Film essay
Compare the attitudes to poverty conveyed in the films you
have studied for this topic
In this essay I will be discussing and comparing the attidues
to poverty conveyed in the films I have studied for this topic. Tsotsi (2005), City of God (2002) and La Haine (1995) are the films foreign films I've studied and all have the same themes even though set in different times such as poverty, conflict, violence and lack of authority. Each film reacts similarly and differently by showing the attitudes to poverty.
In the opening scene of Tsotsi is Tsotsi himself playing cards with his friends. Dices are shown in slow motion being thrown on the table to represent the hope and chance the characters need and want because of the poverty. Betting on their lives is the only way that the characters can possibly get out of the poor environment they are in as the dices symbolise their lives being thrown for a bet, it may go right, it may go wrong.
Similarly in the opening scene of City of God, the theme of chance is again seen as the scene consists of a chicken run as the chicken getting ready to be killed runs away and is getting chased. The chicken symbolises the youth of the environment in City of God as they took their chance of escapism and followed it through. This shows us, the western audience, that chance/hope and betting are all daily activities and thoughts for the youth of the two films as needing to bet your life for the chance of escaping or getting out of the poverty is crucial and the number one motive.
Escapism and "getting out of here" are themes in all three films due to the poverty the youth are surrounded in. In Tsotsi, he travels to the outskirts of his environment to get a gazing view of the city of Johannesburg. This shows us the inequalities of the two social scenes in the post- apartheid setting of South Africa. Tsotsi wanting to look at the city shows us that his thoughts are of wealth and living like the people working at the city as he is surrounded in poverty and only dreams an 'escape' to the sweet life.
The same theme is in City of God as different characters go to the beach and smoke a joint and take a view of the sea and the transparent mountains in the distance. The relaxing scenes of which the characters engage in this gives us a peaceful and calm sense which juxtapositions the violence, poverty and conflict we are watching and feeling throughout the film. It is also binary oppositions as we have the setting of the beach which is peaceful and the favelas which are violent. This shows us the western audience that in environments drenched in poverty, the youth and people have to find these binary oppositions and these peaceful locations and states of mind to escape from the cruel reality they must return to sooner or later.
This is the same in La Haine where we get numerous shots of the three young friends sitting around looking bored in different locations such as a kids playground. This shows us that they are somehow trapped in this never ending routine by the performance of the actors not enjoying all this sitting around and giving this impression they have to go and sit through it because of the poor environment they are in. This shows us that even though we see these binary oppositions and sense of escapism, the characters cant exactly leave so easily as it seems they are only viewing the future whereas actually reaching out and grabbing it, for example Tsotsi gazing at the city and Rocket smoking in front of the beach.
Violence is key in all three films and money seems to be the greater motive for it. In Tsotsi, in a brutal scene set in the interiors of a train, Tsotsi and his gang stab an innocent man because of his wealth and to steal his bag of money. This shows us that the only reason this youth is doing this is because of the poor environment they were raised in and that they have to turn to violence as a source of financial income. The western audience are also shocked as it the scene is held inside a train and is surprised how noone saw or maybe that noone cared as it is such a common thing which reinforces the dramatic situation of how poor these environments are.
On the other hand, In a scene in City of God money is not the motive but poverty is still the reason as Lil Zee holds ups a group of children misfits in the favelas and orders two of em to shoot and kill another one of the kids. The western audience are again shocked as the situation is so drastic that children are being ordered to kill their friends for no valid reason. Children in film and in life are such a delicate subject, so in City of God, the directors really wanted to show the brutality and horror that poverty creates in these environments by using children as a real punch in the gut in showing the reality of the environment by making it as candid as possible by shocking an audience that doesn't know anything about this.
La Haine is similar along the lines of being violent as the opening scene shows us real life footage of Riots occurring in Paris. By using real life footage, the audience feel more as if they have to believe the rest of the film as they see it more as a fact than a story like with documentaries. But the clips of the youth and public throwing bricks, smashing glass and tipping cars alongside reggae music shocks the audience as they are told this is real and not actors doing this which makes it more effective as it is golden proof and evidence of the effects of being under poverty or a corrupt environment involving different classes on regards of the money in their pockets as the audience can see this is what happens when people are put in these situations and environments.
In conclusion, all 3 films have similar and different attitudes towards poverty for different reasons. Having studied 3 foreign films, I think that having the films in different settings such as outskirts, third world countries and the streets and also having it being in the language of the mother tongue of the setting, make the films more realistic in a way that the audience are engaged in learning about these situations and themes and not particularly too happy about it because they tell the truth about their own countries and their own problems and situations they are in. The audience can't look away but at the same time can't keep full attention to the films as they might feel embarrassed that maybe they didn't know these situations of poverty were going on or that maybe they hadn't ever seen scenes such as realistic in the films. The films are clear potryal of a democratic public standing up and saying "were not taking it anymore". Violence, corruption, and conflict are all themes factors created by poverty which is ignored and also enhanced by the government and authority as seen in City of God and in La Haine. which is also a clear representation of what is happening at the moment in America as two cases of white police officers shoot/beat innocent black individuals, and the public don't want to stand for the class segregation anymore just like in La Haine.
