Targets (1968) Film Essay Example

Over the years, Hollywood's enduring strength has been its ability to withstand its cannibalistic desires. Even though the film is not the first medium to effectively lash itself, Hollywood's type of horror movies have been effective over the years in using self-parody and deprecation to allow new artistic paths. While Peter Bogdanovich is not a monolith in the horror category, as a critic, film producer, film director, a historian in the film sector and author, his legacy surpasses the horror clique. Just like the best artists, Bogdanovich did not restrict himself to a single genre. His work in the movie Target (1968) shows an acute sense of the genre's history. Through the movie, a relationship between the old and new version of horror genre emerges. Besides the genres, there is a rich history found in the film Target (1968), and this shows the chronological progression that has taken place in the film industry in terms of production.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The character and the actions of the killer were influenced by Charles Whitman, an American mass murderer who was well-known as "Texas Tower Sniper." Byron Orlok's character in the film was inspired by Max Schreck with an imaginary element of being disillusioned with the film business and aspiration to retire. This was the last American film that featured Karloff. At the end of the movie, Byron Orlok who was old-fashioned and obeyed the rules confronted the new, genuine and meek serial murderer. The production of the film was easy because the studio was owned by Boris Karloff and this meant no costs of production. At the same time, Bogdanovich included in the movie other clips from Corman's Napoleonic-era thriller The Terror. The clips from The Terror provided generous assistance in the production since there was no fee incurred and no edits were done. This was done because of the fact that it had an action-packed conclusion. Paramount Pictures purchased the film at $150,000, and this gave Corman an instant profit even before the movie was released. Even though the film was completed in late 1967, it was later released after Martin Luther King was assassinated in 1968 and this case, created significant relevance to the then events. The reception was however not good at the box office. Subsequently, Targets 1968 is an account of B-movie business which represents the utilization of fear and the irrelevance of the culture in the traditional society, then progresses to a new kind of fear, societal rebellion from within and without. It talks about the mass murders like Charles Whitman of Texas and Sergeant Medina of Vietnam. This film was the beginning of a new era; the loner with a gun without a good motive other than an urge to kill.

On one side, the film warns the society on the dangerous rife with guns. Bobby can easily acquire a rifle and ammunition locally, just as if buying snacks or fruits. This was meant to be a warning fable: an approach of saying that the previous Karloff Victorian violence was not as creepy as the type of random murders that were attached to snipers. Above all, the film has been linked to a violent thriller, formed to stimulate and misuse the fear of the audience, the fear of assassinations that were prevalent during the time of the movie. A notable sequence in the film takes place in a drive-in-theater when Bobby hides in the scaffold behind the screen, where Orlok was part of the audience premiering the new film, The Terror. Bobby starts firing at the customers through a hole made in the screen. Drive-in, which was once American icon depicts a place where people sat to watch movies separated from each other, and there is no difference from Bobby's life at home. When he began to shoot them with the gun, there is confusion, and everybody becomes confused, unaware of what is happening until a warning is made. Cars begin to hysterically take off.

Even though the film had a disjointed origin, there is an impressive story about the end of an era. It was the end of faded, black old-fashioned movies and the start of new and frightening kind of monster films. Those that cannot be easily recognized by horrific visage or naive motives. While other producers were making movies that celebrated the youth culture and sensitization of violence, Bogdanovich formulated a cinematic elegy that had been seen as Hollywood's golden age. Initially ignored during its day and forgotten, at the moment this film remains to be one of the most unsung masterpieces in the Hollywood spectrum. It was an excellent mediation of the development that occurred in horror film production and one of the most frightening descriptions of gun violence in the film industry. Ultimately, the condition proved important to the success of the film; it would not be a success without Karloff and The Terror playacting themselves. The link between the films Targets and The Terror was highlighted at the beginning. In the end, Bogdanovich utilized less of Corman's 20 minutes of The Terror. He uses a small portion of The Terror in Targets to make sense for the viewers of the originality of the film. The screening clearly reveals the degree which Bogdanovich incorporated Corman's ideas in his film.

