I. INTRODUCTION
This curriculum unit begins with two
basic premises:
1.
Films can be powerful educationally, but they must be chosen carefully and
selectively.
2. The
objectives behind the use of films should be integrated into a unit’s overall
objectives. While films can be used to reinforce the objectives of a teacher’s
lectures, discussions, or print materials, it may be more effective to use
films to complement other objectives.
The
topic of this unit is ethnicity and race. I will discuss film selection and the
integration of film into a two semester course based on Thomas Sowell’s 1981
classic Ethnic America. Movie reviews for each film will be provided, along
with a set of discussion questions. My target audience is a college audience.
There
are several criteria to consider when selecting films for classroom use:
1.
The films should have educational value. Educational value is not the same as
entertainment value. A film which is entertaining but has minimal educational
value is not appropriate for classroom use.
2.
The film’s educational value fits in with the overall objectives of your
curriculum unit. Many of the films in my ethnicity and race unit deal with
cultural and familial themes. Far and Away (Irish-Americans), Avalon
(Jewish-Americans), A Bronx Tale (Italian-Americans), The Long Walk Home (African-Americans),
and Mi Familia (Mexican-Americans) are examples of this approach to ethnicity.
They complement Ethnic America, which is basically a social, political, and
economic history of ethnicity. Yet all five films are set in an historical
context, which means they also reinforce the themes of Dr. Sowell’s book.
3.
Students will become involved and engaged with your films. The five films
previously mentioned all meet the criteria. Students do not put their heads on
their desks when these films are shown. In other words, these films have entertainment
value as well as educational value.
4. The
great majority of your students have not seen the films before. I prefer small
films instead of Hollywood blockbusters for this reason. I also lean toward
films which were released several years prior to their use in my classroom.
That way even students who have seen the films before will remain interested.
Interesting plots and thought-provoking themes - as opposed to expensive
special effects - are another criteria you may wish to use when selecting your
films.
Thomas
Sowell’s Ethnic America (New York: Basic Books, 1981) remains a most profound
and provocative response to the liberal view of ethnicity and race. In his
introduction, Sowell provides a chart which ranks ethnic groups in terms of
average family incomes (p.5) Average is 100, but several ethnic groups exceed
the average:
Jewish 172
Japanese
132
Polish 115
Chinese
112
Italian
112
German 107
Anglo-Saxon
107
Irish 103_________
Other
groups do not fare as well:
Filipino
99
West
Indian 94
Mexican 76
Puerto
Rican 63
Black 62
Native American 60
Liberals,
Sowell explicitly and implicitly asserts throughout the book, believe these
differences are due solely to discrimination. But, Sowell wonders, how can this
be if several ethnic groups which have experienced discrimination rank above
and even far above the U.S. median income?
The reason, Sowell claims, is something which in his other
books he calls cultural capital. Cultural capital includes a strong work ethic,
a stable family structure, and a propensity to save and invest rather than to
consume. But cultural capital also involves an understanding of the four paths
to the upper middle class and above.
The first of these paths is politics, especially urban
politics. This involves electing members of your ethnic group to offices, such
as mayor, that can provide access to government jobs in police and fire
departments, schools, and municipal services. Irish-Americans have historically
excelled in this area, while African-Americans have been using this path since
the 1960’s. Political jobs offer security and good benefits, but they are
seldom very remunerative.
Business ownership may be more risky, but the potential
benefits greatly outweigh the costs. High percentages of Jews, Japanese, and
Chinese have excelled here, although Sowell is well aware that members of all
ethnic groups have succeeded in business.
Higher education, the third area, is perhaps the most
dependable path to success. Again it is the Jews and the Asian-Americans who
have excelled the most here. Both Sowell’s supporters and his critics call
these groups the model minorities, a term which Sowell himself does not use.
There is a fourth area - sports, music, and entertainment.
Here the results can be spectacular, but the odds for success are not good.
