Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Censorship in modern day society
Effects of censorship on society
Censorship in america 1950- present
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Censorship in modern day society
An Examination into Howard Hawks’ Film Scarface (1932), and Whether This Film Was Truly Dangerous, Deeming the Necessity for Censorship
This paper discusses the controversial issue of censorship of Howard Hughes’ film Scarface (1932) while presenting the opinions of the proponents and opponents of the practice of censorship in Scarface. Although Scarface (1932), was thought to be a dangerous film during the 1930s, the film, in general, only portrayed the violence that already existed in the society at that time. The film wasn’t a “clear and present danger” to the public; therefore, the film shouldn’t have been censored. Changes that were made to the film at the behest of the Hays’ Office , may have been out of good intentions but were carried out poorly—the revisions to the film weren’t necessary and in a sense were more harmful to the film than beneficial. Being more harmful than beneficial, the changes made to the film violated the 1st Amendment, misrepresenting the film itself away from the artistic credibility of the original script while also disabling the creative process of the producer, Howard Hughes.
Although Scarface was a film that was ahead of its time in terms of vulgarity, pushing the boundaries of modern films during that time, the film itself in a realistic and logical sense was not dangerous. All audiences (adults and children, both male and female) know the difference between reality and film; therefore, there is no moral obligation for the film industry to consider censorship due to the preconceived ideas that crime films case audiences to imitate “immoral” behavior seen on screen.
Throughout history, censorship has been a significant issue of controversy. With the demands of popular entertainment,...
... middle of paper ...
...sad to say but it seems that there is no trust in the maturity and logical thinking of society or in the human race itself. As individuals of society we are given the choice, the freedom, to choose whether we want to view “inappropriate” films. After all, films are rated and we are to view with our own discretion.
Works Cited
Black, Gregory D. Hollywood Censored: Morality Codes, Catholics, and the Movies. Cambridge England: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print.
Dirks, Tim. "Scarface: The Shame of the Nation (1932)." Greatest Films - The Best Movies in Cinematic History. Web. 03 Feb. 2011. .
McCarthy, Todd. "Howard Hawks: The Grey Fox of Hollywood." Google Books. Web. 21 Mar. 2011. .
Scarface. Dir. Howard Hawks and Richard Rosson. Perf. Paul Muni, Ann Dvorak, Osgood Perkins. Universal, 1932. DVD.
The characters in these films were savvy, secretive and wealthy unlike the gangsters seen in Little Caesar and Scarface: The Shame of the Nation. Brian De Palma’s Scarface (1983) payed homage to the original, and although they follow roughly the same storyline, De Palma’s remake is more reminiscent of The Godfather films than its predecessor. Tony Montana (Al Pacino), the film’s main character, worked his way up from poverty by selling drugs and committing horrifying acts of violence in order to attain the power, wealth and woman he so desired. In his 1983 review of Scarface, Pulitzer prize winner, Roger Ebert states “Al Pacino does not make Montana into a sympathetic character, but he does make him into somebody we can identify with, in a horrified way, if only because of his perfectly understandable motivations” (RogerEbert.com). More than fifty years later, Ebert expresses similar thoughts to those of Robert Warshow, esteemed film critic and author of “The Gangster as a Tragic Hero.” “…We [the audience] gain the double satisfaction of participating vicariously in the gangster’s sadism and then seeing it turned against the gangster himself.” (Warshow) These sentiments are exactly what the censorship of the 1932 version intended to prevent, yet Scarface (1983) did not receive the same scrutiny. Despite the mixed reviews that Howard Hawk’s original Scarface: Shame of the Nation and Brian De Palma’s
2. According to Sobchack, contemporary screen violence greatly differs than portrayals of violence in years past. Today, violent scenes are careless and lack significance because we as audiences have become calloused and desensitized to any acts of violence. She states that there is “no grace or benediction attached to violence. Indeed, its very intensity seems diminished” (Sobchack 432). Senseless violence, gruesome acts, and profound amounts of gore are prevalent in movies today, and because even this is not enough, it must be accompanied by loud blasts and noise, constantly moving scenes to keep audiences stimulated and large quantities of violence for viewers to enjoy what they are watching. Decades ago, it was the story that was engaging to audiences and filmmaking was an art.
“When a great democracy is destroyed, it will not be because of enemies from without, but rather because of enemies from within.” During the late 1940s and early 1950s, these words of Abraham Lincoln were all on the minds of Americans (McCarthyism). After fighting against Communism for decades, the fear of it taking down the country terrorized people’s thoughts. Even more so, people were extremely frightened of the idea that there could be Communists within the spotlights of American influence that were plotting the destruction of the United States. A fear swept the country for almost a decade, and it transformed every aspect of American culture. This transformation began in the entertainment industry and hit here the hardest. The fear of Communism completely spun the industry upside down and distorted everything that made American showbiz so distinct. Even today, the controversies of the 1940s and 1950s have left an impression on the current entertainment industry.
