Action Films free essay sample

The films Dirty Harry and Die Hard are considered to be two of the most sensational action movies ever made. The two movies adhere to the guidelines that define the quintessential action film in that not only do they contain very strong and improvisational leading men, but they contain two very ingenious and almost neo-fascist types of villains. The level of violence within each film demonstrate the extreme measures to which the film makers go to show the both the evil of the villains and the unconventional attitudes of the protagonists. However, the two films differ in their effect on American society and in their political significance, not because they are innately different movies. Rather, these differences have stemmed from the different social climates into which these two films were born. Both the protagonists in Dirty Harry and Die Hard are representative of unconventionally ruthless and tough cops whose bottom line is to thwart the plans of those villains who seek to hurt people. We will write a custom essay sample on Action Films or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The unselfishness and cruelty of the villains in each story is matched by the strength and ingenuity of both Harry Callahan and John MacClane. The two cops defy the odds that include incredible intellectual or ingenious villains who will stop at nothing to get their demands. Both officers try to do their part as lone actors, as they are both cut somewhat off from the aid of their police departments. While Harry Callahan experiences this alienation as a result of his attitude, MacClane experiences this simply because no one from his department is aware that he controls such a close view of the hostage situation. However, both cops share similar personalities, and one gets the feeling that John MacClane prefers to act alone and would have done this voluntarily, much in the same   as Harry Callahan orchestrates the situation in which he finds himself acting alone. The villains found in both movies are also bases upon which they are similar to each other. The villain Hans Gruber of Die Hard and Scorpio of Dirty Harry are both semi-mad creatures who hold people hostage in order to gain fortunes for themselves. Hans Gruber goes about his hostage taking in a moderately conventional sense, by restricting the motion of persons within a building and denying their exit. Scorpio, on the other hand, takes hostages too but in a less conventional sense. He does this by keeping all the residents of San Francisco in extreme danger by threatening to shoot at random if his demands were not met by the police. Both villains are also incredibly astute and make the situation very difficult for the respective police departments. Hans Gruber’s ability to conceal from the police the fact that he has even taken over the building reveals the depth to which his thoughts run in concocting his plan. Similarly, in Dirty Harry Scorpio succeeds in warding off the police so that they are unable to detect who is sending the threatening messages. This leaves them powerless to locate and stop the murderous crimes that he plans to commit daily. Both movies also compare with each other in the extent to which spectacular stunts were utilized as well as in the cinematographic elements. The location of the hostage situation in Die Hard and the extent to which John MacClane has to go to conceal his presence in the building leads to many situations in which people are pushed to the limit regarding their physical actions. Such scenes as the ones in which persons and cars are hurled through glass windows make spectacles that thrill the audience. In Dirty Harry, Callahan finds himself perched on the trestle of a railroad, waiting to jump onto a bus in motion that is carrying Scorpion. These scenes represent major stunts being performed by the actors (or doubles), and the spectacle created by each succeeds in exciting the action movie lovers that hold the films in high esteem. The cinematographic elements of both films are also very interesting and technical. One particular scene in Dirty Harry shows an aerial view of Callahan as he crushes the wounded leg of the villain. The angle of the camera and its motion away from Harry symbolizes the removal of the audience from the pain of the victim (villain) and the rights that they grant to Harry to perform such an act that might have been considered cruel under normal circumstances. This motion of the camera away from Harry shows, rather, the turning of a blind eye by not just the law but by upstanding people capable of making judgments concerning the morality and legality of this action. Harry is left to his own devices, and the cinematography ends up mirroring the trust that the American people place in their law enforcement officers. The cinematography in Die Hard is also spectacular and meaningful, and it works in synchronization with the action of the film to create the exciting effect that it has on its audience. The scene previously mentioned in which the car is driven through the window is a foreshadowing of the final action sequence in which Gruber smashes through a window and hangs there with MacClane’s wife. The angle at which this is shot allows the audience to view the perspective of MacClane who now has his hands full with his wife (whom he’s trying to prevent from falling) while having a gun pointed up at him from a villain who is about to die. The angle of this shot holds certain similarities to the previously described Dirty Harry scene. The cinematographers allow us to view the