ALC201 Module 3 Essay: Digital Media and Surveillance Use in The Purge (2013)

The Purge (2013) is a film that introduces a low crime North American society in the near future, all thanks to a single annual day during which crime is legal – murder, vandalism, theft – so that citizens can ‘purge’ their anger.

The audience is brought into one particular household, introduced to the protagonist characters (a family called the Sandins), and depicts an eventual home invasion on the day of the annual ‘Purge’. The use of technology utilised by all family members through the film both helps and hinders their crisis. 

One example of these is the official footage feed displaying the effects of the ‘purge’, not only to the public of the film, but to the audience as well; utilising this digital media to tell the film’s narrative. This feed is available on televisions within people’s homes, and the footage itself is CCTV footage in public places; hitting home the gravity of legalising crime for the night.

The official government surveillance being circulated through the public raises some interesting questions on privacy and distribution ethics. This film may be set in a near, dystopian future, but are there not regulations for the use of CCTV and its distribution?

Levin (2002, p.578) notes the particular use of CCTV cameras today and the ‘dataveillance’ taking place, comparing such methods to dystopian ideas and themes in Orwell’s classic Nineteen Eighty-Four. The omnipresent effect of surveillance and the possible uses for such footage is not lost within Levin’s text, and this sequence seems to visually articulate these fears in The Purge.

Another example of digital media use through the plot is the security system placed on the house for the family’s use in the ‘purge’ to keep them safe. This is symbolised by a separate room with the footage from the house security cameras. Charlie Sandin; being able to see the outside and letting the attacked man obtain sanctuary in their home becomes the driving point of the story; who is this man? Is he dangerous, is he armed, does he want to hurt the protagonists?

Screencap from The Purge (2013) of the family’s surveillance system and their multiple screens

The situation is worsened when an armed group arrive at the house and ask for him alive; this interaction takes place entirely through the surveillance cameras, where the family is safe inside their house and guarded by the wonderful technology that surrounds them. At least, until their power is cut by the group.

People have been conditionalised to feel ‘safe’ in the presence of such technology. Turner (1998, p.93) explains in the following how surveillance technology works, within an effective manner.

“Indeed all forms of surveillance, but particularly massive or magnified surveillance practices, or panopticism, are employed throughout Western bureaucratic and capitalist institutions to enhance predictability, risk assessment, security, identification, efficiency, and control.” 

Turner’s explanation of panopticism and its use in Western society in surveillance allows the observer to observe everything and asserts control. The Sandin’s house and extensive surveillance footage (while seemingly exaggerated for a family home) provides the observer the advantage of seeing without being seen, and this takes panopticism to a new level in regards to surveillance and technological developments in the narrative’s imagined future.

Another use of digital media is the toy surveillance camera, foreshadowed near the film’s beginning and utilised much later, by Charlie Sandin. The film includes camera angles of the floor to reveal the presence of the small surveillance camera. This later becomes important to the narrative when an attacked man seeks refuge in the family’s home and needs to hide. Having eyes and ears everywhere allows Charlie to hide the man, through which most of the story is again utilised through the camera’s live footage. This is again another example of Turner’s explanation of panopticism (1998, p.93); being able to see everything without the observer seen themselves.

This technique of storytelling allows the viewer to feel more suspense in the scene, especially when Charlie’s older sister Zoey decides to hide in the same spot and discovers the fugitive.

Another surveillance worth discussion is the one carried out by the film’s audience. The audience is receiving an ‘all-access’ pass to the lives of the Sandin family; all of their actions, movements and decisions during this family crisis. The audience is especially privileged with the information that Zoey’s boyfriend Henry has stuck into the family home and is now trapped inside. Their reunion is barely censored for the audience and the film’s classification rating, and the male gaze has taken hold as the camera lingers on Zoey’s short plaid skirt and long legs.

Hollinger (2012, p.22) incorporates Laura Mulvey’s discussion of the male gaze in cinema while discussing Hitchcock’s film Vertigo (1958), and her arguments certainly apply here in The Purge. Zoey has been objectified by the filmmakers, which is evident in camera movements and costume choices (the ‘sexy schoolgirl’ archetype), and these choices have been ‘justified’ because her boyfriend is not a legal adult; making their ‘relations’ more legal than, say, a man ten years older engaging in the same acts with Zoey. Zoey’s underage status has been made irrelevant by the filmmakers and their decisions.

While the surveillance carried out is not all strictly by the characters of the film, it is quite clear that all forms of surveillance need to be taken into account when discussing digital media use and surveillance.

References:

Hollinger K 2012, Feminist Film Studies, Taylor and Francis, retrieved 11 October 2013, Deakin University Library e-book database.

Levin TY 2002, ‘Rhetoric of the temporal index: surveillant narration and the cinema of “Real Time’‘’, in Levin, TY, Frohne, U and Weibel, P (eds.), Ctrl Space: Rhetorics of Surveillance from Bentham to Big Brother, ZKM, Karlsruhe, pp. 578-593

Turner JS 1998, ‘Collapsing the Interior/Exterior Distinction: Surveillance, Spectacle, and Suspense in Popular Cinema‘, Wide Angle, vol. 20, no. 4, October, pp. 93-121 (Deakin Library e-journal database).

Week Eight: Celebrity Culture

Source: Click.

Professor David Marshall's guest lecture this week was quite an illuminating take on globalisation in terms of 'celebrity culture'. Examples included Prince Harry's leaked photographs and Catherine Zeta-Jones' anger appearing in paparazzi pictures. I was incredibly interested in the idea he introduced about private and public persona, and how the line has become finer and much more blurred with converging technologies.

