english and media centre | February 2011 | MediaMagazineOnline Culture 11

MM
If youre doing the Film Studies FM2
unit on Producers and Audiences,
youll be thinking about Star Power;
and if youre also following our
culture theme, you may also be
considering film culture and its
uses of popular iconography in the
marketing process. Here Film Studies
teacher Graeme Scarfe looks at the
ways the director of modern British
Western Harry Brown has recycled
and exploited past performances by
one of our most iconic British actors:
Michael Caine.
A lone gunman comes to the rescue of a
community besieged by a gang, by picking
them off one-by-one until he comes face-to-face
with the head-strong leader who, finally, gets
his comeuppance, after which the community is
once again free of such threatening oppression.
This could be the plotline for Shane (Stevens,
1953) or Pale Rider (Eastwood, 1985) and many
Hollywood-made Westerns in between. But, for
the purposes of this article, it perfectly describes
Britains most recent post-modern Western, Harry
Brown (Barber, 2010). When it was released
in cinemas, this directorial debut from Daniel
Barber generated as much column inches about
the social background and social problems as it
did about the film itself. The films star, Michael
Caine even commented, upon returning to the
Elephant and Castle region of South London
where a majority of the film was shot and,
incidentally where he grew up:
The fact is that we [society] are failing [our
youth]. If they are brought up with violence
they have no option but to join a gang most
of them join for protection, not because they
are naturally violent themselves.
So the film can be seen as a cautionary tale
about our inner cities and what happens when
we, as a society, create these ghettos, in very
much the same way as Death Wish (Winner,
1974) purported to do. There will always be a
vigilante.
But this is nothing new, as former Western
icon Clint Eastwood found in 1971 when he
stepped into the shoes of a legalized vigilante,
one Inspector Dirty Harry Callahan in the first
of a series that ran through the Seventies and
the Eighties. The argument with Callahan is that
he is standing up for the moral right against
the bureaucratic wrong. For example, on being
confronted by the Mayor of San Francisco about
his shooting of a potential rapist, his logic is
both amusing yet stark in its
argument of black and white:
When a naked man is chasing
a woman through an alley
with a butcher knife and a
hard-on, I figure he isnt out
collecting for the Red Cross.
Michael Caine himself of
course is no stranger to these
ambiguous roles himself, Get
Carter (Hodges, 1970) remains
closely associated with the
actor forty years on; and it
is this I want to explore and
discuss in the body of this
article.
Playing with
iconography
Clint Eastwood himself
used his iconic Dirty Harry
character to his advantage
when making the acclaimed
Gran Turino (Eastwood, 2009).
When his character, Walt
Kowalski growls Get of my
lawn to a group of anti-social
youths who are terrorizing the
neighborhood, it is hard not
to see Callahans .44 Magnum
lurking in the background. The
audience are being toyed with
for maximum effect, which
leads right up to the chilling
and memorable volte-face of a climax when
Kowalski is gunned down, unarmed. Bet ya didnt
see that comin! Its intertextuality alright, but
so well hidden as to make it almost subliminal.
The audience here is doing all the work, and
Eastwood is just waiting for the right time to turn
this expectation on its head.
Daniel Barber doesnt go as far as Eastwood in
turning the iconic image of the lead actor on its
head, but he does go some way down the road in
its exploitation.
When the film Alfie (Gilbert, 1966) was
released, it did so with an unprecedented
announcement: Michael Caine IS Alfie ran
Get Caine,
Us Caine :
How to Exploit Iconic Status in the Marketing of Your Film
12 MediaMagazineOnline Culture | February 2011 | english and media centre
MM
the promotional campaign. Never before had
a screen role been so inextricably linked with
the actor playing it. For Caine it was to prove a
springboard into movie stardom rather than a
millstone of typecasting.
Now, forty-four years later, in the autumn of his
career, Lionsgate spun the same line: Michael
Caine is Harry Brown. Actor and Character
intertwined, only this time it has more resonance.
In the Sixties Michael Caine, along with his
flat-mate, actor Terence Stamp, had a reputation
of being a ladies man something he has never
played down; but apart from frequently-run
stories in gossip columns of the day, he was an
actor relatively new on the scene. After a decade
of bit-parts and walk-ons he had landed leading
roles in both Zulu (Enfield, 1964) and The Ipcress
File (Furie, 1965). Alfie was his third film. As an
actor he had no reputation that could augur
well for the theatrical and critical success of the
film (although he was nominated for an Oscar),
but as a playboywell it was clear what was
going through the minds of the marketing boys.
And it worked! In the publics mind the actor
and character were one and the same, and it did
neither any harm whatsoever.
Marketing Harry Brown
This is clearly the thinking with those
marketing Harry Brown, only this time they do
have Caines considerable iconic status to play
with.
