THE PHENOMENON OF CRIME AS PRESENTED IN
“AMERICAN GANGSTER” MOVIE BY RIDLEY SCOTT
A Thesis
Submitted to Faculty of Adab and Humanities In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Bachelor Degree (S1)
Arranged By IRMA WAHYUNI
105026000938
ENGLISH LETTER DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF ADAB AND HUMANITIES
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY “SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH” JAKARTA
APPROVEMENT
THE PHENOMENON OF CRIME AS PRESENTED IN
“AMERICAN GANGSTER” MOVIE BY RIDLEY SCOTT
A Thesis
Submitted to Faculty of Adab and Humanities in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Bachelor Degree (S1)
Arranged By IRMA WAHYUNI
105026000938
Approved By Advisor
Drs. H. Abdul Hamid, M.Ed Nip: 150 181 922
ENGLISH LETTER DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF ADAB AND HUMANITIES
STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY “SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH” JAKARTA
2010
LEGALIZATION
The thesis entitled “The Phenomenon of Crime as Presented in ‘American Gangster’ the Movie
By Ridley Scott” has been defended before the Faculty of Letters and Humanities’ Examination
Committee on April 1, 2010. The thesis has already been accepted as a partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of strata one.
Jakarta, April 1, 2010
The Examination Committee
Signature Date
1. Dr. H. Muhammad Farkhan, M.P.d (Chair Person) _________ _______ 19650919 00003 1 002
2. Drs. A.Saefuddin, M.P.d (Secretary) _________ _______ 19640710 199303 1 006
3. Drs. H. Abdul Hamid, M. Ed (Advisor) _________ _______ 150 181 922
4. Inayatul Chusna, M. Hum (Examiner I) _________ _______ 19780126 200312 2 002
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this submission is my own original work and that, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person
nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or
diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except where do acknowledgement
has been made in the text.
Jakarta, February 2010
IRMA WAHYUNI
ABSTRACT
IRMA WAHYUNI, The Phenomenon of Crime as Presented in “American Gangster” Movie
By Ridley Scott, (2007). Thesis, Jakarta: English Letter Department, Faculty of Adab and Humanities, State Islamic University “Syarif Hidayatullah” Jakarta, February 2010.
The study concerned with the American Gangster Movie by Ridley Scott, released on November 2nd, 2007 inspired by the true story of America in 1971. The movie reflected the social phenomena in America, especially the crime in Harlem who well-known as a neighborhood in the New York City borough of Manhattan, also long known as a major African-American residential, cultural, and business center. This study was to find out the kind of crime that performed in American Gangster. The analysis is focused on the social issues of crime like the using of drug, heroin problem, sex offences, violence, corruption and murder.
In this paper, the writer uses qualitative method and descriptive analysis as a technique of the study. The writer describes one by one the kind of crime that most often appeared in American Gangster. In analyzing this study, the writer uses the theory proposed by two American sociologists, Judith Montero and McDowells who have classified the Crime into 5 categories; Juvenile Delinquency, Victimless crime, White-collar crime, Organized crime and Violent crime. As it is showed in the film, the writer will only analyze 4 categories excluding juvenile delinquency.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Praise and thanks to Allah SWT who has allowed the writer to finish this paper. He has
given the writer spirit, guidance, patience and positive thoughts. There is no strength in the
world, except him. Great and salutation be upon the Master of the Messenger, Prophet
Muhammad SAW. He has made the breakthrough from the blackness of life toward the
straightway and high Islamic civilization until the end of the world.
In this very valuable occasion, the writer would like to thank her beloved parent M.
Yunus Sadar and Siti Khodijah who have given their spiritual support, advice, love, and financial
encouragement during the study. Then the writer would like to say many thanks to her advisor
Drs. H. Abdul Hamid, M.Ed for his guidance and patience while the writer was writing this
paper until it finished.