In the opening scene of Tsotsi is Tsotsi himself playing cards with his friends. Dices are shown in slow motion being thrown on the table to represent the hope and chance the characters need and want because of the poverty. Betting on their lives is the only way that the characters can possibly get out of the poor environment they are in as the dices symbolise their lives being thrown for a bet, it may go right, it may go wrong.
Similarly in the opening scene of City of God, the theme of chance is again seen as the scene consists of a chicken run as the chicken getting ready to be killed runs away and is getting chased. The chicken symbolises the youth of the environment in City of God as they took their chance of escapism and followed it through. This shows us, the western audience, that chance/hope and betting are all daily activities and thoughts for the youth of the two films as needing to bet your life for the chance of escaping or getting out of the poverty is crucial and the number one motive.
Escapism and "getting out of here" are themes in all three films due to the poverty the youth are surrounded in. In Tsotsi, he travels to the outskirts of his environment to get a gazing view of the city of Johannesburg. This shows us the inequalities of the two social scenes in the post- apartheid setting of South Africa. Tsotsi wanting to look at the city shows us that his thoughts are of wealth and living like the people working at the city as he is surrounded in poverty and only dreams an 'escape' to the sweet life.
The same theme is in City of God as different characters go to the beach and smoke a joint and take a view of the sea and the transparent mountains in the distance. The relaxing scenes of which the characters engage in this gives us a peaceful and calm sense which juxtapositions the violence, poverty and conflict we are watching and feeling throughout the film. It is also binary oppositions as we have the setting of the beach which is peaceful and the favelas which are violent. This shows us the western audience that in environments drenched in poverty, the youth and people have to find these binary oppositions and these peaceful locations and states of mind to escape from the cruel reality they must return to sooner or later.
This is the same in La Haine where we get numerous shots of the three young friends sitting around looking bored in different locations such as a kids playground. This shows us that they are somehow trapped in this never ending routine by the performance of the actors not enjoying all this sitting around and giving this impression they have to go and sit through it because of the poor environment they are in. This shows us that even though we see these binary oppositions and sense of escapism, the characters cant exactly leave so easily as it seems they are only viewing the future whereas actually reaching out and grabbing it, for example Tsotsi gazing at the city and Rocket smoking in front of the beach.
Violence is key in all three films and money seems to be the greater motive for it. In Tsotsi, in a brutal scene set in the interiors of a train, Tsotsi and his gang stab an innocent man because of his wealth and to steal his bag of money. This shows us that the only reason this youth is doing this is because of the poor environment they were raised in and that they have to turn to violence as a source of financial income. The western audience are also shocked as it the scene is held inside a train and is surprised how noone saw or maybe that noone cared as it is such a common thing which reinforces the dramatic situation of how poor these environments are.
On the other hand, In a scene in City of God money is not the motive but poverty is still the reason as Lil Zee holds ups a group of children misfits in the favelas and orders two of em to shoot and kill another one of the kids. The western audience are again shocked as the situation is so drastic that children are being ordered to kill their friends for no valid reason. Children in film and in life are such a delicate subject, so in City of God, the directors really wanted to show the brutality and horror that poverty creates in these environments by using children as a real punch in the gut in showing the reality of the environment by making it as candid as possible by shocking an audience that doesn't know anything about this.
La Haine is similar along the lines of being violent as the opening scene shows us real life footage of Riots occurring in Paris. By using real life footage, the audience feel more as if they have to believe the rest of the film as they see it more as a fact than a story like with documentaries. But the clips of the youth and public throwing bricks, smashing glass and tipping cars alongside reggae music shocks the audience as they are told this is real and not actors doing this which makes it more effective as it is golden proof and evidence of the effects of being under poverty or a corrupt environment involving different classes on regards of the money in their pockets as the audience can see this is what happens when people are put in these situations and environments.
In conclusion, all 3 films have similar and different attitudes towards poverty for different reasons. Having studied 3 foreign films, I think that having the films in different settings such as outskirts, third world countries and the streets and also having it being in the language of the mother tongue of the setting, make the films more realistic in a way that the audience are engaged in learning about these situations and themes and not particularly too happy about it because they tell the truth about their own countries and their own problems and situations they are in. The audience can't look away but at the same time can't keep full attention to the films as they might feel embarrassed that maybe they didn't know these situations of poverty were going on or that maybe they hadn't ever seen scenes such as realistic in the films. The films are clear potryal of a democratic public standing up and saying "were not taking it anymore". Violence, corruption, and conflict are all themes factors created by poverty which is ignored and also enhanced by the government and authority as seen in City of God and in La Haine. which is also a clear representation of what is happening at the moment in America as two cases of white police officers shoot/beat innocent black individuals, and the public don't want to stand for the class segregation anymore just like in La Haine.
