Movie 'Training Day' gives the wrong message to the naive and young

[shakabroh]

Training Day with Denzel Washington is one of my most favorite movies of all time. Denzel's acting is excellent. The movie is scary for it's realism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMEUHPxn3xA

When the movie starts, I'm on Denzel Washington's (Alonzo's) side. As the movie continues, slowly I find myself switching sides and supporting the rookie cop. But I realize that in real life, I would probably be more in favor of Denzel Washington's role than the white rookie cop.

Though well intentioned, I wonder if the movie gives the wrong message to the naive, young and innocent.

This rookie cop thinks that the force of the law--the force of justice is behind him. He feels justified in being righteous. And that is where he is a fool. He is a modern day Don Quixote. He believes in being a chivalrous knight of shining armor in a world that is tarnished.

Whose fault is it that no one told this rookie cop about the way that life really is? Whose responsibility was it to tell him? If this rookie cop went on a chest thumping mission of cleaning up the world, sooner or later he would die. He would rub some politician or someone higher up the wrong way. They wouldn't care for his arrogance and his straight shooting ideas of right and wrong in a world where people are supposed to bend to the different subtle flavors of power. And that which does not bend when it is supposed to, when a greater force asks you to bend, gets crushed.
It's not personal...it's just the law of nature.

Here is this cop. Just graduated from police academy. Feels all high and righteous to save the world. Thinks that the world operates with these clean ideas of morality, when it doesn't. He thinks that he is backed up by the force of righteousness. It's not.

The rookie cop wants to turn the world into something from his ideals...without taking the time to understand where the world is really at. Is there more grease in the world than he has the soap to clean? He doesn't have to consider all that. He's righteous, and somehow, magically, his chivalry is going to make up for all the shit in the world. Puh-lease.

He totally doesn't understand the power dynamics of the world that he lives in, including his individual power in the larger dynamic playing out. He totally doesn't understand the degree to which the forces of justice will protect him when he goes head first to bend these other forces of power. This is a recipe for him to get crushed. And he almost does, under that Mexican gang's gun in the bathtub. It was sheer luck, and the good will (and somewhat, stupidity) of the Mexican gang that they let him go. If they were smart, they wouldn't have relied on the rookie cop's good will to not come back with a vendetta.

He is a fool for trying to do his job in a vacuum without taking the time to understand the power dynamics in the world around him and how his own personal power fits into that equation. By doing so, he has made himself into a law of nature, while ignoring the laws of nature that operate. Arrogance.

And what? He is going to personally redefine the world with his ideas of righteousness that he learned in school? He thinks that the way the world is, is not going to push back, when he goes plunging into the darkness, mistaking it for the light?

Why didn't police academy train this cop for the real world? Why did they feed him liberal bullshit that doesn't apply to the way the streets function? Why didn't the system protect this rookie cop from destroying himself? Why didn't it vaccinate him with all the disease that he would face out so that he knew his realistic role? Why did the system over-play the good that he would achieve and set unreasonable expectations for him? Don't you think that his liberal bullshit education turned him into a pessimist?

Why didn't it teach him about who he could fight and how...and not to go after seeking justice blindly? Why didn't it teach him about his own limitations?

In the steets, if you want to survive, you learn to study your environment and be flexible. You learn to study yourself in relation to the power dynamics playing out. Yes, it asks you to be adaptable. And yes,sooner or later in the process you find yourself twisted out of everything you knew to be good. But that is why it's called the streets, its where the rubber hits the road. And sometimes the friction erases a part of you.

When this rookie cop gets twisted out of shape in the context of trying to adapt to the real world, whose responsibility is it to put him back into shape? Where is that mold that he would use to put himself back into shape? Why would he be motivated to regain this shape? Why is it better to play it straight than to be twisted...if being twisted allows you to survive the streets a lot better than if you play it straight?

