I think that the movie Die Hard is a deceit movie, but I would definitely have to say that is was not a great movie. If anything I would rate this with 2 stars out of 4. My rating is greatly affected by the newest version of Die Hard, Die Hard 4.0, which I felt was much more engaging and I enjoyed the setting and the plot of that movie much more. I felt like the plot of this Die Hard was not as engaging and could have had so much more to make the plot more complicated. However, some people may argue that it is an older movie and back then movies were not as dense compared to the present films. To this I have to point out the film Blue Dahlia, which is older than Die Hard, yet the plot, contains twists and turns that leaves the viewer wondering. Furthermore, while watching this movie there wasn’t really anything that grab my attention and hooked me into the film. I didn’t feel like there was anything unique and exciting about it such as unique stunts or memorable quotes, but rather it was a basic average movie.
I and Roger Ebert have at least one thing in common which is that we both gave this movie a 2 star rating. However, there is also one key area that Ebert talks about in his blog that I would have to disagree with. Ebert says that the role of the deputy police chief, Paul Gleason, is an unnecessary additional character. I disagree with him on this as I think Gleason adds value to the movie by getting the viewer to further appreciate the police officer who keeps in contact with Willis. Ebert gives the opposing side and shows that not everybody is as trusting as the officer. I think that Ebert also is placed to be compared with Willis as when Gleason messes up; it is Willis that comes around to fix his mistakes even though he isn’t in charge. This then creates a better image for Willis and draws the audience to relate with him more.
The article by Hugo Schwyzer, a professor at Pasadena City College, argues that the privileged white male is led to mass murder in public places due to them feeling unrecognized in a place where they should be. I see how Schwyzer lands on this idea and the reasons make sense as to why the privileged white male would feel that they have been wronged. I see this because they would be so used to a certain way of living and that changed takes them by shock and in the end for some their reaction leads to mass murder.
One idea that he mentions is the “white boy mojo”. I feel like this idea is one that I can greatly relate with because I was a Kenyan at an American high school in Kenya. I felt like I had a greater connection with the locals around the school than my American friends merely due to the fact that I was a Kenyan. However, now being at the University of Richmond I have lost that connection that I once had with the locals. The different approach that I take is that I understand that I am no longer at home and I can act the same way everywhere and expect this privilege that I had to follow me around. I think for the privileged white male they expect the same kind of privileged treatment everywhere that they go.
This same idea though makes me think about why it is the white male expects to be welcomed everywhere they go. The one thing that I get from this is that it comes from the way that they live their lives and how they have been received from past experiences. I can only speak really from two perspectives that the white male encounters that I know of. The first would be in their home country as here they are a “native” and would have that special connection I talked about earlier. Then there is the second perspective which would be them in a foreign country. The one county I can talk about is Kenya. Once again in Kenya if a white male would be seen they are placed in a higher level. One aspect is seen when young children get really excited when they see a white person and they begin to happily chant “mzungu, mzungu, mzungu”, which is white person in Swahili. To them they are absolutely thrilled to be seeing a white person.
Stuart Hall shows part of this white male privilege in his article “The Whites of Their Eyes: Racist Ideologies and the Media”. In the article Hall gives an example of inferential racism on the matter of race relations. The media in this example infers that the blacks are the problem and that the whites are innocent in the matter. Another example for this same article is the slave figure. This example once again doesn’t show the whites as bad people. If we look further into the media we can also see that in a large number of movies the main hero is white male. I think these ideas would also play into the white male privilege as they see themselves as causing no harm to society and expect people to listen to them.