Scene Compositon Exercising Dominance in "Network"

A particular scene in "Network" that I gravitated towards was the scene where Ned Beatty's character Arthur Jensen delivers a speech to Peter Finche's character Howard Beale. There were two things about this scene that I noted. First, the lighting. Jensen makes a point to close the shades behind him, to in part, impose higher authority over Beale to influence him. Jensen is the most lit in the room and Beale is cowering in shadow to demonstrate a shift in dominance. Second, I noted the language used in the scene. It's on an astronomical level, where Beale had been speaking from. Jensen condescends Beale by out doing Beale's religious zeal with his own, becoming the face of God to Beale. Watch this scene and take note of these two factors. Also, in addition to the lighting and language, the composition of the room and placement of the actors is significant as well. Beale sits at the end of the table closest to the entrance, while Jensen stands deep in the room across the large table, all the way on the other end. His speech is allowed to echo through the room. Everything builds towards Jensens dominance over Beale in this scene. You can view the scene here.

The Parallax View and Network

The Parallax View was a cinematically intriguing film, full of drawn-out suspenseful shots that make the viewer experience the same paranoia the characters are experiencing. This film always kept me guessing and never gave too much away. I also appreciated the contrast in its use of sound--how it would shift from a loud action scene to a serene quiet scene with little warning. The brainwashing scene was especially impressive and thought-provoking. Here is an interesting explanation of the "Incredible Montage."

While I found Parallax to be a better quality film, I found Network to be more journalistically relevent. It certainly had a lot to say about the corruption of the media. Like Ace in the Hole, Network portrays the media as harsh and unforgiving, using people merely as subjects of their own profit rather than viewing them as real human-beings. Over and over, Max tries to convince the network that Howard needs medical and psychological help. In the end, the network kills Howard for their own gain just as Chuck Tatum killed Leo in Ace in the Hole. This seems to be a common theme in films about the media; rarely is it portrayed favorably.

Network

I think that in 2011, it is a perfect time to watch a film like Network. Our current socioeconomic conditions are fairly similar to the 1970’s (gas prices, the middle east, recession, loss of trust in the govt) and our broadcast journalism has only gotten worse since the advent of 24-hour cable news. Every media message is constructed, now more than ever. Every TV journalist has an angle, whether it’s an agenda, ratings, visibility, etc. In the 70’s TV was still new, so it was easier for the people in the film to have an idea of the effect that television was having on people (a negative one, in the screenwriters opinion). Today, TV is so interwoven into all aspects of society that we are almost too far in the forest to see the trees. It’s hard for us to have any perspective on a life without TV, or the pacification of the public that has taken place because of our TV obsession. I think if this film was made today the famous line would be “I’m mad, but ill keep taking it so long as the office and sportscenter are on when I’m bored!”…or something like that.

Network and The Parallax View

Network and The Parallax View are two very different films which convey very different messages.

Network

Network is a highly exaggerated look into a failing broadcasting network (UBS), and what its higher-ups are willing to do in order to get back on top of the ratings. It begins by looking at news anchor Howard Beale. The head of the news and journalism branch of UBS, Max Schumacher, was keen on adhering to traditional journalistic values, and made every effort to do so on all UBS news programs, including Howard Beale's. Due to the failing ratings of the news division and the influence of Diana Chistensen (who was later put in charge of most of UBS' programming), Howard and Max received news that they were to be fired. Traditional journalistic values were done away with in order to bring about higher ratings. On what were to be his last shows, Howard began to rant and rave in anger. Diana sought to exploit this as people were tuning in to see Howard's ludicrousness. This progressed into a seeming endless downward spiral progressing further and further away from the values Max represented to the ruthless "Whatever Sells" attitude of Diana. Howard's ratings eventually began to fall. The film ends with Diana and her colleagues discussing what to do about these failing ratings. They conclude that the best approach is to assassinate Beale and use the footage on one of their other shows. Though a complete exaggeration, Network shows that there is more to reporting the news than journalistic values. There is a corporate ratings machine to contend with, and one must wonder, "To what extent are networks willing to compromise traditional values in order to maintain ratings?"

The Parallax View

This film tells the story of reporter Joseph Frady, and his investigation into the Parallax corporation. The evidence he has gathered indicates that this corporation is involved in a greater conspiracy to shape the outcomes of political races by seeking out individuals with aggressive tendencies to carry out assassinations. The film begins with the murder of a senator, and years later those who witnessed this murder were being picked off one by one. Joseph begins to realize that these murders, though portrayed as occurring by natural or unaided means,are being controlled by some greater force. Through his investigation, Joseph realizes that the greater force controlling these deaths is the Parallax Corporation. He then seeks out employment in this corporation in order to infiltrate their ranks to further his investigation. The movie ends with Joseph being framed and killed for the assassination of a perspective senator by the corporation he sought to undo.