Often this is the area first available to ethnic Americans. Sowell knows this,
but he issues a caveat anyway. Put your eggs in this basket, he is saying, and
most likely they will break. Sowell is clearly delivering a message to members
of his own ethnic group - African-Americans.
By now Sowell’s argument is clear: the liberals are wrong.
All ethnic groups have faced discrimination - some more than others- Sowell
acknowledges, but it is really cultural capital which accounts for the income
differences among ethnic groups. Sowell clearly suggest entrepreneurship and
higher education are the best paths to success. It is not surprising that he
sees reliance on the federal government as the worst of the legal paths to
success. While he in no way supports discrimination, he believes that pooling
resources with members of your own family and ethnic group is a better way of
starting a business than going to court and claiming you were denied a loan due
to your ethnic or racial background. Even better, start your own bank within
your own ethnic group. Eventually you can start your own country clubs if the
WASP country clubs will not accept you.
Naturally liberals find Sowell’s ideas anathema. While most
liberal would not quibble with the importance of cultural capital, liberals
believe European and Asian ethnic groups have faced far less discrimination
than other ethnic Americans. Assertive affirmative action policies and strong
federal government action, liberals believe, are necessary to assure ethnic
equality.
My
goal is to use films to complement the objectives of teaching Ethnic America.
When we begin studying each ethnic group, we look for answers to these
questions from the book:
1.
When did most members of the group come to America?
2.
How did they come?
3.
Why did they come?
4.
Where did they settle?
5.
What are the divisions within the group?
6.
What is the dominant religion?
7. What
successes have members of the ethnic group attained in politics, business,
higher education, and sports, music, and entertainment?
Ethnic
America says little about what might be called cultural contributions, such as
foods. Thus the study of each ethnic group begins with each student writing
anonymously on a sheet of paper what comes to mind upon hearing the name of the
ethnic group. All responses which reappear at least once are recorded on the
board.
Now is where the films come in. Family and cultural dynamics
are still missing from our study of ethnicity and without them we will have a
rather sterile unit. These two critical aspects of ethnic experience are best
taught through films. It is one thing to read about Protestant-Catholic tension
among the Irish and about Irish-Italian tension in Boston in the mid-19th
century. It is another thing to watch these themes develop in the movie Far and
Away.
It is one thing to read about Jewish Americans remarkable
business successes. It is another thing to watch this happen in Barry Levinson’s
Avalon.
Telling students about stereotypes of Italian-Americans is
easy to do, but seeing the character of Lorenzo the bus driver brilliantly
juxtaposed against that of Sonny the local mob underboss in A Bronx Tale is far
more powerful.
Lecturing on the African-American struggle for civil rights
is important, but watching that struggle unfold in The Long Walk Home may have
an even greater impact.
Finally the statement: different members of the same family
succeed in different ways takes on real meaning through Mi Familia.
Films do have pitfalls. The reviews which follow will point
out both the weaknesses and he strengths of these and other films.
Before
presenting the film reviews, some guidelines for the use of films should be
proposed. There are several actions that teachers can take to make sure that
the films used in our classrooms will have optimal educational value. Here are
my guidelines:
1. Preview
the film yourself. This is absolutely essential. You know your students better
than anyone else does. You will be able to determine not only if the film fits
into your curriculum, but also whether it is appropriate for your students.
Furthermore, you will be able to prepare a set of discussion questions in
advance.
2.
Prepare discussion questions which will enhance students viewing of the film. I
recommend a set of questions which are organized day by day. You may wish to
have students write out the answers to the questions each day to assure that
they are watching carefully and comprehending the film. But when discussing a
film after its conclusion, I usually begin with these three questions:
a.
How would you rate the film on a 1 to 10 scale?
1-terrible
2-poor
3-well
below average
4-below
average
5-average
6-above
average
7-good
8-very
good
9-excellent
10-superior
b.
Describe each of the film’s main characters.
c. What
are the film’s main themes?
The
first of these questions seems very popular with my students. We go around the
room and each student gives their rating and their ratings and their reasons. I
give mine last in order not to bias the students.
