Although the Gangster genre may appear at first to promote anti-social behaviour, a closer reading may prove that it is the same as all other genres, in so far as it is still used to promote the two ideas of Civic Responsibility and Social Contentment. Rather than showing the benefits provided to the member of society who chooses to fall in line with socially accepted practices it tends to concentrate on how an individual will be made to pay for his discrepancies. In the case of Bill the Butcher he meets the same end as many of his predecessors, his own acts of violence (killing ‘Priest’ Valon) and arrogance (allowing Amsterdam Valon to go free when he had him at his mercy) come together to seal his fate as he is killed by Amsterdam Valon in the last act of the film. However preceding his demise Bill displays characteristics which would normally be considered admirable, in this case courage to face Valon alone and a strong sense of honour, when he seems to welcome his death at the hands of Valon to avoid the ignoble end he would receive from the shrapnel wound he has suffered. Even though these would usually be aspects of a person’s character which film makers would attempt to promote in this case they are given a bitter edge when the audience sees that Bill dies alone, a fate from which none of his riches or his power can save him. This idea of being alone is the greatest fear of the Gangster within the genre, and is best illustrated by the words of Tony Camonte (Paul Muni) in the film ‘Scarface’ (1932), “I don’t got nobody…I’m all alone… I’m no good by myself.” This fear of ending up alone is shared by almost every individual, it is this fear which drives us to find acceptance among peer groups, and as such the idea that this is the fate which awaits those who shirk any civic responsibility may be disturbing enough to be an effective deterrent against anybody who is considering this life style.
While this ending does provide an effective deterrent against people entering into a life of crime it would not be in the society’s best interest to portray this as the only fate for the Gangster. If the ultimate fate of every criminal was seen to be their destruction at the hands of society, or at the hands of a rival it would provide no incentive for those who are already involved in this counter culture to give it up. To this end there have been a number of Gangster films that end with the redemption of the Gangster. Although the 1933 film ‘Blondie Johnson’ has a rather sappy ending it is films like this, in which the main character Blondie finds redemption after falling in love with a morally upright man, which provided a sense that it was never too late to conform to society. However not all films allow a completely happy redemption for the criminal. In ‘Goodfellas’ although Ray Liotta’s character Henry repents he can no longer enjoy the power he once had as to do so would put him at risk of being killed. Although Henry has avoided the ultimate fate of the Gangster he cannot better himself in the real world because of the restrictions he has placed upon himself as a result of the life style he originally chose. In this way the film seems to suggest that the Gangster will still be punished for their actions, they cannot simply be allowed to enter back into society freely as this would undermine the labour of the legitimate work force. As can be clearly seen there is a strong argument that Gangster films are used in the same way as cautionary tales told to children by their mothers, although in this case the mother is replaced by the censorship boards of the country and the studios which produce the film. However it can be said that there have been some films which do not seem to follow the idea that ‘crime doesn’t pay’ to the contrary in fact, ‘crime pays big, and it’s cool!’
‘The Godfather’ is a film which inspired a generation of film makers (and a generation of gangsters if you believe the FBI), but it contains perspectives on the gangster life style which are not the traditionally accepted ones. If ‘The Godfather’ is taken as a stand alone film it does not include the traditional destruction of the main protagonist (although this aspect is examined in ‘Godfather part III’) on the contrary the film depicts Michael’s meteoric rise within the family. Although this alone is a major break from tradition it is not the most drastic aspect of the ‘Godfather’ films. This comes in the form of the recent comparisons which have been drawn between the growth of Vito Corleone’s crime empire and the ideological view of the ‘American dream’. That is to say a penniless boy is able to come to America and make a success of him self, although in this case he achieves this power through ruthless acts of violence. Some critics of these observations have pointed out that Michael’s rise within the mafia is accompanied by the destruction of his family. However this destruction could simply be seen as yet another perversion of American ideologies in this case it would be the idea of capitalism with Michael ‘removing’ any competition. This perversion of the ideologies of America would appear to fly in the face of the previous argument put forward that gangster films are supposed to promote a countries ideology. However as it has been previously noted the ‘Godfather part III’ returns to the original format with Michael seeking redemption but being destroyed by his family’s past, so it would be unfair to suggest that Coppola set out to romanticize the gangster, instead the creation of this reading of the film may be found amongst the audiences views on the movie. This shows the beginnings of what can be seen as the counter culture reading of Gangster films. In these situations the audience at which the film is aimed does not pick up on the preferred reading of the movie and instead concentrate on another aspect of the picture. If this were the case it would be possible to see Gangster films promoting anti-social behavior rather than promoting a socially acceptable way of life. With the creation of oppositional and negotiated readings of Gangster films the original message of the film, which may have followed the idea of promoting civic responsibility, is lost and replaced by a new message which has been ascribed to the film by its audience. To define this clearly it would be helpful to look at another example of this. In the James Cagney film ‘White heat’ the main protagonist takes his own life at the end of the film (accompanied by the immortal line “Made it, Ma, top o’ the world!”) in order to avoid capture by the police. While the original message of this film may have been that the gangster’s lifestyle brought him to his death, genre fans interpreted this action, accompanied by the manic and almost defiant line, as the actions of a man who was in total control of his own destiny.
