Be it stoic corporate boardrooms or newsroom chaos, cinema has served as society’s unflinching mirror. Power, in all its shapes and forms, has always fascinated filmmakers.
In an era where only 50% of people worldwide say they trust the media, that mirror becomes more vital than ever.
There are a few timeless films that have gone a step beyond depicting corruption. They have held up their lens to how the corrupt system operates and destroys in the process.
These stories remind us that control, once gained, seldom stays benevolent.
When artists dare to reveal what the authority hides, the screen becomes something far greater than entertainment. It may become a testimony or a warning depending on the story it tells.
This article revisits three films that strip away the glamor to expose the moral costs of authority. Each reminds us, in its own way, that power’s brilliance often casts the darkest shadow.
Network (1976): The Media’s Hunger for Control
Few films have successfully captured the dangerous seduction of mass media like Sidney
Lumet’s Network. It may come across as a satire on television, though it is anything but.
Lumet desired for his movie to be a prophetic dissection of how media morphs into an instrument of power.
He highlights how the media can shape public consciousness while devouring authenticity. Sounds a lot like the tin foil hats conspiracy theorists wear, right? Network may be five decades old, yet its dialogue reverberates like an angry sermon against the machinery of manipulation.
At the heart of the film is Howard Beale, a disillusioned news anchor who unravels on live television. Ironically, this moment also became the network’s most profitable spectacle. His shocking declaration of committing suicide on air should have ruined his career. Instead, Beale’s unfiltered rage resonated with a restless public hungry for authenticity. Well, ‘authentic’ was also 2024’s word of the year!
That ended up being a ratings miracle for the network. Even an outburst so serious turned into profitable entertainment. The film exposes how easily truth becomes commodified, especially when a hunger for power is at the root of it. Here’s what this movie ultimately exposes about power:
● Media as manipulation: Beale’s meltdown doesn’t call for a suicide hotline, but becomes a product that could reel in huge profits.
● Emotions as currency: Moral panic and empathy are packaged and sold. Emotions no longer belong to the people, but to corporations that monetize them.
● Spectacle as a sedative: The film shows how constant stimulation dulls one’s discernment. Do we see a self-fulfilling prophecy of the digital age here? When everything feels urgent, nothing truly matters.
According to a 2024 poll by Gallup, only 31% of US adults agreed to having a great deal or fair amount of confidence in the media. This statistic lifts the veil on how public erosion of trust has worked through the years. There is a disconnect between what the media portrays and what the public perceives.
As of Lumet’s filmic world, this disconnection is engineered, not accidental. In a nutshell, that’s the dark side of cultural power. It doesn’t operate via violence, but through manipulation and colonization of thought.
Dark Waters (2019): Where Morality and Monopoly Clash
If the Network portrayed the media’s moral decay, Dark Waters exposed the ruthlessness of corporate power. Directed by Todd Haynes, the film follows environmental lawyer
Robert Bilott, who uncovers decades of chemical contamination by DuPont.
This wasn't a case of a mistake or an accident. DuPont had knowingly poisoned a community while hiding behind layers of bureaucracy and legal manipulation. What makes Dark Waters so haunting isn't the pollution it documents. It has to do with the machinery of denial it lays bare.
Every ignored letter or buried report contributed to a portrait of systemic deceit. What's more is that this is disturbingly relevant today. The film reveals the dark side of corporate power through:
● Institutional gaslighting: We see how corporations rewrite narratives to minimize or eliminate accountability.
● Legal fatigue: The timeline and cost of litigation are designed to discourage justice unless reliable legal support is available.
● Moral corrosion: When loyalty collides with one’s conscience, individuals feel compelled to make compromises.
Bilott’s battle against DuPont is a direct reflection of a consolidated litigation against chemical manufacturers responsible for contaminating drinking water across the US.
The echoes don't end there, but extend to other modern struggles of ordinary people against entities too powerful to challenge alone.
Take the ongoing Paragard IUD lawsuit as an example. Thousands of women have alleged that a non-hormonal intrauterine device or contraceptive led to serious complications due to device breakage and migration.
According to TorHoerman Law, severe cases involve permanent infertility and uterine perforation. Be it the case of contamination or device failure, both involve wars against colossal systems of power. Individuals are left seeking not only restitution but also recognition for their injuries.
Resisting melodrama, Haynes keeps his palette muted and refined. Though the fight seems overwhelming, the film ends with endurance, not despair.
She Said (2022): Voices Against Silence
Maria Schrader’s She Said does not rely on loud drama or sensational moments. Its calm approach is precisely what makes it such a powerful film. Based on the investigative work of journalists Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, the film follows the pursuit of evidence against Harvey Weinstein.
The Hollywood producer has had a long-hidden history of sexual abuse. It was the kind that brought worldwide attention to how powerful men in the entertainment industry abuse their positions. The outrage against this particular producer helped spark the #MeToo movement, drawing eyes to workplace harassment.
The true horror lies not in what the system committed, but in what it enabled. As a shocker, She Said sheds light on institutional silence. The villains are not hideous caricatures but executives and publicists who keep the system of exploitation well-oiled.
Let’s see in detail the dark side of power that the film unmasks:
● Systemic suppression: Years of non-disclosure agreements did not aim to fix the
wrongdoing. They simply tried to keep it hidden from public scrutiny.
● Social complicity: An important thing the movie highlighted is that silence isn’t always forced. Sometimes, it’s built on the fear of losing one’s status or voice.
● Gendered hierarchy: There is a portrayal of power with a clear gender dimension. The system deems certain voices to be too inconvenient to protect. Many films depict external revolts against power, but She Said turns inward. This is because it isn’t focused on who shouts the loudest. On the contrary, the lens is on whether someone gets to speak at all.
In this context, a 2024 workplace report deepens the movie’s resonance. One key finding included that less than half of the surveyed women stated that they received support from their manager. At the current rate, it might take 48 years to reach gender parity in senior or leadership roles.
This is a movie that holds immense cultural significance. However, it is not a victory film that ends with a mic drop. The reason, perhaps, is that Weinstein’s conviction is only the beginning of a lifelong battle against cover-ups and cultural power.
In conclusion, we can understand that it’s not the critique of power that ultimately binds these films together. Each story pulls back the curtain on systems thriving in silence. So, the shared moral thread is that of an insistence on accountability.
The settings may differ, but the theme is universal. Today, even in ordinary daily life, we can apply the lessons of vigilance. Power will always seek new disguises, but the real antidote is taking a stand of courage.
People who liked this also liked...
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing for valuable opinion. We would be delighted to have you back.