Conspiracy Theories and Sensationalism

Network and The Parallax View look to be completely unrelated. One is about a corrupt network who kill a man for lousy ratings instead of getting him help, because he is quite obviously insane. The other is about an American senator's assassination at the hands of a very large and organized secret assassin's company. The ridiculousness of that last statement is a testament to America's love of a good conspiracy. But how are these things related? In the beginning of this year Representative Gabrielle Giffords was shot by a crazed gunman. Fortunately for her and 13 other people, the wounds were not fatal. 6 more were not so lucky. The assailant, Jared Loughner, was quite obviously insane and showed numerous signs of mental illness. It was obvious that he acted alone and carried out the deed in broad daylight in front of numerous witnesses. That didn't stop conspiracy theorists from trying to claim the whole thing didn't happen. What drives people to this edge? When 99% of America believes this is an event that happened, why do 1% hold to a falsehood? Sensationalism is the answer. The greatest of all sensationalists today (and thankfully, recently fired) is Glenn Beck. Dana Milbank, of The Washington Post, explains why Beck lost his job even though he is one of the most popular TV personalities on Fox. The entire time I was watching Howard Beale lose it in Network I kept thinking of Glenn Beck. They both have wildly popular shows and they both cater to an audience that is mad as hell. Like Beale, Beck encourages his audience to do something about it, but Beck caters to conspiracy theories and I believe in many cases, can inadvertently promote them. Beck uses a blackboard to connect all of the crazy ideas he has in his mind, and it worked for a while. He rode the fear wave that comes out of a post 9/11 and post economic-collapse world. But like Howard Beale he eventually became a liability for the controversial things he was saying. I'm just glad Fox didn't take the route that UBS did in Network. Sensationalism can easily lead to conspiracy theories, but that just might be a conspiracy theory of my own.

Network & Parallax View

Network

Aside from being lengthy and full of long-winded speeches (some of them quite memorable), I enjoyed this movie. William Holden was a breath of fresh air; a character with more than an ounce of morality. Faye Dunaway, although I couldnt stand her shallow character, embodied Diana Christensen flawlessly. I couldn't stop thinking about if TV was corrupt in the 70s...well what does TV say about our culture today?!

Parallax View

I COULD NOT STAND THIS MOVIE! I felt uncomfortable throughout the entire viewing, and seriously considered walking out. The only positive thing was the extraordinary photography and cinematography! Besides that, I completely lost track of the fact that Joe was a journalist. I think he came off as a wanna-be-detective or investigative agent. The depressing ending only reaffirmed my disgust in this film. Don't just take my word for it, when the film was released it didnt exactly get rave reviews from the NY Times either.

Photography makes it

The key to The Parallax View is in the photography. Every moment, every character connection and disconnection, every story, every emotion is in the way it's shot. The use of color separation, light and dark, angles, diagonal lines all support the message and story of the film. Plain and Simple.

http://www.filmreference.com/Writers-and-Production-Artists-Vi-Win/Willis-Gordon.html

The World Revolves around George Washington

The speech in Network about money being the center of our operating world really hit me as an all too true "natural order of things" (click to see the monologue on youtube). Another biting line from the film was when the middle aged man leaves the woman, making for a better story so they called it: "Dianna, everything you touch dies with you."


In The Parallax View, an interesting point from a cinamatographic view is when Robert talks business with a man about the possibility of sporatic serial killers attacking his friend group--on a choo-choo train.

Ace in the Hole

While a really enjoyed Ace In The Hole, both the performances as well as the cinematic choices, there were a couple points in the plot that left me scratching my head. The first issue for me was the sensational nature that the story took on so quickly. There was no real explanation of how his story goes from the Albuquerque Sun-Bulletin to the national radar. All of a sudden there are just thousands of people at the cave, wanting to hear the news. It went from one family going to see the caves to thousands of people and carnival rides very quickly. It seemed like they could have used some sort of explanation there, although it’s a small thing. The bigger thing that bothered me in the plot was the reality that Douglas’ character was able to keep any other newspaper from being reporting on the story from up close. Besides, even if those reporters couldn’t get up close doesn’t mean they couldn’t still write the story. If there’s anything I’ve learned about newspapermen through these films it’s that they are willing to do whatever they can to get the story they want. So, for me it was hard to believe that he could just keep them at bay. That being said, I really enjoyed the film. I thought that Kurt Douglas was very good and the last shot where he falls down dead right at the camera lens is exceptional.

Ace in the Hole

Toddi mentioned that the camera zooms up on the characters to create a sense of entrapment, which is clearly appropriate when a descent amount of film is taken from within a cave. Wilder's adventurous shots must have wowed audiences when it first came out.

Another interesting shot was when Charles claims he is taking over the small town newspaper (shot of Charles walking into the camera). When Charles is again that close to the camera he hits the ground, dead. Wilder seems to believe in the superiority complex going nowhere, that greed does not triumph truth.

