Meggie Macdonald

My paper proposal on violence in American cinema was accepted for presentation at the British Association for American Studies conference 2008 at the University of Edinburgh.  However, I was unable to attend.  I wanted to relate the basic premise of my ideas to try and garner some kind of response that might help answer my main question.

The basic purpose of my proposal for the BAAS was initiated by the advertisement for  yet another film about violence, cruelty, and morality:  ‘The Brave One’, starring Jodie Foster and Terence Howard.  I had been startled by the overwhelming number of what is commonly called ‘torture-porn’ meeting with mainstream audience support and felt that this film could be nothing but more of the same, if a little diluted.  More definitive examples of the ‘torture-porn’ genre are ‘Saw’ (2004), ‘Hostel’ (2005), and ‘Captivity’ (2007).  These films, as far as I can tell, were set up with a very basic slasher or thriller plotline and then just allowed to run wild with the idea of pushing the limits of acceptibility in cinematic violence.  Assuredly, some special effects co-ordinators, make-up artists, and cinematographers must have had a field day as they worked to create a realistic portrayal of such brutal violence, including decapitations, amputations (without anaesthetic), physical and mental torture, and anything else that one human being can conceivably do to another.

What I find interesting is that, in light of such terrible events going on around the world today – the genocides in Rwanda and Sudan, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the continued unrest in Israel and Palestine, the terrorist attacks in the United States, the school shootings starting with Columbine and escalating from there, the human rights issues in China and elsewhere, and probably hundreds more that I am unaware of - the artistic impulse has turned towards ‘torture-porn’ as a response.  In the face of death, destruction, and suffering, what cinemas are showing more and more frequently is death, destruction, and suffering.  Long gone are the days when audiences preferred seeing Cary Grant in a beautifully-cut suit on screen while POWs were being tortured and killed in war-torn Europe.  The escapism of the cinema has taken a dark turn.

Because this certainly retains escapist tendencies; there is something fantastical about the brutality and cruelty enacted on screen, simply because we cannot imagine what it would be like if it happened to us.  The ‘what if’ question of old, previously used in discussions over the death penalty, now refer to questions of how much pain someone can endure.  “Could you handle it?”  “Could you survive it?”  “Could you walk away from it and lead a normal life?”  This is the new focus.

Let us see a few examples.  Matt Damon’s character, Jason Bourne, regains a heightened sense of morality only after a clear break with the past wherein he was an assassin.  He had to lose his memory and all sense of his previous self to regain the ethical code familiar to the modern western world.  And yet, he still kills.  But rather than killing for money or pride, he kills to survive and to ensure that the truth will out eventually.  It is interesting to note that the character must break completely with the enculturation that defined his personality in order to have his morality restored.

Jodie Foster’s character in ‘The Brave One’, Erica Bain, on the other hand, is acutely aware of her lack of morality as she kills.  She had suffered a terrible loss, both in the person of her fiance, and in her sense of personal security and the general goodness of humankind.  The film asks the question:  does it matter what she is looking for, be it revenge, justice, or something else?  Or is the audience meant to focus on the way in which she copes with tragedy and suffering?

Jennifer Tree, the character played by Elisha Cuthbert in ‘Captivity’ is forced to come to terms with the inherent cruelty of humanity when she suffers as a captive for no apparent reason whatsoever.  There is no motive here, except the enjoyment of watching suffering in others.  ‘Saw’, the 2004 film that spawned no less than three sequels, follows the experiences of several captives in a maze of what is affectionately referred to as ‘evil’ and how they survive.

The basic question that comes out of these films is simple.  How can one survive the dangers of the world?  This is certainly not a new question, no is it an invalid one that has no bearing on the modern world.  I find it unnerving, however, that the people who look for the answer to this question are rarely the ones who go to the cinema to see it in gruesome detail on screen.  We are all aware of how war movies can send veterans back into shell-shock; for example, the Normandy sequences in ‘Saving Private Ryan’.  As a result, many of our grandparents decline to attend such films and show no interest in seeing them at any time in the future.  So why is there an audience for ‘torture-porn’?

This was the question I had put to myself to answer for the purposes of the BAAS conference.  I have not yet completed the necessary research to offer a possible solution, but invite comments on this site to engage in discussion on the subject.