The first film to be analyzed will be the Princess Bride, directed by Rob Reiner, but original novel written by William Goldman. I believe this film was the satire of the two films, because as stated in its very definition, it definitely attempted to “bring about societal change by making a serious point through humor and irony.” There are many possible morals to the story of the Princess Bride, but this is the one that resonates with me personally the most. The theme that to me is the most applicable to the movie, is the idea of the impossible. Constantly, Vizzini doubts the man in black’s strength but is completely in awe when he (inconceivably) manages to beat Inigo in a swordfight and Fezzik the giant in a weaponless wrestle, and even eventually beating him in a battle of wits. Later, Buttercup realizes the man in black who has ‘kidnapped’ her is actually her true love Westley, which is very much impossible as she received word not long ago that he was killed by the Dread Pirate Roberts. Westley and Buttercup survive a journey through the fire swamp, something considered impossible as no one else had lived to tell about it. Westley goes through intense torture ordered by Prince Humperdinck and dies but miraculously comes back to life. Nothing is impossible in the Princess Bride, and I believe this is the point that the writer was trying to make in order to make societal change.
The novel written by William Goldman was immediately classified as a satire when it was published, and the film was made similarly to how the book was written, with the author (the grandpa and his grandson) narrating the story and sometimes interrupting to comment their views on a scene. This is the first element of satire in this film as it is shown right from the start, adding a different aspect to the film. In addition to the added comments from the narrator, the grandfather while reading to his sick grandson purposefully skips the more mushy or boring parts for the sake of the boy’s attention to the story. For example in the final scene of the film Westley and Buttercup ride off into the sunset and look at each other and suddenly the screen cuts to the grandfather who stops reading and closes the book, because the boy before did not want to hear the ‘kissy’ parts of the story. Now, with a change of perspective the boy insists on hearing the rest of the book and the grandpa continues describing the kiss between the two lovers and reads the last words of the book with a smile. Another key factor of a satire is the use of humor, irony and exaggeration to prove a point; one of my favorite quotes from the movie is when Miracle Max is trying to revive the “mostly dead” Westley. Max tries to avoid the fact that Westley mutters “true love” under his breath and changes the subject to how good MLTs are (mutton, lettuce, tomato sandwich). The second he hears that if revived, Westley would humiliate his arch enemy, Prince Humperdinck, Max agrees to help. Once Inigo and Fezzik are given the miracle pill and run off, Max and his wife laugh about how their plan to stop Humperdinck’s wedding would take a “miracle.” Little comments like these make up the film’s satire genre.
The second film to be looked at is the film Robin Hood: Men in Tights, an obvious parody to Howard Pyle’s novel, Robin Hood. This film is most definitely the parody of the two as the film had little to no plot or moral to the story, and was not aiming to make any sort of societal change. The one thing that was mocked consistently throughout the film was religion. At this period in time Christianity ruled and other religions were seen as heresy, but the film does not stay true to this fact as the Jewish rabbi appears many times throughout the movie. The rabbi passes by the Merry Men in Tights while delivering sacred wine, and insists they can’t drink it as it is used for blessings. He realizes there are many things to be blessed in the forest: trees, rocks, grass, using this logic he allows the men to drink the wine he is delivering. Another object of mockery pertaining to religion was Maid Marian’s chastity belt and virginity. She even says at one point something along the lines of “I will not give myself away unless I am married, or the man confesses his endless love for me, or if he’s really cute.” Her “chastity belt” is an Everlast, with a lock on it. At the end of the movie Robin realizes the gift his late father left him contains the key to this belt, meaning the two were destined to be together from the start. In the end, Robin Hood and Maid Marian get married to support the tradition of marriage before sex, but by a Jewish rabbi, as a final act of making fun of the religious traditions of the Renaissance.
These two films although set in similar time periods had completely different objectives, as the Princess Bride aimed to make a serious point and Robin Hood Men in Tights aimed to entertain.
No comments:
Post a Comment