Philadelphia Movie Analysis

2103 Words9 Pages
FILM REVIEW
PHILADELPHIA

Subject – Law & Language
Submitted to – Mr Manav Kapur
Mr Sidharth Chauhan
Professors, Law & Language

Submitted by – Shubham Sancheti
First Year, Semester - I
Roll No. 2014-57

NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 3
PLOT 4
About protagonist 4
Transformation of behaviour 4
ANALYSIS 5
Concealment of disease-only way to survive 5
Discrimination leads to sympathy 6
Impeccable arguments in the court 6
Oscar winning performance 6
Symbolism 6
PHILADELPHIA AND ITS IMPACT ON PEOPLE 8
My viewpoint 8
Discrimination in even same disease 8
CONCLUSION 9
Resemblance to present day situation 9
Male chauvinism 9
Natural rights 9
Tone of arguments 10
Language in the courts 10

INTRODUCTION

“The noble
…show more content…
The protagonist of the film, Andrew Beckett, is shown as a generous and hardworking man who works for a law firm. He is introduced defending a construction company for creating a pestilent dust which is referred by him as ‘innocuous’. The way he keeps his arguments is really appreciable. There is no melodrama in the film. The only support he got from the faggot hater society is of his family who motivates him to fight for his rights.
Concealment of disease-only way to survive
The Firm fires Andrew for uncertain reasons of being incompetent but Andrew argues that he has been fired because of the discovery of the fact of his contraction of disease by one of the senior employers. The way the senior notices the Kaposi’s sarcoma lesions denotes that he has come through the lesions before and know why these lesions occur. But Andrew conceals the fact of his fatal disease and gives a false reason behind it. Therefore, the valour and bravado shown by Andrew in the film is covered by this concealment. But if he did not conceal the fact he might not be given the most important case and promoted to the senior most
…show more content…
In the movie, Miller says that He doesn’t want a strong person in the bed as he is. So we can probably infer that he was a chauvinist and sees that one spouse should be in a dominating position. And in the real world, I think, the situation is same. Do these are the repercussions of heterosexuality in which the whole world takes stand of it and reprimands its opposite?
Natural rights
The beauty of nature is somewhat ambiguous but it clearly gives freedom to everyone to choose anyone they want as their partner. A man has a craving for love, wherever he finds it, he moves in that direction. Therefore, in my viewpoint, it is not wrong to be loved by someone who is of the same gender as you. However, the incurable and dreaded disease AIDS is not the remote consequence of homosexuality, there are many instances where heterosexuals also become the victims of this disease.

Tone of
Open Document