Film Synthesis: Image of Politics, Economics and Society - Essay Example

Film Synthesis: Image of Politics, Economics and Society Film is considered to be one of the breakthroughs in the field of technology and the arts. What seems to be unique about it is its capacity to integrate all art forms: theatre, music, photography and the like. In terms of subject matter, films have encompassed almost the economic and socio – political conditions of a society where a film is made. It may have a general approach or a specific one. There are even cases that films serve as a propaganda tool to reinforce the status quo or to break the problematic paradigm of social discord. In terms of criticism, this has been common that people would always look into the contextual premises of the production and perception of the film. This definitely gives light and a deeper discussion of the matters present in film. Two films that I shall discuss in this paper are the “Spirit of the Beehive” and the “Bicycle Thieves.” Both films are considered to be rich in socio – political and economic messages. At the same time, there will be a synthetic analysis of both the films in terms of the content. To further amplify the discussion in this paper, certain film elements like the camera angle, music and movement shall be assessed in connection with the aforementioned messages. In the film “Spirit of the Beehive”, the political context seems to be in a problematic condition. The camera has shown how a child tries to struggle between the social conditions that beset her and other people. At a very young age, it can be seen, through the lens of the camera, that the child is having a questioning of her own status. With a melancholic music, her curiosity is amplified about why such an old person is allowed to suffer in a lonely and deserted place. As the characters interact, the sharing of experience about how life is difficult already signals how things are in a despicable condition. Most of the time, there are several cuts and editing that happened to employ the political message but there is continuity present (Butler 2005, p. 24). In terms of economics, it is seen clearly, that the barren houses, deserted landscape and candle lights are already manifestations of uneven economic development. Also, the richness of honey coming from the bees, are signs of richness and hard work by the old man in the film. The camera, focused on the man, upon doing the chores on the bees and the capturing the acts of the bees, strengthen further the need to work harder and taking care of resources that can help one’s condition in a society. This is considered a long shot, with no editing or camera intervention (Butler 2005, p. 22). This enhanced the economic problem and conditions. At the same time, the lighting in the room where bees exist is another crucial element to reify the complexity of economic status (Butler 2005, p. 29). In terms of politics, one element in the film that cannot be neglected is the power relations between the student and the teacher. The domination of the teacher in the discussion in class is a sign of a repression and fear that the teacher can emanate and felt by the students. The way the students do not want to engage in class participation and discussion is already a manifestation of political turmoil. This can have a parallelism of the way the government tries to manipulate people instead of serving the people in all aspects of possible. To connect things further, the setting and the spaces also contribute to the enhancement of the political, social and economic content of the film. This is one of the key elements of mise – en – scene (Butler 2005, p. 21). One must not neglect that the spaces of the cinema interact to ensure that the political, economic and social problems will be felt by the characters and the viewer. For the political space, the classroom is already a manifestation of clashes when it comes to power, manipulation and control. Analytically, this relates to the space of the barren land. A possible reading would emanate that political conflict and competition would only yield problematic effects and problems for the people: making people astray, no food to eat and the society unproductive. Economics then involves the loss of potential income which integrates with the society where an individual must secure his or her safety while competing for survival. Time is a crucial element in this case since the narrative manner of the film enhances the mise – en –scene of the the film (Colman 2009, p. 9). In totality of this film, it can be seen that the political, economic and social conditions transcends from the individual up to the society. How is this similar to that of the film “Bicycle Thieves”? In a general sense, the “Bicycle Thieves” has more images that open up political, social and economic discourses which are more evident in comparison with the “Spirit of the Beehive.” In terms of political context, the camera has taken the acts of policemen who are abusive in the film. These policemen have engaged in oppressive acts. There are cases where policemen just took bikes from the makers of it without just compensations. Abuse of power is manifested. Upon its exposition by the camera, there is a need to carefully assess what are the predicaments of society that has something to do with the abuse of power. This is just a small aspect in contrast with the larger composition of it. The individuals, who have become victims, have no choice but to comply instead of getting hurt. In this political problem, economic issues emerge. Most of the abuses come from getting bicycles from the maker which are paid at an unreasonable price. This is evident in the way that the camera shot the event of getting and giving money. The characters have been resistant about the amount and there are characters who want to chase those abusive policemen for the sake of economic safety. The music, like the shouting and other musical accompaniment are enhancers of contextual reading of the film (Stam, Burgoyne, Flitterman – Lewis 1992, p. 58). The very act of chasing and resistance is a sign that the victims aspire for a just and humane treatment. In terms of social context, one cannot deny that the setting of the film is already a manifestation of the problematic condition. The people in the cinema are confined to spaces which are uncomfortable, small and underdeveloped. These are all taken by the camera by certain angles which may be neglected by the viewer upon seeing due to the focus of the camera to the characters. It may be glimpses but must not be neglected. This still contributes to the enhancement of the social contents of the film. Also, the characters are experience the problems in their everyday life. Living in such a place that cannot yield comfort even if it is the home already shows how saddening the situation about it is. To a certain extent, almost all of the other characters who are living the same lifestyle experience the same social problem and inequality. In terms of the spaces as part of the mise – en – scene, all the spaces interact once again to reinforce the messages that are oftentimes overlooked in film. The political aspect of the film meets with the socio – economic. Synthetically, the political abuses affected the manner