How has the “American Dream” been translated into popular film? Refer to at least four films.

The American Dream is a frequently mentioned and well-known term

used to describe the ideology of the United States of America. Despite

the common usage of the term it is not always completely understood

and so requires, at least, a brief introduction and definition. P Mueller

in his writing Star Trek and the American Dream claims that “…to

some the American dream is just "from rags to riches", to others it

includes the realisation of high flying ideals as old as mankind itself.”

Mueller then goes onto say that the term was coined in 1931 by James

Truslow Adams and identifies three main roots: mythical aspects

(leading back to the ancient dream of a perfect society and as paradise

even before the continent was discovered), religious aspects (which

Mueller describes as dealing with the puritan vision of a city upon a

hill) and political aspects (arising from the declaration of independence

and the constitution). It would seem that the most important of these

three themes is arguably that of the political nature and various

commentators have defined the American Dream in this way. Martin

Luther King claimed “It [the American Dream] is found in those

majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, words lifted to

cosmic proportions: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all

men are created equal, that they are endowed by God, Creator, with

certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the

pursuit of Happiness." This is a dream. It’s a great dream.” Jim Bickford

concurred with this view within his writing The American Dream: Our

Heritage of Hope (in which he goes onto to identify several examples

of the American Dream in practice throughout history) when he

claimed “America was built on dreams” and went onto to discuss the

importance of the declaration of independence in creating the dream

by stating “Our ancestors chose to take the risk by putting their lives

on the line and fighting for freedom” .

In respect to the medium of film it comes as no surprise that the

American Dream has filtered itself, both consciously and

unconsciously, directly and indirectly, onto the screen. America, and in

particular Hollywood, is the dominant producer of film within the world

today. Where Hollywood leads other filmmaking nations follow. The

American Dream is largely presented within film in the sense of the

political context: life, liberty and (in particular) the pursuit of Happiness

but there is no uniform depiction of this. There are various distinct

ways of presenting the American Dream within film and not all of these

correspond to each other. For example, for every glorious and

gratifying presentation of the USA and the American Dream there is

arguably a cynical and misanthropic representation, criticising America

and it’s society. Situations such as this lead us to question the

methods of presenting the American Dream. What forms can this

presentation take? What agendas do the filmmakers have? And do the

films come with any particular political, social or ideological comment

intended?

The most common thread of the American Dream within film is

arguably that which Mueller identified, the rags to riches story. Mueller

describes this as the most basic definition of the American Dream and

its simplicity may be one of the factors in increasing its appeal to

filmmakers. Mueller also lists key elements within the American Dream

such as “manifest destiny”, “the frontier” and “the melting pot” and it

would seem prudent to include another key element, that of “the land

of opportunity”, which whilst not specifically mentioned by Mueller is

often held to be interlinked to the American Dream. Mueller transposes

these notions onto the long running television series Star Trek and

cites such elements as the ship “boldly going” and the role of space as

“the final frontier”. However, he does not comment as to the motion

pictures of this franchise and the difference of the two mediums (most

notably reception and presentation) could make the comparison

difficult. Whilst it is highly feasible to suggest that that these ideas

could be applied to film it seems prudent, for the sake of both clarity

and originality, to concentrate upon other examples.

As well as appealing to filmmakers it also arguable that the simplicity

and clarity of plots involving rags to riches also appeals to audiences.

Rags to riches stories present a feelgood factor to the audience and

the tale of a successful underdog is often alluring to the public. One

example of a simple rags to riches presentation of the American Dream

is the 1990 film Pretty Woman. Pretty Woman tells the story of a

hooker, played by Julia Roberts, who falls in love with a successful (and

extremely rich) businessman and essentially goes upwards in society

becoming a “princess” to her handsome knight in shining armour. The

film is fundamentally a reinterpretation of the classic “frog turned

Prince” story, albeit with a reversal of the sexes, with the central

premise that regardless of who your are and what you do you can still

be successful in America, fulfil your dreams and live within a fairytale

world. Pretty Woman is unarguably a simple rags to riches story in

which Robert’s character starts of at the base of the social ladder, as a

no-hoper (a theme that Roberts would later re-explore in Erin

Brokovich). However, despite this she successfully climbs the social

ladder, achieves a sense of worth and achieves what Mueller describes

as her “manifest destiny”. The film does not make any specific

comments upon society, although it could be criticised upon Roberts’s

reliance upon a man to pursue her goals. Aside from the overriding

message that anyone (even a hooker) can succeed.