[Alessan]

But that's what the movie was about - how the rookie cop learned how the world works. It's called "training day", after all, because that's what it was. He'll be a lot less naive in the future.

That doesn't change the fact that the Denzel character was a criminal, and got what he deserved.

[SecondJudith]

What is the "wrong message" you think the film is sending?

[Stanislaus]

But the rookie cop wins the and the streetwise "morally flexible" cop gets a righteous comeuppance.

And the rookie cop wins precisely because of his morality.

SPOILER:

It's Ethan Hawke who makes Denzel pull over so he can fight off the two muggers/rapists and save the young Hispanic girl. Denzel, had he seen it, would probably have driven on by. And it's saving that girl that - by a bizarre coincidence - saves Ethan Hawke - she's the niece of the gang leader that Denzel pays to kill his aggravatingly moral trainee. That good act saves him from the assassination, and allows him to confront Denzel in the rooftop battle finale. Moreover, for all Denzel's posturing about how all the gangbangers in the housing estate do his bidding, when the chips are down they turn on him and given Ethan the gun. Because Denzel's manipulation and power-plays have worked, but at the cost of creating a lot of resentment.

In the end, the rookie has learned some useful things about the differences between the theory and practice of policework and some much more useful things about how widespread corruption is in the LAPD . But he hasn't sacrificed his ideals - his commitment to those is what got him through the day. Ultimately, he's not twisted out of shape at all. Ultimately, the person who didn't understand the forces at work was Denzel.

[twickster]

Welcome to the SDMB, shakabroh. We have a dedicated forum for discussions of movies (TV, books, music, etc.), Cafe Society. I'll move this thither for you.

twickster, MPSIMS moderator

[Grumman]

I completely disagree with the OP. Quite apart from Stanislaus's point that Alonzo's "street smart" approach turned out to be street stupid, a police officer's purpose is more than to just survive. A police department filled with people like Alonzo is just another gang.

[orcenio]

In that movie though everyone is corrupt. Remember? Just how did Alonzo get the warrant to raid that drug dealer's house? He bribed a Judge with money he stole from another drug dealer. He then kills a richer drug dealer and uses the drug money to try and bribe some unrelated Russians not to kill him.

The SWAT team Alonzo works with, the politicians/Judges he eats with, everyone is a crook. Alonzo justifys his actions with comforting thoughts like "they build prisons because of me!"

[Baal Houtham]

I wasn't as fond of the film as the OP was; it started strong but the bad guys turned into caricatures and by the end the good guy was leaping off buildings in the name of justice.

In this life moderation is often the key. You have to compromise to get along. Still we need the idealists more than the amoral pragmatists. Politics and law enforcement won't stay clean without a regular influx of people with a nearly spiritual belief in honesty and fairness.

[Capitaine Zombie]

Originally Posted by Baal Houtham

I wasn't as fond of the film as the OP was; it started strong but the bad guys turned into caricatures and by the end the good guy was leaping off buildings in the name of justice.

Yeah, Ethan Hawke having to smoke drugs ten minutes into his job was great, but you're right, it's like the makers of the movie kind of lost their balls halfway into the movie, and what could have been a great story about corruption turned into another standard action movie.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Baal Houtham

I wasn't as fond of the film as the OP was; it started strong but the bad guys turned into caricatures and by the end the good guy was leaping off buildings in the name of justice.

Agreed. I was a little surprised at the time to see how much praise Denzel Washington got for this movie. His performance was fine, but by the end his character turns into a mustache-twirling villain and he's just chewing the scenery. It was bad writing.

Originally Posted by shakabroh

When the movie starts, I'm on Denzel Washington's (Alonzo's) side. As the movie continues, slowly I find myself switching sides and supporting the rookie cop. But I realize that in real life, I would probably be more in favor of Denzel Washington's role than the white rookie cop.

It's all well and good to teach somebody how the world really works. Alonzo doesn't just get his hands a little dirty. He's a murderer, he's involved with the mob, and he steals millions of dollars from evidence. He's not teaching Jake how the world works so much as he's justifying his own behavior and trying to win over another stooge. I think you saw a more nuanced movie than I did.

