Emergence of the Rap Culture through film

Movies like Boyz in the Hood are very unique in that they showcase real life in the ghetto. Some places are more dangerous then others to live in and violence and drug use can become rampant. Tough times are inevitable amount some people and doing stuff just to fit in can land them jail time or even death. Music has been used as an outlet for such people, explaining how they are treated and how they feel within their lyrics, which often host the same verbose they use in their daily life. Others outside this culture may find it vulgar and offensive, but by doing so they are missing the point. They are speaking to the other members of their culture, in a way they can fully understand, almost as if it was a new language. In places like this, the F word isn't as powerful by itself as it would be in an office setting, so as a listener (and a viewer) it is important to not see such words as being offensive.

There have been many rap artists who sing about their struggles of growing up that many people can relate to, and movies like Boyz in the Hood and 8 Mile showcase this as artists use their knowledge to not only make a film, but to depict how it was living in such neighborhoods in a realistic fashion. In a way, these are the true music videos.

The unique shots of a Scorsese film

Scorsese is a very unique director, and this movie exemplifies some of his work. He uses interesting shots and camera angles and will often depict a character by himself, but the scene has so much going on, in terms of intensity, that it doesnt even feel like he is alone. It is like the actor is addressing the viewer. This could be seen in the Taxi Driver when Robert Deniro was flipping the gun out of his jacket.

Some other cool instances that Scorsese uses is at the beginning of GoodFellas when blood splatters on the camera. He is also very well known for using freeze frames, but in a good way, not like Dukes of Hazard. These freeze frames pause the moment, and either allow narration over, explaining the moment without having the viewer miss any action while listening, or it is able to portray the thoughts of the character. Scorsese is also a big fan of violence, and these scenes are unique in that usually violence can't be depicted in one frame. Overall, Scorsese was the main influence for freeze frames, and most people that use them look to him for influence.

A limit to crime

The film Bonnie and Clyde did have its faults, namely in the introduction of characters and a sense of a strong motivation, but in the end, that is not what this film is about. The film could have, and in my opinion should have, started with the gang pretty much already formed. What was really intriging was the fact a couple was so involved with each other and formed based on crime. Such an unusual bond for two people to have. While the two didn't exactly serve justice, they also knew their limit. While bad, they showed a strong sense of morals.

For the most part, the gang tried to avoid killing. This was seen when the butcher attacked Clyde and he was honestly confused, he really did not expect such a thing to happen, and he also didn't try to kill the man back (although I'm sure he would have to save his own life). However, the first moment we really realize how much Clyde in particular is avoiding killing is when a man jumps on their car and CW caps him in the head. Clyde, as well as the others, are shaken up by this. They wanted to be bank robbers, not murderers. Most of the people they killed after this were only means to protect themselves, and only if they were an immediate threat. An example of this is when they ran into the sheriff, and even after spitting on Bonnie, did not resort to killing him.

In no way what they were doing was right, but at least they didn't have the full capacity to kill the innocent, which would make them much more dangerous then they were.

An eye for an eye

In the film "The American Tragedy" George Eastman is put to death for the murder of Alice based purely on circumstantial evidence. First off, George Eastman did not "murder" Alice. For it to be murder it has to be wished upon. You can not accidentally perform a murder, we have another word for that, manslaughter. The argument in court changed from you planned it, to you hit her on the head with an oar, to you didn't even try to save her. A textbook example of guilty until proven innocent. Since he could not be "proven" innocent (and I have a firm stance on requiring evidence) the initial judgement of guilty made by the police was the final verdict.
Let's say, for arguments sake, he did hit her on the head with an oar, and drowned her with his own hands. Does this justify killing him in an expedited fashion? This puts his punishment at par with those who rape and murder entire families. This creates a viscous cycle of an eye for an eye. How is the attorny fighting for his death any different from the murder he thought he was fighting against? The attorney literally wished death upon the man, and put much more effort into ensuring his death then George did with Alice. Who is going to take responsibility for killing George, or are they just going to pass the blame around, pointing fingers? He didn't kill himself, it was not suicide.
The attorney should have fought to at the most imprison him with rehabilitation, but that would require such an attorney to be a clear-headed reasonable man, which he clearly was not (ie, breaking an oar in court).
Circumstatial evidence to condemn is a pretty scary thing, it leaves doubt. It is a way of convicting the leading suspect, key word: suspect. Regardless of if you believe in circumstantial evidence, the punishment of death in the case of George Eastman is severely over the top, especially when no can can say, without a doubt, what happened.

What's in a code?

As we all know, film has received some of the harshest treatment of censorship due to the fact it can show both audio and video that can be offensive. No doubt a spike in violent/sex films would have occurred much earlier had the code never been written, and who knows, may have even surpassed our levels of violence currently. The code is very interesting as how it tries to protect the viewers. The list of what is taboo now is much different, and nearly required the offensive subject in question to be grossly exaggerated. However, right before this code was put into effect, a few movies slipped by to live in the world of a released film even if it was but a brief period of time.

What is funny, is these films still somewhat censor content, although their reason could be debatable. When they turn the camera away from a gunshot, did they really do that to avoid the sight of a death, or was it because honestly, it was cheaper?

Because of this time before special effects and animated elephants being blown into nearly a thousand pieces in detail, the violence part of this code kind of gave directors an excuse to hide what was going on in the story. When asked about plot holes or questions on what exactly happened can be easily dodged by placing the blame on the code. While the code did put a greater emphasis on good story telling and using film as art, it took away realism, as anything that censors life, can not imitate life.

The Art of Saving Money

On Wednesday we watched the movie "Redskin," a full length black/white/techni-color film focusing on the Native Americans and the Indian Boarding Schools. This film was very shocking to me because it seemed very well developed for the time period it was from. Based on the other films from the time I have seen, this one seemed way ahead of its time.

This was a silent film, and it had a score of a piano to accompany the film, but there was no voices none-the-less. Surprisingly there was a lot of dialogue. The characters would often have a whole screen full of text, but it was done in a way that wasn't as annoying as it would sound. The background for the text was very styled and really matched the tone of the movie. At no point was I ever confused about who was saying what to who.

Another very interesting thing was this movie was both in black and white and techni-color. The black and white parts of the film were when they were in the boarding school or in the city, and the techni-color (which is a pseudo color, mostly focusing on the color red) was shown in the Native American village. While the movie was switching between these two the entire film, it was not a big shock and it flowed between the two very naturally. It never felt like watching two different movies edited together.

Overall, this was the best black/white/silent film I have seen. The story had its points and it also had points that were evident of its time.

Film: Within Our Gates

On Wednesday, we watched the black and white film Within Our Gates This movie was a silent film and all the dialog had to be written in a blank frame. This movie was hard to follow as nothing except instrumental music was played. However, despite a low amount of speaking, it was a full film.

Something about the film that is interesting is that the black characters that were portrayed more as the hero or the main characters were a lot lighter skinned. In a couple scenes, the lighting was different, making them appear much darker. This made a differentiation between the blacks within the movie, which the film has received criticism about.

While the white people are the ones shown with all the money and power, one kind old white lady decides to donate to the school for African American students, and further more decides to donate $50,000 instead of $5,000. This movie shows truths of the time, and has some sense of closure and help towards the end.