|
Post by snsurone on Mar 26, 2018 14:22:28 GMT
There are certain movies, such as THE SNAKE PIT and I AM A FUGITIVE FROM A CHAIN GANG whose primary purpose was to expose horrific conditions in prisons, asylums, etc. with the goal of bringing about positive changes in these institutions. I believe this was especially true of WB films of the 1930's.
Does anyone know if any of these movies were successful in their aims?
|
|
|
Post by mattgarth on Mar 26, 2018 14:44:17 GMT
Adding THE LOST WEEKEND (alcoholism) and GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT (anti-Semitism), both of which won Best Picture Oscars, were very popular in the postwar years, and were apparently successful in shining a needed spotlight on social problems.
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Mar 26, 2018 15:13:16 GMT
"Salt of the Earth" - this one got Will Geer blacklisted...
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 26, 2018 15:15:24 GMT
Am I allowed to make a joke on this thread and recommend Duck Soup?
|
|
|
Post by snsurone on Mar 26, 2018 15:30:26 GMT
Adding THE LOST WEEKEND (alcoholism) and GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT (anti-Semitism), both of which won Best Picture Oscars, were very popular in the postwar years, and were apparently successful in shining a needed spotlight on social problems. There are also movies dealing with racism, such as PINKY and INTRUDER IN THE DUST. Sadly, at the time they were made, they had no impact on the Jim Crow south.
|
|
|
Post by snsurone on Mar 26, 2018 15:39:11 GMT
Am I allowed to make a joke on this thread and recommend Duck Soup? Sal, DUCK SOUP was made in 1933, the year Hitler came to power. Would the Marx Brothers have made a movie lampooning war and dictators if they knew about Hitler? I think not. BTW, Charlie Chaplin's classic THE GREAT DICTATOR depicted Hitler and Mussolini as narcissistic buffoons. In later years, Chaplin stated that he would never have made the movie had he known of Hitler's policy of mass genocide.
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Mar 26, 2018 15:44:47 GMT
Lewis Milestone tried to support international peace with All Quiet on the Western Front. He later made The North Star, The Purple Heart, A Walk in the Sun, and Pork Chop Hill.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 26, 2018 15:49:02 GMT
Am I allowed to make a joke on this thread and recommend Duck Soup? Sal, DUCK SOUP was made in 1933, the year Hitler came to power. Would the Marx Brothers have made a movie lampooning war and dictators if they knew about Hitler? I think not. BTW, Charlie Chaplin's classic THE GREAT DICTATOR depicted Hitler and Mussolini as narcissistic buffoons. In later years, Chaplin stated that he would never have made the movie had he known of Hitler's policy of mass genocide. In some ways my [attempt at a] joke did have a point: satire is often an effective tool to achieve social change, and the Marxes certainly were satirizing government and bureaucracy. Would they have made Duck Soup if they’d known everything about what Hitler would do? I don’t know, but I’m still happy they did make it. Later on, of course, Kubrick made Dr. Strangelove, which satirizes the terrifying threat of nuclear war. Or, as Groucho said, “What significance? We were just four Jews trying to get a laugh.” Yeah, I still think they would have made it. The point of comedy is to lampoon even the serious stuff. I know what Chaplin said about The Great Dictator, but he never says (this is pointed) that he shouldn’t have made the movie, merely that he wouldn’t. I think that’s important, as I think it was necessary that the movie was made when it was made, to send up what was known about Hitler at the time and to present a ringing endorsement of democracy and liberty in its place. Was it Luther who said that the devil can’t stand being mocked? That’s why comedy is so great a weapon in combatting tyranny. EDIT: It wasn’t Luther, it was St. Thomas More (“the devil, the prowde spirit, cannot endure to be mocked”). Luther did write something similar, though: “the best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn…”
|
|
|
Post by snsurone on Mar 26, 2018 16:02:00 GMT
Sal, THE GREAT DICTATOR was made in 1940, when many leaders (especially Neville Chamberlain) believed that Hitler could be appeased. Well, they found out differently, didn't they?
