Computer Games – Alicia H.

I also grew up playing a lot of computer and video games. One type of computer game that I really loved was the Adventure Game. It is kind of a dead genre these days, but some of its characteristics can be found in many Role-Playing Games and even First-Person Shooters.  These games (like Myst, King’s Quest, and Grim Fandango) required me to solve puzzles using trial and error, and logic in order to progress further into the story. I had to explore areas, look for clues, talk to characters in the game, collect, examine, and combine items, perform tasks in a certain order or with a certain timing, etc. Many of the puzzles were indeed very challenging and often complex. I was constantly using Gee’s “probe, hypothesize, reprobe, rethink” cycle, so as Johnson claims, I was basically using the scientific method! I’m a biology major, so maybe I have games to thank for helping me develop my skills.

The downside I can see to gaming is that with its clear objectives and reward structure, and strong entertainment value, it might lessen one’s tolerance for less-stimulating activities. Games just have a lot more appeal than, say, laundry. I think you just have to make sure that while playing games you are not neglecting any important responsibilities.  It’s the same way with a lot of other enriching leisure activities. It’s all about moderation.

Rewriting Mutual – Alicia H.

Movies that are moral, educational, amusing,  or harmless will get approved, so a movie won’t get censored as long as it sticks to those guidelines.  In other words: Don’t make “bad” movies and there won’t be a problem! It is not Ohio law that is to blame for any perceived profit loss when a film ignores the rules and has to be censored.

The law was made because all films, including seemingly harmless ones, have the potential to be evil. In fact, the seemingly harmless films can be the most dangerous of all– like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  The ability to entertain, influence, and draw together crowds of all ages and sexes makes this type of film especially dangerous.

1st Amendment – Alicia H.

Technically, the censorship of Scarface by the Hays’ Office did not violate the 1st Amendment. This amendment specifically prevents the government (Congress) from “…abridging the freedom of speech…” and does not pertain to private organizations. The Hays’ Office, being a film industry censorship group, and not a government agency, could legally compel filmmakers to comply with its standards outlined in the Hays Code.

However, why did the industry feel the need to practice this self-censorship? Obviously, one could conjecture that it was in response to protests by the public, and that it was an attempt to keep paying customers happy. Not only individuals, but private organizations such as Parent’s Magazine, the New York Times, and the New York Knights of Columbus became even more vocal after an incident in which a boy, playing with a gun after having seen a gangster film, accidentally shot and killed his friend (Black, p.129). If the self-censorship were only about making sure these people still bought movie tickets, I wouldn’t have a problem with it– that’s business. But not everyone was up in arms about this new breed of violent gangster films. The movies were very profitable; for example, the censored version of Scarface (which was still very violent and racy by standards at the time) did well in the box office and was critically acclaimed.

What I really think is the issue is that the film industry was afraid that if they did not practice self-censorship, the government might step in, perhaps in response to outcries from vocal groups of citizens. I find it disturbing that the Hays’ Office may have been created to prevent government intervention, possibly in the form of more severe censorship, banned films, strict regulation, or even the dismantling of the industry. If that is the case, then this censorship runs counter to democratic principles as evoked in the 1st Amendment and Section 12 of the Virginia Bill of Rights.

Intro Text – Alicia H.

In most movies today, the audience is left to come to its own conclusions about the movie’s message. People are allowed to think for themselves, analyze, and interpret the movie however they want; very thought-provoking and controversial movies are often celebrated. I believe the introduction text added at the behest of the Hays’ Office was an attempt to try to control what the audience took from the movie, because censors at the time were afraid of what people might think of it themselves. Such violent gangster movies were just getting their start, and I think that the people in charge were afraid of what impact this new type of movie might have on society. There was probably an increased desire to portray organized crime in a negative light (as something that should be an outrage) because so many people were suffering in poverty during the 1930s; a rich and glamorous gangster life might seem appealing to the masses.

