thesis: hollywood films tend to glorify the theme of criminality, compared to independent films that subvert the hollywood and theme of crime in order to challenge the audience.
The film 'savages' is an independent and 'the wolf of Wall Street' is hollywood with some Hollywood conventions in both. Both films contradict eachothers perception of crime. Hollywood films tend to glamorise the theme of criminality, and independent films tend strip back the reprocessions and the severity of crime in a realistic way. Both can be related to real life situations and scenarios that occur in the world now, being the credit a result of greedy bankers, and violent gang battles, as shown in savages.
the wolf of Wall Street present Jordan Belfort as a loveable vouge. He has been given this role as it is similar to the one in catch me if you can. In the scene where Jordan illudes to the fact that everything that they have been doing in the brokerage firm is well and truely illegal. This film has the same director as the film 'goodfellas'. So Jordan has characteristics or trates of an Italian gangster. Schorzazy tends to make mafia films, so this film is presented in a 'mafia' turn of events, with different aspects of Mise en scene, narrative and use of camera. the director has also used direct adress in the way that is has been filmed in this scene. This is to make the film look almost Documentry like, giving it a sense of realism that independent films tend to possess . in comparison, the film 'savages' present the stock characters of 'heroes' in ben and shon, but they both possess characteristics of criminals as they are drug dealers. this subverts the typical hollywood narrative in a sense that they are not directly heroes. independent films are looked at as a piece of art work, and should be made to make the audience think, this is the challenge that comes with savages.
ben and shon are put in mexican tribal masks when trying to rescue their girlfriend, so the masks actually represent your typical 'heroes' very well.
the wolf of wall street tries to glorify the theme of criminality, which tends to be common in Hollywood films. especially ones where there is no identifiable criminal, but the film exaggerates money laundering to make it look like a good thing that will make you a wealthy man. This tends to attract a wider audience and is called 'mass marketing to attract all audiences'. this method is used in Hollywood films as they are strictly there to make a profit. the aspects of mise en scene plays a big part in the way criminality is presented. there is a mass use of bright colours, in order to keep the film in a positive light, and sets the mood.
also suits tend to be the main costume, and people commonly assosiate suits with the hero and good characters (James bond, mission impossible, men in black). This is where the wolf of wall street subverts the typical Hollywood narrative. in contrast, 'savages' has a wider sense of realism, with a true reflection on gun crime, drug crime and murder. this is where independent films are in place in order to challenge the audience, and are commonly made for specific audiences to enjoy as a peice of art with a message rather than a profit.
again, the heroes are put in mask s when trying to save their lover. this is a very Hollywood way of doing things. I believe the director done this to wider the audience.
The wolf of wall street, although it being more glorified, it is probably the most realistic as it can be related to in real life situations, for example the 2007 economic crash was a result of greedy bankers, similar to those in the Wall Street offices. There is no scene in the film that alludes to this, but it is a general message that it portrayed in order to challenge the audience, which is a typical convention of an independent film rather than an Hollywood film. This could be used to widen the audience, as this Hollywood film is a product to make profit. In contrast, savages, 'an independent film' does not use any form moral or warning, which is strange for a independent film, so this also widens the audiences. However, the fact that Shon, Ben and ophelia are in a 3 way relationship, which is very independent and adds individuality to the film, rather than conforming to Classic Hollywood narrative.
The outcome of the two films similarly resemble eachothers, in terms of punishment and rehabilitation. In the film 'the wolf of wall street' Jordan Belfort doesn't really serve a punishment for his fraud, Laudery and drug use. This is evidenced towards the end when he is narrating his experiences in prison. And he mentions that he enjoyed his time there as he forgot he was rich. This scene also uses brighter lighting, in terms of Mise en scene, in order to portray the way his life was enlightened after prison. Also his costume went from a suit, commonly associated with stock characters of hero and Villian, to all white overalls, which suppresses his identity as a rich man. In comparison, the film 'savages' also serve no punishment for their criminality, but quite the opposite in regabilitation. The director alludes to this point in the closing scene, where the narrator (ophelia) tells the audience about what the 3 are doing with their life at the moment. Again the lighting is turned up, and there is a use or a lot brighter colours aswell as lens flair to portray the enlightening of the situation. On the other hand, the criminals (bahar Cartel) we're arrested, due to the running of a drug organisation and multiple counts of murder. This is more typical for an independent film, as the villains tend to get killed, and there is a clear 'winner' if you like, in the resolution stage of the film. This is where the independent challenge is introduced to the audience.
to conclude, both films possess the presentation of criminality in different ways. as the wolf of wall street is a Hollywood film, with independent conventions, it tends to exaggerate the themes as well as its message. this is to widen the audience and evidences that theory that Hollywood films are prodominatlty made to make a profit. on the other hand, 'savages' confronts criminality and presents it how it is. this is a common thing within independent films, and also evidences the theory that independent films are designed to challenge the audience, and send out messages rather than making a profit. 'savages' also has hoHollywoodonventions in terms of micro analysis, I believe this is to widen the audience. finally, both films present criminality in different ways, but both give seperate messages.
