Thursday, February 4, 2010

Scarface ( 1932)

I thought Scarface was really well done and really enjoyable to watch. It definitely advances in film techniques compared to the other movies we’ve watched so far. The most obvious of these advancements is definitely sound! And although silent movies have their own essence to them I would just like to state that I’m glad sound has now come into the picture, it’s easier to fallow the plot and I think it gives the characters more depth and easier to relate to. I also loved what they did with the gun and the calendar, not only was it a cool effect I also thought it was a really creative way to transition throughout time because it gave you a sense that the months had passed but also implied that the gangsters were up to no good and continuously shooting/killing.

I know this film was given a hard time because of the violence and with all the codes and for the most part I don’t mind. For instance they never show blood; they never show the killer and the victim and sometimes didn’t even show the murder altogether just the dead bodies after. For me it actually added to the mysteriousness and allure of the gangster and suspense of the death. However what kind of bothers me about them making them change the film is the overall message; I understand that they don’t want to glamorize the gangster and promote the “bad guy”. But when you look at what they show you in the beginning:

---"This picture is an indictment of gang rule in America and of the callous indifference of the government to this constantly increasing menace to our safety and our liberty. Every incident in this picture is the reproduction of an actual occurrence, and the purpose of this picture is to demand of the government: 'What are you going to do about it?' The government is your government. What are YOU going to do about it?"---

Although they say it’s asking the government to step up on the crime in the last two sentences, “the government is your government. What are YOU going to do about?”, it also suggests that we the people, the viewers should do something about the crime wave of gang rule in America. But what exactly were they supposed to do?? It’s a gang war, why would the public get involved? I suppose they could not join gangs.

And even the police made a comment:
---"Don't blame the police. They can't stop machine guns from being run back and forth across the state lines. They can't enforce laws that don't exist"---

Which I guess is supposed to be a statement that the government should be dealing with this by making laws. But I think that whole message is so unnecessary because the police ended up stopping Tony at the end. So really what needed to happen is the police needed to capture the ones that are creating the problem to begin with. And with Tony and pretty much all the other gangsters dying in this movie, it sends the message not to become a gangster because you’ll end up dying. But the message they tried to send just gave me the feeling that the public was being blamed for the existence of gangs rather than the enforcement officials, which I don’t agree with at all.

1 comment:

  1. Lauren, I like what you did with the film's messages about our responsibility to clean up the crime epidemic and what the visual images actually promise. That would be a good topic, if you wanted to write about it for your paper.

    ReplyDelete