-page 8- JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND POPULAR CULTURE (ISSN 1070-8286) Volume 1, Issue 2 (June 13, 1993) Pages 8-15 EDITORS' NOTE The Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture welcomes all of our new members. Criminal justice educators may find this issue's movie reviews quite helpful in organizing a theory course on crime or deviance. Martin Gottschalk and Greg Howard suggest utilizing the movie "FISHER KING" at the beginning of such a course in order to draw out basic philosophical issues concerning human motivation and responsibility. In our second review, Sean Anderson proposes that the film "MENACE II SOCIETY" may be used as a course overview because of its abundance of theoretically rich material. For those new subscribers and the general public, prior issues are available from the LISTSERV. Using a "GET" command, any archived document may be retrieved automatically. We invite submissions from all of our subscribers. Movie reviews submitted to the JCJPC should conform to the format outlined by the current contributions. Please direct all queries and submissions to SUNYCRJ@ALBNYVM1.BITNET -page 9- "The Fisher King": A Review Director: Terry Gilliam Writer: Richard LaGravenese Starring: Jeff Bridges, Robin Williams, Amanda Plummer, and Mercedes Ruhl Released: Columbia Tristar Video (1991) VHS, 137 min. Rating: R Consistent with the corpus of Terry Gilliam's work (e.g., BRAZIL and THE ADVENTURES OF BARON MUNCHAUSEN), THE FISHER KING once again deals with grand themes against the backdrop of an alienating and dehumanizing social environment. The movie begins with Jack Lucas (Jeff Bridges), the biting, sardonic, and caustic radio "personality," berating his callers and listeners from a small studio somewhere in New York City. Speaking to one of his "fans" named Alan, Jack launches into a lengthy tirade in which he derides "yuppies," declaring that they deserve to die. With another day's job of derision completed, Jack goes home to prepare for his first television appearance, practicing his "presentation of self" by uttering the words "forgive me!" with every possible vocal permutation. This exercise soon proves prophetic, however, when the 11 o'clock news--that bastion of violence and disembodied imagery--reports that Alan (Jack's caller) went on a shooting rampage earlier in the day, killing several people at a trendy New York nightspot frequented by "yuppie" types. Herein lies the fundamental conflict of the movie--Jack's seething guilt for the deaths of those in the club. Three years later, Jack's guilt is exacerbated further when Perry (Robin Williams), the husband of one of the murder victims, saves him from a suicidal plunge into the Hudson. Throughout the rest of the movie, the fateful relationship between Jack and Perry unfolds, providing the springboard for Gilliam's brilliant exploration of such fundamental human problems as sin, repentance, and redemption as well as the search for personal fulfillment. The focus on the search for personal fulfillment in an increasingly bureaucratized and alienating world is played out through the more basic (and ancient) debate surrounding human motivation. In Jack Lucas, Gilliam gives us a portrait of egoism -page 10- incarnate--a covetous, self-interested radio "personality" who is perpetually anguished despite his material success. Against this image, Gilliam juxtaposes Perry, the homeless madman--the fool--who finds satisfaction through apparently selfless and noble acts. The Egoism-Altruism dichotomy is made even more explicit as Perry relates the story of "The Fisher King" to Jack. The story concerns a king with visions of glory and fortune who spends a lifetime searching for the sacred Holy Grail, only to find himself emotionally scarred and embittered as he nears the end of his life. At this point, a fool comes along. Finding the king thirsty, the fool offers the king a drink of water. As the king drinks the water from the fool's cup, he finds himself not only emotionally healed but also in possession of that which he had chased for so long--the Holy Grail. Of course, the point of "The Fisher King" story is clear: the single minded pursuit of personal satisfaction (i.e., egoism) is doomed to failure. Only through other pursuits can true happiness be realized. Given this central theme, THE FISHER KING seems particularly well suited to courses that examine the nature of deviance. Obviously, any course that concerns itself with human behavior must address the basic philosophical question: what motivates people to act as they do? In Jack and Perry, Gilliam provides concrete examples with which to discuss the Egoism-Altruism debate. The questions that the instructor can pull out of this movie to address this issue are manifold. If one assumes an altruistic position, one must ask what forces (e.g., social, structural, economic) are responsible for Jack's abandonment of his basic nature? Conversely, if one adopts the position of psychological egoism, how does one reconcile Perry's apparently selfless behavior with a self-interested human nature? If one responds (as egoists would be inclined