Chapter 27: The Muddled Morals of Movies

While enjoying some spare time between the hustle and bustle of a record-breaking theatrical weekend, I sat down and watched Aaah! Zombies (2007). Also known as Wasting Away, the film was creative in its high-concept. A group of twenty-somethings are infected by a top secret military serum and turned into lifeless zombies. They don't realize what has happened and the entire movie is told from their perspective as they slowly realize they have become the living dead. Some of the in-jokes can be a little contrived and silly (you don't think something is amiss when you're eating human brains?) but everything for the most part was decent if inconsequential.

We Want Equality!...and brains

 When the group finally realize it isn't the rest of the world that's gone mad but them, the movie makes a half-serious attempt at a civil rights message. Zombies were people too, and shouldn't be persecuted for being different. Whoa? Don't get me wrong I'm all for civil rights but zombies aren't exactly known for their co-mingling abilities. Plus unlike other groups suffering from discrimination, you're not really born a zombie, you become one and most of the time its against your will.

If anything, Aaah Zombies! got me thinking about other movies with questionable lessons. Movies that, despite being of high caliber explain things in just such a way as to make you cock your head. Need a few examples?

Scent of a Woman (1992)
Scent of a Woman concerns a prep school student named Charlie (Chris O'Donnell) who takes on a job taking care of a blind ex-colonel (Al Pacino) over the holidays, to pay for his school expenses. What is supposed to be a pretty easy babysitting job turns into a three day excursion into New York City involving Tango, Ferrari racing and an awkward family dinner.

Why do the kids at Hogwarts get all the cool stuff?

While trying his best to keep up, Charlie's mind is occupied by his shaky standing with the school's dean who has threatened him with expulsion. Charlie had been witness to a ballsy practical joke conducted by the school wise-ass (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and his friends. The usually straight and narrow Charlie is torn on whether or not he should tell on them. Spoiler alert! He doesn't; and faces a dramatic disciplinary hearing in front of the whole school. Al Pacino shows his face and makes a heartfelt speech in defense of Charlie's honor, the hearing members back down, case closed.

If the kid don't snitch you must acquit, hoohah!

So what exactly is wrong with this picture? Well it's basically a diatribe against informing authorities of wrong doing disguised as a platitude about honor. Charlie risks absolutely everything for a group of guys who aren't too keen on him and honors his promise not to narc, even when he's screwed over in the end...all for what? For a moral code that can be best summed up as "no one likes a tattle-tale." This is exactly the mentality of neighborhoods riddled with gang and mob violence and arguably the biggest reason why it takes officials so damn long to prosecute dangerous criminals. Granted going to the opposite logical extreme isn't much better but its not like Charlie was protecting the French Underground.

What up, comrade?

The moral of On the Waterfront (1954) is the perfect example of a lesson that is diametrically opposed to the one posited by Scent of a Woman. Watch them both side by side and see which one you would agree with more. What? On the Waterfront was director Elia Kazan's response to those who accused him of narking on supposed communists during the red scare? Never mind.

The Lion King (1994)

...And that is why poor people must remain poor son

Hear me out. At the beginning of the movie Mufasa brought Simba to the top of Pride Rock and explained the hierarchy like this; "When we die, our bodies become the grass, and the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected in the great Circle of Life." If you ask me the antelope still get a bum deal but his basic point is you must have respect for the balanced system that has and will always exist.

Hyenas however don't have a say in this balance and are forced to live in deteriorating conditions and scavenge on the outskirts of the kingdom. Now along comes an ambitious revolutionary named Scar who wants to include them among the lions. True Scar was also motivated by his desire to be king but as the sequel showed, its not like he didn't already have his supporters among the pride. Scar could have used them in his plans to kill Mufasa and Simba. Failing that he could have just started the stampede himself! So why would he include the hyenas? Simple, because he was a genuine political game-changer and had a clear vision for organizing his kingdom. Distribute the wealth sort of speak. This is seen as absolutely evil? He kept Zazoo around so he couldn't have been all bad.