Really, the intro reads like propaganda to me. It tries to stir up negative emotions against organized crime, and tells people how they should think. I can understand why they might have included this text at the time. However, I still am not quite sure it was neccessary because it seems obvious to me throughout the movie (even without that text) that the gangster life isn’t all fun; it has a dark side and many negative consequences, too. I guess they really wanted to drill the message into people’s heads, though, and not leave the audience’s ability to grasp that to chance.

Camonte – Alicia H.

My first impression of Tony Camonte is that he is very smooth.  The first time we see him,  he is whistling as he calmly strolls over to shoot his boss,  Big Louis.  Awhile later,  when the cops arrive at the barber shop to take him in for questioning,  Camonte’s seemingly unflappable attitude is once again on display.  His he is very nonchalant and does not seem to take the cop very seriously at all,  even showing his disrespect for the cop by lighting his match on the guy’s badge.  When the officer responds by punching him in the face,  Camonte seems to get a little angry for a split second,  but quickly brushes it off and composes himself before being lead off to the police station.  Once he’s there, the police chief reads out a long list of Camonte’s aliases and crimes,  and we find out that Camonte is suspected of committing the murder of Big Louis.  Camonte once again plays it cool,  joking that he and Big Louis were “like this,” as tight as his crossed fingers.  He denies everything, and makes a mockery of the police.  At this point, I don’t really like Camonte– he seems like he has a huge ego– but I still admire his cool attitude and wit, and he is pretty charming.

You can start to see how ambitious Camonte is when he goes over to meet his new boss, Lovo.  Camonte is admiring all of Lovo’s nice, expensive stuff, including Lovo’s girlfriend;  he wants it all.  Lovo says to leave all the ideas up to him, but soon it will be Camonte trying to take control.  Camonte reveals to his friend and coworker Rinaldo his philosophy on how to stay out of trouble: “do it first; do it yourself; keep on doing it!” At first, this all seems kind of fun.

However, Camonte’s love of control is further revealed when he arrives home.  When he finds his sister, Cesca, kissing a man, Camonte flies into a fit of rage. He orders Cesca never to do that again, and gives her some money to keep her happy and buy her submission.  Their mother warns Cesca not to accept that money, because it is bad money and Camonte is a bad person.  This is becoming more apparent.

As the movie goes on, I see more and more just how self-possessed and ambitious Camonte is. He will do anything to get his way. He shows complete disrespect for Lovo as he goes after his own targets, ignoring his boss’ orders. Camonte even repeatedly tries to woo Lovo’s girlfriend. Finally, Lovo gets tired of all this and tries to get Camonte killed. Camonte survives, orders Lovo killed, and runs off with Lovo’s girlfriend. He can be so impassioned and full of rage (about his sister), but he is so imperturbable when it comes to the violence all around him, much of which is committed on his orders.

Really, I don’t think that this movie glorifies the gangster lifestyle. Sure, it seems fun and glamorous at times, but it is clear that there is a dark side to the business.  The gangsters’ violence terrorizes the city. Gangsters are shooting other gangsters, and they could never really feel safe or trust people. Finally, even Camonte’s life is crumbling around him. Out of his possessiveness, Camonte shoots Rinaldo when he finds his friend with his sister, who (unbeknownst to Camonte) just got married.  His beloved sister cries and screams at him, calling him a butcher. Finally, he ends up at his house, surrounded by the police.  He laughs like a lunatic as he shoots down at the cops from his steel fortress. He’s manic and in denial of the situation.  After his sister is shot, he’s terrified because he’s finally going to be alone; nobody will be there to help him anymore.  His cool facade has been torn down and he has been reduced to a panicked, afraid, and pathetic human being.  I don’t think that this makes organized crime look appealing. I actually really felt sorry for Camonte;  I pitied him.

Introduction – Alicia H

Hi, my name is Alicia.   I am a biology major, but my other academic interests include art and education.   I have a ton of random little hobbies and interests– from computer gaming to hiking to knitting.   I grew up in Northern Virginia, and I am a commuter.