Just like this first three films, Caines career has
not been pigeon-holed either by role or genre;
he is just as adept at light comedy see the
much maligned, but I think perfect, Blame It On
Rio (Donen, 1984) as he is with straight drama
such as The Man Who Would Be King (Huston,
1975). But no matter how many films he makes
inbetween and lets face it thereve been a few
he seems to be linked not unfavourably with
gritty British crime-thrillers: Get Carter, Mona
Lisa (Jordan, 1986), Shiner (Irvin, 2000). He is
the man directors like Guy Ritchie name-check
when attempting to give credence to their own
submissions to the genre and who, given his
availability, they would want to cast in their work.
In Daniel Barbers case, its worked out quite
nicely. So lets look at the way Caine is used in the
marketing of Harry Brown.
For a start theres the clear anchoring of the
movie as a British film. The red, white and blue of
the Union Jack used in the poster not only ties in
with the UKs national flag but the fact that it is in
the shape of an instantly recognizable Mod target
too the Sixties = Caine. If The Beatles were the
decades fashion template, and the Stones its
musical heartbeat, The Who were the sounds
from the streets of the inner-city, and the target
its very own logo.
Its not the only film to play on this iconic
Swinging Sixties reference. When Caines 1969
movie The Italian Job (Collinson) was given a
theatrical re-release in 1999, that too played on
the red, white and blue. In the Sixties, thanks to
The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Michael Caine
and others, there was nowhere cooler than Great
Britain. Those marketing Harry Brown are buying
into this nostalgia, just as much as film critics who
hail the actor as the king of cool. Caine is a rare
beast: a genuine, bona fide British film star, and
maybe thats what makes him so special.
On top of the tricoloured target comes another
tasty piece of intertextuality: when Get Carter
was first released, some promotional images
framed Caine inside a target, the unwitting
victim of a lone gunman (which foreshadowed
the films bleak climax when having avenged his
brothers murder Carter is gunned down from
afar). Harry Brown is similarly framed, only this
time he is walking towards the audience, facing
down the danger.
Then again, in yet another promotional
image there is the low-angle shot of Brown
looking down towards the camera.. Compare
this with the now iconic shot of Carter, shotgun
in hand looking down the lens. See any
similarities?Without crowing about it, the film-
makers are wearing their genre influence on
their sleeve and using Michael Caines star power
to their advantage. The message is clear, this is
Carter for the 21st Century, a gritty no-nonsense
film that pulls no punches; and an audience
coming into the film with these images and
these links to a modern classic will have their
expectations set high. Fortunately the film
doesnt disappoint.
english and media centre | February 2011 | MediaMagazineOnline Culture 13
MM
As a document of social comment, Harry
Brown is unflinching, and if the resolution is
simplistic: lock up the trouble-makers and all will
be well. Without actually addressing the causes
of the problem, it is at least satisfying in some
sort of wish-fulfillment. As soon as Harrys friend
Len says:
Youve never talked about your time in the
Marinesdid you ever kill anyone?
we know that he will react, the quiet man will
once again find his voice.
And this is the main difference between
Eastwoods manipulation of his own iconic
onscreen image, and Barbers use of his star.
Eastwood as both director and star is in control
of the message he wants to send out. Kowalskis
martyrdom is in some way cleansing, suggestiing
that a violent past can be redeemed (just as a
directors violent past films can). Browns act(s)
of vigilantism, on the other hand, says quite
clearly that if society has caused the problem
of anti-social behaviour, then the society must
solve it. The final scene of Caine walking past the
subway, stopping and then walking through it
is triumphant in a way the Gran Turino driving
across the frame at sunset isntand perhaps
more British which is in keeping with a film that
has used its main star not only as its actor, but
also as its link to the past.
Enduring connections
And that connection with the Sixties, and
Caine in partcular, doesnt stop there. There is
even a further intertextual relationship between
the titular hero of Barbers film and yet another
piece of Caines cinematic history.
Caines second film: The Ipcress File (Furie,
1965) features, in Len Deightons original novel
at least, a nameless narrator. Clearly this would
never work in film although Daniel Craig
manages to pull it off in Layer Cake (Vaughn,
2007) so a name was sought. As Michael Caine
himself explains inhis 1992 autobiography,
Whats It All About?:
Saltzman [producer of the James Bond series
and Ipcress] was after the antithesis of James
Bond: a very ordinary bloke, someone who
could mingle unnoticed in a crowd and who
should have an ordinary, boring name. I
suggested Harry is a pretty dull name. Now
all we needed was a surname. We [Saltzman,
Caine and other dinner guests] all started to
go through the dullest names we could think
of Smith, Brown, Jones etc.
They ended up with Harry Palmer, but it could
so easily have been Harry Brown, and in many
ways, with his military past buried deep, Brown
could very well be Palmer. At a stretch.
So here we have a low-budget British film
(approx budget 4.3m) that cleverly uses
its lead actor not simply for his Star Power in
attracting an audience, but more importantly his
iconic status in, lets face it, his most iconic film
roles to create a deep intertextual resonance and
reflect positively on the new film in its attempt
to punch above its weight and stand shoulder-
to-shoulder with the Hollywood heavyweights at
the Box Office.
Graeme Scarfe teaches Film Studies at Uckfield Community
Technology College.