Yet, despite the simplicity of Pretty Woman not all rags to riches

stories may be devoid of socio-political comment. One such example of

this is Rocky (1976) in which a no-hoper boxer finds success and gains

a title fight against the heavyweight champion of the world. There is no

doubt that Rocky is a rags to riches story, Jonathon Rosenbaum

describes it thusly “The Italian Stallion, a white sub-proletarian regular

loser…thumbs his nose at a society that could not care less about him,

and finds both love and self-respect in a corrupt world.” Whilst the

Time Out Film Guide comments upon “…this low-budget film whose

success, against all odds, mirrors its own theme” However, despite the

simplicity of this film and its story, Rosenbaum argues it has a deeper

meaning. The main thrust of this argument is that Rocky, and other

films of that era, provide a counterpoint to the atrocities committed in

the Vietnam War. Rosenbaum discusses the sense of guilt felt by

America following Vietnam and comments upon the use of the

Watergate scandal to provide a scapegoat in order to alleviate guilt. In

the eyes of Rosenbaum Rocky provided America with a vehicle through

which Americans could feel better about themselves and their country.

Rosenbaum specifically mentions “the true all-American spirit” of

Rocky and mentions the profound effect that the film had upon

audiences stating “Responding to the fairy tale quality of this modern-

day romance…audiences stood up and cheered.”

Yet, not all films of this era were received quite so readily. Such as the

film Taxi Driver (1976), a film from the same year that centred upon

Travis Bickle, a Vietnam veteran, whom who could be described as

another “loser hero” character. Taxi Driver provides an alternative,

harsher form of the rags to riches story; Bickle is an unlikeable

character in an unlikeable world, who achieves success and recognition

within the film world. Success and recognition that Rosenbaum

comments “…smacks of no less than fanciful wish fulfilment.” And “…

granted the Vietnam veteran a heroic standing in his community that

the real world outside the movie theatre denied him” Taxi Driver was

received in a different way to Rocky, whilst it received critical praise it

was not as popular as Rocky, audiences did not stand up and cheer.

Both films invoke responses to Vietnam, however, they also contrasts

the all-American spirit of Rocky to the violent content of Taxi Driver.

Rosenbaum claimed that both films “…were at once too shocking and

too suggestive of certain American atrocities in Vietnam…” This

distinction provides a powerful example as to the differing

presentations of the American Dream on film. Both films maintain

similar themes, a no-hoper central character, grasps an opportunity

that presents itself to him and achieves success and recognition, yet in

very different ways. Taxi Driver is a much more cynical film that

criticises Vietnam and hints at the devastating impact it has had on the

main protagonist. Rocky is more inspiring and centres upon the

greatness of America and the opportunities therein, Rocky’s Italian-

American origin also refers back to the melting pot mentioned by

Mueller, the American Dream is available to everyone even

immigrants. The two films illustrate the rags to riches element of the

American Dream from alternative viewpoints and highlight the impact

that socio-political comment and context can have upon the

presentation of the American Dream within film. Rosenbaum’s

comments upon the political status of Rocky also serve to illustrate

that films may become political indirectly and unconsciously due to

their context rather than their content. Rocky was seen to alleviate

guilt following Vietnam but the film does not deal with that issue even

remotely. The main point that can be taken from the contrast of the

two films is that the American dream can mean varying things within

the filmic world depending on the intention of those who use it. The

American Dream can be used as a tool not only to praise the country

but also to criticise.

One film that makes use of the American Dream as a critical tool is the

1983 Brian De Palma film Scarface. Scarface is another film that

presents a rags to riches story, and the plot centres around another

loser-hero in the shape of Tony Montana. The film encompasses many

of the elements discussed by Mueller: Montana’s Cuban refugee

symbolises the instability of the USA’s cultural mix, the country itself

arguably represents the frontier and a land of opportunity for Montana

whilst Montana himself is fulfilling his manifest destiny. However, in

contrast to pro-American films, and similar to Travis Bickle, Montana is

an unlikeable character and his rise to the top is to the top of the

criminal underworld (a world that is ultimately his undoing) which

leaves a trail of death and destruction. The film is critical of the

American Dream, it presents America as a land of opportunity and

success is available to everyone, even refugees such as Montana. Yet,

De Palma presents America as a corrupt and mercenary land in which

opportunity is available to those who are prepared to go further for

success. Go further in the sense that they, like Montana, are prepared

to kill and literally dispose of the competition. De Palma was critical of

America and presented the view that to be successful in a corrupt

world, to fulfil their goals and manifest destiny, characters would have

to become corrupt as well. This theme was presented to some extent

in Hawks’ 1932 version of Scarface, which had the tagline “Shame of a

Nation”. Yet, De Palma went further in his criticism and the tagline to

the video of Scarface tellingly claims “He loved the American Dream

with a vengeance.”