villain from above while he is experiencing vengeance and pain brought on by the protagonist. However, this scene differs from the Dirty Harry scene in that it represents the melding of victory and the possibility of loss for Harry. It also leads to one of the aspects in which the two protagonists actually differ. While Dirty Harry represents almost the quintessential tough guy who fears very little, John MacClane shows vulnerability in his love for his wife and his fear of her death. The two movies differ also in the socio-political contexts of their histories. Having been made at the beginning of the 1970’s when social and political conditions in the United States were at a turning point (sexual revolution and widespread aversion to war/violence), the movie Dirty Harry made a much more sensational entrance into the movie field. The movie itself was both shocking and appealing to audiences, as it features scenes and themes that were never before dealt with in a similar fashion. The attitude of the protagonist himself, Harry Callahan, had before been prefigured in such characters as had been played by John Wayne in his movies. However, Dirty Harry Callahan added to this an ruthlessness that itself rivaled the unscrupulous attitude of the villain. This depiction of a police officer had never before been seen, and though this is similar to the way John MacLane behaves in Die Hard, the impact of Dirty Harry on American audiences proved to be more shocking in its era. Another area in which the two films compare is in the impact of the sexuality and language on the American public. However, this comparison must be considered on different levels, as the audiences of each era were both intrigued and excited by these thematic elements for different reasons. The sexuality found in Dirty Harry represented early attempts at being overtly sexual in any form. On the other hand, the sexual exploration found in Die Hard represents early attempts at being candid concerning homosexuality. The sexually explicit language of the Dirty Harry film was (like the explicit violence) new to the American public in 1971 when Dirty Harry was released. In one of the beginning scenes, Harry refers to a previous slaying of a rapist who was pursuing a woman with a knife and a â€Å"hard on.† This explicit reference to the state of the criminal’s arousal while chasing the woman represents an attempt to demonstrate the nature of the crime being described—and in this Harry is supremely effective. The decision of Dirty Harry directors’ to include this detail represents a very bold attempt to redefine sexual boundaries in American mainstream film. In Die Hard, however, the sexual undertones found in the language of John MacLane represent a type of homophobia that was not new to American society but which had just started coming under fire by human and gay rights activists. Therefore, both films lost some popularity with minority activist or socio-religious groups. Die Hard was moderately offensive to the gay community in its paronomasia references to anal sex and the effeminacy of the villain Gruber. Dirty Harry, on the other hand, was able to gain some unpopularity merely through its indelicate references to sexual themes. The films Dirty Harry and Die Hard are films that had a lasting effect on the American public for reasons having to do with their thematic concern with violence and the criminal mind. Both movies are concerned with lone-acting police officers who take on one of the most intelligent and cruel criminal minds of their time. These police officers prove themselves to be resourceful and fast-thinking, especially when faced with difficult situations in which innocents are being tortured. The tensions created by the meeting of each villain and protagonist allow for the inclusion of many lurid scenes, and these in turn facilitate the use of interesting and spectacular cinematographic elements. The socio-political cultures of the time in which each movie was written also provided some ways in which several were opposed to the content or undertones of the films. However, the two films differ in the methods in which their elements shocked the public. Works Cited Siegel, Don. Dirty Harry. Hollywood: Warner Brothers, 1971. McTiernan, John. Die Hard. Hollywood: 20th Century Fox, 1988. Action Films free essay sample The term genre is a diverse categorical element, it does not give any absolute definition as to what extent a certain art-form can be categorized under a particular genre.   This is what plagues the realm of film simply because there are several elements incorporated in motion pictures.   The script or the screenplay, for instance,   is considered a form of literature, and the script is only one of the components.   Other elements such as character and plot serves as an aid to defining the genre and ultimately communicate how genre gives a better understanding of commercial cinema. Take the case of the action genre, films conforming to the usual conventions of action involve, exploding buildings and vehicles, hi-speed car chases, seemingly tough on-screen aura, remarkable martial arts and fight scenes, technologically advanced gadgets and weaponry, high-risk stunts, biological disasters that either threaten or bring human existence to a screeching halt, these are several of the recognizable elements and themes found in action films (Dirks 2008). We will write a custom essay sample on Action Films or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page    More often than not, action films rouse a certain form of excitement through its distinct elements, but apart from all the blatant spectacle action movies promise, the genre has also become a communication device for the mass audience to understand how genre is crucial in representing commercial cinema. Mikko Lehtonen, Aija-Leena Ahonen (2000), and Kris Clarke write that there is a possible way to distinguish common ground where action can be able to send its message to the audience. In the case of action, the myriad of elements and themes that comprise action makes the genre defined. The series of odd circumstances that pile against the protagonist, the magnificence of the frequent explosions throughout the film, and the blood-rushing scenes that gives the audience a sudden rage in adrenaline hormones are common elements not found in drama or to some extent horror.   