[SecretaryofEvil]

The movie Training Day was not very realistic at all. It was a very over the top film. I didn't think Denzel's plan in the movie was very smart, but in the movie's defense, his plan doesn't work and it gets him killed.

The OP seems to greatly overestimate how likely it is for a police officer to be murdered in the United States. Statistically, they're more likely to be killed in car accidents while on duty than to be murdered in the line of duty.

I'm not sure I get your point. Surely you don't think that police officers should act like Denzel's character, do you? All things considered, he wasn't a very effective cop.

[Little Nemo]

The OP complains about the police academy teaching its students "liberal bullshit" but what does he want them to teach instead? Should there be courses on how to take bribes and beat up suspects? The academy teaches recruits how to uphold the law - it's not the academy's fault that other people choose to break laws.

Instead of complaining about how the police academy is full of liberal bullshit like truth and justice and integrity, maybe you should be trying to fill the rest of the world with the same liberal bullshit.

[Typo Negative]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

The OP complains about the police academy teaching its students "liberal bullshit" but what does he want them to teach instead?

It should teach them how not to be framed and murdered by their new partner!

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by spooje

It should teach them how not to be framed and murdered by their new partner!

And how not to get killed when they only have one day left 'til retirement.

[NDP]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Agreed. I was a little surprised at the time to see how much praise Denzel Washington got for this movie. His performance was fine, but by the end his character turns into a mustache-twirling villain and he's just chewing the scenery. It was bad writing.

...

I think you saw a more nuanced movie than I did.

That was the same problem I had with the movie. Alonzo HAD to be all-bad with no good traits whatsoever. Everything was black or white with no shades of gray or room for ambiguity. Training Day reminded me of another movie about a crooked cop: Touch of Evil. However, at least Hank Quinlan (Orson Welles' character) in the latter film, as bad as he was, still retained his detective instincts. Alonzo was completely worthless. I would've liked Training Day much more if they would've had Alonzo to be right about some things. Or, in other words, have Alonzo be a "good detective" but a "lousy cop."

[njtt]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

The OP complains about the police academy teaching its students "liberal bullshit" but what does he want them to teach instead? Should there be courses on how to take bribes and beat up suspects? The academy teaches recruits how to uphold the law - it's not the academy's fault that other people choose to break laws.

Instead of complaining about how the police academy is full of liberal bullshit like truth and justice and integrity, maybe you should be trying to fill the rest of the world with the same liberal bullshit.

Furthermore, aren't conservatives as least as much in favor of truth, justice and integrity as liberals are? The left does not have a monopoly on starry-eyed idealism (and that's a good thing).

[shakabroh]

My critique of this movie was not just based on the United States police or American education system. I don't think that 'the Straight dope' is American centric...or is it? Am I mistaken?

But you're right, the movie is based in the United States. I'm just trying to analyze it from a slightly broader perspective.

Look, I'm not saying Liberal bullshit education as a way to hate on liberalism or the education system. My anger more comes from this cops lack of preparation. I feel for him. I am looking out for the cop and his survivability. I just don't want to see this cop hurt himself because he set his ideals too high. I just don't want him to be disappointed in his zeal to change the world. I want him to set realistic expectations so that he can actually be effective. Is there a question of effectiveness before survival?

And don't get me wrong. I don't necessarily agree with Alonzo (Denzel's character) either. Alonzo is a "three wise men" (remember them?) wanna be. He's way too much of a hot head strutting his stuff for me to consider him slick for the streets. Alonzo's character (trying to emulate "the three wise men) thinks he is a lot smarter than he is. That's why at a certain point he loses his grip, and the streets turn on him.

But the main point is that Alonzo chose who he wanted to become. In the case of the white rookie cop, this guy is an emblem of the education system. All I'm saying is that I feel that it leaves a lot to be desired for this cop to survive his environment.