Film Noir, as Paul Schrader integrates in his essay ‘Notes on Film Noir,’ reflects a marked phase in the history of films denoting a peculiar style observed during that period. More specifically, Film Noir is defined by intricate qualities like tone and mood, rather than generic compositions, settings and presentation. Just as ‘genre’ categorizes films on the basis of common occurrences of iconographic elements in a certain way, ‘style’ acts as the paradox that exemplifies the generality and singularity at the same time, in Film Noir, through the notion of morality. In other words, Film Noir is a genre that exquisitely entwines theme and style, and henceforth sheds light on individual difference in perception of a common phenomenon. Pertaining
The focus of this investigation is the ability of leaders to appeal to human emotion through propaganda. Propaganda became especially prevalent in the United States of America during the Second Red Scare between 1947 and 1954. Propaganda assisted in the infiltration of anti-communist ideals. This examination specifically focuses on the extent to which film propaganda during this time period influenced anti-communist hysteria. The movies produced during the Cold War glorified American democracy and an evaluation is completed discussing the impact of this glorification on society. The analysis emphasizes how these beliefs infiltrated all genres of moviemaking, according to researchers of film propaganda and American politics. Several secondary sources are used to look at film propaganda produced during the era of McCarthyism and the anti-communist hysteria existing exclusively in this time period.
Houchin, John H. Censorship of the American Theatre in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2003.
Nichols, John. ""Counbtering Censorship: Edgar Dale and the Film appreciation movement (critical essay)."." Cinema Jouranl. Fall 2006.
One could easily dismiss movies as superficial, unnecessarily violent spectacles, although such a viewpoint is distressingly pessimistic and myopic. In a given year, several films are released which have long-lasting effects on large numbers of individuals. These pictures speak
The MPAA rating system was once a good source for people to find out whether a movie would contain immoral or violent images; currently the system has grown to become ineffective in today’s society. Society changes as well as movies; content and subject matter has changed for movies of this generation. If the system is not changed it will not help parents to know what movies will be appropriate for their children to watch. Because of the influence and prevalence of movies in our society and culture today a rating system is important, if that system fails to do its duty the negative influence that the movies can have on the children and youth of tomorrow will be great.
... and therefore have potential consequences perhaps film-makers should be mindful of these effects. Simon also recognizes that popular culture can have influence but suggests that rather than changing popular culture to drive public opinion, it is important to study it to gauge public opinion of ethics and morals and could be used to influence the standards on which rules of ethics are based. Both articles offer compelling arguments about the importance of popular culture to both the study and the formation of legal ethical standards.
The tendency to go soft on McCarthyism has been evident in popular culture as well. The presentation of a special Lifetime Achievement Award to director Elia Kazan at the 1999 Oscar ceremony is the most flagrant and controversial example. Another example of the current vogu...
Like most things captured on film for the purpose of being marketed, the richness of gangster life, with sex, money, and power in surplus, is glorified, and thus embraced by the audience. And as a rule, if something works Hollywood repeats it, ala a genre. What Scarface and Little Caesar did was ultimately create a genre assigning powerful qualities to criminals. Such sensationalism started with the newspapers who maybe added a little more color here and there to sell a few more copies, which is portrayed in Scarface’s two newspaper office scenes. Leo Braudy denounces genres as offending “our most common definition of artistic excellence” by simply following a predetermined equation of repetition of character and plot. However, Thomas Schatz argues that many variations of plot can exist within the “arena” that the rules of the genre provide.
Many Americans love films, the meanings behind those films and the impact some films have on people’s lives. Ever since films were created there have been people and organizations that have tried to censor and block what the public can and cannot see. Even to this day there are certain things that if put on film because of censorship, would never make it to the public. This is very sad. Film is one of this country’s great expressive outlets. Many filmmakers and the people who enjoy what these filmmakers put out are effected by the horrible concept of censorship. When a film is put out to the public it is first reviewed by a movie rating board who then assigns the film a rating to tell people what age groups the film is suitable for and what the film contains. Movie selection for minors should solely be the responsibility of that child’s parent, not some critic that watches films and then makes decisions for other people about who can watch it and who can’t. People just need to start to understand the real meaning of free speech and expression in this country. Too many people are taking it for granted. People who are for the censorship of films may argue that it’s for the good of our children, shielding them from violence and sex, and not exposing them to something that they claim may be mentally harm...
... middle of paper ... ... Larry Ceplair and Englund stated in the book The Inquisition in Hollywood, “The destruction of the motion picture Left not only transformed the political atmosphere in Hollywood, but also adversely affected the kind of product which the studios turned out. “ In the early 20th century Hollywood reframed from producing politically controversial films in fear of becoming a target of McCarthy or the HUAC.
The Godfather is the “dark-side of the American dream story” (Turan, pp2). The film follows the practices of a fictional Italian mafia family, the Corleone’s. Though most Americans do not condone the practices of the Italian mafia, they cannot deny that Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather is a cinematic masterpiece. This film gave insight to a mysterious way of life that the average person does not have knowledge of. As the audience is educated about the mafia they also are introduced to many stereotypes.