3.
Make sure the film and your tv/vcr are in proper working order.
4. Time
your films so you won’t have a class period end with a few minutes of film
left. FAR AND AWAY Irish-Americans,1992, 140minutes,PG-13
Far
and Away is not a great film, but it will hold your students interests and with
a skillfully-led discussion will result in most students learning more about
the Irish-American experience than they would learn from the more scholarly yet
somewhat tedious PBS special on Irish-Americans. Film critics Mick Martin and
Marsha Porter give four stars to director Ron Howard’s sweeping tale of Irish
immigrants who come to America in the late 1800s. This entertaining saga
features Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman as a bickering couple from different social
classes who find themselves adrift in the New World. Video Movie Guide 1996
(New York: Random House, 1995), p.527.
The film’s ending is ending, however, is pure Hollywood,
which is one reason why critic Roger Ebert, usually generous with both stars and
upward pointing thumbs, gives Far and Away only two stars of a possible four.
1998 Pocket Video Guide (Kansas City: Andrew McMeel Publishing, 1997), p. 16.
My students give this film an average rating of 7 - right between Martin-Porter
and Ebert. They realize that the film features a number of improbable
coincidences, but still has a lot to say about the Irish-American experience.
Day 1 questions
1.
What did Joseph learn from his father?
2.
What happened at the Christie home?
3.
Describe Joseph and Shannon.
4.
What happened when Joseph and Shannon arrived in Boston?
5. How
does the film show religious and social class differences among the Irish?
Day
2 questions
1.
Who probably destroyed the Christie home?
2.
Who found it harder to adjust to America- Joseph or Shannon? Why?
3.
How successful was Joseph’s boxing career?
4.
How did Joseph and Shannon’s feelings for each other change during the movie?
5.
What discrimination did Irish-Americans face?
6.
Describe Irish-American relations with Italian-Americans.
Day
3 questions
1.
How does the race for land in Oklahoma symbolize America?
2.
Was the ending realistic or Hollywood? Why?
3.
What were the main themes of the film?
4.
Evaluate the film in detail, giving reasons for your comments.
AVALON Jewish-Americans, 1990, 126
minutes, PG
Avalon
comes close to being a great movie. Armin Mueller-Stahl is memorable as a first
generation Jewish grandfather whose first image of America is a Fourth of July
celebration. Mueller-Stahl, a German actor, makes his character seem totally
Jewish. The same can not be said of Aidan Quinn, who plays Sam’s assimilated
son Jules Kay.
Roger Ebert sees this film as a tale of how a strong
extended family degenerates over time into an isolated nuclear one. 1998 Roger
Ebert’s Video Companion (Kansas City:Andrew McNeels Publishing, 1997), p. 44. I
like to emphasize the risk-taking and creative thinking necessary for success
in business.
The story is slow-moving, which is why my students rate the
movie higher for educational value than for entertainment value.
Part
1 questions
1.
Describe Sam Krichinsky.
2.
What do we learn about the Krichinsky family from their Thanksgiving dinner.
3.
How did Jules Kay and his cousin Izzy Kirk do in the television business?
4. What
problems did moving to the suburbs bring for the Kay/Krichinsky family?
Part
2 questions
1.
How did Sam Krichinsky feel about his son changing his last name to Kay?
2.
Give at least one example of Jewish humor in the film.
3.
How did Thanksgiving dinner help create a split between Sam and his brother
Gabriel?
4.
Why were Sam and Eva Krichinsky upset about their son playing golf?
5. Why did
Sam resign from the Family Circle?
Part
3 questions
1.
The burning of the store was presented with much symbolism. Discuss this
symbolism.
2.
What made Eva’s death so painful to her husband?
3.
What were the movie’s main themes?
4. Rate
the movie on a 1 to 10 scale for both educational and entertainment value,
giving your reasons.
�A BRONX TALE� Italian-Americans, 1993, 122
minutes, R for violence and profanity
Year after
year my students rate �A Bronx Tale� higher than any other film we see. It is easy to see why.
