The current version of the Motion Picture Association (MPA) film rating system went into effect in 1990. Based on the depiction of violence, profanity, substance use, and nudity, movies receive either a G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17 rating. The practice helps parents decide which films are appropriate for children. However, there is no analogous guide for adults desiring to avoid other forms of objectionable content such as racism and misogyny. And in the current polarized political climate, the moviegoer may also want to know where a narrative fits in the political ideology spectrum.
My history teacher sufficiently prepared me for the racist portrayal of slaves in Gone with the Wind. However, I was unaware that the 1939 film's narrative is also entrenched with misogyny, which many 21st-century audience members may find unacceptable. I would have watched the film anyway due to its historical and cultural significance, but I may have skipped other less noteworthy films with similar outdated content.
Researching a movie comes at the cost of revealing spoilers that may detract from the viewing experience. So sensitive audience members may dive into a movie without sufficient knowledge of potentially offensive material. I chose to watch the 1957 film The Bridge on the River Kwai because it is considered one of the greatest movies of the 20th century, named by the American Film Institute in 1998 as the 13th best film ever. It also received seven Academy Awards, including the Best Motion Picture honor. But it's hard to know how a movie aged in 60 years. And when the film began, an uneasy feeling immediately took over. I learned that the narrative centers on World War 2 Allied prisoners in a Japanese prison camp. Thus, I was concerned that the movie would employ stereotypes to degrade the Asian enemies.
The Bridge on the River Kwai is adapted from the 1952 novel of the same name by Pierre Boulle. Although Japanese soldiers, especially the commanding officer Colonel Saito (Sessue Hayakawa), are cast in a negative light, it's not atypical of how war dramas portray enemies. The film's director, David Lean, as well as most of the actors, are British, with the notable exception of the American William Holden, who plays a major supporting role. The British and American historians are unequivocal in viewing World War 2 Japanese combatants as belligerent aggressors. Thus, portraying Saito as a morally compromised individual is not a stereotypical depiction of all Japanese or Asians in general. Furthermore, the incompetent Japanese engineer in the film does not represent Asian incompetence, but rather the denigration of an enemy. It's comparable to negative portrayals of white enemies, such as the Nazis, in countless movies.
Sessue Hayakawa in The Bridge on the River Kwai
The inclusion of Thai women as love interests in the film also posed a potential problem. But Lean largely avoided stereotypically casting Asian women as passive and subservient, willingly seduced by any white man. The narrative suggests sexual interactions between white soldiers and Asian women but does not reek of overt racism or misogyny. First, William Holden seduces a white nurse before his relationship with the Thai woman. In both instances, he charms them with his good looks and charisma. In another example, the Canadian soldier (Geoffrey Horne) is infatuated with a beautiful Thai woman who returns his affection. One can argue that the sexual innuendos are superfluous to the narrative, but probably not offensive to 21st-century sensibilities.
William Holden, 1950 (wikipedia.org)
And for the political ideology of the film, it's definitely in the liberal camp. For starters, the two screenwriters, Americans Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson, fled to the U.K. after being blacklisted by the House Un-American Activities Committee for being communists. And the film is critical of the traditional British military practice of following decorum rather than doing what is pragmatic or moral. In the final scene, Major Clipton (James Donald), who is the de facto conscience of the film, witnesses the actions of British soldiers and concludes the narrative by stating, "Madness!...Madness!"
The film largely avoids promoting another source of potential discomfort for a modern audience: colonialism. The story involves the Japanese military building a railway from Thailand to Burma (now Myanmar) with war prisoners. Japan occupies Burma, which was formerly in the hands of British colonialists. The film does not directly endorse or criticize the British colonialism of Burma. However, the British prisoners' commanding officer, Lieutenant Colonel Nicholson (played by Alec Guinness of Star Wars fame), effectively represents Britain itself. And in his brilliant portrayal, Guinness plays a man who at first is confident of his ideals but eventually recognizing his error. Accordingly, his final line in the film is, "What have I done?" And the realization of his mistake is perhaps analogous to the British relinquishing colonial rule over Burma following the War.
Alec Guiness in The Bridge on the River Kwai
Today, when "cancel culture" is criticized for limiting free speech, providing a warning about politically or socially offensive material in movies is no different from the traditional MPA film rating system. Without banning a movie, the public is informed about potentially objectionable material so that the audience can decide where they can best devote their leisure time. With this in mind, it's probably safe to claim that The Bridge on the River Kwai is unlikely to upset a politically liberal audience. It does not exploit racist or sexist stereotypes. And the story is critical of war itself, showing the "madness" of flawed protagonists.
It's remarkable how well The Bridge on the River Kwai has aged. Despite being released in 1957, the narrative is in tune with 21st-century sensibilities. But more importantly, the suspenseful story is supported with excellent acting and cinematography. And no one can resist whistling the iconic Colonel Bogey March featured in the film.
Andrew’s Grade: A
Racism content: low
Misogyny content: low
Political ideology: liberal
Comentarios