What do you think of “violence” as a lens for examining the movie? I see someone mentioned it in the notes of a recent post contrasting Ben and Ian’s approaches to getting fingerprints, and I remember observing to one of my friends that it struck me as an action movie where the heroes are being shot *at* but never shoot anyone, they outwit, hide, and flee. Even at the end, under Trinity Church when they outnumber Ian’s team, the heroes don’t attempt to rush the surviving henchman and get his gun, their response is still to *outwit* Ian again.
Hey @kaiyves-backup,
Great question!
I believe the commentary in question is by @tentacledwizard.
Parallel Action
I adore the heist sequence so much. It's conveying a lot of information about both teams visually while ratcheting up the tension the whole time. This technique of cutting back and forth between two sequences of related activities is called 'parallel action', and it is used to fantastic effect in this part of the movie.
I mean, pretty much every part of National Treasure is one of my favorite parts of National Treasure, but the heist sequence just sings, and this crosscutting is a big reason why.
Good vs Evil
The trope of the heroes winning through wits instead of violence is a longstanding one. You could probably trace it back to The Odyssey if you were so inclined? It plays on some base cultural assumptions we have about good = clever, intelligent, peaceful while bad = violent, brutish, dumb. Obviously the particulars of those associations change over time, but broadly they stand.
And National Treasure is very clear about situating each side with the "good vs evil" narrative. While Ben is prepping UV light powder, Ian and co are amassing grenades and blocks of C4.
Ian's crew tases a guard to gain fingerprint access, while Ben artfully steals Abigail's fingerprints with no harm done other than some awkward flirting and potentially weird implication for their relationship later but that's not what we're dealing with atm.
The film takes every opportunity to show us the difference between these two approaches, and I think there are a few reasons why, both in general and to serve this story in particular.
First of all, both teams are doing a "bad" thing. They are both trying to steal something that we, the American public consciousness, hold sacred. To differentiate them and make sure we know who is doing it for the right reasons and for the wrong reasons, the film gives them two very different approaches. It's clear at every step who to root for.
The parallel action is also creating dramatic irony. We know that Ian is coming, and that he's heavily armed, but Ben doesn't until it's nearly too late. That creates some delicious tension, because the editing keeps reminding us what Ben and Riley don't know: this sequence is actually a race not just against the clock, but against armed mercenaries Yikes!
It also sets up Ian as a formidable antagonist. He's just as capable as Ben, but much more dangerous. He's able to match Ben and Riley's heist literally beat for beat on screen, while causing much more harm to people and property. This underscores that he will not hesitate to harm Ben, the Declaration, or anyone else who crosses his path on the treasure hunt (as an unfortunate Dr. Chase is about to learn).
Clever Heroes
One thing I want to focus on especially is the way this movie actually subverts this trope a teeny bit. Usually, the trope is that the good guys are just as capable of violence as the bad guys, but choose not to use it. They elect to outwit because it's more 'gentlemanly.' Off the top of my head I'm thinking of:
The Princess Bride. Both sides feature skilled fighters and Wesley and Inigo can and have killed a man like slicing butter, but they elect to use their wits and civility whenever possible. By contrast, Prince Humperdink and the Six-Fingered Man will use any violent means necessary to get what they want.
White Collar. Slightly random, I know, but I'm watching this right now, and the show makes it clear from the outset that Neal Caffrey is an expert marksman and highly competent with guns but he chooses not to use them because he's a classier (and therefore more likable) kind of criminal.
James Bond?? Honestly I haven't see one of these in a while but I feel like 007 isn't just mowing people down all the time. He's playing them. Outsmarting them. Only getting his hands dirty when he has to. Because he's, again, smarter/suaver/more 'civilized' and likable than his antagonistic counterparts.
The key here is that these guys all have the same violence as their opponents as an option in their toolbelts and make a moral choice not to use it.
Ben doesn't have that option.
Weak heroes
He could not, on his best day, go toe-to-toe with Ian or any one of the henchmen, let alone a group of them together. His only choice is to outwit them.
Throughout the course of the movie Ben throws one (1) punch and it hurts enough that he has to stop and shake his hand out.
And he only gets that punch off in the first place because Powell isn't expecting it.
He's a researcher. Yes he's fit enough to run around and scuba dive but if he had any kind of hand to hand combat training it would have been ~20 years ago when he was in the ROTC program.
This puts him in a sub-category/related trope: the scrawny nerd who outwits the much more physically powerful enemy. Think Mulan using the weights to help her climb the pole or a pre-serum Steve Rogers pulling the pin out of the flag poll.
And Ben is the most athletic of the bunch by far. Abigail seems like a person who takes good care of herself, but probably in a lowfat-yogurt-and-pilates way not in a can-fuck-you-up-with-martial-arts kind of way. And Riley? ...Riley does not strike me as someone who is especially strong or fit. Screen time, junk food, late nights online. Patrick is in his 60s and eats pizza alone on Friday/Saturday nights.
So while they maybe could have overpowered Ian all together, it would be a big risk, and probably none of their first instincts. Team Treasure is entirely composed of neurodivergent nerds--one imagines they all learned pretty early in their childhoods that they couldn't overpower their bullies, but they could outsmart them.
And so when their lives are on the line, they turn to the self-preservation strategy that's gotten them this far: their wits.
Conclusion
Wow, I did not expect this answer to get so deep!
This turned into an interesting look at both the creative choices in the movie and the characters.
Thanks so much for your question! Feel free to send another any time.
20 notes
·
View notes