Mick Martin and Marsha Porter call the movie an �atmospheric, exquisitely detailed
character study of a youngster torn between his hard-working bus-driver dad
(played by director Robert DeNiro) and the flashy mobster (played superbly by
screenwriter Chazz Palminteri) who rules their Bronx neighborhood. (p.482)
Roger
Ebert gives the film four stars, praising its subplot of interracial romance,
which seems just a bit out of sync to me, while claiming the film�s importance is that �it�s about values. About how some boys
grow up into men who can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning, and
others just go along with the crowd, forgetting after a while that they ever
had a choice.� (p. 115)
The
educational value of this film may not match its entertainment value, but there
are a number of good themes to discuss. The sound track and the cinematography
are also exceptional.
Day
1 questions
1. Where
and when does the story take place?
2. Describe
the Anello family: Lorenzo, Rosina, and their son Calogero.
3.
Describe Sonny and his friends.
4. After
the shooting, what should Calogero have done? Why?
5. If you
had been Lorenzo, would you have taken the $150/week from Sonny? Why or why
not?
6. How did
Sonny influence Calogero?
7. How did Lorenzo react to Sonny�s influence on �C�?
Day 2
questions
1.
Describe C�s friends.
2. List
two pieces of advice Sonny gives C. How does this differ from Lorenzo�s advice?
3.
Describe C as a young man.
4.
Describe Jane and her relationship with C.
5. How did
C react when his friends attacked the young black men?
6.
Describe Sonny�s �door test.�
7. What prevented Jane from having
her first date with C?
Day 3
questions
1. What
happened to C�s friends? What happened to Sonny?
2. What were the movie�s main themes? Rate the movie on a 1
to 10 scale.
�THE LONG WALK HOME� African-Americans, 1991, 97
minutes, PG
�The Long Walk Home� is a story of courage and
salvation. Whoopi Goldberg plays Odessa Cotter, a maid who quietly supports the
Montgomery bus boycott and inadvertently converts her employer Miriam Thompson,
played by Sissy Spacek, to the cause. This film was not a huge box office
success, but I get the feeling that many teachers around the country are
showing it to their students. It is a moving story which shows ordinary people
in an extraordinary time period. Roger Ebert suggests that by making Miriam�s daughter Mary Catherine the
narrator, director Richard Pearce is making it clear that this film is intended
for white audiences. (p. 473) My experiences suggest otherwise. My students are
almost all African-American. When Miriam�s moderately racist husband punches his totally racist
brother at the end of the film, whoops and hollers fill the room. Mr. Ebert may
have missed the bus here, but he and virtually every other film critic love �The Long Walk Home� as much as my students and I do.
Discussion
questions
1. When
does the story take place? How can you tell?
2. Who are
the main characters? Who is the narrator?
3. What
does the first scene in the park symbolize?
4. How did
the boycott affect the following?
a. Odessa?
b. Miriam?
c. Odessa�s family?
d. Miriam�s family?
e. the
city of Montgomery?
f. the
rest of the U.S.?
5. Did any
characters change during the movie? If so, how?
6. What
was the meaning of the incident with the three white boys on the bus?
7. Discuss
the importance of the scene where Odessa announces her intention to quit.
8. Discuss
the significance of the movie�s final scene.
9. What was your reaction to the
movie? Rate the film on a 1 to 10 scale, giving reasons.
Short
essay topics:
1. Write a
character sketch of Odessa, Miriam, Herbert, Norman, or Tucker.
2.
Describe the philosophy behind the Montgomery bus boycott.
3. Tell
how both Odessa and Miriam became stronger individuals during �The Long Walk Home.�
4. Compare �The Long Walk Home� with other films dealing with
Black-White relations.
�MY FAMILY� (�MI FAMILIA�) Mexican-Americans, 1995, 122 min., R for violence,
profanity, drugs, and nudity
My
students give this family saga mixed reviews - and so do the movie critics.