The atmosphere of the film "The Terror" was scary and entirely artificial. On the other side, Targets was exclusively naturalistic. Bobby's actions took place in actual location (the Reseda Drive-In), during the day and with no non-diegetic tune. The horror movies during this time were spooky and at the same time reasonably cathartic. It was cast in France a long time ago, had numerous ghosts and witches and offered some horror that was taken from our lives. Bobby's horror is unnerving since it is rooted in actual scenes while Bogdanovich's character was attached to Charles Whitman who killed his mother and wife, then proceeded to kill another dozen from atop clock tower. It is regrettable that these kinds of events still occur in the contemporary world. At the moment, it is difficult to watch the climactic killing at Reseda Drive-in and forget about the recent mass shootings in different states and nations across the globe. There exists significant relevance between the traditional events attached to gun violence and recent cases.

It fascinating that the preliminary parts of the film criticized the backdoor handshake that represented much of the classic Hollywood studios but the film was produced because of such gestures. There were conditions that were put by the producer beforehand. The early work done by Bogdanovich was impressive, and for that reason, he was given a 20 minutes clip from Karloff and another clip from "The Terror" to facilitates the production of the film "Target." This displays the level of discrepancies and corruption that were present at the time and how these issues affected the film industry. Because of the incidences that unfolded, Bogdanovich could oppose the opportunity to direct the film. Samuel Fuller, who was Bogdanovich's mentor also brought in his ideas to the production but rejected the opportunity to be given credit.

Despite the subject matter of mass shooting in Targets, there is a sense of fun with Orlok's story. Karloff was delighted as an old-fashioned actor who could not diminish his appeal. Through the film, he relished his presentation, specifically when Orlok narrates the W. Somerset Maugham piece. The camera focused on the narration and his accent. The delivery was powerful to the point that it halted the busy companions. The story concerns death, but they cannot help but focus on the amusement of telling the tale. Part of the pleasure is as a result of how they consume it as a group, collected by Orlok's creepy personality, foreshadowing the audience to watch The Terror. The idea in this context is that the enthusiasm in horror relies on how we watch with others are part of the entire audience. There is a sense of safety when it is watched with others.

Conclusion

The film "Target" received mixed reactions from the audience. Whereas others criticized it for symbolizing the actual situation in the ground, others celebrated the positive change that was happening in the film industry in terms of production. As the film industry developed through the '60s and beyond, war and gun violence became an environment where the "normal' citizens transformed into outrageous murderers. The film is metaphoric for the changes that occurred in the cinematic horror. Two primary stories stand for the two sides of the human/non-human binary of killers, and this represents the actual situation in the traditional and contemporary society. The convergence of these two at the end of the film created a shadow. In actual sense, the hostility does not only happens in movies, but it has been happening between a generation of people and their histories. The case study is the recent mass shootings, and many incidences of gun violence reported and unreported. In the historical context, this clash meant a change in the nature of conflicts across the globe, particularly as felt by soldiers. War changed from a shared to a less shared encounter. It became a psychological durability assessment for soldiers. Karloff and Bogdanovich lamented the long-gone innocence of films in the lives of people. They are distressed that gun violence in the streets outshined their brand of horror. Even though the motive of the film was to shun gun violence and mass killings, it was as if the audience got an authority to engage in murders across different states. As a result of the collision between fictional and actual violence in the streets, many questioned the need to watch horror movies when the world was horrific by itself. As a result, there was a mixed reception of the film.

Bibliography

Kaminsky, Stuart M. "American film genres: Approaches to a critical theory of popular film." (1974).

Lavergne, Gary M. A sniper in the tower: The Charles Whitman Murders. University of North Texas Press, 1997.

Mast, Gerald, and Marshall Cohen. "Film theory and criticism: introductory readings." (1980).

Pinedo, Isabel Cristina. "Postmodern elements of the contemporary horror film." The horror film (2004): 85-117.

Prince, Stephen. Classical film violence: Designing and regulating brutality in Hollywood cinema, 1930-1968. Rutgers University Press, 2003.