Slant Magazine's review of Ace in the Hole spekas of the psychology of Charles , which is interestingly ironic--he has broken the rules of journalism yet clearly reprimands Lorraine for breaking mental bonds with her husband. Maybe he does not want Lorraine to like him because he himself doesn't even like him. This is evident when Charles reacts so strongly to Leo's diagnosis from the doctor--his face doubles over and he becomes more violent. Billy Wilder showed the slow death of Charles from the first day Charles picked one man's story over the crowd--when he put human interest before human life.

Ace in the Hole: Skewing Reality

From a strictly cinematic view, Ace in the Hole was my favorite film so far. I love its unexpected and non-cliché plot that shows an honest representation of the media and human nature, as unglamorous as it may be. The themes about journalism and the media were so beyond their time. Though Ace in the Hole deals with newspapers, it holds even more true today with reality shows and 24/7 television news. In fact, this film reminded me a lot of The Truman Show, a 1998 film about a man whose life has been completely manufactured for 24/7 public viewing, via the television. The audience in the The Truman Show, Ace in the Hole alike is ruthlessly consumed and infatuated with the media victim’s fate. The producer in The Truman Show is strikingly similar to Chuck Tatum in that they both will stop at nothing for a good story, no matter the pain and misery they inflict upon their subjects. In reality shows today, there is very little “reality,” just as the need for a week-long rescue mission of Leo wasn't reality. Though dramatized to an extent, I think Ace in the Hole portrayed the reality show/tabloid aspect of the media dead-on, especially for a film made in 1951.

Pocket Aces

This film made me feel like a terrible human being. And that is a good thing. Kirk Douglas plays this type of Han Solo character that you can't help but love and hate. Everytime he comes close to doing a good deed, he screws it up for his own personal gain, and we're left there clenching our fists wanting to yell at the screen and curse. It's difficult to even talk about this film in an educated way. Kirk Douglas made this what it is in my opinion. The charm and bite of a snake.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000018/

Ace In The Hole

Ace in the Hole is a fantastic film about one journalist's determination to extend a story as far as it can go. He does this with the purpose of getting back on top of the newspaper game. Unfortunately his actions cause the death of the protagonist of his article. I believe that director Billy Wilder was saying something about the power of media influence in this film. That the media can significantly influence the outcome of a story. For Kirk Douglas in Ace in the Hole, it was the creation of a media firestorm that resulted in a tent city. I know that the media has a great potential for doing good, alerting the public to an important situation, but I wanted to see if there was any case where media overexposure worked badly. A recent story that came to mind for me was the issue of Obama's birth certificate. It was proven long ago that Obama had a birth certificate, he was born in the U.S. and he has every right to be the president since he was elected democratically. But, even so, many people cried out for his birth certificate, especially Donald Trump. Every news channel picked up the controversy, but there was no controversy. It was already proven that Obama had it, but the firestorm forced him to release a long form birth certificate anyways. Should the media have covered what many consider a non-story? I feel like this overexposure may have actually led more people into believing there was no birth certificate. I know that this is not as dramatic as a man's death like in Ace in the Hole, but it shows how overexposed some things can get. It is a tricky area for networks to balance what is important and what is too frivolous to really matter.

The Circus and it's Ringmaster

When watching "Ace in the Hole" I was struck by the actions above ground compared to the situation underground. Everyone on the surface had a false sense of optimism about getting Leo Minosa unstuck from the ancient indian mines. Not only that, but the situation had turned into a spectacle, to the point where people were literally celebrating and having a circus above a suffering Leo Minosa. In this movie, the type of journalism that is portrayed is selfish, and sensational. Tatum bends the truth to tell people what they want to hear, which in part is reflected in the overly positive gathering next to the ancient indian mines. What comes next is a process of acceptance, and in my opinion redemption. Chuck truly realizes what he's done, and accepts his own fate. His announcement to the audience is chilling when he says "The Circus is over." I feel this scene is the most powerful scene in the movie, because it shows really how out of hand the entire situation has become. Chuck must yell over the jubilus crowd several times, and even when the sound quells down he still yells "Listen," almost to quite their spirits as well, and lay the gravity of the fact that they have all turned a suffering, trapped man in a mine into a circus, and that he was the ring master.

Ace in the Hole

Ace in the Hole


This movie was probably my least favorite so far! The cinematography was amazing, but the storyline was not for me! Douglas' character was dispicable- killing an innocent man and taking advantage of threatening circumstances in order to get a big break in his journalism career. The way an innocent man's misfortunes became a spectacle, ultimately a 'circus', made my stomache turn. Even though I hated the adulterous wife character, I still felt sympathy for her when Douglas slapped her face and almost choked her! Those moments were very jarring and unexpected. This movie exemplified 'below the belt journalism' and characters that completely lack a moral compass. I feel more educated and well-rounded having watched this famous Billy Wilder film, but I hope to never sit through it again.