I felt the movie finished with an unspoken message that the rookie cop was someone to be admired and emulated. And I feel that was the wrong message. I thought it was too simplistic. Have you heard that saying, "the path to hell is filled with good intentions?"

[MrDibble]

Much more nuanced portrayal of a crooked cop/good cop dynamic: DCI Hunt/ DC Tyler in Life on Mars - Hunt is a brutal thug, a torturer, on the take (at least initially) and has no problem with shopping someone if he thinks they're guilty. But for all that, he still is a copper, with a copper's instincts and his justification (that it's the only way to get the job done) actually seems to be sincere belief. Definitely not a moustache-twirler.

[Argent Towers]

The Shield is the ultimate corrupt-cop show. Incredibly well-written show...no end is left untied. And all the characters are very believable.

[enomaj]

Originally Posted by Marley23

And how not to get killed when they only have one day left 'til retirement.

And how to say, "I'm too old for this shit!"

[shakabroh]

Going undercover is a very dangerous part of police work. People mostly focus on the danger from the criminals, if discovered, part. But what about the whole psychological part of it?

Playing a double agent has got to be one of the most stressful things in the world.

The movie: In Too Deep, depicts that world really well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Too_Deep_(film)

It's about a cop who infiltrates a criminal gang to the point that his identity almost gets erased. He almost can't seperate the cop aspect of him from the criminal in the gang. His loyalties are torn between the two.

In some ways, asking cops to adapt in such an environment seems like cruel and unusual punishment.


If you're taking your responsibilities/job so seriously that it results in self-destruction, is there something that is seriously wrong with that picture? Or are under cover cops sort of like soldiers who have chosen to sacrifice for their nation?

That was the question I was asking myself when I was watching the movie The Departed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Departed

Was he naive and stupid for being talked into "sacrificing for the common wealth?"

Some people might say "that the fella should slow down and smell the flowers." Some people might tell him that there is more to life than sacrificing your life away for any ideal.

Or is there something work sacrificing yourself for?

Should you sacrifice for your country? Your family? For world peace? For global warming? For God? For your church? For the love of your life? For your political party?

Are there things that are truly worth sacrificing for....that are worth destroying yourself over? Certainly, soldiers in armies all over the world are saying, "Yes!" every day by fighting and dying while following orders.

Why is that sacrifice superior or inferior over any other?

[AClockworkMelon]

Yeah, we definitely need more cops who attempt to force their juniors to smoke hard drugs, shake down civilians for their drug money (to pocket), let attempted rapists run free in favor of their being hunted by vigilantes, murder unarmed informants for their drug money (to pocket) and then leave them to be butchered by hired gangsters.

You're right, the movie was wrong in its message to young viewers that all of the above is bad. Thanks for showing us the light.

[Chicagojeff]

Originally Posted by Argent Towers

The Shield is the ultimate corrupt-cop show. Incredibly well-written show...no end is left untied. And all the characters are very believable.

OHHH I gotta call bullshit on this one.. I love The Shield.. but Mackey? realistically? Nahh No chance you could partner up with some dudes willing to go to federal prison for one another.. Vic had so many balls in the air no one could expect to come out of shit like that.. all .. the.. time..

"They killed Lem!!!!"

[Acsenray]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

My anger more comes from this cops lack of preparation.

What are you talking about? How do you think cops are properly trained for their jobs? They are put under the charge of an experienced cop, just like in the movie. It just so happened that this cop was a murder, drug-dealer, and racketeer.

You seem to be treating this movie as some kind of documentary. You think it's actually realistic for rookie cops to be taught to expect that they will be set up and murdered by their superiors on their first day on the job?

[shakabroh]

Originally Posted by AClockworkMelon

Yeah, we definitely need more cops who attempt to force their juniors to smoke hard drugs, shake down civilians for their drug money (to pocket), let attempted rapists run free in favor of their being hunted by vigilantes, murder unarmed informants for their drug money (to pocket) and then leave them to be butchered by hired gangsters.