IMO, had that movie been made in later years, it would not have been a satiric comedy, something that Chaplin acknowledged.
|
|
|
Post by kijii on Mar 26, 2018 22:38:30 GMT
Adding THE LOST WEEKEND (alcoholism) and GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT (anti-Semitism), both of which won Best Picture Oscars, were very popular in the postwar years, and were apparently successful in shining a needed spotlight on social problems. There are also movies dealing with racism, such as PINKY and INTRUDER IN THE DUST. Sadly, at the time they were made, they had no impact on the Jim Crow south. However, Intruder in the Dust (1949) presented a really great black actor in a serious and mature role: Juano Hernandez. (This, in itself, may have brought on social change..who knows) Hernandez came on the scene just a little to early for the civil rights era, but he always took on his roles in stride and with pride: Stars in My Crown (1950) Young Man with a Horn (1950) Trial (1955) St. Louis Blues (1958)--If never seen this but it looks like it might be interesting (I wonder where I could find this movie?) Sergeant Rutledge (1960) is a John Ford Western about the Buffalo Soldiers--this is about a black soldier accused of unspeakable crimes. Hernandez nicely played an old slave-born soldier as a witness in the court-martial of Sergeant Rutledge (Woody Strode). Hernandez continued to take on supporting roles: The Reivers (1969) in another Faulkner novel brought to the screen.
|
|
|
Post by RiP, IMDb on Mar 26, 2018 23:26:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by marshamae on Mar 27, 2018 14:05:19 GMT
One Potato Two Potato - making the case for interracial marriage before the Loving case.
To kill a Mockingbird certainly had racism as a major theme but It was not completely given over to this one idea as Gentleman’s Agreement
To Be Or Not To Be -a comedy that absolutely intended to attack the Nazis by making fun of them . I can’t find the quote but someone suggested that in making the Nazis ridiculous by mocking their bad manners , they were attacked more effectively than if the attack had been aimed at their anti semitism, aggression against European powers etc.
Once Upon a Honeymoon, and Foeign Correspondant were certainly aimed at awakening America and attacking the America first ideas .
Someone mentioned North Star. Another film that tried to drum up support for our new Ally, the USSR was Days of Glory.
|
|
|
Post by kijii on Mar 27, 2018 14:20:17 GMT
Thelma & Louise (1991) may have been giving a social message about women.
"We are mad as hell and we aren't going to take it anymore."
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 27, 2018 14:43:50 GMT
marshamae, are you referencing the Sarris’s line that “... for Lubitsch, it was sufficient to say that Hitler had bad manners, and no evil was then inconceivable”? I’m out and don’t have my copy of The American Cinema in front of me, so I can’t give the whole line, unfortunately—and I’m unable to find it on Google. It’s a great quote and sums up, in many reasons, why Lubitsch was so interested in appearances, masks we put on to show the world in the form of manners.
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on Mar 27, 2018 14:55:32 GMT
Just about every movie by Stanley Kramer...
|
|
|
Post by teleadm on Mar 27, 2018 17:34:17 GMT
The Grapes of Wrath 1940 is usually mentioned as an eye opener.
Both How Green Was My Valley 1941 and The Molly Maguires 1970 had concern for mine workers hazardous unsafe work environments.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Mar 28, 2018 14:21:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snsurone on Mar 28, 2018 15:31:46 GMT
You all are very good about naming movies that are meant to bring social change (although I must seriously question the inclusion of THE BIRTH OF A NATION). But my question was: were any of these films successful in helping to bring about changes?
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Mar 28, 2018 15:41:43 GMT
Speaking of the Marx Brothers and Chaplin, the 3 Stooges spoofed and stereotyped Nazi's and Japanese soldiers in several of their short films...
|
|
|
Post by telegonus on Mar 29, 2018 7:49:36 GMT
You all are very good about naming movies that are meant to bring social change (although I must seriously question the inclusion of THE BIRTH OF A NATION). But my question was: were any of these films successful in helping to bring about changes? Good question. I can only say that most "social change" movies, whether they work, which is to say play a role about bringing about social change, are often already surfing wave that their makers had the good fortune to have caught. In some cases it's daringly early, as in the two anti-lynching films from the Thirties, Fury and They Won't Forget; and yet in the end lynching was outlawed, though it took a long time, and whether those two films were instrumental in bringing out that change is open to question. I'd say, maybe a little, but mostly they were largely forgotten by the Fifties and Sixties. One movie I can think of that tried very hard to bring about social change, Nine To Five, did not help the cause of overworked, underpaid and frequently harassed office workers, even with the superstar starring trio of Jane Fonda, Lily Tomlin and Dolly Parton. The movie was a big hit, and it touched a few "feminist nerves", but that was about it. I suppose it helped the women's empowerment cause. The digital age has changed the office workplace almost beyond recognition over the past twenty to thirty years; and the emphasis on power, as in individual power, has won the battle, it seems, over the more magnanimous sort,--or maybe collectivist or community based is a better way to put it. Power today seems "all about me", not "let's take care of us".
|
|