“In what ways can both your focus films be considered typical of their genre?”

In what ways can both of your focus films be considered typical of their genre?

Crime films have for a long time been a genre that filmmakers use to sometimes comment upon social or cultural issues. To some extent, both of my focus films can be considered films of the crime genre. Crime has been a conventional genre for a long time now, and many conventions have always been repeated in crime films. Using these conventions, I’ll explore if these films can be considered crime films or not.

One convention that has been present throughout crime films ever since they were first established is that it highlights the life of a crime figure or victim. Without this convention, it’d be extremely hard to class a film under the crime genre. In ‘City of God’, this convention is densely apparent. The films narrative highlights both the lives of crime figures and victims. We as the audience follow Lil’ Zé’s rise to the top of the empire from an early age; filling the role of the crime figure in this convention. The character of Knockout Ned however fills both roles of victim and crime figure. When we first meet the character, we learn that he’s used to fight in the war, and has strong ideologies against crime. So when his girlfriend is raped and his family is murdered, he automatically fills the role of the victim. However, by occupying this role, his character uses it as a trigger to turn him into a crime figure. From this event, his new life as a crime figure is highlighted and used as main code that drives the narrative forward. This point highlights a common theme that runs throughout the film (and in the real favela’s) that everyone has the choice of either kill or be killed. In ‘La Haine’, it’s a bit more difficult to establish a crime figure and/or victim. In terms of the main characters, it’s easier to define them as victims, but not necessarily of crime. The trio are subject to racial segregation in the film and are constantly targeted by the police for simply being immigrants. However, none of the characters’ lives have truly been disadvantaged due to crime in the film. The director may not have included events of crime that affected these characters lives to suggest that in the banlieue’s; the immigrants rarely encounter acts of crime. In fact the thing that makes them suffer might be the racial abuse they receive for perceptions of their involvement in crime.

Another convention that crime films commonly use is that they often glorify the rise and fall of a particular criminal. In ‘City of God’, this convention is, again, strongly present. Lil’ Zé’s character arc in the film is the complete rise and fall, as we join him from his first involvement in crime to the moment in which he is killed. We join Knockout Ned in his similar arc of rise and fall. The key element of both of these crime figures is the fact they both fall. The director could be choosing to comment upon the consequences of crime here, suggesting that crime doesn’t pay. In ‘La Haine’, none of the characters can really be considered criminals as none of them really perform crimes. Like mentioned in my last paragraph, this could be intentional by the director to show these lads do no wrong in an attempt to show that the mediated perception of these young immigrant lads is a lie and they are not criminals.

The convention of including real life situations and reports are also usually apparent in films of the crime genre. Both of my focus films does use this convention, and I feel they’ve both used it for the same reason. In ‘City of God’, the characters are based on real crime figures and the issues tackled concerning the state of the favelas are also true. ‘La Haine’ similarly uses the real events of the riots from the 1990’s as a central narrative point. It’s made clear that this isn’t a subtle mistake neither because the very first shots in the film are real footage from those riots. The film uses the death of a young immigrant caused by a police officer to drive the narrative forward as well, which was the thing that triggered the riots that were shown at the beginning of the film. And again, the director reiterated his intention of doing this by emphasising it was no coincidence and using the real name of the young man that was killed (Makome M’Bowlé). I think both directors have included these elements of the film to make it very clear to the audience that, while the film may be entertainment, it’s also out to make a clear point. In ‘City of God’ it’s to suggest that crime doesn’t pay, and that there is a flawed system within the city that allows a cycle of violence to continue that must be intervened. In ‘La Haine’’s case, I feel Kassovitz’s main intention is to promote the ideology of the corrupt government and authorities within Paris. And also to show the other side of Paris, the side that highlights the city’s more urban area’s that contain violence, abuse and racism. Not the side of love, adventure and exaggerated happiness.