In addition, regardless if the character, events, and setting are fictional or real, action films mostly focus on a single male individual overcoming all odds to resolve the film’s conflict or series of conflicts. In accord with Lehtonen, Ahonen, and Clarke (2000) mentioned, the protagonists of action films or action heroes contribute in large part to how the genre gives a better understanding of commercial cinema.   From the moment the reel for the motion picture Dirty Harry started rolling in 1971, the modern archetype for the tough guy action hero was born.   The vigilante incarnation of Clint Eastwood as Harry Callahan may already be a clichà © but Eastwood’s character in the film introduces to the audience a new breed of police character that does not feel bound to the limits of the law, but a liberal law enforcer willing to sacrifice the ethical principle of the law to let justice prevail. Before the release of Dirty Harry, the police characters in action films do not project a character trait that engages a more serious approach to the audience.   This   â€Å"shoot first, ask questions later† type of character who does not establish any psychological capability of solving crime, nor any investigative approach to crime fighting eventually seemed to have become less palatable to the audience.   This is perhaps brought about by the tendency of films with such characters to become predictable and less interesting as a result of the aforementioned predictability. In Dirty Harry, Clint Eastwood’s characterization for Inspector Harry Callahan appears to be drawn from the western films he previously starred in (Lichtenfield 2007).   Modifying his previous role characterizations to a more modern, urbanized set up, Eastwood redefines the cop character and the action film through his constant collisions with his superiors.   Eastwood’s context of the action hero (and the action film for that matter) cannibalizes how police officers are traditional conformists to the law. The film revolves around Inspector Harry Callahan’s struggle to change the incumbent system of enforcing the law, inciting arguments with police officials, the district attorney, and the mayor.   He starts to bend the rules while in pursuit of a sniper who is out on a killing spree threatening to only stop the brutal killings if the officials decide to pay him (Siegel 1971).   The protagonist in the film relates a form of social awareness relevant during the 60s and the 70s by challenging the suffocating norms being practiced by society at the time. Eric Lichtenfeld (2007) writes that in his concept of maintaining law and order, Inspector Harry Callahan implies an individualistic approach.   Such premise of a rebellious side is quite feasible to the public taste considering that the time of Dirty Harry’s release was also the rise of modern liberalist ideologies that defies the authoritative and prejudiced norms that plague societies, especially America.   Furthermore, Harry appears to be compelled by the fact that the very law he attempts to enforce hinders him to effectively do his job and rid the social system of the practices and established constructs that delivers the fake sound of progress. The big city clash found in action films in the 1970s evolved with much stakes during the 80s as Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 1984 film The Terminator involved the fate of the entire world and the human race.in its plot.   More importantly, The Terminator gave the action genre a revamp in such a way that it incorporated elements of science fiction, by including the concepts of time travel and advanced robotics technology into the action genres. Action once again played the vital role of how genre contributes to the understanding of commercial cinema.   In the context of The Terminator, action brings about the understanding commercial cinema tapping the prevalent fear of technological advancement during the time as Schwarzenegger threatened to exterminate the entire human race to give rise to machines as the new intelligent species of the world.   In a similar magnitude, Robocop features how the fear of technology can serve as an irony to humanity as Robocop experienced an identity crisis where he asserts whether he is a person or a mere weapon.   Robocop is shown to be a tool manifesting a few vestiges of what was once his humanity.   In this sense, the film showed how one man struggled to maintain his humanity with the aid of technology. Apart from the cybernetic hero, the 1980s also saw the emergence of the new action hero with a macho look and me versus the world attitude.   