Censorship Essay 1

Censorship Essay 1

[Student’s Name:]

[Institution’s Name:]

Censorship Essay 1

Since the advent of movies in America in 1896, people have criticized the content in films, which they found undesirable or inappropriate as per their preferences. This criticism has been made by individuals as well as institutions. In 1934, Joseph Breen was appointed by Will Hays as the Head of the Production Code Administration (PCA). All the films produced afterward were liable to follow the film production code of the authority. The script was sent to the PCA prior to the production and after the film had been completed, the display of the code seal was necessary in the film.

PCA’s Main Concerns for “High Sierra”

The film, High Sierra, ran in theatres in 1941. Before the film had to undergo the production process, the script of the film was sent to the Production Code Administration for approval. The PCA replied and identified their main causes of concern regarding the script of the film (High Sierra, 2019). They objected the portrayal of the film’s lead character, Roy Earle, which was to be played by the rising star of that era named Humphrey Bogart. They expressed that the character would be shown to be a hero before the audience, whereas it was a totally negative character. The script was written in a way to promote the character with heroic traits and attributes so that the audience can enjoy the strength and impact of the character to the full extent. It was reinforced by manly characteristics that can only be demonstrated by a real hero. The dialogues given to him were like that of a hero. The hero of the film was glamorized to the degree that it was quite possible to be followed as an ideal by the audience, or it might have had strong impact on the behaviors of the viewers who would get inspired by the character. The climax also included a victory of the hero. All the script was dedicated to exemplify the film’s protagonist.

On the contrary, the character was negative from start to end of the story. He continued to kill a number of persons during the course of the film. He did all these killings with brutality. He escaped from jail in the beginning of the film and met an old gangster named Big Mac. Big Mac had planned a robbery at a hotel in California. The hotel was situated in Tropico Springs, a fictional place in California, which served as a resort. A long part of the film was to be devoted to his journey for making the robbery. On his way to Tropico Springs, he met with other gangsters to form a group of gangsters for achieving their task. On the way, he fell in love with a girl, Velma, who was engaged already. When Roy failed to win her love, he returned to Marie, the girl who wished to marry him since a long time. The weakness of his character can be sensed by the transition of his love from one girl to another without delay. He did not need more time to forget the previous love of his life.

The climax of the film was also objectionable to the censor authority, as it clearly violated their code of films (Doherty, Doherty, 2007). A character that is entirely negative was fortuned to escape at the end of the film, with all the money he had stolen. This was justified by the death of Big Mac, the boss of the hero, when he is approached by the hero near the end of the story. The character of Roy Earle was written in this manner because that was an era when hard-boiled fiction was in great demand to be selected for action or crime films. This kind of portrayal of a gangster was in demand in that time. The censor authority of that time imposed restrictions on the film producers to show this kind of story in their project. They asked the film producers to change the climactic script of the film. They demanded that the protagonist should get the due punishment at the climax so that the audience would remember the film only as a piece of visual entertainment. They might not keep this film saved in their memory such as it could have negative psychological effect on their decisions. They demanded to alter the climactic scene such that the hero would die or get sentenced for a life-long imprisonment.

The PCA further suggested to reduce the length of the action sequences. They asked the film production unit to remove certain scenes from the film to be made. These scenes include extensive chasing of the protagonist carried out by the police department and the successful escaping of him at all times. The lead character was to be played by the protagonist in his thirties. This was a very concerning element for the PCA. They did not want to allow that at any cost. A gangster in his thirties was to be made the hero of the film. It was not the only cause of concern regarding this particular aspect of the film. The producers had an intention to glamorize this character by enriching it with style, dialogues, and cinematography. The censor authority demanded the production unit to remove the attractive features of the character from the script.

PCA’s Comments w.r.t. the Social Context of the Movie

The Production Code Administration’s comments were in accordance with the social and cultural contexts of the movie. That period of history was characterized by the traditional norms, which had been followed by people for centuries. The regulatory authorities of that time were inclined in maintaining the course of traditions and keeping people on the same paths. They did not want to cause any disruptions in the society by their decisions. The character of hero was against the cultural and social ideals of that time. Although time was changing and the new trends were arising, yet the sudden change of behaviors and attitudes needed to be discouraged. That is why the censor board demanded for the changes in the script as detailed above.