to do) that furthering the interests of others increases Perry's own happiness and, therefore, his self-interest, does not the egoist doctrine risk vacuity? In addition to providing material for discussing the various doctrines regarding human motivation, THE FISHER KING also addresses the Determinist- Indeterminist debate which is another essential issue when examining deviant behavior. Accordingly, notions of free will and responsibility play critical roles in the movie's narrative. For instance, when -page 11- Perry enters a catatonic state after facing the haunted memory of his wife's sordid death, Jack visits him in the hospital. In an extended soliloquy apparently designed to assuage his feelings of guilt, Jack says, "I don't feel responsible for you. I'm not God... I don't feel guilty. I don't feel sorry for you. It's easy being nuts. Try being me." As an example of the Determinist- Indeterminist theme found throughout the movie, this monologue raises several basic questions. Is Jack responsible for the tragedy at the heart of the movie? What is the connection between guilt and responsibility? Did the killer act of his own free will or were his actions determined by Jack (and by extension the media) and/or mental defect? In sum, THE FISHER KING does an excellent job of drawing out some basic, and essential, philosophical issues that bear directly on the study of deviance. In addition, the film prompts more obvious, but often neglected, questions about who is deviant and why. Accordingly, the film might be most profitably used at the beginning of a course to introduce and help stimulate thought and discussion regarding some of the basic ideas that will appear throughout the course. Finally, while the movie has much to recommend it for analytical purposes, Gilliam's storytelling ability and eye for stunning visuals should help to captivate the students' attention throughout the course of the movie. In the end, THE FISHER KING is an engaging movie-- intellectually, aesthetically, and emotionally. Thus, the film receives a rating of three gavels. Martin Gottschalk and Gregory J. Howard State University of New York at Albany School of Criminal Justice -page 12- "MENACE II SOCIETY": A Review Directors: Allen and Albert Hughes Writer: Tyger Williams [based on an idea by Allen and Albert Hughes] Starring: Tyrin Turner, Vonte Sweet, Larenz Tate, Jada Pickette, Bill Duke, Samuel Jackson, and Charles Dutton Released: New Line Cinema (1993) showing at a theatre near you, approximately two hours Rating: R Building upon the groundwork laid by films such as "BOYZ N THE HOOD" and "STRAIGHT OUT OF BROOKLYN," the Hughes brothers weave a despairing tale of urban violence in America's black communities. MENACE II SOCIETY traces the vicissitudes of a group of friends in the chaotic environment of Watts. The narrative revolves around the anti-hero Caine, a small time drug dealer, who was raised by his devoutly religious grandparents because his mother died of a heroin overdose and his father was killed in a drug deal when Caine was a young child. The film opens with Caine and his closest friend O-Dog (Larenz Tate) attempting to purchase some malt liquor at a Korean-run convenience store. As soon as they enter the store, the proprietors have the young black men under dogged surveillance, fearful of their possible intentions. Resentful of the Korean store owners' antagonistic perceptions, O-Dog quickly escalates into explosive violence upon hearing one shopkeeper jeeringly state, "I feel sorry for your mother." So begins the cataclysmic venture of Caine and his pals, each scene punctuated with machismo and brutal violence, seemingly engendered by the surrounding social circumstances. The film then suggests that the current ethos of the Watts community can be genealogically traced to the riots of 1965. By tying the community's current social problems, such as drugs and violence, to the systematic oppression (perceived or realistic) derived from white America's vision of law and order in the 1960's, the Hughes brothers present several poignant questions. What are the implications of the 1992 L.A. riots to that city's future twenty years from now? Does the genesis of the recent L.A. riots rest within the Watts riots? Do riots help or hinder a communities' future development? Are the destinies -page 13- of precious African-American children in the big cities of America already set? MENACE II SOCIETY answers the last question with a resounding, "Yes!" While oppression and isolation from the dominant society appears to be a necessary ingredient for the current misfortunes of African-American violence, the directors locate the specific etiology within the process of learning destructive and violent behaviors via social interactions. Caine learns how to sell and mix drugs as well as kill by witnessing his father murder several people before meeting his own demise. His father substitute, an older streetwise youth, mentors Caine on life within a tough urban community, specifically teaching him how to shoot a gun. Peer influence is depicted as the paramount force in the molding of the young black man's