Eric Lichtenfeld (2007) attributes the introduction of the new action hero such as Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone with then president Ronald Reagans nationwide call for fundamental change in the economic, political, and moralistic planes. This new archetype of the action hero brings a never before seen masculinity reminds the viewers of the United States warrior myths and racial supremacy issues indicated by the nations past.   The action heros   seemingly impossible body build, heavy armaments, and ridiculously impossible fighting ability has then become appropriate for the havoc wreaking,   extreme stunt perpetration and the overwhelming explosions of action films. In creating the identities for the action heros, the basis for characterization were injected with anti-Soviet implications and similar threats to what then President Reagan considered a threat to the norms of democracy.   The dangers and hazards the fiendish villains pose to society is recognizable enough to be related to what Ronald Reagan called the Evil Empire which was the Soviet Union (Lichtenfeld 2007).   As a result, the heros goal became apparent, total annihilation of the threats to a democratic society.   For the general public this meant the heros display of compassion to the norms and principles being held by American society during the time, and any threat to what freedom loving Americans value was not good, and should therefore be eradicated once and for all. The character type projected by actor Sylvester Stallone did not only establish a macho, tough guy- feel for the action hero, but it also marks a new era wherein the action hero poses both as an underdog and a superhero (Lichtenfeld 2007).   Although the concept of the superhero already ventured in to the realm of film in 1978 with Richard Donners Superman starring Christopher Reeve, Rambo revolutionized the action hero as a hero possessing superhuman capabilities. For one, John Rambo became a superhero by having an origin to his aggressive character.   His experience in Vietnam as a soldier prompted grassroots activism and public unrest together with hostile treatment from local police officers   in turn caused John Rambo to vent out his aggression to society.   Based on his origins as a superhero, Rambo became an underdog through the harsh treatment of society which is the foundational purpose of his superheroism and destructive nature in the first place. But putting the context of origin aside, Rambo became action superhero through the daring stunts that he did out of desperation.   Cliff-jumping, or in a more modern, urbanized context, building hopping has become a constant feature of future action films.   For Rambo, it is a move to avoid hot lead from sticking to his skin and penetrating through his internal organs.   Simply put, the seemingly dangerous stunts performed by the action superhero is his own ironic way of cheating death in order to continuously advocate his mission of curing the destructive way of cancer-stricken moral society. Through the superhero qualities portrayed by Sylvester Stallone, the comic book superheros have found a way in the world of motion picture.   during the 80s and early in the 90s, costumed fighters seemed to have found luke-warm acceptance from the mass audience.   This is because of the fact that most of the heros experiences were originally printed on paper and thereby absurd.   However, the spectacle of special effects together with more emotional, and highly dramatic origin concepts, the superhero characters have found a home in the accomodating hearts of the mass audience. The motion picture adaptation for the comic book series Iron Man for instance goes beyond the borders of its comic strip origins to create a social awareness in a post 9/11 America.   Receiving a wake-up call from his captivity in Afghanistan, Tony Stark (through Iron Man) decides to stop manufacturing weapons that seek destruction to peoples lives and property before the margin reaches in a more global scale.   With the height of terrorist attacks in several parts of the globe, the motion picture dares the audience to answer the question what solution can be brought to put an end to humanitys lust for power. Similarly, in a much smaller setting, Christopher Nolans The Dark Knight further attests that every action hero is a superhero and vise versa.   The Dark Knight, particularly, the Joker, challenges the moral consciousness of Batman, the district attorney Harvey dent, and the entire Gotham Police Department.   In contrast to the traditional context of the action hero as projected by Clint Eastwoods Harry Callahan, the Dark Knights villain, Joker, argues that the very law the police officers enforce is what hinders justice to prevail.   Joker individualistically wreaks havoc all over Gotham to prove that the so-called decent people who uphold the ethics of the law do not practice what they preach but simply bend them to their own advantage. For more than two decades, the action genre of film has communicated cinema through the events and experiences in the lives of the protagonists.   Although it blatantly promotes violence and destruction, action movies present the world with possible consequences of human acts.   Beyond the spectacle of perfect physique, explosions, and stunts, the action genre poses as a morbid distorted reality of human tendency. Bibliography Dirks, T. 2008, Action Films.   Filmsite Organization Official Website, Available at: http://www.filmsite.org/actionfilms.html Lehtonen, L. et al. (2007) Cultural Analysis of Texts. London, Sage Publications. Lichtenfeld, E. (2007) Action Speaks Louder: Violence, Spectacle, and the American Action   Movie. Middletown, CT, Wesleyan University Press