The film Philadelphia (1993) is one of the first Hollywood films to really look at homosexuality.  This film comes at a time shortly after the aids epidemic in the United States.  This film stars Tom Hanks who plays Andrew Beckett a lawyer at a high profile law firm in Philadelphia who is fired shortly after because he has aids.   Beckett tries hire a small time lawyer Joe Miller played by Denzel Washington, who homophobic, in order to sue his former employer for unlawful termination.   Miller refuses to work with Beckett because he is scared of Beckett and his disease, how when Miller sees Beckett being discriminated against because of his appearance.  In the film you see Miller and Beckett become closer, and you see Miller come over his homophobia by realizing that there is no difference between himself and Beckett.  Not only does this film look at a homosexual mans struggle with aids but it also looks at how discrimination affects people in America.

This film is one of the first to really tackle the idea of aids and its impact.  However the reason I find this film so interesting is because it looks at how discrimination evolves.  Miller who is an African American man living in Philadelphia who probably faced a lot of discrimination in his life than places similar discrimination onto Tom Hanks character Andrew Beckett.  One of the most interesting scenes is when Miller is discussing Beckett’s case with his wife and says his does want to touch him or breath the same air as him, because at this time many people still didn’t know how aids was transmitted.  This was one of the most interesting scenes to me because this something I’m sure many white Americans have said when discussing African Americans.   Casting an African American actor to play this role of homophobic lawyer Joe Miller really captures the juxtaposition of racial and sexual discrimination.   In a scene when both Miller and Beckett are in a library, Miller over hears a conversation between Beckett and a librarian, where the librarian ask if Beckett would be more comfortable in a private room with Beckett replying would you be more comfortable with me in a private room.   This scene is when Millers homophobic attitude changes because he realizes has felt the discrimination that Beckett is experiencing.

This film also attempts to break down the stereotype of homosexual men in popular culture.  The character of Andrew Beckett doesn’t exhibit any of the common stereotypes associated with being a gay man.  He isn’t fashionable in anyway, he doesn’t talk a differently and he does display any feminine characteristic that are common in many portrayals of gay men.  Andrew Beckett is just a regular man, which is an important aspect in this film because it shows that whether you are gay or not you deserve to be treated equally.

This is one of the most amazing movies of this era because touches on so many emotions while still shining a light on discrimination in todays society.   This film was also incredibly well cast with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington playing two characters that are both very relatable to the audience.  Washington’s portrayal of homophobic lawyer is a character many people at the time can relate to but his transition from homophobe to compassionate friend is also believable.  Tom Hanks who one an Oscar for portrayal of Andrew Beckett gives a fantastic performance as a dying man fighting for his right to be treaded equally.   This is a very honest film which allows any viewer to understand the struggle gay men and anyone who is HIV positive have experienced

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107818/

On Wednesday we were asked to compare a two of the six films we have watched in class and it made me start to think about the movies we have seen and how some of them have certain themes in common.  Most of the films we have watched are all centered on movies themselves.  Singin’ in the Rain, Peeping Tom and 8 ½ in general really focus on the struggle of making a film.  Looking deeper at this theme of movies about movies, I saw a connection especially with Peeping Tom and 8 ½ and how they both centered on this idea for perfection.

Peeping Tom is a film that is centered around Mark a filmmaker in search of perfection. Mark is looking for the perfect shot of fear, which leads him to start killing women hoping for the perfect face of fear that will cause him to stop his search.  In 8 ½ you see the main character Guido unable to make his film because he is uninspired however there are multiple scene to me that suggest that he is actually in search for the perfect women.  Both of these also center on not being able to finish a project because they are too busy trying to attain perfection.

There are many scenes in 8 ½ that show Guidos struggle to find the prefect women.  Guido is surrounded by women a large part of the movie with leads me to think that he hasn’t found the perfect woman for him making him need a different woman for each situation.  Probably one of the more recognized scene is when he is in a room with all of the women in his life and they are all serving a different function for him.  This also apparent within the film he is directing as well because he is unable to cast a female lead.  We can also see his struggle to cast a female lead when pictures of female headshots surround him.   The only perfect women that seems to exist for him with in the film is Claudia who may or may not be real, my interpretation is that she in fact doesn’t exist.  The fact she doesn’t exist helps show that perfection is unattainable for him.

In Peeping Tom, Mark is surrounded by women; much like the character Guido.  However what Mark is looking for in a woman is much different.  In this film Mark has found the perfect woman but he is trying to find the perfect image of fear.  Mark is a much different character than Guido because Mark seems to be trying harder to find perfection even taking to killing women in order to find the perfect face of fear.

While these men are searching for different types of perfection this is an interesting theme that these two very different films share.  In both films you see how the search for perfection is really the end for the main characters; it causes Guido to commit career suicide and leads to the death of Mark. These films are in two different genres but they both make you look at how the search for perfection can really consume a person’s life and cause destruction.

“Singin in the Rain” is a commentary on the silent film industry and the transition into the world of the talkies. While watching “Singin’ in the Rain” I noticed the film could be seen as a piece of satire not only on the silent film era but I also noticed that some of the movie could be seen as a commentary of Hollywood in general.   Much of the film is centered on the Hollywood lifestyle not only the actual work that takes place but also the parties and premieres of the movies.   For example in the opening scene you see a women announcing the stars on the film and the fans screaming.  This part to me seemed like a satire the Hollywood industry of prompting the stars more so than the film itself.  Though much of the film you do see Don working on a film but in the movie we never see “The Dancing Cavalier” we just focus on the stars of the film and their transition into the talkies.  “Singin’ in the Rain” could even be seen as a critic of the Hollywood lifestyle in present day.  Today many movies focus mainly on who is in the movie than the actual content of the film.  Like in “Singin’ in the Rain” the audience going to the premiere of the film in the beginning of the film where only getting excited for the stars of the movie and not caring about Cosmo who worked on the film but didn’t star in it.  Cosmo is also probably one of the most important pieces within the film because he really is the one that solves a majority of the problems but gets the least credit.  This could be a critique on how the star of the movie really gets the most credit but really doesn’t do to much in the product of the film.

I think that while this film is an obvious critic on how the changes of the film industry caused problems I think that it also highlights some problems with the ideas of Hollywood stars and how fleeting their careers can be.  The film reminded me a bit of another film that came out two years before “Singin’ in the Rain”, “All About Eve” which is also a critique of how women in the media real get turned away after the age of 40.  While this film is obviously different but you do have this idea of a younger women taking over the career of film star who can’t really continue her career due to the changing of the times.  While Lina Lamont and Margo Channing are two very different characters they do share a common story, which is the fear of having their careers taken away from them.

While this film definitely a critique of the silent film area it is also a very enjoyable which is the overall purpose of the film.  While watching the film it was very difficult to look at it from an analytical perspective because the movie is just suppose to be enjoyed which it is.