"No Country For Old Men"

The past couple of weeks I have been watching all of the past, Best Picture Oscar winners I had never gotten the chance to see. This week I watched No Country for Old Men. Set in Texas, this dark and violent film focuses on three men, interweaving their stories intricately together.

Javier Bardem plays Anton Chigurh, a psychopathic Mexican killer in pursuit of Llewelyn Moss, played by Josh Brolin. Though Anton's upper lip is void of a mustache, I would argue that his character is more or less a watered down version of the classic Latino stereotype, the greaser. Throughout the movie Anton murders no less then five people in a brutal inhumane way. This in itself, is reinforcing the myth that Hispanics and Latinos are violent in nature. Unfortunately the directors gave no back story as to why he had become this way which would have been helpful in piecing together his violent character. The film did little to individualize Anton's character and instead grouped him into the classic stereotype many of us thought to be gone.

Llewlyn Moss, portrayed by Josh Brolin, is a hunter who just happens to stumble upon a stash of two million dollars. Though Josh is not of Hispanic descent, the makeup used and his character's accent imply that he has a Mexican heritage. Llewlyn is a much less violent character then the average greaser stereotype shown in films but I would say his role still reinforces violence and greed as being common among Latinos and Hispanics. Unlike Anton, Llewlyn is much more individualized and is given a little bit of back story. Perhaps this is because a white man, (Josh Brolin), is portraying a Hispanic, much like the early filmmakers did using the technique called "blackface", to portray African Americans. One thing to note though, is that Llewlyn is actually the one who ends up dying in the film, while Anton roams free. An interesting twist that doesn't line up to the classical way a movie should end where the, "other" character, dies.

The last of the three men involved is Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, played by Tommy Lee Jones. Sheriff Ed is the "white" man of the group. His role in the movie seems very insignificant and his screen time is very low, compared to the other two protagonists yet his story seems to be the most important of the three. We as the audience are told why he became a sheriff, and are given a significant account of his life story to identify with the "good" guy. It seems Hollywood still hasn't realized that movie audiences are of mixed race and ethnicity.

One last thing to note is the fact that Javier Bardem won Best Supporting Actor in the 2007 Oscars for his role as Anton. He is the first Spanish actor to ever win an Oscar, which is a huge accomplishment. But I wonder if he would have won had he played, say, the sheriff character? If he had not portrayed a stereotypical role would the judges of the Oscars look at him differently? Just something to think about.

Sources: Picture taken from Google Images

Directing. A Mans Job?

In the article Patriarchy, Allan G. Johnson wrote this. "When we routinely refer to human beings as "man" or to doctors as "he", we construct a symbolic world in which men are in the foreground and women in the background, marginalized as outsiders and exceptions to the rule."

It's interesting for me to think about how we perceive certain words and assume that their gender is male. When I told some of my co-workers that I had gotten to meet the director of "Humpday", every single one of them responded with, "Wow! Who is HE?". Or, "What was HE like?". Even some of my female friends asked this, assuming that only men make movies. Of course the word, director, has been genderized in such a way that, when used we, as Americans, automatically think of a man.


According to history, women have had a large role in film making. In our textbook, America on Film, by Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin, it reads, "film historians credit Alice Guy- Blache as the first to tell a fictional narrative on film." (pg. 224) Funny how the first person to set the standard for most modern Hollywood films would be a women.


During the early 1900's there were many other women involved not only in directing film but also in other parts of the business. Lois Weber, Anita Loos and Frances Marion are just a few of the women behind the scenes in classical Hollywood. America on Film states, "many researchers now estimate about half of all the films made in the United States during the 1910s and 1920s were written by women." Quite an impressive number seeing as women were treated quite differently then.

This year, 2010, we have seen yet another huge step toward women becoming famous behind the camera and not just in front of it. Kathryn Bigelow won Best Director Oscar this year for her film, "The Hurt Locker." She is indeed the first women to win Best Director, and only the fourth women to be nominated. It's a really small number seeing as the Oscars have been going on for 82 years! When asked in an interview with The Wrap, whether she was ready for this historical moment, Bigelow replied, "First of all, I hope I’m the first of many."

So why has this career as a director taken on a male persona? The answer to that is easy, patriarchy. But will we ever be able to break away from these ideologies so ingrained in our minds? What would this mean for us?

Sources: America on Film: Representing Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality at the Movies by Harry M. Benshoff and Sean Griffin
Patriarchy by Allan G. Johnson
Picture of Alice Guy- Blache from BBC.co.uk

Clash of the Titans, A Masculine Disaster

I recently had the unfortunate pleasure of watching Clash of the Titans, Warner Bros. latest box office hit. For those of you who didn't know, this is indeed a remake of the classic 1981 film with the same title. This male dominated movie is nothing more then a bunch of guys killing things and shouting corny one liners to each other.

-WARNING SPOILERS-

Sam Worthington, of James Cameron's "Avatar", plays Perseus a demigod, (half man, half god), trying to discover who he is. Early on in the film the audience learns that Perseus is indeed the bastard son of Zeus, the king of the gods.

Zeus, portrayed by Liam Neeson, is a "god", whose persona is very much what we view in our society today as manly or masculine. Within the first fifteen minutes of the film, he plans to "punish" the humans for their lack of worship towards them. With little council to any of the few female gods, or any of the other gods for that matter, Zeus decides to destroy the human's most precious city, Argos. Though the human race is not necessarily a female person, per say, Zeus does this to establish his dominance and gain the love of the humans once more. This idea of gaining love by violent means is a dangerous and usually unsuccessful way to do so, yet it is an idea that is still instilled in a lot of the media that we consume. Martin Luther King Jr. put it bluntly, "Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars... Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."

Perseus, our protagonist, is much like the strong action hero that began to get famous in the 80's. He's ripped, sexy, and can beat the crap out of anything. Though he wears a skirt through most of the film, his traditional masculinity is not questioned. He shows no emotion accept anger and hate towards the gods who killed his human family. Even when his love interest, Lo, (a demigod like himself) is killed brutally onscreen, the only emotion shown is that of anger which in turn leads to revenge. Can "real" men not cry, or show any type of sympathy? Apparently not in the mythological, patriarchal realm where this story unfolds. It seems in order for one to be considered masculine he must possess strength, be bent on revenge and care only for himself.

Although this movie did have its moments, it suffered greatly due to what I would like to call, the "dude factor" aka the hyper-masculinity. The few female characters involved in the plot are either love interests or villains who end up being killed, once again establishing male dominance and supporting the idea that women are to be seen and not heard.