Archive of ‘Uncategorized’ category

The Film Industry Throughout the Years

One notable aspect of the film industry is how it differentiates defending on the time period. Beginning in the 1910s, this is when the identity of the star was unknown to the public. The star’s name was not advertised on film billboards, not any other form of exposure. During the 1930s and 1940s, “studio publicity focused the public’s attention on stars’ personalities rather than their craftsmanship. In promotional campaigns for specific pictures and behind-the-scenes bios of individual stars’ audiences were told that Hollywood actors were natural actors whose unique qualities were captured by the camera” (Cynthia Baum, ‘Crating Film Performances’, 31). The studios placed a large emphasis on showcasing the star’s personality, and showing that the star is a real person. It was sort of a facade; the studios would try and show the star’s personality through their film work. Basically, the character that the star played would have to have the same personality as the star themself. When comparing this to how film and Hollywood work today, they are complete opposites of one another. In today’s world, a film star can play many roles, no matter what the character’s personality is. The star is actually praised more if the character doesn’t match the star’s real life personality because this shows talent. The transition to sound also affected the film industry greatly. 1926-1934, to be specific, were the transformative years of sound in film. During this period, vocal modulation became of great importance in the film industry, thus there being an influx of demand for dialog and drama coaches. With this new sound and intensity of the vocal range, there was a shift of where the successful actors and actresses performed. Once vocal modulation became of importance, drama actors moved from Broadway to Hollywood, resulting in a decline in theater productions. With the rise of Hollywood stars came more employment in Hollywood film industries and production companies. With more employment came a larger production atmosphere, and with a larger production atmosphere came stricter rules and regulations for the stars. In the 1940s and 1950s, it was extremely hard for a star to move from one studio to another. We then move onto the time period of the 1950s and 1960s. During the 1950s and 1960s is when tabloids started to play a big role in a star’s career. “Publicity offices were responsible for distributing stars’ photos to magazines and newspapers, for planting stories about their private lives in news outlets and for arranging interviews with journalists” (Rigoletto). A prime example of this can be the analysis of Marilyn Monroe’s career. She was one of the biggest icons of this time. Her entire life was a string of some true, but mostly false narrative created by production companies. Specifically by male members of the production company. Monroe’s whole life was constructed by the media. I think it’s important to compare Monroe’s physical appearance to another female star such as Marlene Dietrich. Dietrich was originally staged as a cold and unapproachable beauty. Dietrich was always photographed with dark clothing, thin dark eyebrows, and prominent lipstick. Her facial expressions were stale and stern. She carried a “no bullshit” attitude to put it simply. Evidently, Monroe’s appearance was the exact opposite of this. Monroe always had open body posture, her makeup was never dark, and in her infamous playboy cover she is wearing a white flowy dress. This is a small, but significant key difference that played a huge role in outlining the star images for the two actresses. Monroe changed everything to put it simply. Before Monroe, the women of Hollywood were seen as home-loving, church-going folks.

When comparing Monroe and Dietrich to one another, the difference between how they were viewed by the public becomes apparent. In my opinion, both of them are female icons, but generally men view Dietrich to be the classical image of “female empowerment”. Why is this? The public’s mind has been conditioned that when females partake in, and even desire, sex they are “bad” and some may even say “tainted”. Dietrich wasn’t publicized as a person that had a sexual drive and that partook in the act of sex, but Monroe was. Because of this, the public automatically assumed that Dietrich was ‘better’. Why is it that men can have such an adamant sex drive, but women are shunned when they do so?

In conclusion, the film industry has evolved into different eras, and will continue to do so. So, the question is, what is next for the film industry?

Marilyn Monroe as a Sex Symbol

Monroe can be seen here with her iconic pink lip and light colored clothing.

It is important to discuss how the audience reacts to the star. According to Professor Sergio Rigoletto, the audience/star relationship can be defined as “the audience gives to the film star a ‘reality effect’, turning her from a mere image in a film (or a music video) into a kind of character that we believe to be real”. In this entry I will be exploring the image that was placed onto Marilyn Monroe, and if that image was an accurate representation as to who she was as a person. I would first like to start off by comparing her to her costar, Jane Russell, who played Dorothy Shaw in the film Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. It is very clear that from the beginning of the film, Monroe embodied the “dumb blonde” persona where as Russell played the role of the decisive, “independent” woman. But, was Dorothy Shaw as independent as she came off as? During the scene where Dorothy and Lorelei board the boat to Europe, it is very evident that Lorelei’s main focus was on the male olympic team and getting their attention. It seems a bit contradictory and hypocritical that Lorelei was seen as a gold-digger by her fiance’s family and the rest of the general public, but when Dorothy is consumed by the male olympic team, no one commented on it? Dorothy was displaying the same intentions as Lorelei but no one treated her differently or looked down upon her. This double standard that is displayed in the film is a great parallel to how Monroe was actually treated in the real world when compared to other women. Richard Dyer’s piece “Monroe and sexuality” explores how Marilyn Monroe came to be and how the public treated and viewed Monroe as just a sex symbol.

Monroe started her career as a pin-up model, and became very successful. This success led her to pursue a career in films, transforming her into, what I would consider, the biggest sex symbol to date. During her time in films, her characters were often times “dumb”, and lacked individuality. Oftentimes Monroe’s character was even kept anonymous in the films. 

“In stressing the importance of sexuality in Marilyn Monroe’s image, it might seem that I am just another commentator doing to Monroe what was done to her throughout her life, treating her solely in terms of sex. Perhaps that is the danger, but I hope that I am not reproducing this attitude to Monroe but trying to understand it and historicize it. Monroe may have been a wit, a subtle and profound actress, and intelligent and serious woman; I’ve no desire to dispute this and it is important to recognize and recover those qualities against the grain of her image. But my purpose is to understand the grain itself, and there can be no question that this is overwhelmingly and relentlessly constructed in terms of sexuality. Monroe = sexuality is a message that ran all the way from what the media made of her in the pin-ups and movies to how her image became a reference point for sexuality in the coinage of everyday speech” (Dyer 2). Dyer then goes on to discuss how in all of Monroe’s pieces of work, she was set up in the eyes of the male sexual gaze. There was never a time when Monroe was portrayed as the intelligent, kind woman she was. I want to touch on how Monroe was set up, physically, in the pieces of work she did. Her makeup was always light and fresh, she never wore any dark eye makeup or dark lipstick. Her facial expressions in photos always consisted of a smirk or a smile, never a frown. She always displayed illustrious doe eyes that encapsulated the vision of sex in them. When examining her body posture, her arms were never covering her chest or any other part of her body. All of these components added extreme desire and lust to her image. Two noteworthy quotes that are included in Dyer’s work appear at the very beginning of the chapter. They state, “The denial of the body is delusion. No woman transcends her body.” (Joseph Rheingold) and “Men want women pink, helpless and do a lot of deep breathing.” (Jayne Mansfield) These quotes are just a prelude for the explanation and dissection that Dyer provides surrounding the sexualization of Monroe. 

In conclusion, Marilyn Monroe, in my opinion, is one of the strongest, most impactful figures in all of Hollywood’s history.