Roger Ebert, describing the film�s final scene, says, �Rarely have I felt at the movies such a sense of time and
history, of stories and lessons passing down the generations, of a family
living in its memories.� (p. 554) Ebert�s four star rating, his maximum, contrasts sharply with that
of Martin and Porter, who give �My Family� three of a possible five stars because the narrative is �spread too thin.� (p. 734)
Everyone
seems to agree that the acting is superb. All this makes the decision to
include the film as part of my curriculum an easy one. Many of us on the east
coast know very little of Mexican-Americans and their culture. �My Family� thus has great educational as well
as entertainment value. Ebert is on target in calling this �the great American story�.(p. 553) I would add that the great
American story is more about commonalities than about differences, especially
where ethnicity is concerned.
Day
1 questions
1. Who is
the narrator?
2.
Describe the narrator�s father and mother, Jose and Maria Sanchez.
3.
Describe the narrator�s brother Chucho and his sister Toni.
4. What
significant events took place at the wedding?
5. Why was
Chucho put out of the house?
6. What happened at the dance?
Day 2
questions
1. Why do
you think the director showed Chucho�s death along with scenes of baseball and �I Love Lucy�?
2. How did
Toni surprise the family?
3. Why did Jimmy get married? How
did his marriage turn out?
Day 3
questions
1. What
happened to Jimmy after Isabel died?
2. What
happened to Memo (William)?
3. How
would you describe the Gillespies� visit to the Sanchez home?
4.
Describe Jimmy�s relationship with his son Carlito.
5. Did the
Sanchez family achieve the American dream? Why or why not?
6. What
were the film�s main themes?
7. How would you rate this movie?
Why?
Race seems
to be America�s albatross. Not surprisingly, race
seems to be Hollywood�s albatross too. While one might claim that Hollywood has
come a long way from �The Birth of a Nation� (1915), the silent Civil War saga which glorified the Ku
Klux Klan, the majority of the films which deal with race still seem to become
controversial for one reason or another.
Sidney
Poitier films in the 1950�s were criticized for presenting �the perfect Negro,� even though his roles were a direct
response to the criticism that Blacks only appeared in Hollywood films as
maids, railroad car porters, chauffeurs, and entertainers. The �Blaxploitation� films of the 1970�s - featuring characters such as
Shaft and Superfly- were blasted for depicting Blacks as violent pimps and drug
dealers, but the films did make money. So did �The Color Purple� (1985), which also was attacked for
promoting negative images of Black males.
Films
which deal with racial issues present us with several themes. White racism
clearly is one of those themes. Racism appears in almost every film dealing
with race. But it is far from the only theme in films about race. The struggle
against racism is another major theme. I think there is a possibility that
White and Black directors tend to handle the interplay between these themes
differently, with black directors emphasizing the struggle against racism at
least as much as the racism itself. This may be because black and White
directors have different audiences. White directors often use racial themes to
convince other Whites that racism is wrong. Black directors, who gear their
films more toward their fellow Blacks, assume their audience knows that racism
both exists and is wrong, so the struggle against racism gets more attention.
Other
themes include interracial relationships and what might be called community and
family studies. This all adds up to a growing number of diverse films about
race. So how is a classroom teacher to choose what to show? I believe the
guidelines presented earlier about ethnicity are equally valid here. Let me
present reviews of several films with racial themes. The films are listed in
descending order of quality, from my perspective. This time readers will need
to preview the films and provide their own questions.
�HOOP DREAMS� 1994, 171 minutes, PG-13
�Hoop Dreams�, a lengthy documentary about high
school basketball in Chicago, is my all-time favorite movie about race and race
relations. Roger Ebert calls it one of the great moviegoing experiences of his
lifetime (368). I concur completely. It would not be possible to write a story
as inspirational as this six year odyssey of Arthur Agee and William Gates, two
of the best 14 year old basketball players in Chicago when the film begins. The
struggles of Arthur, William, and their families will remain with the viewer
forever.
