I made it through thirty-eight minutes of this pollyanna, Pleasantville, Mayberry movie in which the senses of the goody-goody teenage boys of North High School were offended. It depicted such a starkly childlike rendition of justice that I couldn't take it anymore.
Across the street from North High was a laundry and press shop in which the owner was killed by Louis Garrett (Charles Bickford), the leader of "The Association." It was a criminal enterprise that was extorting all of the local businesses. The press shop owner, Herman (Harry Green), refused to "join the association" even in the face of threats. He naively stood upon the fact that America is "a free country" and as long as he doesn't do anything illegal he should be free to operate his business without being harmed.
That's true. In theory. Not true in practice.
Whatever the case, Herman was shot and killed. While Louie (Charles Bickford), the gangster, was tapping the till one of the high school kids came in. He saw Herman dead and Louie stealing money. It didn't take a genius to put two and two together.
We, as the viewers, know that Louie shot Herman and under what circumstances Louie shot Herman. The kid, however, does not know for a fact that Louie shot Herman. Still, he tells all of his friends that Louie shot Herman and it is taken as an established fact. To them, it's an open and shut case. They should be able to tell the police, who would then arrest Louie, who'd go to trial where the kid would act as a witness, the jury would convict him, and Louie would get the chair.
Simple.
But it's not. And nor should it be, but "This Day and Age" made it seem as though it was a great travesty of justice that things weren't so simple. As though the youngsters were the only sane folks while all of the adults were either crooked or powerless to do anything. We were given a POV from the perspective of the youth with a clear message that this is how things should be.
Johnny saw the man with the gun. The man with the gun must've been the murderer. Johnny is an honest kid. The man should go to prison.
But it didn't go like that. The judge and lawyer were talking about procedure, precedence, presumption of innocence, and other legal jargon that didn't add up to the innocent teens. In their minds the justice system should be so simple that teens should be able to adjudicate the whole thing. And this is where the movie started to lose me.
As much as they were crying about the fact they couldn't get a conviction I couldn't help but thinking about the myriad times in history when a conviction was acquired on the most tenuous of evidence because the defendant was a poor person or a person of color (who was usually also poor). "Good," "honest" boys like them have been able to finger a defendant and put them away.
Still, I didn't stop watching. I was waiting for the moment in which sound reasoning would enter into the film because the fact of the matter is; Steve (Richard Cromwell), the kid, never saw Louie shoot Herman. Yes, by putting together circumstantial evidence we could draw that conclusion, but Steve and his pals were running around as though he'd seen the trigger being pulled.
After the judge dropped the charges due to lack of evidence a group of boys decided they would break into Louie's place and get the evidence themselves.
What!?
What dairy farm did they grow up on where they think it's safe to break into the home of a killer? They know he shot and killed a guy, so what if he caught one of them in his place?
They went through with the plan and then something extremely odd happened that I don't even think the writer could explain.
They succeeded in breaking into Louie's place, but like the young idiots they were, they told other people about it. One person they told was a girl that two of the boys were fawning over. She, in attempts to defend the character of Steve, told another boy. He, thinking it was a joke and looking for a means of chumming up to Louie, decided to tell Louie!
At this point I was incensed. I just couldn't take it. It was so illogical that my brain was going on the fritz trying to understand. Even if he believed it was a joke, why in the world would he tell Louie?? At best Louie laughs it off, at worst Louie kills one or all of them for even thinking of doing such a thing.
He did kill one kid when he decided to investigate this supposed "joke" and found them snooping through his belongings. That's when I said, "Enough's enough. I'm done," then turned it off.
Free on YouTube.
Across the street from North High was a laundry and press shop in which the owner was killed by Louis Garrett (Charles Bickford), the leader of "The Association." It was a criminal enterprise that was extorting all of the local businesses. The press shop owner, Herman (Harry Green), refused to "join the association" even in the face of threats. He naively stood upon the fact that America is "a free country" and as long as he doesn't do anything illegal he should be free to operate his business without being harmed.
That's true. In theory. Not true in practice.
Whatever the case, Herman was shot and killed. While Louie (Charles Bickford), the gangster, was tapping the till one of the high school kids came in. He saw Herman dead and Louie stealing money. It didn't take a genius to put two and two together.
We, as the viewers, know that Louie shot Herman and under what circumstances Louie shot Herman. The kid, however, does not know for a fact that Louie shot Herman. Still, he tells all of his friends that Louie shot Herman and it is taken as an established fact. To them, it's an open and shut case. They should be able to tell the police, who would then arrest Louie, who'd go to trial where the kid would act as a witness, the jury would convict him, and Louie would get the chair.
Simple.
But it's not. And nor should it be, but "This Day and Age" made it seem as though it was a great travesty of justice that things weren't so simple. As though the youngsters were the only sane folks while all of the adults were either crooked or powerless to do anything. We were given a POV from the perspective of the youth with a clear message that this is how things should be.
Johnny saw the man with the gun. The man with the gun must've been the murderer. Johnny is an honest kid. The man should go to prison.
But it didn't go like that. The judge and lawyer were talking about procedure, precedence, presumption of innocence, and other legal jargon that didn't add up to the innocent teens. In their minds the justice system should be so simple that teens should be able to adjudicate the whole thing. And this is where the movie started to lose me.
As much as they were crying about the fact they couldn't get a conviction I couldn't help but thinking about the myriad times in history when a conviction was acquired on the most tenuous of evidence because the defendant was a poor person or a person of color (who was usually also poor). "Good," "honest" boys like them have been able to finger a defendant and put them away.
Still, I didn't stop watching. I was waiting for the moment in which sound reasoning would enter into the film because the fact of the matter is; Steve (Richard Cromwell), the kid, never saw Louie shoot Herman. Yes, by putting together circumstantial evidence we could draw that conclusion, but Steve and his pals were running around as though he'd seen the trigger being pulled.
After the judge dropped the charges due to lack of evidence a group of boys decided they would break into Louie's place and get the evidence themselves.
What!?
What dairy farm did they grow up on where they think it's safe to break into the home of a killer? They know he shot and killed a guy, so what if he caught one of them in his place?
They went through with the plan and then something extremely odd happened that I don't even think the writer could explain.
They succeeded in breaking into Louie's place, but like the young idiots they were, they told other people about it. One person they told was a girl that two of the boys were fawning over. She, in attempts to defend the character of Steve, told another boy. He, thinking it was a joke and looking for a means of chumming up to Louie, decided to tell Louie!
At this point I was incensed. I just couldn't take it. It was so illogical that my brain was going on the fritz trying to understand. Even if he believed it was a joke, why in the world would he tell Louie?? At best Louie laughs it off, at worst Louie kills one or all of them for even thinking of doing such a thing.
He did kill one kid when he decided to investigate this supposed "joke" and found them snooping through his belongings. That's when I said, "Enough's enough. I'm done," then turned it off.
Free on YouTube.