I was curious about the meaning behind the movie title and this is what I found! I'm guessing that Douglas thought the news of the man in the cave would be his 'ace in the hole' or assurance for journalistic success.

Sweet Smell of Success' Tony Curtis in movie trailer for Some Like it Hot

Journalism in Ace in the Hole

Ace in the Hole is the perfect example of how journalism can get way out of hand and potentially magnify situations which it seeks to report. Chuck Tatum's desperation to make it big drove him to commit atrocities that eventually lead to his own death and the death of Leo Minosa. For Chuck Tatum, what ever sells is what he prints; Exaggeration of existing details of the story, and fabricating new details are the name of the game. Tatum put his advancement over the lives of those who were involved in the story he was covering and as a result parents lost their son, a wife lost her husband, and Tatum lost his own life.

Journalism as Portrayed in Good Night and Good Luck

Good Night and Good Luck is a film about Edward Murrow, who was a radio/ television journalist for CBS throughout the 30's, 40's, and 50's. He is most well known for his investigation and criticism of senator Joseph McCarthy, who at the time was involved in the identification of members of the communist party on American soil.

McCarthy was using interrogation techniques that a lot of people considered to be outrageous.

No one would call McCarthy out for fear of being accused of being a communist, that was until Murrow

and his team sought out to investigate McCarthy. They aired a series of shows that used McCarthy's

own words against him, and revealed his style of interrogation. Their shows eventually lead to the

censorship of McCarthy by the U.S. Senate.

Murrow was an outstanding journalist, who valued practicing good journalism just as much as getting the story. His fearless investigation of McCarthy has gone down in journalism history. He advocated the use of television to inspire, educate, and perhaps introduce important issues to the general public. He believed that to impose censorship on the news would contribute the the deterioration of the country, and he did all he could to prevent that from occurring.

Deadline USA

Deadline USA is the first film we’ve watched that has a main journalist character that the audience can easily root for. His plight is straightforward: they are trying to close down his newspaper even though it’s the only one willing to cover the Rienzi story. Ed Hutcheson is very loyal to The Day and to the ideals of good honest journalism. He is the first character we have watched who wasn’t a ‘yellow journalist’ and was only concerned with the pursuit of truth. For me, this made the film slightly less effective. It made Hutcheson seem like more of a fictional character than the other films we’ve watched. Someone like Charles Kane serves as an example of the twisted, corrupting power the media and wealth can have on a person. Kane is a character that seems real and flawed, which ultimately leads to his demise. Bogart’s character, on the other hand, personifies the ideal journalist in such a way that it made him seem less likely to be a real person, at least to me. Because of the way journalists have been satirized and criticized throughout film history, Deadline USA almost feels like a rebuttal to all of those portrayals. Depicting a man who is steadfast in his convictions, rather than just seeking personal wealth and success.

Also, an interesting review of 'Sweet Smell of Success' from when it was released

DEADline

Good journalism was seen in this movie! Good ol' Humphrey stood up for justice, fighting against the dirty town with truth in his print. Symbolically, violence landed upon his press, but even that did not stop him. I like how the producer portrayed the antagonist as an all encompassing bad guy.

What is with all these movies having ex-wives back into the picture, and remarrying the next day? Curious...

Sweet Smell of Roses?

"Sweet Smell of Success" was an interesting film that glided across the reels with more action that the others we have watched so far. Falco's twisted character fulfilled the greedy journalism thread throughout. I enjoyed the twists at the en with Susie, who thankfully set herself free from the one man creating all the trouble in the first place--her brother. At one point during the movie, we get a close up of JJ in a smokey haze, as usual. He is dictating orders to others, and a black shadow completely encompasses his eyes. This shot portrays JJ as more than an evil character but an evil idea--showing the dark side of journalism and how far people are willing to go to get what they want. Selfishness, lies, deceit, violence, and manipulation interweave throughout this film--in other words, bad journalism.

A review, check out the cinematography comments on my link.

Truth is Marching On!

Though Deadline USA offers a lot of insight into the world of journalism, its major theme seems to be that journalism is not just “comics, contests, and puzzles;” it’s a symbol of freedom. The film isn’t shy about getting this message through, and it does so in more ways than one. Lines like “A free press is like a free life—it's always in danger,” and “Show me a martyr and I’ll show you a dead man,” emphasize that journalism is a matter of liberty—a cause worth fighting for. With Mrs. Schmidt’s heart-warming testimony she explains that the newspaper helped her learn English and stay informed about current events so that she could be an involved American citizen rather than a helpless immigrant. Most blatantly of all is, of course, Ed Hutcheson’s passionate final monologue. When mobster Rienzi threatens Ed’s life if he prints the story, Ed replies, “People like you have tried it before. With bullets, prison, censorship. But as long as even one newspaper will print the truth, you're finished,” and then proceeds to triumphantly hold the phone up to rolling presses. Ultimately, Deadline USA was not about Ed or even The Day, but rather about need for truth, and the freedom of the press to print the truth. As the Battle Hymn Republic resounds throughout the film, the lyrics match the message: the truth will march on!