Response of the Studio to the PCA’s Comments

The studio received more than forty suggestions from the censor authority, and they responded to the authority with reasoning. They tried their best to justify the sequences of the film, and get approval of the script. They stressed the need of the film sequence to add such kind of material. The impact of the character could not be created sufficiently until the character would not have power. They asserted that the glamorization was necessary for the desired build-up of the thematic content of film. The film sequences could not articulate in absence of the projected elements.

Realization of the PCA’s Suggestions in the Film

The film production unit followed the instructions given by the Production Code Administration, but not to the full extent. They did not follow almost half of the instructions. However, they somehow succeeded to convince the authority to give them release permit. They changed the portrayal of the protagonist to the required level, by deglamorizing the character. The hero was then shown as a mediocre gangster. His image was changed from a high profile villain of the story to an ordinary villain who did not possess enough power to inspire large folks of the audiences. The film was, therefore, categorized as film noir, and it lacked the expensive sets as compared to the mainstream movie sets (Dinerstein, 2008).

The producers did not follow the PCA’s comments in filming the action sequences. They did not reduce the length of the chasing scenes. The climactic scene of the film was kept the same way as had been mentioned in the script. The action sequences created the impact on the audience opposite to that preferred by the censor authority. The public was touched very much by the performance of Humphrey Bogart, and the film proved to be an important milestone in his career, eventually causing him to be cast in major film projects later.

The climax of the scene was altered as per the PCA’s comments. Since it was a serious issue, the writer changed the script by ending the film with the pathetic death of the hero. He had been left alone as the other members of his gang have been targeted by the police except his final lover, Marie, whom he had helped in escaping. Roy was followed by police in the mountains of Sierra. He was shot dead from behind by a professional shooter, when he tried to run calling ‘Marie’ repeatedly. The film had a tragic end and the audience was moved by the scene. However, the impact was emotional rather than being inspirational.

A Contemporaneous Review of the Film

The film was received well by critiques. One of the reviews critiqued the film for creating such negative character in film (Kracauer, 1942). He exclaimed regretfully for the selection of these types of scripts by the film production companies. He remarked the portrayal of protagonist as causing anxiety and distress. The theme of the story was condemnable in his point of view. The character stood on the weaknesses of human beings that could not be promoted anyway. The heist carried out by the group of gangsters had no reason to be justified. The love triangle could have provoked illegitimate intimacy behaviors in the viewers.

The critique’s reading of the film was almost the same as that of the censor board. He criticized the film company for violating the code. No company could deviate the instructions given by the film censor board. He was also surprised on the seal given to the Studio for completing the project. He could not understand why the film censor authority approved the project. Such permissions could alleviate the PCA’s control over the film ethical issues.

Conclusion

The Production Code Administration regulated the film production projects by commenting on the scripts prior to the commencement of the projects and after the completion of the film as well. They had developed a document that was used as a standard and reference for evaluating the film’s social, cultural, and ethical effects. The censor authority criticized any sensitive, immoral, explicit, or violent elements in a film, which could affect the audience and cause anxiety to them. The film, High Sierra, also faced criticism by the PCA. The Studio responded to the authority with moderate changes to the script and by altering the final scene of the film. The reason for which the Studio got permission for the release of the film was the deglamorization of the lead character. They were not supposed to get the seal otherwise. However, the filming of action scenes was not altered as per the PCA’s comments. The project was a commercial success and proved to be categorized as the classic film noir later. The film was in accordance with the audience demand in spite of being contradictory with the social and cultural values.

Works Cited

HIGH SIERRA, 1941:: Motion Picture Association of America. Production Code Administration records. (2019). Digitalcollections.oscars.org. Retrieved 2 October 2019, from http://digitalcollections.oscars.org/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p15759coll30/id/5519/rec/6

Doherty, T., & Doherty, T. P. (2007). Hollywood's censor: Joseph I. Breen & the production code administration. Columbia University Press.

Dinerstein, J. (2008). “Emergent Noir”: Film Noir and the Great Depression in High Sierra (1941) and This Gun for Hire (1942). Journal of American Studies, 42(3), 415-448.

Kracauer, S. (1942). ROSTEN, LEO C.," Hollywood, the Movie Colony-The Movie Makers"(Book Review). Social Research, 9(1), 282.