You're right, the movie was wrong in its message to young viewers that all of the above is bad. Thanks for showing us the light.

So are you saying that it's ok for anyone to sacrifice themself...to the point of self-destruction....for whatever cause they please? And you're ok with this?

[Alessan]

No, we think cops should do their jobs, which is to uphold the law.

[shakabroh]

You're ok with someone like Leonardo Di Caprio's character (William "Billy" Costigan Jr), in Departed, being innocently recruited to go serve "the people of the common wealth" to then...

I mean his handlers used the fact that he came from a broken, dysfunctional, criminal background, his intelligence and his good intentions (very different from the rest of his family)...against him.

You're ok with this? You're ok with him slowly, in the name of sacrificing for a greater cause, losing himself in the snake pit of Francis "Frank" Costello's (Jack Nicholson's character) gang? You're ok with him suffering from such conflict due to the sacrifice that he is doing that he needs to take medications...just so he can live with himself and not get depressed? What about the excruciating inner conflict that this guy felt? That's not yours or mine problem? The fact that this guy lost his identity, his life (what life? he had no life) all because his handlers kept insensitively forcing him to eat the vomit of his own unknowing self-deception. How screwed up is that?

All for what?

You expect me to be ok with this? I mean his handlers lost him to a criminal organization...to the point that he couldn't come out. Billy had a chance for a bright future if he had pursued any other goal. But he destroyed himself in the name of the common good, without anything to show for it. He was a fool!

Would you wish this on your child? Or is it just that you're ok with other people's children sacrificing in this way?

So it's ok for me to make another person to sacrifice for whatever cause I please...because...why? What gives me that level of arrogance?

[DrFidelius]

Um, dude. It's only a movie. And not even a hugely influential one at that.

Fiction. It is a difficult concept. In fiction an author will create unrealistic situations to explore the human condition. Or to just be entertaining. And you are obsessing on some pieces of entertainment as if they were intended as serious philosophical exercises or guides for living a moral life.

Relax and enjoy the pretty pictures and the absurd imaginary events.

[Alessan]

Wait - I thought this thread was about Training Day. When did it become about the Depahted?

[Grumman]

Originally Posted by Alessan

Wait - I thought this thread was about Training Day. When did it become about the Depahted?

When the OP lost the argument, I think.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

My critique of this movie was not just based on the United States police or American education system. I don't think that 'the Straight dope' is American centric...or is it? Am I mistaken?

We have people posting from all over the world, but the U.S. is the most-represented country.

Look, I'm not saying Liberal bullshit education as a way to hate on liberalism or the education system. My anger more comes from this cops lack of preparation. I feel for him. I am looking out for the cop and his survivability.

I think you're projecting your views about liberalism and society onto the movie. Which is fine, I guess, but how do you know cops are actually this underprepared? Because the movies say so? Ethan Hunt's character is naive, but that's an element of the story. Denzel's character is not the example you want cops to follow in real life.

I felt the movie finished with an unspoken message that the rookie cop was someone to be admired and emulated. And I feel that was the wrong message. I thought it was too simplistic. Have you heard that saying, "the path to hell is filled with good intentions?"

The rookie cop is resourceful, merciful, and his goal is to protect others. Alonzo's goal is enriching himself and he views other people as expendable if they're in the way. So yes, the movie is saying the rookie cop is more admirable. It's pretty hard to argue that he isn't. And I think "the path to hell is paved with good intentions" probably applies more to Alonzo- at least assuming that he originally wanted to be an effective cop and wound up compromising his ethics over and over until he dispensed with them entirely.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Ethan Hunt

That Hawke won't Hunt.

[shakabroh]

Right, the OP.

So are you saying that there are not people in the military and in the police forces that recruit naive and innocent children from poor backgrounds? And are movies and fiction not used to influence people's ideas?