Marshall (2008, p.498) talks about how it is personalities that the public are interested in, and personalities that are being bought and enjoyed. Marshall also discusses that new media are making possible what was thought impossible about fifty years ago. Media input has become more democratic, and the humiliating, unexplainable acts by celebrities are able to be posted, reported, broadcast and digested by audiences almost within the hour, within even minutes of occurring. 

Source: Click.

I personally do not understand this boom in 'celebrity culture'. and I barely care; especially when the celebrities involved have not earned their media coverage as others have. Celebrities are human and they are free to make their mistakes; but I don't support these mistakes splashed across covers of magazines and in big, bold headline font, by people paid to do it and apparently frame this as 'news'.

More recently people tend to explode with their media coverage; One Direction and individuals associated with Twilight come to mind. I have found that people either care religiously or not at all; both extreme polar opposites. There's the few people in the middle, but most tend to be one or the other.

Are your own experiences something like this? I'm interested to hear what you think!

Marshall, D, 2008, The Specular Economy, Society. Vol. 47.

Week Seven: Protecting Culture.

As I previously mentioned in Week One, there has been an increasing awareness of culture and clash. Whether globalisation meant a loss of cultural identity for all countries involved. Being disadvantaged in this world of corporate giants can mean smaller scale countries are finding increasing difficulty in their representation.

However, there are some that manage to integrate multiple cultures to be heard. For instances, Sita Sings the Blues makes use of the late Annette Hanshaw's voice and recordings from her radio career in the 1920s and 1930s.

But the visual doesn't always necessarily match the audio material - culturally anyway. The film makes use of stories from the Ramayana, and there is a decided conflict of cultures. It defies audience expectations; combining 'Western' and 'Eastern' cultures in the one text.

Source: Click

This was taken by yours truly.

Also taken by yours truly.

Yours truly again.

Even making use of the concept of intermission, which my mother tells me was very common with Indian and Sri Lankan films at the cinema. She would always tell me that they would buy lollies and candy before rushing back to watch the film's second half.

With the above in mind, the intermission depicted in Sita displays characters from the feature taking bathroom breaks and visiting the candy bar as the clock counts down. I personally appreciated the nod to the traditions of cinema; it is a little ironic now as we watch from our computer screens and can simply pause the film if a break is needed.

The marrying of traditional and contemporary entertainment is one of joy. Having spoken of my own conflicting cultures before, I find this film can best contextualise how culture collides today.

Week Six: 'Alternative Media'?

Source: Click

What I think is the issue with people discussing Al Jazzera is that people are treating the programs and its content like it's 'alternative' to the Western media. Hence our problem again; we're still in the mindset of 'us' and 'them' in regards to the Middle East.

All media is subjective. All topic matter is subjective, and from whatever region is subjective. But we're still being steered in the direction of what is thought to be 'appropriate' news matter. We hear of shopping controversies on shows like A Current Affair that are not really news - but these stories are fast becoming the norm. Since when are we to absolutely judge television and its content?

There are even channels like SBS here in Australia that provide news from multiple countries and languages; Greek, Italian, Indian, Lebanese, the list goes on. Could these programs be judged as absolutely?

As Sun points out (2002, p.119), many diasporic groups in the contemporary global context use the Internet for community-building. Does this not apply to television programs? How can building a sense of community, for those who belong to a different country, be a bad thing?

And this is where another gap emerges, the 'race' gap. Even in trying to maintain all communities fairly, there will sadly be no room to deplete racism. Paradigms are difficult to shift for most people, and the one of race doesn't seem to be vanishing soon enough.

Sources:
Sun, W 2002, ‘Fantasizing the homeland, the internet, memory and exilic longings’, Leaving China: media, migration, and transnational imagination, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, Md., pp. 113–36.

Week One: My basic understanding of globalisation.

Taken by yours truly in Thailand - April, 2012

From my understanding of globalisation, in very basic terms, is there are many factors to consider if we were all to become one society, one planet, a uniformity. To become a uniformity would require a major paradigm shift for every individual involved - millions of people! - to think in the one mind set, as Pieterse (2004, p. 7) immediately points out in his discussion.

Which is impossible to me, because all people are subjective in their thinking.

And I acknowledge that the above statement I have made is entirely contradictory of itself, but that is my point precisely. I say this with the knowledge and view that each and every opinion, even on the same topic, is different. To become a uniformity would mean denying culture and language, and that's not something that people will willingly give up. There's the potential for more war right there. I'm imagining reactions from the United States of America if the dominant language were to suddenly become Swedish or Chinese. The bridge between "Western" and "Eastern" worlds has to be resolved.

Even if uniformity were possible, there are differing interpretations of the word uniformity. I'll use an example from a first year class debate - fast food (McDonald's). In each and every culture, countries generally have the same food McDonald's, but there's usually a cultural spin depending on the country. Australia are quite used to asking for sweet and sour sauce or tomato sauce with their food at . But France offers mayonnaise, Turkey offers onion rings, and quite a few European countries offer alcohol at McDonald's.

I myself was in Thailand for two weeks last April and found that KFC over there was a little more spiced - the locals would consider that mild.

Have any other experiences with fast food overseas? I'd love to hear!

Source: Nederveen Pieterse, J 2004, ‘Globalization: consensus and controversies’, 
Globalization and culture: global mélange, Rowan & Littlefield, Lanham, Md., pp. 7–21.