�DO THE RIGHT THING� 1989, 120 minutes, R for nudity,
profanity, and violence
Ebert also
champions this community study by Spike Lee, and again I agree completely. This
may be Mr. Lee�s best movie. A tragicomic study of a Brooklyn neighborhood,
this film raises many issues about race and race relations - never providing
pat answers but always raising more and more questions. The main characters-
Sal, Mookie, Radio Raheem, Buggin� Out, and Da Mayor- are as memorable as the film�s final violent and tragic scenes.
This is a powerful film. Teachers should preview it carefully before showing
it.
�JUNGLE FEVER� 1991, 135 minutes, R for nudity,
profanity, and violence
Martin and
Porter only give this film three stars out of five, largely because of its
excessive length (561), but Roger Ebert is much more positive, noting that the
crackhouse scene is amazingly powerful, as is the frank discussion of sexual
attraction between the races.(418) Ebert criticizes the depiction of the
interracial romance because the characters are not fully developed. I liked the
way it was handled because I believe Mr. Lee was trying to portray merely a
physical attraction, not a relationship.
The
film fully deserves its R rating. The nudity is so pervasive that I have not
shown this film in my classroom - although I wish I could.
�A RAISIN IN THE SUN� 1961, 128 minutes, B&W, unrated
This
screen adaptation of Lorraine Hansberry�s classic play is of great interest to my students, who
usually have little use for black and white films. We watch the film before
performing several of the scenes. Sidney Poitier is terrific as Walter Lee
Younger, but it is Claudia McNeil�s performance as his mother Lena which really impressed me.
There
is a 1988 version which features Danny Glover as Walter Lee and Esther Rolle as
Lena. I liked this one too, but it is unnecessarily 43 minutes longer than the
original.
�MALCOLM X� 1992, 193 minutes, PG-13
Spike Lee
directs, Denzel Washington stars, and the result is a great screen biography.
The film may have disappointed those who hoped Mr. Lee would provide a new
interpretation of Malcolm X, but I believe Mr. Lee accomplished more by
remaining faithful to the Autobiography. Once again, there are no easy answers,
but race in America has never been an issue with easy answers.
�BOYZ N THE HOOD� 1991, 111 minutes, R for profanity,
violence, and nudity
Martin and
Porter wisely note that this is not the exploitation film about gang violence
it appears to be.(133) It is probably the best of the central city dramas of
the early 1990�s. A high percentage of my students had already seen it,
which is why I have not shown it .
�AMISTAD� 1997, 160 minutes, R for violence and brief nudity
Steven
Spielberg received a fair amount of criticism from historians for this powerful
discussion of an 1839 incident which led to one of the first legal challenges
to slavery. Yet if America is to confront its racial past, Amistad seems to be
one of the best films available. Yes, the film is long, and yes, there are some
tedious legal scenes, but the portrayal of the Middle Passage is as powerful as
the death camp scenes in Schindler�s List.
�GUESS WHO�S COMING TO DINNER� 1967, 108 minutes, unrated
�Guess Who�s Coming to Dinner� may be somewhat outdated, but it
remains a fine middle of the road film about interracial marriage. This classic
stars Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn as liberal White parents who become
conflicted when their daughter becomes engaged to a Black doctor played -
surprise!- by Sidney Poitier. Martin and Porter correctly note that this once
controversial picture seems �rather quaint today,� but that has not bothered my students.
�DRIVING MISS DAISY� 1989, 99 minutes, PG for profanity
Film
critics loved �Driving Miss Daisy,� which stars Jessica Tandy as an elderly Jewish widow and
Morgan Freeman as her Black chauffeur. Roger Ebert sees it as a film of �great love and patience�(234). Martin and Porter give it the
maximum five stars (309). The only dissenter seems to be Spike Lee, who blasted
the Best Picture of 1989 for portraying Blacks in stereotypical roles. Mr. Lee�s �Do the Right Thing,� also released in 1989, was unfairly
denied a Best Picture nomination. But that is not the fault of �Driving Miss Daisy,� an especially fine film for
students unfamiliar with the history and dynamics of American race relations.