Journalism as Compared Between Sweet Smell of Success and Deadline USA

Sweet Smell of Success

Sweet Smell of Success is a film about a New York columnist by the name of J.J. Hunsecker. He is well known, feared by some, and respected by all. He uses Sidney Falco as a "press agent," but in reality Falco gets J.J. tips for stories and does J.J.'s dirty work. The central issue of the film revolves around J.J.'s sister, Susan Hunsecker; specifically her relationship with Steve Dallas. J.J. wants this relationship to be disbanded, and uses Falco in a variety of ways to accomplish this objective. While Falco works on the more intimate aspects of their plan, and J.J. uses his power and influence to make the necessary calls when required.

Falco uses the power of persuasion and manipulation to entice and blackmail columnists into publishing bad reviews about Steve's band, which had been gaining popularity. As a result, Steves's band looses their venue. Susan asks J.J. to make a call to get Steves Job back. Falc0 then sets up Steve to speak his mind and stand up to J.J., which then gives J.J. the ammunition he needs to disband the relationship.

Falco and J.J. are characters that are used to being able to charm and persuade in order to accomplish their goals and get where they need to be. They practice a lowly form of journalism, which involves bribery and blackmail. These two men are used to being on top, and getting what they desire, but by the end of the film the way they conduct themselves catches up to them. Falco is imprisoned and J.J. looses his sister. The real winner in this film is Susan, who gained independence from the manipulative tongue or her brother.

Deadline USA

Deadline USA is the story of newspaper editor Ed Hucheson and his battle to save his paper The Day while attempting to publish a story which would put away a serous gangster by the name of Tomas Rienzi. Ed is a strong believer in the principles which The Day is founded upon, and knows that if this paper were to go under there would be a considerable void in the lives of its readers and in the newspaper business as a whole.

The Day is in danger of being sold off to one of its competitors, and Ed believes that if he could publish the Rienzi story, he just might be able to persuade the owners not to sell the paper and get them to realize how valuable it is. Ed plans to accomplish this by linking the murder of a young woman to Rienzi. When publishing the story of the woman's murder Ed chooses not to show any racy pictures of her in the paper and not to demoralize the victim in anyway. Throughout the entire investigation of the woman's murder and Rienzi, Ed sticks to his morals and practices good journalism (With the exception of offering a cash bribe to a witness). He is rewarded when the woman's mother agrees to share her side of the story with Ed because he had shown such integrity in the way he published the story of her daughters murder. This was the missing link that Ed and The Day needed to nail Rienzi.

Ed Hucheson is an excellent example of what it means to practice good journalism. He is courageous and cunning, while maintaining his principles and integrity. This is clearly illustrated by what most consider to be the most powerful scene in the film.

-Tom H.

The Sweet Smell & Deadline

The Sweet Smell of Success

I both enjoyed and disliked this movie. I was eager to watch Tony Curtis, as I have enjoyed him in many other movies including Some Like it Hot ( a great comedy if you haven't seen it!). However his portrayal of his slimey character Falco left me wanting more from Curtis. I also was very frustrated with the role of Hunsecker's sister; extremely weak and helpless in the presence of her brother. From a journalistic point of view this movie is all about what not to do! Falco would compromise anything for an 'item' when in reality journalism should be all about presenting the truth to the public. Although I am not usally attuned to artistic shots or musical scores, I couldn't miss either in this movie. The cinematography and jazz scores were the unavoidable elements of success in this movie.

*1st link is for fun-trailer for Curtis' movie Some Like it Hot

Deadline USA

Deadline USA was deffinitely more of a 'feel good' kind of movie- made me proud of journalistic work, but in contrast the cinematography was much less crafted even to the untrained eye. I felt strongly that Deadline had a much better storyline, where the journalist of a dying newspaper were working to bring the truth to the people even until its last moments of publication. Two of my favorite quotes from the movie about journalism: "...the profession for the public good. It's the best profession." "A journalist is the hero of a story. The reporter is just a witness." And Bogart also said at one point that he was looking for "facts that wont bounce." I loved that! great script writing and great advice to tuck away for a journalistic career someday.

*2nd link is of personal/most memorable scene from the movie.