The writer would like to say thanks to these following persons who have contributed their
supports, namely:
1. Prof. Dr. Komaruddin Hidayat., the Rector of UIN Jakarta. Thanks for your policies
related to the requirement of TOEFL and TOAFL test that became motivation especially
for English Letter’s students to work harder and learn more although sometimes it
became a boring and annoying thing.
2. Drs. H. Abdul Chair, M.A., The Dean of the Faculty of Adab and Humanities.
3. Dr. Muhammad Farkhan, M.Pd., the Head of English Letter Department, and the
Department’s Secretary, Drs. A. Saefuddin, M.Pd.
4. All of Lecturers in English Letter Department. Thanks for teaching and guiding us during
the study.
5. The writer’s beloved husband Ahmad Cholil, Thanks for always be there for me. I could
not do this big project well without your love, pray and support. I hope it would not be
last until the end of our time. I’ll always love you.
6. The writer’s beloved sister Dina Yustiana, and brother Muhammad Ilham Subagja for all
of your pray and support. Also her brother Royfana Muhammad Caesar, thanks for your
cute and funny smile. It makes the world cheerful.
7. Her lovely friends in English Letter Department, especially Jamilah, Ulfa, Asri, Narsih,
Vio, Ratu, Isty, BeTe, Bejo, Iqbal, Billy, Irul, Muhaqqiq and other classmates that could
not be mentioned one by one. Thanks for all of our colourful memories in English Letter
Department. I hope we’ll be friend forever.
8. Her friends in BERITA UIN/ UIN-News, especially Drs. Nanang Syaikhu as the Head of
UIN Press and Ms. Elve Oktaviani as the Editor. Thanks for advice, support and teach
many things.
9. Her friends at MUJTAHID Period in Darunnajah Islamic Boarding School, especially
Wanda Zulfian (Mr.Director) at IKJ. Thanks for your patience in helping and
accompanying the writer while searching references in your campus.
10.The librarians of UIN Jakarta, University of Indonesia, Unika Atma Jaya and IKJ.
Finally, the writer realizes that, this paper is away from being perfect. Therefore the
constructive suggestions were hoped to make it better.
With Love;
Jakarta, February 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVEMENT ……… i
LEGALIZATION ……… ii
ABSTRACT ………. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ……….. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ………. v
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study ……… 1
B. Focus of the Study ……….. 4
C. The Research Question ………. 4
D. The Significance of Study ………. 4
E. Methodology of Research ………. 5
1. The Objective of the Research ……… 5
2. The Method of the Research ……….. 5
3. The Technique of Data Analysis ………. 5
F. The Unit of Analysis ………. 6
G. The Time and Place of the Research ……… 6
CHAPTER II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK A. Understanding Film ……… 7
B. The Description of Crime as Social Problem ……… 9
C. Definition of Crime ………. 11
D. The Varieties of Crime ………. 13
E. Montero and McDowell’s Approach on ……….. 16
Understanding the Crime as the Social Problem 1. The Deviance Approach ………. 16
2. The Functionalist Approach ………... 17
3. The Conflict Approach ………... 18
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH FINDINGS A. Data Description ………. 20
B. Data Analysis; The Kinds of Crime Presented in American Gangster ………. 27
a. Victimless Crime ……….. 27
b. White-Collar Crime ……….. 29
c. Organized Crime ………... 32
d. Violent Crime ……… 40
CHAPTER IV. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion ……….. 46
B. Suggestion ………... 48
BIBLIOGRAPHY ………. 49
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A. The Background of the study
As the film develop in some various genre, until now film is still as an entertainment media
that being a favorite entertainment beside music. Film is a creation art of fiction about the
phenomenon in the world which is served in auditory visual form that reflected a condition by a
setting of place with all systems inside it, be its social system, economy, culture, tradition etc with
the theme that was performed inside of it.1
Related to film’s development, in the years of 2000, America produced more films
described American’s social condition such Bad Boyz, American Pie, American Dream, American
Crime, American Gangster, etc. They reflected all kinds of American’s trademark, character and social life.