Simba was gone for about five years (lion's manes are fully grown by five). A lot could have happened in that time. There could have been a great amount of food until that last year. Simba could have just arrived at the tail end of the dry season and the pride just didn't think things through. A mistake, sure but not a coup-able offense. Scar could have also inherited a lot of the problems from Mufasa. He may have been a good father but a shitty king; after all he kept Scar around. However the movie paints Scar as absolutely evil and his reign as a bleak and terrible time when the balance was disrupted. So the lesson then is don't rock the boat.

Lets face it, there are too many "rights"

Dirty Harry (1971)
A San Francisco detective known as Dirty Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) kick ass and takes names with little regard for the rules or human rights. Things however get messy when he comes face to face with The Scorpio Killer. Because Harry searches Scorpio's home (a hobble in Kezar stadium) without a warrant and tortures him to find the location of a victim he buried alive, Scorpio is let go to kill again. You can probably guess what the moral of the story is. Fuck habeus corpus and criminal rights.  Now anyone who doesn't know a thing about the law would probably rant and rave about the "stupid" rights criminals have in our country. "There is just too much red tape dammit!" they would exclaim.

Such luxury

First off, time restrains, like the one posed by a victim being buried alive is considered probable cause to search someone's living quarters. It's a legal precedent known as "running out of time." Secondly, if the D.A. was smart (as I like to think most are) he would have shaved off the charges that provided questionable evidence. Worst case scenario that still would have left three cases of 1st degree murder! But lets leave out the improper application of the law for a moment. Lets say everything that is presented in the film is completely accurate; a serial killer can walk out of a police station scott free because a vigilante cop went ape shit on him and the amount of red tape protecting criminals is staggering. There is this pesky thing called the Bill of Rights that explicitly enumerates criminal rights. Specifically the fourth Amendment which states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation...". That's a lot to overcome when the moral of the story is criminals are just too pampered.

Frankenstein (1994)
The lesson I felt was brought forth was essentially, the human impulse for discovery is a hollow and dangerous pursuit. There are just some things only God is meant to do or know. I already discussed Frankenstein in a previous article so I won't go into too much detail. There's a youtube clip featuring Neil deGrasse Tyson which I feel best sums up my feelings about Frankenstein so here it is.

Yea, I'm kind of a big deal

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)
Ferris Bueller (Matthew Broderick) is probably one of the most gleefully egocentric main characters to ever exist in mainstream cinema. On the surface, Ferris is just a upper middle-class white boy who wants to have some fun. Nothing wrong so far except the fact that he's a psychopath. What really gets to me is his complete disregard for his friends; his lady Sloane (Mia Sara) and the deathly ill Cameron (Alan Ruck).

jackass won't even let me drive

The day starts after Ferris pretends to be sick then calls Cameron who is at home bedridden. He doesn't want to go on an excursion which is reasonable given the fact he's white as a sheet, but Ferris basically bullies him into not only going, but boosting his dad's prized Ferrari. Sloane (yeah I didn't know that was her name either) is a bit more willing but certainly didn't have plans to skip school on that fateful day. She was likely shoehorned at the last minute because Cameron was too much of a damp towel to let loose in Chicago. You basically know the rest of the story, they go to the city, con their way into a four star restaurant, ruin a parade, total the car and Ferris gets away with everything. So the lesson is essentially, its okay to run amok and treat your friends like shit; so long as you have a good time doing it.


Sleepers (1996)

And they turn into perfectly adjusted adults

I have plenty more examples but I'll give you just one more. Sleepers tells the tale of four Hell's Kitchen yutes who are sent to a reform school after a prank goes horribly wrong nearly killing a man. There they are raped and abused by a group of guards which include Kevin Bacon in the creepiest role of his career. Years later two of the four boys are accused of killing Kevin Bacon and its up to the other two to help them out.

You know the old saying the truth shall set you free? Yeah that doesn't really happen here. Not that "he raped me" is a justification for murder...well not a foolproof one anyway. The two guys not accused of murder conspire with underground elements, falsify evidence and even involve a priest (Robert De Niro) in their web of lies. To make matters worse, the one played by Brad Pitt works for the D.A. office and is the freakin' prosecuting attorney for the case! Someone should have told these four men revenge and justice are not one in the same, and breaking nearly every code of ethics to get that revenge is probably one of the most backwards moral of all.