This paper will discuss the following statement: ‘The cinematic genres can bee seen as representing broad social allegories in which society plays out the problems of contemporary life in imaginary form’. Focusing on the gangster genre this essay will discuss Little Caesar (1930) and The Godfather (1974) and discuss these movies in terms of representing the reality, ethnicity and ideology of that era.
The gangster movies are the one of the profound genres in Hollywood cinema. It has peculiar history. Its narrative derived from nowhere and became immensely popular in the beginning of 1930s. Refined by the series of the early gangster movies this genre depicted XX century, its time and the problems of that era. The very first classic gangster movies were Little Caesar (produced by Warner Brothers and directed by Mervyn LeRoy in 1930), The Public Enemy (produced by Warner Brothers and directed by William Wellman in 1931), and Scarface (produced by Howard Hughes and Howard Hawks in 1932) which became immensely popular in a short period of time by celebration and glorification of contemporary urban life, violence and brutality. That was the main reason why they faced many threats of censorship, boycott and federal regulations which forced studios to restructure gangster genre. Academics state that the gangster genre was the one of the few genres which enjoyed possibly the briefest time in classic Hollywood era. And since its appearance this genre was contradictory and arose many questions according its content, theme, ideology and moral. But when this genre first appeared in cinemas there was one definitive feature which distinguished the gangster movies: these movies were about urban life. The gangster’s environment is the modern city, basically seen at night, and accentuated by city blocks, street shadow, slums and black automobiles. And the gangster movies were about how the force of social order and disorder collides and turns into unending struggle. The city represents the complicated, alienating, strange and suppressing environment which creates the gangsters and eventually destroys them. Screening the first gangster movies we can see that they represented the ambitious alter ego of the profit—minded American male. According to the narrative, the urban environment with its institutions, classes, distinction and segregation in society denies him to get the legitimate power. Thus he starts to struggle against the society using his technology – guns, cars, phones and etc. – to reach his goals, to get power, wealth and glory. But the environment, the urban community, becomes more powerful and stronger than the hero. It suppresses him; it pursues him and makes more challenge for him to fight against. The gangsters attempt to establish and to assert his individuality through violent action represents him as an ideal screen persona. His standing against social rules heightens his individuality. The basic content of gangster movies narrative is neither about the contradictions in society nor contradictions between the police and the gangster. It’s about the contradictions within gangster’s mind: it’s about the gangster’s struggle with himself. This internal conflict – between personal accomplishment and the common good, between man’s self-serving and communal instinct, between his savagery and rational morality – is reflected in community, in environment where he lives. The gangster’s effort to rearrange that balance to get his own particular needs is however destined to failure.
Screening Little Caesar (1930) we can see that one of the remarkable aspects of early gangster films were their attempt to establish hero’s aggression and immense violence as a given and common. This film about a man named Rico Bandello raising form little mob to gang boss has a few classical standpoints which are common for the most of Hollywood gangster movies. First aspect to consider is the fact that the film shows gangsters life in the lights of American dream[1]. Rico left the provinces in order to make his dream in the big city where he will achieve the power and the status he desired. The narrative can be seen from the first few opening scenes which is usual for the most of the gangster movies. The very first scene what we see in the beginning is biblical reference: ‘He who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword’. The film shows the gas station where two came and killed somebody and then got in and drove away. Later we see café where two sit and talks about the headline in the newspaper. The discussion turns into dispute about power and glory in which Rico says that the city is a place where power can be achieved, where ‘nobodies’ like him can ‘be somebody, know that a bunch of guys will do anything you tell ‘em, have your own way or be nothin’’[2]. These scenes have several opening ideological messages for its audience. Firstly, the gangster’s desire for power is established by violent means as well as the power they wish to achieve. Secondly, the gangster’s immigrant background is set out as is his lack of opportunity defined by his immigrant status. Thirdly, it shows the very common aspect for the most of the gangster movies – the male friendship.