And is being a cop deep under cover...or a double agent...something like a unicorn or a fairy...that they are not found in reality?

[Alessan]

They recruit them, then they train them, and then they have them serve with more experienced soldiers and cops* to learn some more.







* Who are not, ideally, murderers and drug dealers.

[shakabroh]

Ok, well maybe I'm wrong then if you feel that the innocent and naive are never sacrificed for other people's negligence, zeal, ignorance, or whatever.

[Acsenray]

Maybe we're all wrong if you feel that in America, the police are just mafiosi in blue uniforms.

[DrFidelius]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

Ok, well maybe I'm wrong then if you feel that the innocent and naive are never sacrificed for other people's negligence, zeal, ignorance, or whatever.

Okay. Name three, from the last ten years, who are not fictional AND whose situations were remotely analogous to the movies you like to watch.

[Alessan]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

Ok, well maybe I'm wrong then if you feel that the innocent and naive are never sacrificed for other people's negligence, zeal, ignorance, or whatever.

So what are you saying? Soldiers shouldn't fight for their country? Cops shouldn't uphold the law?

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

So are you saying that there are not people in the military and in the police forces that recruit naive and innocent children from poor backgrounds?

No, nobody said anything like that. That's because you didn't mention anything about this idea, so there was no way for us to respond to it. I'm sure some people are naive when they enter the police and the military. That's kind of what training is for. What does that have to do with the movie? The movie doesn't celebrate naivete. The thing you're supposed to admire about Helen Hunt/Howard Hawks/whatever is his commitment to the law and justice in a crazy situation. That can go hand in hand with naivete but it's not the same thing. The point is that he remembers why he's doing his job - to help other people - and Alonzo doesn't.

[shakabroh]

One person's food is another person's weapon. And liberalism doesn't care about that. It measures everybody on the same scale.

And what it doesn't want to see...it doesn't. It is based on it's own morality...that feeds it's children and poisons it's neighbors child.

[Alessan]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

One person's food is another person's weapon. And liberalism doesn't care about that. It measures everybody on the same scale.

And what it doesn't want to see...it doesn't. It is based on it's own morality...that feeds it's children and poisons it's neighbors child.

Those words are in English.

Beyond that, I got nothing.

[DrFidelius]

Okay ... You're not talking about movies anymore, are you?
What else do the voices tell you about "liberalism?"

(And as a disclaimer, I do not participate in political / cultural debates on this board because my natural inclination is a little to the right of Tomás de Torquemada.)

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by Alessan

Those words are in English.

Beyond that, I got nothing.

Doesn't seem to have anything to do with Training Day either.

[Acsenray]

Conservatives would advocate training cops to become bribe-taking, drug-dealing, colleague-murdering racketeers?

[Bryan Ekers]

Sure, as long as they bust up gay weddings.

[Covered_In_Bees!]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

Sure, as long as they bust up gay weddings.

But that's only so they can find a new baggage handler, right? Don't want someone else taking a good baggage handler away from them.

[Larry Borgia]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

One person's food is another person's weapon.

Well sure, if you go around hitting people in the face with pies.

[SecretaryofEvil]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

One person's food is another person's weapon.

I can throw this can of mushroom soup pretty hard.

[xenophon41]

Originally Posted by SecretaryofEvil

I can throw this can of mushroom soup pretty hard.

And I've spent the last few years building up an immunity to iocane powder...

[PlainJain]

Originally Posted by shakabroh

One person's food is another person's weapon.

Don't bring a baguette to a lightsaber fight, right?

OP, I'd like to ask you respond to DrFidelius request of naming "three, from the last ten years, who are not fictional AND whose situations were remotely analogous to the movies you like to watch" but, despite my lack of formal training (and despite the fact I only know you from a few posts on a message board), it's very clear you are clinically mentally ill and you need to go back on your meds so I won't as it would be cruel to ask you to do so.