of economic activity. The effects become problematic since it escalated to the social contexts. The camera has been keen and sharp in capturing the oppressive moments as highlighted in the previous paragraphs. Also, the music just enhances the dramatic content seen in the suffering and oppression that the people in the film have experienced. Even the editing that allowed the transitioning of one oppressive event to the other is another amplifier of the conflicting aspects present in the film. Upon seeing the technicalities that involved the film, I shall to provide synthetic and analytical approaches in further understanding the complexity of socio – political and economic discourses present in both films. In the political context, both of the films have their own modes of political discourses. However, both of the films are focusing on the use of power, which can have positive or negative effects depending on how the people who possesses it utilize it. In the “Spirit of the Beehive”, politics is more evident on how people are affected by the order of things and hierarchical conditions present. On the other hand, “Bicycle Thieves” focuses on how people who are in the position use it to abuse and make people follow suit in accordance with their interests. In both films, personal interests can be seen as the pre – cursor of the problematic use of power. Economically, both films are emphasizing how things are problematic the living conditions of people when it comes to business activities. In the “Spirit of the Beehive”, honey is the source of income that can be seen. In the film, there is a moment where there is abundance at the start. As the film progressed, there are even moments where there is no more honey left and the bees are the one that just play in the light of the room. In the “Bicycle Thieves”, bicycles serve as the source of income. In the film, the process of production is evident and it serves as the source of income for the people. However, these are the ones that have been abused by society. In both films, it is obvious that economic activities are in problematic states. In terms of the social conditions, both films are depicting social turmoil as seen in the landscapes of the film. In the “Spirit of the Beehive”, the deserted farmland signifies a neglected part of the society; a place that progress is not able to get in touch with. The “Bicycle Thieves”, on the other hand, emphasizes a place where progress exist but not all experience the benefit that it has to offer. Both films emphasize how progress does not fully integrate everyone and only a few people benefit from what it can offer. This is saddening due to the fact that society, no matter how advance, does not embody the advancement needed by everyone. There seems to be neglect. Synthetically, how does the films message affect the modern society? Film techniques like the montage, mise – en – scene and music emphasized how the characters made the viewer feel struggle present in the films. However, one that must not be neglected is how the viewer will process the message, which can be considered criticisms of the directors towards the society they belong into or to the whole world in a general and universal sense. Film, as an art, embodies a cultural system (Geertz 1976, p. 1475). This is already an assertion of how art becomes a critique and an embodiment of the social structure where it is confined. In these cases, the films served as an exposition of the predicaments of society. Both have asserted how people, who have the political power, manipulate the economic status of the society. In the facets of the current world, the industries before may have been the industries that still exist now; maintaining their dominion over the world through amassing huge wealth at the cost of injustices in terms of labour and policies. These are evident in the films where honey came in shortage while bicycles are not paid in a reasonable amount. Possibly, personal political interests are also evident in films. Most of the time, the main characters are acting on their own accord and quite individualistic. Analytically, this can be seen how people pursue personal interest to ensure safety and comfort in a world or society that does not show much concern for everyone. This would rectify the fact that people who control the social order are the ones who would experience the best things. Another condition to scrutinize is that the individualist conditions will not guarantee a change in the status quo. This is indeed problematic because it is safe to assume that if majority of the people cooperate in changing the society, then the messages of that the films carry will materialize and more relevant. In the end, one must understand that these films can be agents of change. However, concrete actions must be implemented. The camera may be good in presenting ideas and concepts through film. Nevertheless, a critical eye is important in understanding the importance the messages these films raise. Films can be propaganda tools to change and reinforce a social order. This is a matter of how one must engage the film rigorously. This is a matter of showing compliance with a condition that cannot be deemed beneficial or defiance to change things to for the better. This nature of film already extends to the political, social, and economic discourses. Politics is not just a matter of power relations. This is a matter of setting up things in order in society. This would be a toss – up where power can affect everyone in a particular society. It can be good or bad depending on how one would use and manage the power responsibly and sensibly for the sake of advancement and progress. This emphasizes how films excruciate the contentious points about politics. Economics, an area that has been concerned on how money is regulated and how financial activities are implemented, is also concerned with the power play. This determines how one will place himself or herself in the society in terms of income and capacity for survival in a society that is ambivalent and vulnerable to shifting paradigms; depending on the stability of the market and economic activity. The films are showing the shifts which are commendable. Society, in the midst of economic and political conditions, is the one that is gravely affected and portrayed by the films. The discord present in society as highlighted by film emphasizes how things are not managed properly to ensure a humane and just condition for the people. This would only justify that society will always be in command of how things will happen in our society. Nevertheless, both films emphasized the need to be concerned and aware of how things are problematic and harsh for everyone due to severe clashes when it comes to power, economic activity and social command. These films are wake up call to be agents of change so that things will be in order and right for everyone to enjoy. REFERENCES Butler, A 2005. Film Studies, Cox and Wyman, Great Britain. Colman, F 2009. Film, Theory and Philosophy, Mc-Gill – Queens University Press, Montreal. Stam, R, Burgoyne R, & Flitterman – Lewis S, 1992. New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics, Routledge, New York. Geertz, C, 1976. ‘Art as Cultural System’, MLN vol. 91. No. 6, pp. 1473 – 1499. Read More