The example above covers only those films whose meaning has been misinterpreted by the audience; however there have been several films in recent years which have changed the fate of the Gangster. The movie ‘Pulp Fiction’ was the first film (according to Marilyn Yaquinto) to offer a third way out of a life of crime by allowing Samuel L. Jackson’s character to retire, although many of the other characters met premature, and often very graphic deaths, the fact that Jackson’s character was allowed to survive without feeling remorse for his criminal actions was ground breaking. By bringing in this plot device Tarantino was clearly going against the grain by suggesting that a Gangster could benefit from a life of crime and as such directly contradicting the need to promote civic responsibility. It could be said that at this point in the development of the Gangster genre that it moved away from the cautionary tale it had once been and had now become centrally a vehicle for entertainment. Why then had this movement been allowed to occur, it may have had something to do with the perceived secularization of society which has taken place in recent years, a weakening in the strength of the Catholic church has also seen a slackening in the censorship guidelines of many countries boards of classification. In short the historical impacts of the desensitisation of society due to the televisation of wars such as Vietnam, and the dropping political desire to show democracy in the best light after the end of the cold war has resulted in a slackening of many censorship guidelines. That said following the 9/11 attacks several films such as ‘Spiderman’ had to have scenes cut, whereas some films such as ‘Collateral Damage’ had their releases postponed. These actions once again illustrate that censorship laws are only lax as long as the country they govern is at peace. Due in part to this movement away from it’s highly moralistic roots the Gangster genre has seen an increasing number of films in which the ‘bad guy’s’ get away with the crime they are attempting to commit. A perfect example of this new breed of film is ‘Swordfish’ a film in which the main protagonist not only gets away at the end but it is revealed that he has in some ways been legitimised by his contact with the American government. In this movement the Gangster genre may be seen to have lost much of its impact upon enforcing the civic responsibilities of the populace; however it still has a major influence on the Social Contentment of the population. This impact is created by the sheer fact that the entertainment value of the film itself increases the contentment of the audience. As well as the visceral and emotional responses the Gangster film can induce it can also provide a Counter- Cultural attraction to the audience, that is to say it allows them to experience a culture they would not normally be privy to. By experiencing this counter- culture in such a controlled environment it could be seen that the audience is fulfilling a desire for violence without actually carrying out any violent acts, and as such they are remaining within the bounds set by their civic responsibilities.
The impact of the Gangster genre as a cautionary tale has also been influenced by changes within society itself. For example in the original ‘Oceans Eleven’ (1960) although the crime is successful the gang is not allowed to enjoy their ill-gotten gains as the money is incinerated at the end of the film. Yet in the remake of ‘Oceans Eleven’ (2001) the crime is successful and the gang escapes with the ‘loot’. This example illustrates how the self imposed morals of the film industry have changed over time, when the original film was made it was not acceptable for criminals to ‘get away with it’ under the censorship laws in America, however the remake was not hampered by such considerations and as such it was perfectly acceptable for the criminals to succeed. This change in values may appear shocking considering the fact that the Gangster genre is supposed to be preventing people entering into a life of crime, not making it look cool. This easy transition may hint at the fact that the perceived political agenda behind the gangster film may have more to do with the censorship of the early films. The first censorship bodies in Britain and America were drawn up using Christian sensibilities as the basis for there rating guide lines. As such it may be easy to assume that the reason criminals didn’t get away with it was because it was seen as countermanding one of the Ten Commandments. If this is the case it would undermine the original argument, however modern films, such as ‘Gangs of New York’ are still showing that criminals will receive their comeuppance as a result of their own actions, and these films are not controlled by the stringent censorships of the thirties and the forties.
Another aspect to consider which is linked to the classification system is the economic considerations taken by a studio. It could be suggested that studios may push a director to cut his film to meet a lower certification such as a 12. In this way the film would be open to a much wider audience, but in doing so it would loose much of its graphic content and as such maybe considered a film which no longer promoted violence as the violence contained within it has either been watered down or is completely non-existent.
In conclusion it would appear that the Gangster genre was indeed created in part from the political desire to promote civic responsibility within its people, however this in no way was the only influence on the early Gangster films. The stringent censorship laws around which the films were constructed may have played a major part in the formation of the early Gangster films, although the political aspect was still required as it was possible for early film makers to work around these censorship laws, by releasing the film un-rated for example. The idea of social contentment was promoted through the idea that the conformity with civic responsibilities would lead to this contentment, however in recent years it would appear that the happiness of the audience is being more directly approached through the entertainment value of the film its self. An excellent way to look at the out early gangster films would be to look at another James Cagney film, ‘Angels with Dirty Faces’, this films ending shows exactly what the classification boards were afraid of, they felt that a strong gangster character would cause members of the populace to follow in their footsteps, so both in the James Cagney film and in the eyes of the censors the Gangster could not maintain their dignity for the good of society. It would appear however that this belief has been lost some what by today’s media savvy society and as such the Gangster can now stand proud, corrupt, but proud. Finally it is important to note that with the expanse in the range of mass media it is no longer necessary or viable to attempt to indoctrinate people through the use of movies alone, instead it is much easier to use movies to entertain the population and as such use these films as an escapist method of maintaining social contentment while other media out lets and institutions are used to promote civic responsibility.