One of those films that attract the writer’s attention to make an analysis is American
Gangster directed by Ridley Scott on November 2nd, 2007, produced by Universal Studio. writer thought the film is very interesting to be analyzed because this Film got the Prize as “The Best Film
of The Year” from Hollywood Films Awards in 2007 and “The Best Action Film” in Film Box
Office, 2007 with the best actor of the film of Gladiator, Russell Crowe and the best Actor of
Action Film and the most popular actor in Box Office 2000, Denzel Washington.2
The writer argued that American Gangster is a movie that boasts two b ig g e st movie stars in
the world; Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe. Separately, Washington and Crowe can lay
claim to the type of film that actors would sell their souls for, and they’re just getting started. In
“Gangster”, the two actors don’t even come eye to eye until almost towards the end of the film.
That’s exactly how it should be. Before Crowe’s crusading cop and Washington’s drug dealer ever
looks each other in the eyes, when watched it, the writer felt traveled the roads with them through
their respective territories and come to know them as more than just cop and criminal, but men.
“American Gangster” opened in 1968 with a blunt introduction to Frank Lucas (Denzel
Washington). The Writer saw him nonchalantly set a man on fire before shooting him five times at
point blank range. Lucas is the former chauffeur and prodigy to Harlem’s reigning gangster,
Bumpy Johnson, who quickly passed away and leaving his empire to Lucas. The young Frank,
realizing that the drug business is going fast, with the mafia, the crooked cops, and his fellow
Harlem gangsters all cutting in on the business, comes up with an ingenious way to get back on top.
He’ll go to the source, into the jungles of Southeast Asia, and bring pure, undiluted heroin back to
America in the coffins of dead American servicemen from the Vietnam War.
And then there’s Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe), a New York Detective at the crossroads.
Roberts spent his nights attending law school and his days as a crusader cop, albeit one who isn’t
beyond tweaking the law in favor of the means justifying the end. His neglected wife (Carla
Gugino) is divorcing him and threatening to take their son to Las Vegas, and his partner has fallen
down the rabbit hole of drugs. When Roberts turned in nearly a million dollars of mob money, he
became a leper to the police department. But salvation came in the guise of a newly created federal
drug task force. Their mission: get guys like Frank Lucas.
“American Gangster” is a richly detailed period film, vibrant with the signs of the times in
which it is set. Everything, from the cars to the clothes to the Harlem neighborhood is brought to
vivid life by the production staff, and Scott fully embraced the grimy, and at the same time
nostalgic cool of the ’60s and ’70s. As a director with many great experiences of best film making
such Kingdom of Heaven (2000), Scott has never had less to do. What is there to do when he has
two Oscar-caliber actors filling up every second of his film? If Washington’s smooth criminal isn’t
holding court on the streets of Harlem, the people are racing across New York with Crowe’s scruffy
cop. For the writer, Scott’s job is simply to point and shoot, and fill in the details between
Washington and Crowe’s command of the screen.
“American Gangster” is not without humor, with a notable scene featuring Lucas arguing
the finer points of copyright infringement with fellow gangster Nicky Barnes (a giddy and pimped
out Cuba Gooding Jr.). Josh Brolin turns in an effective supporting performance as a crooked cop
who ran his own crew as if they were another gang roaming the streets of New York protecting their
turf. Lucas’ wife is played by Lymari Nada as a former Puerto Rican beauty queen who catches
Lucas’ fancy. The rest of the cast is rounded out by Armand Assante as a representative of the
established New York mob that wants in on Lucas’ business.
So, it can be said that “American Gangster” is really two separate movies included the rise
and fall of Frank Lucas’ criminal empire, and the police procedurals of Richie Roberts’ war on
was a great, understated verbal duel filled with unspoken threats and counter-threats, written
superbly by Zaillian and shot without fanfare by Scott, who knows he is working with great actors,
and so never interjects himself into their affairs.
