4/16/2019 2 Comments Analysis XI: Q&ACorruption is commonplace in the 1990 film, Q&A directed by Sidney Lumet. The film follows the new assistant district attorney of New York, Al Reilly (Timothy Hutton), a former policeman whose father was once a legendary cop on the force as he is brought in to conduct a simple Q&A to determine the legitimacy of a police shoot-out. However, things get complicated when Al begins to suspect that the detective involved in the shooting, Mike Brennan (Nick Nolte), a cop as famous and popular as his father once was, engaged in an unlawful shooting. On the edge of discovering a large conspiracy, Al's investigation into the shooting leads him to finding his ex-lover Nancy Bosch (Jenny Lumet) and her husband, the gangster Bobby Texador (Armand Assante). Al is forced to revisit his troubled past with Nancy as he also works with detectives Sam Chapman (Charles Dutton) and Luis Valentin (Luis Guzman) to bring Mike to justice. Al, Bobby, and Mike become involved in an intense game of cat-and-mouse as each tries to hunt the other down. Mike wants to solidify his criminal reputation with the gangsters by whacking Bobby, while Al wants to bring both of them in and Bobby just wants to stay alive and free. Ultimately, Bobby and Mike are killed, but not before Mike reveals that Al's father was dirty just like him and that Mike's dirty dealings were known and encouraged by police chief Kevin Quinn (Patrick O'Neal) who is running for commissioner. Al is dismayed to learn that Quinn will not be exposed for his corruption by the end due to a lack of evidence attributed to Mike's death. The film concludes with Al disheartened, leaving New York to try to rekindle romance with Nancy. In this analysis, I will primarily be focusing on the movie's usage of characters, essential themes, and character relationships. The characters featured in the film are very compelling, because no one in the main cast isn't corrupt in some way. There are characters who are corrupt in a traditional way, betraying their oaths and virtues in exchange for money like Mike and Quinn. Then there are characters like Al, morally corrupt as a closeted racist and Nancy as and unloyal ship jumper. Mike is interesting because his exposes a societal hypocrisy. To me, Mike's character is a representation of "hero-worship" and the celebrity effect that is so commonplace in America. Further, Mike is meant to represent how people are often willing to believe and defend someone who they admire to the bitter end, despite evidence to the contrary. He is the perfect representation of how power is abused. Within the story, Mike and Reilly are opposites. Mike is a detective that everyone admires but is crooked while Reilly is an ADA that no one likes who plays it straight. At the start of the film. Mike comes across as a sort of mentor figure to Reilly, and in scenes like the one where the car gets pulled out of the river, he even speaks to Reilly like a father might. All this is an attempt for the director to subconsciously cement the idea that Mike is a spiritual successor to Reilly's dad. Reilly is also interesting, he strives for justice but also wants a second chance. An interesting view on Reilly's need for justice is testified to by Sam Wiebe of Bright Light film journal. Sam argues, "Reilly, unlike Serpico and to a much greater extent than Ciello, realizes that he is part of these structures, that to maintain the power to stop monsters like Brennan he must let others escape. If he is to remain a functional part of the justice system, Reilly will have to do so in awareness of his own compromised position, in a world where the criminal you can’t prosecute has a chance to rise to the highest elected office in the land, and career criminals like Texador can be viable rivals for the woman you love". This is a true statement, but by the conclusion of the film it seems as though Reilly is not willing to make the sacrifice he must to play his part in the system, so he forfeits his role, atleast for a time. I find the relation between Mike and Reilly to be really interesting because it shows us what it would be like if a son had to hunt down his gangster father in a way. In all seriousness, the relationship between Mike and Reilly is meant to symbolize how people's perception of parents changes over time. No one gets to experience their parents when they were young, not firsthand, It's all through different experiences. True, Mike is not exactly the same as Reilly's father, but he is close enough for the analogy to work, since the only things the viewer knows about Reilly's dad is that he was a hero cop and that he was crooked. Ultimately, the film's message that parents and elders are not necessarily as flawless as we once saw them is an effective message since the film portrays it in such a meaningful way. The presentation really inspires the viewer to think about this message long after the credits have rolled. Obviously, corruption is the foremost theme present in the film and a pivotal one at that. If nothing else, Q&A argues that people are not perfect. I find this to be a particularly interesting argument when applied to the context of the film. I believe the movie means to say that our standards for people in films are too high. The viewer always to judge characters in a film for any bad traits they may have. Even if a character is only portrayed with one flaw, they are typically condemned by the audience. Yet in real life, people are far more forgiving. It would be like having a long-time friend for years and then discovering they stole five dollars from you years ago. The likely outcome of this would be that the victim would forgive the transgressor. If we weren't so harsh with judging people from movies, it is likely that we would find characters to be more relatable. This can be viewed as an enhancement to film watching. The director wishes for the audience to dislike Reilly because of his bias against Nancy's father, but he's only human. He was never violent towards her father and the end of the film seems to suggest that his mind can change. Most importantly, he still loves Nancy, and that's all that's really important to him at the end of all the trouble he experiences in the film. Really, Reilly is not so bad afterall, he tried his best to see justice through and at the end, he has to prioritize what's important to him, like anyone would. Corruption is terrible, it makes people disloyal, unreliable, and untrustworthy, but everyone is corrupt to some degree for a variety of reasons. Another powerful theme is perception. Reilly always perceived his father as a police hero, but the director teases his true nature early on in the film, as Mike is established as the modern-day equivalent of Reilly's dad, the hero cop. It only stands to reason that he would be exposed as a corrupt fraud just like Mike. This realization helps Reilly to realize just how far the corruption has gone and fundamentally changes his perception. He goes from viewing the system and justice as important to viewing his own happiness and romance as important. This a profound message and key if the viewer wishes to understand themselves. Our unique perception of events, things, and people really affects how we prioritize and think about things. Perception changes constantly, little by little and in the end, this helps us evolve into better people. For introducing the theme in the film in this way, it's message is very effective. In the end, Q&A is a film about how people change and how perception changes with them. As tackled in the film, the idea of parents change as one grows older. However, maybe the perception of parents is not meant to include them and all their faults and mistakes. Parents and elders may be real people just like us, but we are trained from early on to think of them as something more. Arguably, this is the way they should stay. Everyone is meant to fill a role in someone else's life and some of these roles can be glamorous or abysmal. Yet all are necessary. It is great that this film pulls these ideas into the light in addition to creating an intriguing idea of corruption and its effects. Truly, Q&A remains relevant even in the modern day and will continue to be relevant in the future. If viewers simply read between the lines of the film, then their experience will be indefinitely enriched.
2 Comments
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |