More Satisfying Movie example essay topic

The Godfather and On the Waterfront The Godfather and On the Waterfront are two movies that make an attempt to explain organized crime, urban life, working people, and the role of government in the lives of people in the 1940's. These two movies share many similarities and differences form both a thematic and artistic standpoint. They also shed some light on a part of American history that is not fully understood. It is in light of these facts and observations that the movie, On the Waterfront is a more satisfying film to watch, in my opinion. In both movies, the general theme is the same. That theme is the role of organized crime in American cities.

Although they tell stories of different aspects of mob involvement on a different part of society, the basic idea is constant, involvement of the mob in everyday life of American society. Artistically these two movies varied greatly, with good reason I might add. On the Waterfront was releases in 1954, somewhat primitive times in the world of movie making, and the Godfather was made in the mid-seventies, it is only reasonable to expect that with the changing times comes changing technology, and therefore changing styling of the films art. On the Waterfront is a black and white film, uses extremely few special effects (as to be expected in this time of movie making), a somewhat corny dialect, and a rare subject matter with very little precedent to work from. The Godfather, on the other hand, is in color, utilizes cutting edge special effects (for the 1970's at least), a more real dialect, which aids in the believability of the film, and the same subject, which in the 20 some-odd years since On the Waterfronts release had become a more researched and documented subject matter. Taking these and other factors into consideration clear shows why, artistically, the Godfather is a better, more advanced film.

In both of these movies descriptive plot and setting helps to educate the viewer about urban life in America in the 1940's. In On the Waterfront, city life is seen as dirty, raunchy, cutthroat, and downright scary. It is seen from the prospective of the docks, or the Waterfront, and life is good for very few people. There is no hierarchy of power in this neighborhood, one group of people has all the power, and one man has control over this group of people.

Taking this into consideration, it is logical that the members of this group are all comfortable, and well off, however anyone not involved with this group with poor, and just barely scraping by. It is a mirror image of American society as a whole form the early 1900's, the rich kept getting richer, while the poor kept getting poorer. In the Godfather, urban life was seen away from the docks, in houses, and big buildings downtown, a more upscale prospective. It is seen as a place where there is more variation in the type of people who live there. There is more of a middle class, making all three of the classes a little more equal in the power scheme.

It shows a more livable aspect of the city, where people can be trusted, family is important, and respect is bestowed upon those who have proved themselves worthy. The only real similarity is that business under any circumstances, always comes first. On the Waterfront and the Godfather showed contrasting views about working people in the 1940 as well. In On the Waterfront working people were seen as the dregs of society, people whose only function in life was to ease the lives of the people who didn t need to do manual labor. Seen an sub-human animals they completed their work, and never asked questions. They are depicted as people who don t ask questions and don t answer them, anonymity is key to these people.

If they can remain unknown, they can remain alive, don t make yourself known, and you can t get yourself into trouble. You never ratted on somebody because you knew the powers would find out in any event, so why make yourself known. It was a place where fear ruled over all. In the Godfather the working class was seen differently. Since there were three well defined classes in society, the working class was spread throughout all of them.

Working people, often times, were still sent to do the dirty work of the upper class, but it was different. They were expected to do the undesirable work, but they were rewarded for it with decent pay and protection from enemies, as opposed to On the Waterfront where people often went without the necessities of life and had to watch their individual backs all the time, true allies were at a minimum. In addition to describing urban life and the role of working people in society, both films depict the role of government in the lives of people in the 1940's. In On the Waterfront the police were not an issue, the police did not exist on the docks, unless you call the power hungry union workers police. The only thing lawbreakers had to fear was the sporadic federal investigations of the goings on in the dock area. In addition, government officials, workers, and members were at a premium in the docks.

People took to the idea that we should let them fend for themselves, we don t bother them, maybe they won t bother us. Unfortunately for the good people who lived around the docks, this neglecting reached and hurt them too. In the Godfather the government was another issue altogether. The government was around, they were a very public, well seen part of society.

The only problem was that they were all on the payroll of the respective mob families of the city. Therefore they proved ineffective in solving the problem. Each family had people in high places that they could rely on when hard times hit, and these people were paid handsomely for their troubles. The mob families had the government in the palm of its hands, which was a clear advantage over the situation in On the Waterfront, having the government on you side is a much better system in the overall scheme. In watching these two movies I learned a lot about the 1940's or at least the mob influence on it. I learned that it was everyone, in all walks of urban life.

It was something that people grew up with, they knew, and they tried to stay on the good side of. Nobody wanted the mob mad at them, for obvious reasons. They were a dangerous group of people who place importance in money, family, and religion in that order. I learned how there were a precious few people with more power than the Dons, or leaders of the respective families. Also about how it was a time where government did not rule the people, the mob did. The government was full of men and women who sold out for money and self security, people who only looked out for number one.

Most importantly I learned that it was a time that I am glad we, as a whole, have transcended and that I am glad I was not a part of. On the Waterfront was a more satisfying movie because it ended with a better sense of closure. The Godfather ended with many loose ends still left untied, a lot of room for a sequel (or two in the this case). On the other hand, On the Waterfront finished nicely.

The movie ends and you feel good about it and how it made you feel, there is little left to the imagination. On a personal note, I also found something profoundly satisfying about watching a movie where Marlon Brando was thin, moderately good looking, and spoke in a manner that was easily understood. Having analyzed, compared and contrasted many of the important ideas behind these two movies one could say many thing about organized crime in the 1940's. It could be said that it was bad, ruthless, mean, discriminatory, blatant, offensive, etc. However one thing that could never be said about organized crime in the 1940's is that it was not prominent.

It was there and it was real, hate it or love it.