The Sweet Smell of J.J. Hunsecker

What is it about success that drives people to depravity? They make it seem like the only way to get it, is to sink to depths so low only the strongest, sickest man could climb out. Sidney Falco is a man willing to do that. J.J. Hunsecker is the man who has been there and found his way to the top. There is a very interesting dynamic between these two men. Sidney is a stray dog; cunning and vicious but without a place to lay his head. Hunsecker is the big dog, graciously allowing Sidney's clients into his much-read column. Sidney claims that he is in it for success, he wants to make it big. His actions show otherwise. When confronted by an important client of his about being a bad press agent, Sidney tells his own client off. All after ranting about how low he is on the totem pole. Sidney shows in the film that he is more cunning than this. He wouldn't just give up a client that easily. Later on in the film, Sidney uses his considerable wit to lure another promising client. But when the client finally decides he wants Sidney as a press agent, Sidney runs off because J.J. called him, telling the client to find another man. This is very self destructive behavior for a man wanting success. Sidney is as pretty as a movie star, but he prefers to play second fiddle. Sidney doesn't want success, he wants J.J. He needs approval from him, he likes playing the pet. Like J.J. needs his sister's love so Sidney needs J.J.'s. Sidney should have seen it coming, he should have known that J.J. cared nothing for him, but he was too tempted by the success of other people to achieve his own.

Both Ends of The Spectrum: "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Deadline U.S.A"

I find it interesting to consider just how different the movies "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Deadline U.S.A" were. On one end ("Sweet Smell of Success'), you have complete and utter corruption of journalism, and on the other you have journalism at it's peak of excellence, even in the face of being shut down ("Deadline U.S.A). Both movies provide two extremes that are almost unrealistic to real world journalism. Corruption runs rampant in "Sweet Smell of Success", and is all muddled up in personal conflict, control and egotism. Meanwhile, even while "The Day" is shutting down ("Deadline U.S.A.") it's workers are still dedicated to the cause, and everyone seems to have potential to be a hero. Not only that, it seems utterly patriotic, especially the music, playing a familiar patriotic theme, The Battle Hymn of the Republic whenever it's main character speaks about the mission of journalism. Deadline U.S.A is capable of representing the workings of a newpaper business very accurately, and in a movie review by Bosley Crowther it is claimed to do "all right by the trade." Crowther notes, also, it is melodramatic, and if anything that adds to the hint of unrealism this movie offers. In "Sweet Smell of Success," J.J. Hunsecker uses his power in journalism to manipulate those around him, including his sister. The characters are shallow and manipulative, and edge slightly away from realistically human. Both movies carry such extremes of both ends that, depending on the journal, if you take a little of both of these and add a hint of unpredictability you would get a closer representation of real journalism. Both are great films though.

Exposing Citizen Kane

After viewing Citizen Kane for the second time, I was able to pay attention to more details than I was able to during the first viewing. Already knowing what "rosebud" meant gave me a chance to pay attention to the journalistic aspects of Citizen Kane.
Kane appears to be a man obsessed with control. Since he was was given away by his mother as a child, it seems like he has been desperately trying to regain control over his life, which has led him to behave in a selfish manner, and put his own needs before the needs of others in his life.
When he first enters the office of the Inquirer, he immediately takes control of the office. He sends orders, and makes promises. He seeks to make all other papers obsolete compared to the Inquirer so that he can control the news.
The second example of journalistic control in Kane is when he abuses his power at the Chicago Inquirer. He throws his best friend, Jeb, to the side when he fires him for writing a bad review of Kane's wife, Susan, and her singing performance. Kane can not loose control of his writers. He writes the review himself. Though he wrote the review from Jeb's negative point of view, he seemed to be shaking with fury knowing that he was loosing control in Jeb's office as Mr. Berstien read the review to him.

Priorities in His Girl Friday

His Girl Friday portrays journalists as so consumed with the story that they overlook the emotions and well-being of other people. From the beginning, it seems as though Walter’s love for Hildy is grounded not in Hildy herself, but rather in her passion and talent for the newspaper business. Even in trying to “win her back,” it appears that he wants to win her back primarily as a reporter for the paper, and secondarily as his wife. He seems more frustrated with the fact that she is giving up journalism, not that she is with another man. While this is the most obvious example of journalism taking priority over human emotions, there are other supplemental examples as well: One, being how Hildy puts poor Bruce through hell as she becomes too consumed with the story to help him. Ultimately, Bruce even decides to give up on Hildy and leave without her, while Hildy barely notices or cares. Second, Hildy and Walter treat Bruce’s mother with complete disrespect, to the extent of telling her to “shut up” and having her carried like an animal out of the building where she is causing a ruckus. Even up to the film’s ending, journalism triumphs over love as the couple’s plans for a romantic and redemptive honeymoon in Niagra Falls are instantaneously negated by a trip to Albany to cover a big story—Clearly the priority!

His Girl Friday and Citizen Kane

Both Citizen Kane and His Girl Friday, while entirely different films, share similar themes about the nature of those involved in journalism. Both films make reference to the humanity lost by its characters because of their obsession with their job. Citizen Kane is a portrait of a confident, intelligent, driven young man who is warped into a tired, soulless, selfish old man. His obsession with the Inquirer strips him of his humanity and leaves him an empty shell. It’s certainly a bleak view of journalism. His Girl Friday is a much lighter comedy, but it has just as bleak a view of journalism as Citizen Kane. Instead of showing the characters slowly morph into soulless people, His Girl Friday establishes the characters as selfish and greedy from the beginning. Instead, the story focuses on the relationship between Walter and Hildy, and Hildy’s attempts to leave the newspaper trade she loves for a chance at having the ‘real’ life that Walter could never offer her. They both talk constantly about how newspapermen are all scoundrels who only care about getting the story, them included. It seems that both filmmakers were concerned about the direction that journalism had gone in the 30’s and 40’s, and where it was headed. It’s interesting how two very different films made in the early 1940’s have a similar view of journalism, which is still resonant and relevant today with the 24 hr new cycle.