destiny. Illustrative of this learning experience, Caine himself tries to teach his former mentor's son how to use a gun. These young men epitomize the concept of the tabula rasa. Having self destructive behaviors impressed upon them at such an early age, these young men are guided onto paths condemned by society. With this as a major theme, the film also allows educators an opportunity to traverse the well-traveled ground of learning theories. Caine and his friends exist within the artificial Hollywoodesque world of the gangster, each trying to outdo the other in arbitrary, but vicious, fits of machismo. The arbitrariness of life on the streets is intricately woven with the systematic oppression, politically and economically, of the dominant world. Yet, the most compelling statement by the film-makers is made when Caine's grandfather confronts him about his consistent involvement in trouble. Prophetically, the grandfather asks, "Do you wanna live or die?" After a moment of pondering, Caine replies, "I don't know." The absence of any value placed upon his life or others is endemic in urban American society, particularly African- American, and the Hughes brothers, with this exchange, excellently detail this tragic fact. Propelled by a sizzling soundtrack, the visceral impact is overwhelming. From the opening scene to the narrative climax, this movie vibrates with an openness and freshness unparalleled among movies of a similar vein. For a film directorial debut, the Hughes brothers (21 year old twins) have demonstrated that they will be a force to reckon with for many years. The cast gives solid performances all around, -page 14- making for a truly entertaining and informative film. It is a rare cinematic experience when a film paints such an unsympathetic character like Caine, strongly played by Tyrin Turner, in a sympathetic light. The movie screams at the audience, "Caine is not a killer but a victim!" Since this film not only tries to illuminate the social circumstances that underlie seemingly incomprehensible acts of violence and destruction within our impoverished neighborhood but also attempts to dissect the roots of African-American violence, it provides a plethora of topics for ANY classroom discussion. For example, one may ask the class how is the police's role depicted in this movie and how closely does it conform to real life policing and real life perceptions of policing? Or what is the role of women in the movie and what role do they play in the violent streets of urban America? In addition, what ideological message about drugs is communicated throughout the movie? Finally, the film hints at various other social theories of black urban violence (e.g., Strain, Control, Social Disorganization, Radical, and Subcultural), making this the perfect movie to show at the end of a theory course. For example, one might ask students to name all of the theories suggested by the film and support their assertions with evidence gleaned from the movie. Used in conjunction with books such as Roger Lane's "Roots Of Violence In Black Philadelphia: 1860-1900" or John Edgar Wideman's "Brothers and Keepers," MENACE II SOCIETY can provide the class with a rare glimpse at the complexity of the black urban crime and violence phenomenon that is running rampant across the garbage strewn streets of inner city America. Given the film's bold commentary on urban African-American life and its ability to conjure up strong emotions in the audience, this reviewer metes out three and a half gavels. Sean Anderson State University of New York at Albany School of Criminal Justice -page 15- Send submissions, comments and queries to: The Editors, Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, SUNYCRJ@ALBNYVM1.BITNET or SUNYCRJ@UACSC2.ALBANY.EDU EDITORIAL BOARD Frankie Bailey, The University at Albany, New York. Leo Barrile, Bloomsburg University Michael Lynch, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Brendan Maguire, Western Illinois University. Richard McCleary, University of California, Irvine. Graeme Newman, The University at Albany, New York. Ray Surette, Florida International University, Miami. MANAGING EDITORS Sean Anderson and Greg Ungar, Editors, Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, School of Criminal Justice, SUNYA 135 Western Avenue Albany, NY 12222 INTERNET: SA1171@ALBNYVM1.BITNET LIST ADMINISTRATOR Seth Rosner, School of Criminal Justice, SUNYA SR2602@uacsc1.albany.edu or SR2602@thor.albany.edu COPYRIGHT STATEMENT All rights are reserved by copyright, except that authors retain intellectual property rights to their articles, but they may not republish them in other publications. JCJPC may be reproduced in whole or in part for non-profit use for such purposes as education, research, and library reference. Any commercial use of this journal in whole or in part by any means is strictly prohibited without written permission from the editors. Any use of this journal in whole or in part, including by authors, should include customary bibliographic citations including author attribution, date of publication, article title, JCJPC, and electronic retrieval instructions.