“American History X” Questions:
1) With which characters is the audience invited to identify?
- The audience are invited to identify with Derek Vinyard (the former neo-nazi) & Danny Vinyard (Derek’s brother)
2) What types of audience would visit the cinema to see this film? What would be their reasons for going? What would be their emotional responses?
- Examples of audiences that would visit the cinema to see this film, would be ones interested in the issue of racism, people interested in Drama, etc…and their reasons for going would be because they enjoy drama films/issues, etc…People’s emotional responses to this film would likely be shock due to the strong violence & racism of characters in the film (especially since the film was released over 10 years ago: 1998) as well as enjoyment and interest if they liked the film. Also, they should care for Derek & Danny (characters) as they are the ones we are designed to identify with.
3) Why might censors, or a government, consider cutting or banning this film? Would their concerns be to do with potentional emotional responses to the film?
- The film “American History X” may have been considered for cutting or banning because of the black and white flashback scenes where the character Derek is a strong neo-nazi and his views could inspire other neo-nazi’s to take further action in their beliefs or could inspire some real people to become neo-nazi’s. Also, the film contains a rape scene (when Derek is in prison and in the showers), full male nudity, 205 uses of the word ‘f*ck’, plus continuous uses of ‘n*gger’, ‘kike’ and ’spic’, and also ’son of a b*tch’ and ‘damn’. As well as the rape, nudity, language and racism, there is also a lot of violence and smoking including a man smoking marijuana. The violence in the film includes Derek making a man open his mouth on a curb and then Derek stomps his head to death. Also there is a scene where a white gang go into a grocery store that employs racial minorities, beating and tormenting them, and destroying the items in the shop. And a scene features a teenager (Danny) being shot multiple times (in slow motion), with blood splattered across the wall.
4) Are there any sections you believe could, or should, have been cut?
- I don’t think the film should have been cut (and I agree with the 18 certificate) as it would make the film less powerful in what it was trying to show, but the language and violence in the film are very strong, and some violence could have been cut out, but would ruin the narrative and make it less effective. The language could not be cut also because there is so much of it and the racist language although offensive is relevant to the film.
5) What certificate is the film given in Britain, and would you agree with this? Justify your response. Find out if the film has been given different classifications in different countries.
- The film was given an 18 certificate in Britain (UK) and I agree with this. I also think it deserved an 18 certificate because of the strong racism (language & actions) and the strong violence (eg: stamping head of a character to death). The film was banned in Malyasia and given high ratings in nearly all countries (also given an 18 in countries such as Phillipines, Isreal, Ireland, South Korea, etc…) and the lowest rating was PG-12 in Japan.