To find an
international audience, films about local and particular problems need to use
mainstream techniques such as those associated with Hollywood cinema
How far do
you agree with this statement in relation to the films you have studied for
this topic
The films I studied are City of
God and La Haine. Both of these films support this statement in their own way.
La Haine is a Social-political
film directed by Mathiew Kassovitz which portrays a challenging representation
of France which goes against the romanticised version of France as seen in
films such as Amelie. The on-going racial conflict in France is clearly shown
in the film through the conflict between the three main characters Vinz, Saïd
and Hubert and their conflict with French society. It is this on-going racial
conflict in France which is the part of the film which can only be understood
by a person who is from France or someone who has studied French history. Its
lack of mainstream techniques means that it cannot gain large international
audiences because they do not know the heart of the film or the core of what
drives the characters, therefore it has no true meaning to outside audiences.
This is shown in the first scene
of the film where found footage is used to show how those in the projects were
treated in the 1993 Paris riots. It also introduces the films key themes.
Mathieu Kassovitz uses many cinema techniques in order to manipulate his
audience. This is shown in the opening sequence when we, as the audience, are
positioned to see the police as antagonists who instigate the violence shown in
the riot shots, and the protestors as protagonists who are driven to reactions
by the violent acts of the police. This is done to give the audience an idea of
whose side they should be taking (and will take) in this film before they have even
seen it.
The sequence opens with a long
P.O.V shot from behind a lone protestor who is facing what looks like an army
of fully armed police in the distance. This shot is extremely effective as it
gives us the idea that the protestors are the underdogs. It does this through
many different cinema techniques. The first is the use of a single protestor.
We cannot see behind us and so don’t know if there are any other protestors
behind us, but the image itself gives us the impression that it is a single man
standing against the full might of the state. The second technique used is the
difference in attire of the police and the protestor. The protestor is wearing
casual clothes; a hooded jacket, jeans, trainers and a t-shirt whereas the
police are fully equipped in padded body armour and helmets. The police are
also militarised with weapons including teargas, guns and batons, which greatly
outmatches the protestor’s sticks and stones. The simple fact that we are on
the opposite side to the police makes us feel like we are part of the
protestor’s opposition to the police’s brutality. The quote which the protestor
shouts to the police also solidifies their lack of power against them; “you’re
murderers! You can shoot, we only have stones.” The use of the word ‘murderers’
also makes us turn against the police as we instantly take the protestors word
because we feel that it is excessive to use bullets against tree branches and
stones. The use of faceless police also turns us against them. This is because
it makes them less human than the protestors, that they are mindless and lack
morality. It makes is easier for us to accept the protestors violence towards
them since we see them as oppressors to the people of the projects. The
representations of the police and protestors as the ‘antagonists’ and
‘protagonists’ is false as we are being manipulated due to the many cinematic
techniques. However those in the projects would have seen the police in this
light, showing how history affects how they see people in this generation. These
riots are very prominent in the French consciousness as the ripples caused by
it are felt even today.
The next scene I will analyse is
the rooftop scene. This scene shows the conflict between the projects and the
police in a very effective way while reflecting the theme of power and conflict
in the film. To begin with the different groups of the projects are separated
to different parts of the rooftop, keeping to themselves and being harassed by
Saïd. However as soon as the police appear to order them off the roof, all the
groups band together behind Nordeen (Said’s little brother) to stand against
the police. This shows that the police are the common enemy or threat and that
everyone is aware of the prejudice and brutality that they face at the police’s
hands. In this scene it is revealed that Hubert has a criminal past but is not
proud of it as he knows that crime is not the answer. However, Vinz seems to
think that going to jail will boost his status and give him an identity in the
community and give him pride. The use of the police as a common threat is in
keeping with the past of French society. All three of the main characters have
reasons to be against the police force; Said, being Algerian, after the second
world war the Algerians protested peacefully which resulted in conflicts such
as the Setif Massacre, Vinz is Jewish and so would have heard the stories about
how the Vichy government in the south sent 75,000 Jews to concentration camps
resulting in only 2000 survivors and how anti-Semitism was sponsored by the French
government at the beginning of the 20th century. This will have
caused bitterness to creep down the family lines and cause distrust and even
hateful feelings towards the police. And of course Hubert will have suffered
due to his ethnicity as black and therefore would be suffering due to it.
Their history in France is
something which is necessary to know in order to sincerely understand their
point of view in the film, without it one wouldn’t be able to fully empathise
with them, possibly seeing them as simple youthful hooligans.
The last scene I will analyse is
the Art Gallery scene which tackles the French social class issue. Like many
other things, class is dealt with differently in each different country. In France,
as shown by this scene, is an extreme issue along with poverty and this is
shown with how Vinz, Said and Hubert are treated in the art gallery. Because they
live in the projects (the poor side of France) they are seen as outcasts by
those st the upper/middle class event. They instantly become the centre of
attention due to their differences in attire and how they act (e.g. their
informal speech and lack of etiquette when discussing art). They are seen as ‘other’
and looked at with disgust because they would dare to invade the upper class
affair. They end up being thrown out, clearly being judged because of who they
are and where they come from. In real life, it is known that those who come
from the projects are far less likely to be given a job or other opportunities.
Fernando Meirelles’ City of God
(2002) supports this statement in a different way as its use of mainstream
techniques means that it can be understood by almost all audiences. Whereas
with La Haine you need to have some sort of prior knowledge about the actual
state of the country and some of its history with minorities, anyone can watch
City of God and understand it. This is shown through the cliché crime film
genre, with the gangsters vs. the police with no real weight on the real
backstory of the location or the country as a whole. The deepest the backstory
goes into real life is how the development of the city was abandoned due to a military
coup, but even this is through inference rather than exposition. This film
contains a lot of iconography of the crime genre including guns, oppression,
police, knives, gang violence and the setting being a city with run down
estates, an urban environment.
One scene which shows this is the
gunfight between the police and Lil Ze’s gang and the death of Lil Ze. This scene
is simply used to create action and an aesthetically appealing fight while also
showing the cycle of violence. This is one of the only things which comes
through as a comment on the society at the time. The film starts with showing
how Lil Ze was twisted into a criminal by role models and killing them, and
then shows him twisting the youth into criminals before showing him being
killed by them in return. However the scene makes no comment on the society or
the backstory of the location like La Haine does. The film almost removes
itself from the City of God, making it seem as though it could be any favela in
Brazil, meaning that it is not specific to any society or location therefore
anyone from around the world can connect to it and see it for entertainment
rather than as a political message like La Haine.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.