It is interesting to note that the 1983 version of Scarface was written

by Oliver Stone, a director who had no qualms in criticising the

American dream within his own films such as Platoon (1986) and Born

on the 4th July (1989). Both these films dealt with Vietnam an issue

that is of great interest concerning the American Dream. Platoon and

Born of the Fourth of July were both anti-war presenting horrific images

and criticising the participation of America within Vietnam. This is an

interesting stance particularly in light of Bickford’s assertions that the

58,202 who died during Vietnam, were fighting to preserve the

American Dream . At the time of Vietnam many movies shied away

from actively promoting or criticising America’s involvement.

Rosenbaum comments upon the presentation of Vietnam and claims

that rather than openly criticising or praising the role of America films

responded to “…the short-term psychic needs of an American or

American-influenced audience…” and “…reinterpret painful recent

history in a more positive light…” . He offers examples of The

Deerhunter (1978) and Apocalypse Now (1979) as films which “…

locate the horror of the war within a containable image of externalised

evil rather than to look at it as the consequence and function of

internal ideological process.” Films concerning Vietnam made soon

after did not directly reference the American Dream, they did not claim

as Bickford has done, that the soldiers were fighting to protect the

American Dream. Instead they responded to the complex status of

society at the time and presented the American dream through

individual soldiers and characters who overcome great odds in

personalised stories deal with singular events rather than the war as a

whole. Characters protecting their “life, liberty and pursuit of

happiness” represent the American Dream political comments are

avoided. As Rosenbaum comments “Hollywood has traditionally done

its best to avoid contemporary politics” and this serves to, once again,

highlight the fact that films concerning the American Dream may be

deemed to do this largely because of there context. As The Deerhunter

and Apocalypse Now were made shortly after Vietnam whilst the

wounds were still felt the American Dream was presented positively

through the medium of the characters in order to make the country

feel better about itself. In contrast Stone’s films and others like them

have been made after a significant gap between the end of the war.

Therefore there was no hesitation in tackling the issue of the war head-

on, these films were anti-war, against America’s participation in

Vietnam and certainly did not echo Bickford’s point that the soldiers

were fighting to protect the American Dream. The films took issue with

the Vietnam War and echoed Rosenbaum’s prediction (although earlier

than he had imagined) that “Perhaps by the Nineties a sufficient time

gap will have elapsed to allow filmmakers to approach the subject of

Vietnam in a more detached, balanced and analytical manner.” . Had

these films been made earlier it is highly likely that they would have

aligned themselves along the same stance as The Deerhunter and

Apocalypse Now and presented the American Dream more favourably.

In conclusion, the American Dream is presented in a variety of different

ways within the filmic world. It can be translated in a variety of

different ways and whilst the main route highlighted has been the rags

to riches depiction there are undoubtedly other methods. Yet, the rags

to riches is the most commonly used, easily identified and simplest

form of doing this within film. However, even such basic forms of story

such as this can have, as discussed, a variety of different meanings,

which illustrates the diversity of the American Dream and its

presentation on screen. The American dream can be praised or

criticised, not just deliberately through the intentions of the filmmakers

(such as Pretty Woman or Scarface) but also accidentally through the

context in which they are read (such as Rocky or the films concerning

Vietnam). The American Dream, is a subjective and living instrument

(as Bickford says The American Dream is alive and well to all those

who choose to chase after it ), it means different things to different

people and so is presented in varying ways within the world of film.

Comments and agendas of the filmmakers may be intended and easily

identifiable. Yet, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that films

could be interpreted subjectively, with different people extracting

different ideals. For example, not everyone may believe in the status

regarding the American Dream given in the descriptions of the

Vietnam films. They may view these films from a different stance and

interpret them in their own personal way. The American Dream has

been translated into popular film in a variety of ways but regardless of

the method and presentation of that transportation the way it is

received is entirely down to the viewer.

Bibliography

Edited by Pym. J, Time Out Film Guide, 8th Ed, Penguin Books, 2000.

http://www.provi.de/~pmueller/startrek/index.html

http://www.speakersevents.com/americandream/bickford.html

http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/sermons/

650704_The_American_Dream.html

Rosenbaum. J, Vietnam Dispatches (PP1621-1624) in The Movie: The Illustrated History, No. 82, Ordis Publishing Limited, 1981.