Therefore, the writer thought “American Gangster” really is that good that it can take two
hours to build up a confrontation, and have that confrontation be a simple back and forth dialogue
scene between two actors in a room across a cheap table. Separately, Roberts and Lucas’ story can
stand on their own, but together, they make for one of the best crime films in a long while.
The description of writer’s reasons and opinion about American Gangster above is enough
to choose this film to be analyzed related to the theme of Crime that often appeared in this film.
B. Focus of the Study
This research will focus on “The Phenomenon of Crime Presented in American Gangster
Movie Based on Montero and McDowell’s Theory”.
C. The Research Questions
Based on the background and focus of study above, the writer formulated the research
questions as what kinds of crime are presented in the American Gangster movie?
D. The Significance of the Study
This research hopefully could give the comprehensive understanding about the social
conflict in American Gangster movie especially the issue of crime. The writer would like to
describe the reader that beside the intrinsic elements, there are also extrinsic elements that can be
analyzed from the movie or other things as a text (object of analysis). Academically the research
Department besides the History of America that has been learned in the class. This research seems
to be “the other side” of Social life in America that often being controversy in the mass or electric
media in the world.
E. The Methodology of Research
1. The Objective of the Research
Based on the research questions above, the objective of the research are; to know the kinds
of crime presented in American Gangster the Movie and how do they relate to the concepts of
Montero and McDowell.
2. The Method of the Research
The Research used the qualitative method with descriptive analysis explanation. It
described and analyzed the phenomenon of crime presented in American Gangster Movie.
3. The Technique of Data Analysis
This Research uses the descriptive analysis technique. Here the writer collects the data
through watching the film and reading its script, then writer will analyze the data by using the
Montero and McDowell’s concept.
The Montero and McDowell's theory in the book; Social problems, the Sociological
approach used to analyze the Phenomenon of Crime in American Gangster Movie. The writer also
needs some references from books and other resources to support the analysis. The writer also
watches the film for many times while checking the important part of the action and the
conversation of the characters in the film. The Film's Script also has the important role for the
F. The Unit of Analysis
The Unit of Analysis of this research is the film of American Gangster and its scripts. The
film was directed by Ridley Scott and released by Universal Studio in 2007 with performance of
Russel Crowe and Denzel Washington as the main character.
G. The Time and Place of the Research
This research has been conducted since the last of seventh semester and the place of the
research is in the State Islamic university “Syarif Hidayatullah” Jakarta, Faculty of Adab and
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A. Understanding Film
What do people mean when they talk about the film? The answers to this apparently
straightforward question are not simple, not at all based in common sense, and go to the heart of the
complexities of the institutions, the practices, and the viewing of movies.
Robert P. Kolker in ‘The film text and film form’ on The Oxford Guide to Film Studies said
that the preference to think of the film as a kind of self-constructed presence, full of story,
characters, and emotion, is strong. A film is there, complete, full, and waiting for people's gaze.3
Kolker in his writing “The Film Text and Film Form” said further that the Film making is
more difficult than it appears because the influence of film on the life of the society is so great,
therefore the film is important to be explained.4
Understanding film seems to be something easy. Strictly speaking, just by watching the film
until the end of the story, people could get what the film is talking about. But actually
understanding film is more than that. It’s all about the aspects that build the film it self as a complex
object to be described. Therefore there’s no specific or a ‘real’ semantics meaning describe the film
3 John Hill and Pamela Church, The Oxford Guide to Film Studies (New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 1998), p. 11
theory.
