In the 1960's, Hollywood began blowing huge budgets on movies called Historical Epics. These movies took legends, or historically true stories and turned them into blockbuster films. The most famous American Epics are probably Cleopatra and Ben Hur. Other parts of the world also made cheaper Epics. Russia, hoping to stop Hollywood from stealing a russian story, made a film adaptation of War and Peace. Being very successful, four different films were made to chronicle the story. Likewise, The Elusive Avengers was a russian Historical Epic that became very famous.
The story follows four teenagers who assist the red army during the Russian Civil war. The teenagers are spurred to fight the white army after one's father is murdered by a cruel official from the white army. The story is an exciting one, and very entertaining. However, there many interesting aspects to this movie, the first of which being that in the 1960's, things were beginning to change as far as what was acceptable for media to show.
The Elusive Avengers was released in 1966. One thing I noticed that was touched upon was the idea of interracial couples. One of the four, a gypsy boy of about 17 or so, is shown as though he loves the young girl of the group, who is about 15. The girl is a white, russian. Although never said allowed, it is implied that he loves her very dearly, and the feelings are returned. This shows how much had changed over the past decade, that this was allowed to even be considered by the audience. However, aside from this, the movie tends to, in a way, put these children who murder and violently attack people, in a hero's light.
The Gypsy Boy
The issue with Historical Epics is that they usually tended to glorify violence and war. The heros of the Elusive Avengers were the children. The villain was an official from the white's army, who seemed to ruthlessly kill anyone who was not a member of his political party. At one point he whips one of the boys. At the end of the movie, the young man returns the favor. It is seen as a just act of revenge. The villain was getting what he deserved. But, in reality, it was a boy beating a man who had hurt him. It was not an act of justice. It was a violent act of revenge. As well as this, the boys in the group kill multiple people. But hey, it's all in the name of revenge on evil people, and they are helping those who are hurting, so it is totally fine. Right? Similar to Robin Hood, these avengers kill the rich, to help the poor. (In a way...)
The movie, with it's flaws, is an exciting epic that captivates it's audience. Progressive in that it implies interracial love, it's heros were still violent. Perhaps, in way, that is more like reality. In the real world, could the Elusive Avengers actually have succeeded without taking a few lives? None of those that they killed were entirely innocent, but was it right? Could it have been avoided? Questions like these are left open for a more scrutinizing audience to ponder. However, for those just looking a for a fun movie, I would highly recommend The Elusive Avengers.
"You see, it's... it's no good, Montag. We've all got to be alike. The only way to be happy is for everyone to be made equal," said the Captain to Motag. In Fahrenheit 451, a futuristic dystopia has banned books. According to the story, the reason for this was that books were the main cause of pain in people. I agree, it was heart wrenching when Dobby died, but I don't think that banning books removed all pain from this society, which was the goal. Rather, I think it increased it because one of the biggest causes of pain for people is Social Control. Comparing this movie to the Civil Rights Movement we can see how in a dystopia, and in a free nation, resistance to the social control is very similar.
Guy Montag (the main character) and his wife, Linda
The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's eventually led to equal rights for black and white people alike. However, the road to this equality was a long path. It all started when africans were ripped from their homes and brought to America as slaves. Slavery was banned in in 1865, but that didn't stop the the mistreatment of these people. From segregated schools, to making them sit in the back of the bus, to not serving them in restaurants, african-americans were horribly mistreated and abused by our society, and finally in the 1960's, led by Martin Luther King Jr, they started to make a very strong stand against the social control over them.
Social control and resistance have a unique balance. The more social control, the louder the resistance. 'Louder' could mean more obvious, taking a stronger stand, or being more violent. It is just making it's cause more known. Along with this, the louder the opposition is, the more it is going to seem on a completely different side than the social control.
When comparing the balance to the Civil Rights movement, it is really obvious to how the scale changes over time. In the 1960's, the abused african-american population were fed up, and ready for some real change. They didn't just want the laws changed, they wanted the thought of the population as a whole to be changed to one of love and unity. At the time, the social control was very strong. White people still looked down on black people, and treated them worse than dogs. Thus, the resistance was strong and loud. This is somewhat different and yet somewhat similar to the resistance in Fahrenheit 451.
The dystopian society in Fahrenheit 451 burns books. Everyone must be equal and painfree. Books cause pain and different views in people, making books bad. However, there is actually a surprising number of people in the society who disagree, and hide books in their house. However, because of the fire men, people who look for books and then start them on fire, their resistance is a silent one shown only in actions. One women, who had an entire library in her house, choose to burn with her books and refused to move. Actions like that was how the resistance was spurred forward. The social control was people who, when they thought someone was harboring books, turned in a picture of them to the firemen. This was a very strong 'informal' kind of social control because it kept the people in check using someone other than authorities. The thing that made it work so smoothly was that you didn't have to have proof to turn someone in. If you were mad at your neighbor, just put their picture in the box. This fear kept the people in check, created 'equality' and 'removed' pain.
A Silent Resistance, but this women got her point across
Comparing Fahrenheit 451 to the Civil Rights movement shows that the two resistances were noticeable similar, however had some stark differences. The most prominent of these differences was that the Civil Rights movement had the ability to gather and speak out, but in the dystopian society, that just wasn't an option. However, even though those fighting for Civil Rights could speak, that doesn't mean that they were always heard. But, eventually the point got across.
The Social Control on The Civil Rights Movement in the 60's
The informal Social Control on the Civil Rights movement was the attitude of white people as a whole. Whereas the more formal control was the police. These controls kept the african-american population in check for a long time, but not forever. Every place I can think have that has had unjust rules has only been able to keep the population in check just just so long. After a while, the people always seem to fight back and eventually win. But, sometimes the pendulum can swing to far to the other side. Maybe that is happening now when it comes to civil rights. Things like Hate Crimes seem unjust, but the law was established in 1969. I fear that in the case of Civil Rights, the pendulum has swung from one side to the other, and now we are suffering the consequences.
This is totally unrelated, but I have been listening to The Beatles since we started studying about the 60's, and I really like this song and thought I would share it with you in case you haven't heard it. :)))
