Sorry if this seems an incredibly stupid question, but what was that scene where Smith was walking around punching people all about? I assumed it was some kind of angry fantasy or dream but there seemed to be no resolute end to it. Clearly a US senator couldn't and wouldn't go around punching people.
shareHe actually did go around and punch some reporters. It was no dream.
shareIn days of old, fights broke out in the senate chamber it self, at least one well documented Cane beating. Not to mention the occasional duel.
5. You can all shut up and just enjoy a movie that requires imagination!
Ay, in the 1850s! Considering these people were reporters, it's hardly likely this would have gone unnoticed.
shareWhen he is interviewed by a group of reporters they all misrepresent him the next day, which he discovers immediately after being sworn into the senate. In a fit of anger he goes to punch out the libelous bastards.
Back then a good punch in the jaw was far more compatible with social norms.
> Back then a good punch in the jaw was far more compatible with social norms.
Yes, it was all part of a kind of "language of men" that the films tried to put across.
1) The reporters had played him for a fool, and got a lot of funny pictures.
2) Then they mis-used the pictures, making him look like a disrespectful moron (which we know he isn't). But to the reporters, this was just the way the game could be played.
3) Smith responds by losing his temper, and starts hunting reporters down and punching out their lights. To him, this is just a point of honor.
4) To the reporters, it also is just how a "man" would respond their trick. They don't blame the guy for wanting to hit them, they just duck and run away.
5) What this leads to (in Hollywood's mind, at least) is the scene in which the reporters sit him down and start talking sense to him and telling him the truth. It's part of the idea that fighting just breeds respect, and everyone starting to like everyone else -- the reporters wind up liking Smith a lot. They're the ones who tell him he's just a temporary senator. (Um, I never got why Smith didn't really understand that in the first place.)
The whole thing is that punching the reporters was supposed to be okay, "boys will be boys" stuff, and that all the reporters wound up liking Smith as a result.
So, what would happen if a real senator did that nowadays? Would he get 'expelled'?
shareno thanks to LAWYERS, people can't do anything for themselves anymore, so it would never happen. BECAUSE of lawyers, law suits etc
share[deleted]
Yes I suppose today he won't get away with punching a bunch of reporters (more media circus, lawsuits), but neither can the media so blatantly misquote a US senator (without adequate proof) and get away with it.
-----
wat are you lookin' at...
If the reporters were inclined to press charges he could receive multiple charges of battery which is generally a misdemeanor but can, depending upon aggravating circumstances, result in a felony. The fact that he had punched so many people could be such an aggravating circumstance. Likewise if one had been serious injured. Of course, Smith might have sued them all for libel but I doubt he would have won since the mocking headlines and unflattering photos were generally permitted.
In the movie, the reporters seem to take the punches in stride - like it was an expected occupational hazard - and see them as, to some degree, warranted.
"The whole thing is that punching the reporters was supposed to be okay, "boys will be boys" stuff, and that all the reporters wound up liking Smith as a result."
I didn't get the impression he won them over by punching them. I thought he won them over through his perseverance and determination during the filibuster, and because Jean Arthur's character, who was pals with the reporters by varying degrees, was won over by him.
This whole thing he's talking about is way before the filibuster. Why is everyone so *beep* stupid on the internet? You're unable to keep track of the simplest conversation. It is so goddamn simple and easy to understand but every goddamn time anyone says anything there's some retard there to stoutly disagree with them on something they didn't *beep* say.
Do you understand that you were responding to a non-existent point? You were arguing over nothing, literally. It's not like when people say, "Stop arguing about nothing," when you're arguing about putting the clothes on top of the hamper instead of in it. You are literally arguing about no thing. It's like you're arguing with a mirror. You made it up and now you're disagreeing with it. Christ almighty.
Man that had to be the funniest post I have ever read. Thumbs up to you brother.
shareThe reporters don't like or respect him after the fight. They undermine his righteous indignation by telling him straight up that he's a joke and he is making himself even more ridiculous by taking their game personally. They're basically saying he has no right to be angry with them and the fact that he is, is just more proof he doesn't belong. That takes the fight out of him, which was their intention.
The only reporter who has a soft spot for him at that point is Diz, who already had a connection with him.
Smith knew his position was technically temporary, but he didn't realise how pointless and disposable he would be. That's what they were really telling him.
It's that kind of idiocy that I empathize with. ~David Bowie
I think it was an honorable thing to do. They made fun of him, and he didn't like it. He was an average Joe, and by punching them, he got his revenge. I would have loved to see John McCain, Joe Lieberman or Barney Frank, (ok, he's not a Senator, but a Representative, but he seems like the guy who could punch a journalist), punch a journalist who "made fun" of them.
Martin Scorsese IS the best
I'm sure the audience applauded! Haven't a lot of us wanted to punch reporters at some time or other?
shareWhile I can never condone retributional violence, it was once considered a part of true manhood to be willing to literally fist-fight to redeem one's honor or defend the honor of one's girlfriend, wife, family, friend, etc. To me personally, would still be hard to resist the impulse to do so, even in this day and age, but nowadays it would only invite jail time and lawsuits so it's best to just grin and bear it.
You also have to remember that, in another day and time, the same two guys engaging in a knock-down, drag-out fight might be spotted later in the same day sharing drinks at the bar; today, fighting is often playing FOR KEEPS and people do die from the stabbings, gunfire and merciless beatings by gangs as a result of it. Again, best to just suck it up when someone offends you, and just let the other guy go on his merry little way and, later on down the road, suffer "karma" or "what goes around, comes around" or "reaping what he sows" or what ever you want to call it.
Sometimes journalists deserve a good slap.
---------------------------------
Best way to deal with trolls is to add them to your ignore list.
My theory was that this was an echo from the screenplay's origins as a sequel to "Mr. Deeds Goes to Town" as this was the kind of straight-forward behavior Longfellow Deeds would engage in.
shareIt wasn't a big deal back then. In real life, James Stewart would get into fistfights with his friends over politics. (Henry Fonda in particular) But they would still remain friends and have a drink afterwards.
George Carlin: It's all bullsh-t and it's bad for ya.
The idea is that Mr. Smith is this simpleton with old-fashioned country values--such as, if someone lies about you, you confront them and possibly knock their lights out.
Of course it's not appropriate for a senator to do that, but that's kind of the point.