However, Little Caesar is untypical to the most of the gangster movies. First of all, who is Rico and how he was depicted? What is his personality? He is represented as a charismatic, arrogant protagonist persona. From the beginning he is depicted as an outsider. Even in gangster world he is an outsider. He is depicted as a small town hood with his wishes to get power, glory and recognition. But this is presented radically different because the gangsters whom he finds in the cities are not like him: they don’t want to be recognised, they try to save status quo. Rico becomes the part of the gang and he desire to be famous by this disrupting the equilibrium in the gang. He looks like an aberrant gangster and represented as a force of chaos and excess. He breaches the traditions of gangsters which we can see when he allows the people from local paper to make a photo from his private party. Rico is a gangster, a charismatic person, who goes not only against community but even in the gangster world he breaches gangster’s status quo which forces everyone to be restrain and disciplined. The relationship between the gang and Rico is also different in terms of their common work. We see Rico never treated to his fellows as members of a gang: they all are nothing more than a just another people for him to get his desires. Rico is a loner here who is always presented in small rooms. Fran Mason claims that:
‘Rico’s world is a secret domain of back rooms and even the banquet scene, which Rico fells is public recognition of his power and status, takes place in a private room above the public space which is open to all. Rico is most often seen in small concealed rooms which are exclusive places signalling that a person is on the inside of the gangster power system, but they are hiding places, fortresses protected from the outside that give the impression that Rico’s power is fragile’[3]
The representation of Rico as a loner is also strengthened by his depiction in the streets. In his street scenes we can see how ha aimlessly walks around the streets and long camera shot reveals him as a tiny figure who struggles against the vastness of the city space. In the end the street which created him such a ruthful gangster endeavours him and he dies. He dies under the advertisement of his friend Joe’s first film. Fran Mason states that this ending scene shows the uncertainties about Rico’s status, in terms of both morality and power[4]. Thomas Schaiz states:
‘The number of gangster films generated by Little Caesar’s popular success indicates that Rico Bandello’s end was just the beginning of the screen persona he helped to establish. Rico’s irrational brutality, his disdain for law and order, and his enterprising business mentality are presented as inherent elements of hi criminal nature. Later gangster movies would attempt, even if only half-heartedly, to provide some motivational basis for that criminality’[5]
Here we can see more than just a death of a gangster. And there are no any moral issues behind his death as in other gangster films. He was killed for his disruptive influence and excessive behaviour. Rico died under the advertisement for a new movie Tipsy Topsy Turvy which can be read not only as a comment for Rico’s rise and fall, but also ‘turmoil of a modern society that has no convention in its values, social structures and ideologies’[6].
The next movie which is worth of discussion in terms of the topic is The Godfather (1972) which was produced by Bryan De Palma. It has many common with the classical gangster movies. But it also differs from them with its technological advantages, narrative conventions, ideology, discourse and the characterisation of heroes. The Godfather was shot in a very classic gangster style: the same styled cars, clothes, guns and the manner of talking. The violence is the common aspect for the both films. But The Godfather represents violence in intellectual way with extraordinary upheavals. Marlon Brando and Al Pacino present us with characters with which we can sympathise and share their viewpoint in the film. Glenn Man reckons The Godfather trilogy as one of the progressive films in New Hollywood history[7]. He states that the first two parts of The Godfather films were released in a period when American history was darkened by the unpopular Vietnam War and Watergate scandal. The distrust to the government in Vietnam War changed into mass disappointment in Nixon era. Thus The Godfather films include a critical approach to the American system during the time of social upheaval and disappointment in country’s traditional values. One proof for this viewpoint is the very first opening scene. We see black screen and Buona Sierra speaking ‘I believe in America’ with rough Italian American accent. He speaks directly to the camera and his pleading voice tells how his daughter was disgraced by Americans. His daughter dated an American, stayed out late in an American way, and consequently was brutalised by the boy. He can do nothing, because of the American system and social order. So he came to Don Corleone to find the justice. He wants the boy to be punished in an old traditional Sicilian way. The discussion between Don Corleone and Buone Sierra shows the main themes of this film: American society and the role of the mafia within American society as a criminal organisation and as a family.
But who is an American in the movie? Who is mafia? How are they depicted here? Well, firstly the main American in the film is Michael Corleone (Al Pacino). From the very beginning of the movie we see him in represented in different way. We reveal him as a person who was brought up in a gangster family but he wanted to choose another way. The first time we see him in a wedding ceremony dressed in his army uniform. He says to his girlfriend: ‘That’s my family, Kay, not me’. Michael is shown as an outsider. He is the most American among all the members of Corleone family. He doesn’t want to be involved in family business and he tried to be legitimate. But he could not because of the accident with Don Corleone and he revenges for that intent of assassination by becoming the one of the gangsters. Alessandro Camon claims that ‘Michael Corleone, a man who had not chosen crime but was pulled into it’ for the family’s honour[8]. He got involved in family business but all his life he tried to get one goal – to be legitimate. He tries to change family’s business and attitude to the state and law. But he could not reach his goal because it was too late to change something. The more he spreads his influence though the country the more he breaches law and order.
