Chapter 1: Setting the Scene PDF

Preview

Summary

Chapter 1 required reading summary...

Description

Chapter 1: Setting the Scene ● Movies can be viewed as independent or dependent variables ○ Independent: influence political thinking in their own terms ○ Dependent: are made because of political happenings (usually the most financially successful) ○ Phillip Gianos says it’s more complex than this – both movies and politics tell about each other instead of black & white independent/dependent categories ● The most popular and persuasive films are the ones where the audience is the least aware that there’s a political message ○ Sentimental movies about personal struggles involving aspects of healthcare system (like As Good As It Gets where a waitress can’t afford health care of her sick son) affected the way viewers appraised policies like Affordable Care Act ● Types of political films ○ Political content ■ Genre: a category or group of films about the same subject or marked by the same style ● i.e. musical, western, gangster, war, scifi, horror movies ● Steve Neale: “most of these genres are uncontentious” (tend to cause argument) ● Any given film may obey many generic conventions of a genre but vary enough in one crucial aspect that it defies easy inclusion in the genre ○ i.e. Brokeback Mountain can be qualified as western with all the western qualities it has, except the main character is gay which defies western film normality ● Political films don’t fit into a unique, recognizable genre marketed to stimulate and fulfill audience expectations ○ Political films illustrate what critics call “hybrid” and “multi-generic” classifications and the tendency to overlap genres ○ Even if there was one genre for political films, it wouldn’t help to identify the kinds of political messages that can appear in many less explicitly political films ■ Having one genre may divert attention from the political aspects of otherwise seemingly apolitical films ■ Most commonly used approach for distinguishing political films

■ Sometimes will use big movies stars in order to push their agendas (like in Philadelphia where Tom Hanks is a sick gay AIDS patient and Denzel Washington is his lawyer [obviously a movie made by liberals taking advantage of well-liked actors]) ■ Political films still don’t have their own official genre with 4 (supposed) reasons: ● They lack internal consistency of other film genres (the form that political movies take vary) ● They don’t share as many plot, characters, and iconography conventions as other genres ● They sometimes combine descriptions (i.e. political comedy, political thriller) thus vitiating/spoiling their status ● People in the film industry fear labeling films as “political” and would rather just hint at them being political through allegories to depoliticize them ○ Sending political messages ■ The most explicit political messages can be in films entire devoid of explicit political content – however, they’re not always the result of conscious planning by filmmakers ● i.e. gender roles in 30s-40s movies: unintentional at the time, but speaks volumes about the gender politics of that era ■ James Combs says “a film participates in a political time not in how it was intended, but how it was utilized by those who saw it.” ■ Usually not the intention of movies as movies are made by by groups; may be truly inaccurate to declare their intent was a consensual decision among a large group of people (usually) ■ When political analysis is the task at hand, intentions of filmmakers are arguably more germane ● Beverly Kelly: “movies reflect political choices” ○ Political film as (potential vehicles for) political theories ■ Two dominant dimensions of political film = content and intent ● These parallel the two major strands of political theory = empirical (based off of observation) and normative (making claims of how things ought to be) ● Content resembles empirical/descriptive political theory ○ Usually helps describe how politics work ○ If they challenge the ideas of the audience’s “norm” it will incite objections and even sometimes ridicule

●

● Intent resembles normative/judgmental political theory ○ Seeks to judge, prescribe, and/or persuade ○ Explicitly challenge audience’s values and incite to political action Basic typology of political films Political content (high)

Pure political movies

Politically reflective movies

Political intent (high)

Political intent (low)

Auteur political movies

Socially reflective movies Political content (low)

○ “Pure” does not mean films are more or less political than others nor does it mean it exists in a definitive sense ■ According to Janet Steiger, “Hollywood films have never been easily arranged into categories. All that has been pure has been sincere attempts to find order among variety”...