07c-Code Report Guidelines
Your Group Report should include:
- 1. A summary of your group’s section of the code organized around what you see as key points and assumptions and the important but subsidiary points that follow from them. Don’t try and cover everything, rewriting the code in your own language but focus on key points and what follows from them.
- 2. An account of any disagreements (and/or agreements) within your group about the code’s meaning and value. You may if you wish, address the document as a whole as well as your group’s section of the code.
- 3. An account of how your group’s section (and/or subdivisions) may be relevant to the production history of Scarface and the changes made to the film at the request of the Hays Office.
- 4. OPTIONAL: A comparison of the code (or particular sections of the code) with the workings of the more recent ratings system.
Your individual posting should include:
- 1. Your own response to the code (primarily the code as a whole but also your groups section to set up point two above).
- 2. Your component of your group’s report. A designated member of your group can then paste your section into the larger group report.
February 17, 2008 at 5:47 pm |
Films during the 30’s were produced and available for all to watch cheaply and frequently; this new median of expression had the potential to change the minds -or so they thought- of anyone who had a nickel and some time to spare. The Lord-Quigley Code had the difficult task of defining what was morally appropriate for the American pubic to view. The Lord-Quigley Code, understandably, used the easiest reference on the ethically correct: the Bible. Group C, focused on page 305, how the films should portray criminals and the law. The Code enforced that films support the natural law of what is good and evil and the consequences of the two. Good guys should win, and the bad guys should always lose. Evil and wrong doing should be quelled by a righteous, just, and organized law. The Code was simply protecting natural law by rejecting “wrong entertainment” that might “lower the whole living conditions and moral ideals of a race” (Black, 302). The Code, had to deal with what they thought was unclean art, instead of censoring form selective audiences, or leaving it up to the American pubic, they blocked everything out completely. This had an immense effect on films created thereafter, deflecting the original intent in order to satisfy the Code. The purpose of the Code is clear, however, the censorship of films for everyone, especially to the extent that the Code brought it too was extreme. The films lost the honesty behind the story, losing the entire point of creating the film in the first place.
Group 3 was assigned pg 305; it defined, basically, how films should portray the law and the criminals who break it. The Code stated that the law should not be presented as unjust and the criminals should not be portrayed in a positive light. Many members in my group believed that the Code had reason to enforce this rule; however the public has the right to differentiate what is wrong and right. Specifically to our section, some members believed a story should be portrayed just as the creators intend regardless of whether or not it represents the law or crime appropriately, because there is a difference between media (news) and film. Film is a form of expression, to tell a story, not relay facts. The public understands this and can make moral decisions based on their own moral guidelines. Two priests cannot dictate what everyone should watch and believe. The main disagreements between our members was whether the Code was needed at the time, our mindsets are far too modern to understand the impact the films may have had on the public in the 30s. After reading the Code many times, everything, during the 30s, seemed to be offensive, however one thing we all agreed on was the Code is simply to harsh to continue to enforce.