Journalism as Depicted in Citizen Kane and His Girl Friday

In the films Citizen Kane and His Girl Friday, Journalism is portrayed as corrupt and lacking integrity. Each film does this in it's own way.

Citizen Kane

Citizen Kane is the story of Charles Foster Kane, a man with humble beginnings who later in life becomes very wealthy and influential. Through a series of events Kane becomes the owner of a newspaper in New York called The Inquirer. When he initially took control of the paper, he sought to highlight injustice and look out for the people. He drafted a document which he entitled "Declaration of Principles," which outlined the rules and principles which The Inquirer would abide by. His friend and co-worker Jed Leland expresses doubt as to whether Kane will be able to stick to the principles he has laid out, and tells Kane that he will keep the document as memoir. As time goes by Kane's newspaper grows in popularity and influence, as does Kane. It seems that with Kane's increased power comes a change in how he operates. His approach had shifted from looking out for the people to looking out for his own interests. He used his paper to influence and persuade others to see things his way. This is illustrated by his use of the paper during his campaign for governor, the persuasion of his wife's singing instructor, the way he portrayed his wife's opera performance, etc. By this time Leland had left New York and has left to write for the Chicago branch of the paper. He sends Kane the "Declaration of Principles," that he had drafted years earlier. Kane then tears up this document, which in the past he had treasured. This more than anything illustrates how Kane's attitude has changed as his power has grown.

His Girl Friday

His Girl Friday is a light, fast passed comedy about a newspaper run by Walter Burns, who is payed a visit from his x-wife Hildy Johnson. She has come to tell him that she is getting married the next day to a man named Bruce Baldwin. Throughout the film Walter uses his charming and persuasive personality to win Hildy back and send Bruce packing. Throughout this escapade, the latest news the paper is working on pertains to the up coming execution of a man named Earl Williams. Walter uses the events surrounding Williams to persuade her to come back to him and to return as a writer for his newspaper.

The portrayal of journalism as corrupt is strewn throughout this entire film. Walter uses his power as owner of the paper to influence elections, to negotiate his release from the police, to portray his paper as superior through exaggeration and falsification, etc. Reporters are portrayed as ruthless, heartless, con artists who will do absolutely anything necessary to get the story they desire. Ethics, honesty, and integrity are not at all seen in any of the characters in this film; That is, except for Bruce Baldwin, who exemplifies all of these qualities and is exploited because of them. The one thing that most stood out to me as i watched this film was the portrayal of women. Hildy Johnson is a powerful, influential, and independent woman. Seeing these qualities portrayed in a female character surprised me, considering that this film was maid in the 40's.

These films have many redeeming qualities, and promoted many messages that were important during the time they were produced, but exemplifying what is meant by "good journalism" is not something either of these films accomplishes.

It is important to consider information regarding journalism in the 1940's. Specifically, current issues and individuals that impacted and influenced journalism during this time period. Given the seriousness of the events that were unfolding back then, you can see why movies that were meant to address serious current issues and movies that were meant to make you laugh and smile might have been produced.

-Tom H.

Citizen Kane/ His Girl Friday

After watching Citizen Kane (a movie I have already seen and appreciate) and His Girl Friday (a movie I have never seen but now love) I was struck by a similar theme in these two very different movies: the lack of journalistic integrity. These films are both amazing movies but anyone looking to find any journalistic principles in either would need to find another film. Citizen Kane is more subtle about it. In the beginning of the film we have an idealistic Charles Foster Kane taking control of a newspaper that doesn't look like it is doing very well. He gets it set up, fires some of the old employees and brings in some new ones, and writes down a Declaration of Principles for his paper: "1. I will provide the people of this city with a daily paper that will tell all the news honestly. 2. I will also provide them with a fighting and tireless champion of their rights as citizens and as human beings." This is a good start to running a newspaper, keeping yourself in check with self-made principles. but the audience knows that this won't last long. I could focus on different parts of the movie where Kane loses track of his principles but the most important one comes during his rising political career. Kane uses his control over many U.S. newspapers to build him up and put his rival down. I think it is safe to say that things he said about his rival may or may not have been true. A media magnet running for office has happened before on the world stage. Italy's prime minister owns the equivalent of all the major U.S. networks, which means he can control the flow of information. Kane's ability to sway public opinion with his newspapers would be too enticing to pass up if he was ever elected.

