parks to round up suspects. One such suspect is apprehended and is brutalised to force a confession about the crime. When the cop thinks that he has zeroed on the killer and brings him into custody, another murder takes place. The murder is considered as a love quarrel due to jealously and an arrest warrant is made out for another suspect. What is surprising is that the cop is upset over the police brutality. He thinks that they are homophobic. This could justify his confusion over his sexual identity. However, in the course of the film, one is made to understand that the cop himself is a gay hater. The end is left ambiguously with the hint that the killings towards the end may indeed have been the handiwork of the undercover cop. The film by Billy Friedkin is a detective thriller with a gay backdrop. The film did not measure up to the critics who found the film wanting. Moreover, the gay community erupted over the film in general too. The protests were significant due to two reasons. There was already a grouse among the gay community over the manner in which media depicted them. Cruising added to the prevailing position. Hence, a sizeable number of gays gathered over this issue, which led to riots. This proves that this community can organise itself to challenge the society’s views (Wilson, 1981). Moreover, there are also contrary aspects within the gay community. These relate to sexuality and the way this is shown outwardly (Ibid). The film is based on New York Times reporter Gerald Walker’s novel in 1970. The historical context of the film needs to be explored to understand aspects of the film. After the Second World War, the New York administration had brought in may laws against the so called ‘sexual degenerates’ i.e. gays and lesbians. Bars that catered to this segment of population were either fined heavily or shut down. This led to these bars coming under the control of the mafia. Whenever the police wanted to close down such a bar, the mafia paid them to keep it running. If the payments were not made, they would be raided. During one such raid in 1969, the patrons who were mostly gays struck back. This incident saw the advent of the Stonewall Rebellion which created the gay and lesbian rights movement in the US. Gays were being murdered right through the 1960s and 70s. When gay rights activists complained at this gross neglect of justice, hardly any action was forthcoming. The novel was inspired by the murders of the 60s, whereas the film took its inspiration from those of the 70s. Neither the novel nor the film could do anything in this direction and these murders still remain unresolved. Though the gay community fought the film tooth and nail, there were many who were not convinced about the whole thing. It was felt that they were being demonised in the name of the protests and that it was justifiable to oppose the community at all costs. The emergence of the Right only made matters worse. Moreover, the whole thing took a negative turn against the gay community when there were allegations of curbing freedom of expression (Ehrenstein, 1995). The gay activists felt that they had to turn to civil liberty whenever someone tried to oppose them constitutionally. The film does disservice to the gay community in that it is objectified here. The controversies surrounding the film only gave it free publicity. However, the film died a quick death once the initial euphoria ended. The film was a peep into the gay community more in terms of curiosity than in terms of something substantial or in terms of what the gays stood for, which explains the protests during the filming. It was a movie by ‘straight’ people for a ‘straight audience’ rather than for an all-encompassing group of people. That the protagonist himself could have committed gay murders towards the end only adds to its woes. It was made from a voyeuristic standpoint, at the same time not going overboard so that the censors would not be irked by its content. The film does depict its period but only tries to sensationalise it. It only answers the question ‘what’ or ‘who’ or ‘where’, but not the paramount question ‘why’. It also implies that associating with gays may lead to doubting one’s own sexuality. Such negative messages only leads to widening the gulf between the straight and the gay/lesbian.          The discussion above throws light on the significance of cinema in modern day life. Cinema as a means of mass entertainment is an expression of one’s cultural self. As in any other field, cinema cannot be divorced from the social and political setting of the day. The New Cinema in Hollywood was part of cinema’s evolution. It kept pace with all developments which were mirrored in the movies that were being made and still continues to do so. It would be unfair to evaluate them on the basis of present day standards given that times have changed since the appearance of the movies in question here. They should be appreciated given the period and the social settings of the day which have been represented through them. However, the social critique made by their makers is relevant to this day. This critique is what leads newer generation of film makers to explore newer themes and undiscovered aspects of previously handled issues. References Ehrenstein D (1995) Basic Impediment: "Cruising" William Friedkin’s 1980 Film Still Rankles Queer Nerves. Bay Area Reporter, XXV (19). [online] available at: http://www.ehrensteinland.com/htmls/library/cruising.html Loyo H & Zaragoza U (n.d.) God, she is beautiful: The Disturbing Representation of Women in Hannah and her Sisters. [online] available at: http://www.miscelaneajournal.net/images/stories/articulos/vol15/loyo15.pdf Wilson A (1981) Friedkins Cruising, Ghetto Politics and Gay Sexuality. Social Text (4): 98-109. Read More