�THE COLOR PURPLE� 1985, 130 minutes, PG-13 for
profanity, violence, and suggested sex
Is it
Steven Spielberg�s fault that Alice Walker�s novel was none too kind to Black
males? Or did Spielberg deliberately exacerbate the novel�s sexism? However you feel, it is
obvious that Spielberg�s problem may have been that he entered the landmine-filled
gender wars within the Black community as an outsider. Whoopi Goldberg, Oprah
Winfrey, and Danny Glover are all sensational, so this film receives my strong
recommendation despite a few flaws, such as occasionally romanticizing life in the
South under Jim Crow.
�A TIME TO KILL� 1996, 145 minutes R for violence,
profanity and rape
Martin and
Porter give this film only two and a half stars, but John Grisham�s tale of a Black man in Mississippi
who kills the two racists who raped and assaulted his daughter has been very
popular with young people of both races. The story is Hollywood at both its
best and its worst, depending on your point of view. If you want to be
entertained, this is a winner. If you want to be educated, try something else.
�ROSEWOOD� 1997, 140 minutes, R for violence, profanity, nudity, and
torture
Rosewood
purports to be an historical film about a racist attack on a prosperous Black
community in Florida in 1923. The film is quite powerful. It seems a bit too
long to me, but its real problem is that the last half hour is, as Martin and
Porter suggest, more Indiana Jones than historical drama.(914) Even so, I have
no problem recommending this film, although I too wonder about the authenticity
of the main character, the �man with no name,� played quite well by the underrated actor Ving Rhames.
�A FAMILY THING � 1996, 109 minutes, PG-13 for
profanity and mild violence
No film
with James Earl Jones and Robert Duvall can be a bad film, even though it is
hard to imagine them as long-lost half brothers. I agree with Martin and Porter
that Irma P. Hall as Jones� aunt nearly steals the film (347), which may go to show
that fine acting covers up a lot of loose edges in the script. An average film.
�ZEBRAHEAD� 1992, 102 minutes, R for profanity, violence, and sexual
situations
This
low-budget film is about a Jewish boy and a Black girl in inner-city Detroit
who find themselves in a state of lust. Zebrahead is intriguing. It is filled
with profanity, modern music, and symbolism. The story will hold your students� interest, but the ending of the
film may be seen as confusing rather than ambiguous. At least one character - a
middle-class Black militant- is not only hopelessly stereotypical, he isn�t even given a name.
�MISSISSIPPI BURNING� 1988, 125 minutes, R for language
and brutal violence
I am more
forgiving than most when it comes to historical inaccuracies in historical
films. Some academics� criticisms seem pedantic to me. But the criticisms of �Mississippi Burning� seem on target. This film was very
popular with both film critics and moviegoers. But Robert Rosenstone, an
historian of film, notes that the movie marginalizes Blacks and makes heroes
out of an FBI which acted very slowly when three civil rights workers were
murdered in 1963. Visions of the Past (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1995), pp. 72-73.
Obviously
I am convinced that films are very useful in teaching about ethnicity and race.
But what about historical and sociological inaccuracies? Doesn�t Hollywood present a false reality
that may actually miseducate rather than enlighten?
Sometimes
this charge is completely valid. Sometimes this charge is not valid at all.
Most of the time this charge is partially valid.
How
do we, first as viewers and then as teachers, determine validity? First we see
the film, next we read the critiques, and finally we may do research of our
own. Then we decide if the film is appropriate for our students. If so, we may
still come up with a few disclaimers - or we may require our students to do
research to discover their own disclaimers.
Minor
disclaimers usually involve minor errors of fact. For example, Professor David
Brion Davis, Pulitzer Prize winning historian at Yale University, lectured to
our film seminar on the Amistad affair on May 26, 1998. When asked about the
movie �Amistad�, his minor disclaimers were that �Men didn�t wear beards� and �People didn�t ride bicycles.� If these were �Amistad�s� only inaccuracies, the film would
be home free as far as I�m concerned. While historical errors should not be excused
completely, it is unrealistic to expect Hollywood directors and screenwriters
to meet professional standards of scholarly accuracy.
