Okay friends of Tom Knight, these are the first two paragraphs of my media studies coursework looking at the representation of the heroes in British gang films. What I would appreciate more than anything are your honest opinions and criticisms so I can make productive changes and learn for the future. Don’t be afraid to be completely honest, but try not to be abusive because that's just crass, unnecessary and not in the spirit of Blighty! Enjoy!
*Note* I am aware of many spelling mistakes in this, I’m dyslexic, I try my best so don’t worry about pointing out those kind of things.
Representation of the hero in British gang films
Films: Snatch (2000) Get Carter (1971) The Italian job (1969)
The British gang film differentiates its self from the American gang film by its difference of context. The British gang film is usually set in the grimy under world of crime, the meise en scene usually reflects this through use of Grey lighting, dank whether and grey buildings along with the use of the stars looking shabby. The American gang films usually focus on the ‘glamours’ Italian-American mafia culture with bright lights, the big city, flash cars and clean cut stars. British gang films are made in this way to give a sense of realism to them and to help audiences align with them. Bulmer and Katz (1974) outlined four different readings that the audience can get from said text, and the uses and gratifications they can get from them: Diversion - escape from everyday problems and routine. Personal Relationships - using the media for emotional and other interaction. Personal Identity - finding yourself reflected in texts, learning behaviour and values from texts. Surveillance - Information which could be useful for living eg) weather reports, financial news, holiday bargains
I feel that these readings can all be found In the texts I have chosen for different reasons by different people, this brings the idea of, Marxist cultural theorist, Stuart Hall’s ‘preferred reading’ argument. This is outlined by Brian McFarlane’s study of the Italian Job, he says: “The Italian Job (1969) is really a war film…Not a lot of people know that”[1] McFarlane goes onto talk about how it’s a “’Special operation’ behind enemy lines” and how “it is the responsibility of a daring, diverse but disciplined group of comrades with a charismatic leader”. This is not a preferred reading of the text; it is portrayed as an oppositional reading by McFarlane stating “If there remains any doubt that The Italian Job is a war movie in disguise it should be dispelled”. Not only does this give us a different reading to the text, but also our first glimpse at the representation of the hero, when McFarlane describes Michael Cain’s character, Charlie Croker, as the “Charismatic leader”. What I think is that the word ‘hero’ isn’t really relevant in any gang film, ‘anti-hero’ is much more appropriate because, when it comes down to it, the leads are the baddies in society. Shown in the Italian Job in the first scene with Croker coming out of Jail, this clearly marks him as a social villain, yet in the film all the women want him, all the men want to be him. This scenario is reflected in the audience, the fact that a big screen, for the sake of this argument, villain is a cultural icon shows that the representation of the ‘hero’, in this case at least, is a positive one, showing almost no down sides to a life of crime.
[1] McFarlane, Brian (2005) The cinema of Britain and Ireland p.145 (London: Mayflower press)