This film also shows the profound representation of mafia. It represents mafia not as a gang or as a group of killers but as a family with its ethics and philosophy. The notion of the family and the core aspects of it were widely revealed in The Godfather trilogy. Michael’s love to his family was the main reason which turned him from a soft lad to a tough gangster. He loves his family and would never dream of neglecting or betraying it. His natural love for his family originally makes Michael such a strong and compelling hero who can kill anyone without blinking because of his wholehearted love for his family. The Godfather depicted the gangsters not as a losers and antiheros but as protagonists with fascinating charismatic persona. The realistic image of the gangster boss and the gangster family was realistically represented in one of the last unforgettable scenes when we see Michael’s enemies being dispatched and his son being baptised. This fascinating scene of conflicting images itself produces meaning and emotional appeal. Alessandro Camon states that the entire session suggests not also this idea but another deeper meaning which comes through. He claims that ‘while his son is being baptised to life, Mike is being baptised to power’[9]. Then he suggests
‘The role of godfather which he will play from this point on is a projection of his role as a parent. The power to give death is of a piece with the power to give life. Using them both, Michael grants family’s survival. With uncanny though unself-conscious precision, The Godfather has captured the essence of the Mafia myth’[10]
Fran Mason has another viewpoint according to this scene. He suggests that in this scene we see Michael Corleone as a family patriarch and we see him fragmented which is depicted by the agents carrying his message. He is dispersed into each of the gangsters and he is shown as a ‘cerebral gangster’ whose power is not achieved by body but by his intellectual abilities to control others. According to him it was the image of absolute power represented by showing his identity in the church but his ideas and plans are being accomplished by others in many places at same time[11].
Summarising the main point of this essay, it is worth to say that despite the fact that these two above discussed gangster films have time difference as far as at least 40 years there are many common between them. First of all these are the movies of the same genre which share the same iconography, settings, themes, style and plot. But the ideological background and the reality represented in these films are quite different. Little Ceasar (1930) is the classical gangster film produced in the era of classical Hollywood. It depicted Rico, the protagonist with charismatic persona, who came from province in pursuit of American dream. He has his dreams and to get them he rages against the society orders in the city and makes gangster career. He breaches the law in purpose; he is famous by his brutal violence and he is obsessed with the idea of fame and glory. Rico is protagonist not only in society but within gangster community. The Godfather trilogy is reckoned as a post-classical gangster movie which has many elements of classical gangster films. Here we see the gangsters represented not like a gang but a family with its ethics and philosophy. The first scene tells one’s belief in America which brings us to the idea of American dream. The main hero Michael Corleone is complete opposite to classical gangster hero like Rico. Brought up in gangster family he is not from province, he does not crave any luxury, wealth or glory. He even does not want to be involved in family business. The only thing what he wants is to be legitimate. This is the main thing to consider in this essay: while Little Caesar depicts the protagonist willing to breach the law, The Godfather represents the gangster who just wants to live legitimate life.
Bibliography
1. Camon, A. The Godfather and the mythology of mafia. In Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy. Ed. by Nick Browne.
2. Man, G. Ideology and genre of the Godfather films. In Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy. Ed. by Nick Browne.
3. Mason, Fran. 2002. American Gangster cinema from Little Caesar to Pulp Fiction. Gen. edit. Clive Bloom. Palgrave. Macmillan.
4. Schaltz, T. 1981. Hollywood Genres. Formulas, filmmaking and the studio system. Boston, McGraw Hill.
10
[1] Mason, Fran. 2002. American Gangster cinema from Little Caesar to Pulp Fiction. Gen. edit. Clive Bloom. Palgrave. Macmillan. p 8
[2]Ibid.
[3] Ibid. p 12
[4] Ibid. p 13
[5] Schaltz, T. 1981. Hollywood Genres. Formulas, filmmaking and the studio system. Boston, McGraw Hill, p 87
[6] Ibid. p 13
[7] Man, G. Ideology and genre of the Godfather films. In Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy. Ed. by Nick Browne. P 127
[8] Camon, A. The Godfather and the mythology of mafia. In Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy. Ed. by Nick Browne. P 66
[9] Ibid, p 64
[10] Ibid
[11] Mason, Fran. 2002. American Gangster cinema from Little Caesar to Pulp Fiction. Gen. edit. Clive Bloom. Palgrave. Macmillan, p 133
No comments:
Post a Comment