Essay by Ray Jones

1. 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 quot;from
rags to richesquot;, 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: quot;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.quot; 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

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