If Kane is considered subtle, then the lack of journalistic principles in His Girl Friday is as unsubtle as anyone can possibly get. I think the most obvious crime is the use of bribery. Main character Hildy drops some money and asks a prison guard if it was his. She did this because before she wasn't allowed in to interview a convicted criminal. She does this in full view of several other prison guards who take no notice whatsoever. If a journalist was caught bribing their way into a jail, it wouldn't be long before they were actually in jail. Bribery is just the tip of the scale in His Girl Friday. Multiple counts of slander directly to elected officials faces occur very frequently. It was so bad that when the movie released journalists of the time wanted ti taken back because of the way they were portrayed.

These are both great films but any professional journalist would be ashamed at the way they were portrayed, even if it is a comedic light.

Her's a blogger has a 'Citizen Kane Award' for newspapers that go against journalistic principles in regards to climate change.

Randy Cohen discusses ethics in His Girl Friday and reporting for the Times.

-Chris O'Connell

Kane and Hildy

I agree with Kate about Kane's quote "If I hadn't been rich, I might have been a really good man." Though Kane claimed he did not care much about his money, he continued to purchase extremely valuable items throughout the world, collecting them in a palace for himself! How selfish, crude, and unaltruistic of a man who longed after the public's heart. Kane eventually only drowned in his insatiable lust for love--all alone. His character makes me think of how we treat Jesus more often than not--we want to be loved without putting the work in. Just some food for thought...Also, when Rosebud was the sled, it made me think that back when he was an innocent boy, life was good. Before the complications and moral dilemmas,before the masses, before the printed papers, life was simple and grand.

“His Girl Friday” could stand for the fact that Hildy is Bruce’s girl for a day, figuratively speaking, before she runs back to her first husband. I loved seeing Hildy as “one of the newspaper men” even with her pinstriped suit. Hildy’s wit was a fabulous thread to follow throughout the film, and along with her hubby, they made a smashing dynamic duo. 

Response to Citizen and Friday

Citizen Kane

Although Citizen Kane was made so many years ago, it's still applicable to today's culture. Some of the overarching themes dealt with money, success, and happiness; the struggle to find a balance between them. One of the lines that struck me was when Kane says, "If I hadn't been rich, I'd have been a great man." - which I feel perhaps might be the truth. Kane was able to run a successful newspaper, but in the end his success and wealth overtook his life and ruined many important relationships.

His Girl Friday

I found this movie to be the more enjoyable of the two, it was more light-hearted even in the midst of some dark circumstances (murder/divorce). At some points it was difficult for me to follow the plot because of the rapid dialogue between the characters. I found Hildy's character as a newswoman quite interesting. Throughout much of the movie Hildy was 'one of the guys' 'one of the newspaper men'. She had a strong personality and earned her rank as a reporter within the patriarchal world of journalism. However, I was suprised at the end when Hildy completely breaks down for love and cries at the thought of leaving the newspaper and her first husband. I thought her role throughout the movie and then momentarily at the end made for an interesting contrast.

Two Forms of Journalism in Citizen Kane

In Citizen Kane two forms of journalism are presented. One is Charles Foster Kane’s yellow journalism approach, and the newsreel reporter’s more traditional approach. The movie begins with a sensationalized view of Kane’s life, with general facts, hyperbole and no account for his personal life or motivations. Upon his death the newsreel reporter Jerry Thompson is intrigued by his last words, Rosebud. In a search for the truth a representing reporter gathers information from people who knew Kane personally, gathering information from reliable sources and patching together a fairly accurate account of Kane’s life. Through the story it is discovered that Kane approached journalism mainly from behind his desk, not seeking out reliable sources but rather, sensationalizing the news, using his publication to attempt to influence people. In many cases Kane was self absorbed, seeking what was best for himself and searching for something that made him happy. In the midst of this he proved to be a poor journalist, but was able to muster a strong public image that people gravitated towards because of his confidence. At the end, the very same type of journalism he had been producing was used against him, to spread false scandal about him. Concerning journalism, it’s very interesting that such methods are juxtaposed in such a manner: Kane’s method is revealed through the process of proper journalistic methods, but even in the end the most personal motivations could not be found out really highlighting in the end how no matter how much information you seek to find you cannot find it all, and that Kane was truly alone in his own world.

What's in a J-Mo?

Hollywood has a way of casting its entertaining light on a variety of issues and vocations, often shaping perceptions and attitudes in the broader culture. But when it comes to portraying the challenging and sometimes dangerous world of journalism, does Hollywood get it right? Do movies like the classic Citizen Kane (1941) or the contemporary story of Jeffrey Wigand in The Insider (1999) help or hinder the public perspective of journalism? Did reporters really act as tough as the characters in His Girl Friday (1940) or as ambitious as those in All the President’s Men (1976)? How do specific decades define the style of a film’s journalistic portrayal? How does a film made in the 1970s differ from one in the 1990s?