Professor
Davis made another, more far-reaching criticism. He said that �Amistad� grossly underrepresented the racism
found in the Northern United States in 1839. This is a major disclaimer, an important
topic for critical discussion.
Note
that the major disclaimer is not merely a question of an error of fact. It
involves an error of omission, a question of emphasis. These types of errors
are much more important than the inevitable minor historical and sociological
errors which crop up in all films.
Documentary
filmmakers must be especially aware of questions of emphasis. Ken Burns, our
leading documentary filmmaker today, was criticized for focusing too much on
the battlefield in The Civil War. A rather obscure general received fifteen
minutes screen time for successfully defending a hill during the Battle of
Gettysburg. Frederick Douglass, the great abolitionist leader, received four
minutes of screen time. I am one of those who sees this as nearly a sacrilege.
Mr.
Burns took some of the criticism rather hard. But he listened to his critics.
His epic �Baseball� place greater emphasis on matters
of wide societal, rather than baseball, significance. The Negro Leagues, Jackie
Robinson, and the other Black baseball pioneers received three hours of screen
time, which I believe reflects the tremendous importance of baseball
segregation and eventual integration.
Of
course baseball purists attacked Burns. An irate caller to WFAN in New York
ranted and raved about the disproportionate amount of time given Robinson,
implying that this came at the expense of Stan Musial, who was merely a blip in
the fourteen hour documentary. The caller kept reading from baseball�s record book, which he claimed
proved Musial was a better player than Robinson.
The
caller may have been right about Robinson and Musial�s playing abilities (actually it is
a close call), but it was Ken Burns, not the caller, who made the right call.
Jackie Robinson is the most significant historical figure in baseball history.
Musial has virtually no wide historical significance, although he may be the
best left fielder of all time.
I
am not going to draw the line between minor and major errors, because this is
an extremely subjective undertaking. I do like the line drawn by Robert A.
Rosenstone in Visions of the Past. He acknowledges that there will be a certain
amount of invention in all historical films. He goes on to distinguish between
true and false invention, asking only that historical films not violate the
overall data and meanings of what we already know of the past.(79) This may be
a relaxed standard, but it is a sensible one when we evaluate films to
determine if they are suitable for our students. We can�t expect filmmakers to be academic
researchers, although we can expect them to use academics as consultants when
it is necessary. But we certainly have a right to expect filmmakers not to
alter or embellish the past to gain viewers.
Books:
1.Ebert,
Roger. Roger Ebert�s Video Home Companion and pocket Video Guide (Kansas City:
Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1997).
2.
Martin, Mick and Porter, Marsha. Video Movie Guide 1998 (New York: Ballantine
Books, 1997).
3.
Rosenstone, Robert A. Visions of the Past (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1995).
4.
Sowell, Thomas. Ethnic America (New York: Basic Books, 1981).
1. �Amistad� (1997).
2.
�Avalon� (1990).
3.
�Baseball� (1994).
4.
�Boyz N The Hood� (1991).
5.
�A Bronx Tale� (1993).
6.
�The Civil War� (1990).
7.
�The Color Purple� (1985).
8.
�Do the Right Thing� (1989).
9.
�Driving Miss Daisy� (1989).
10.
�A Family Thing� (1996).
11.
�Far and Away� (1992).
12.
�Guess Who�s Coming to Dinner� (1967).
13.
�Hoop Dreams� (1994).
14.
�Jungle Fever� (1991).
15.
�The Long Walk Home� (1991).
16.
�Malcolm X� (1992).
17.
�Mi Familia� (1995).
18.
�A Raisin in the Sun� (1961).
19
�A Raisin in the Sun� (1988).
20.
�Rosewood� (1997).
21.
�A Time to Kill� (1996).
22.
�Zebrahead� (1992).
Posts