Related to this statement, Robert Stam in his Film Theory, an Introduction said “Film
theory is rarely “pure”, it is usually laced with admixture of literary criticism, social commentary,
and philosophical speculation”.5
Stam continued that to slightly modify the formulation, film theory is an evolving body of
concepts designed to account for the cinema in all its dimension (aesthetic, social, psychological)
for an interpretative community of scholars, critics, and interested spectators.6
In the other hand, in responding the movie complexities, the Post-Theory: Reconstructing
Film Studies, the most popular book in the Faculty of Film Studies in the University of Wisconsin London that was edited by David Bordwell and Noel Corrol stated:
“Since we ask so many different kinds of general questions about film, there is no common feature that all of our answers should be expected to share. Some theoretical questions about film- for example, about cinematic perception – may have answers that primarily advert to cinematic forms and structures, whereas other different answers to difficult questions might refers to economic forces. That I, some theories maybe formal, while others may be social. Our collection of film theories may very well to comprise a mixed bag. There simply is no reason to think that every film theory will have something to tell us about the same subject – such as the way in which each and every aspect of film figures in the oppression or emancipation of the film viewer”.7
From those explanations, it could be perceived that there is no specific theory about the
5 Robert Stam, Film Theory, an Introduction (Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 2000), p.5
6 Ibid. p.6
film, but as the film developed into various genres, the film studies share a great development until
now as an art that could be studied specifically and interested to be explained.
Richard Dyer in his essays Introduction to Film studies on The Oxford Guide to Film
Studies said that Film-as-art discourses argue, or assume, that film is related to the social –
ideological value therefore it is intrinsically worth studying. If they lean on wider discourses of art,
of aesthetics or sometimes erotic, then this is only because film itself is an art and therefore
valuable in the terms of art. There is no appeal to something outside film art.
According to him, one kind of Social argument sees film as the exemplary symptomatic art
form of the category 'modernity'. This itself is conceived of as a structure of feeling characterizing
an epoch in western (and subsequently world) society from, say, the late eighteenth century
onwards, based in capitalism, industrialism, urban and large-scale, centralized, 'mass' societies.8
B. The Description of Crime as the Social Problem
As the Social movement developed in each era of this life, people's needs also increased
into higher and higher level, especially the economical needs. The increasing number of people
year to year with different life condition also causes the Social Instability then several of social
problems appeared as the reality in the life of society.
Related to the Social problems, Darrel Montero said that very often new conditions emerge
suddenly that disturb the balance of the Social structure. Recent technological innovations, in
Pre ss, 1996), p .41
particular, are seen as contributing to a variety of social problems.9
Social Problems are not mere trifles. They are problems of considerable magnitude.
Specifically, in order to be so defined, social problems must affect large numbers of people, or they
must affect certain influential people within a society. Moreover, social problems are problems that
arouse considerable passion.10
According to Montero, the kinds of Social problems are Sexual Variance, Drug abuse,
health care, the family, sex roles, education, work, poverty, aging, racial and ethnic relations,
crime, urbanization and the ecological crisis.11
But in this research, the writer will not describe all of the social problems above. The writer
will focus her analysis on the Crime as the kind of social problem.
Americans frequently get upset or angry about the problem of crime. A small child is killed,
a mother is strangled by her estranged husband, or a businessman cheats people out of their
retirement. Such crimes enrage people and can lead to an increased demand for law and order.12
Furthermore, Robert H. Lauer said that crime is a social problem that pervades American
society, and it includes respectable and nonrespectable citizens.13 Crime became a major concern
9 Montero, McDowell, Social Problems (New York: Mcmillan Publishing Company, 1986), p.5
10Ibid
11 Ibid. p. 7
12 Robert H. Laurer and Jeanette C. Lauer, Crime and Delinquency on Social Problems and The Quality of Life (New York:McGraw Hill Companies, 1978), p.93
in the sixties that continues unabated in the seventies, officially and publicly. One observer of the
phenomenon reports:
“Sometimes during the 1960's, it is not easy to pinpoint just when crime emerged as a predominant public issue. By the end of the decade, some polls revealed that the
public ranked crime as the most serious problem facing our society above the Vietnam war, race relations, and inflation. Certainly there have been other time in our history when this issue has aroused great anxiety, and this is hardly the first time that politicians has exploited America's chronic apprehension that the moral order is breaking down. Nevertheless, at least in its magnitude, the current reaction to crime is unprecedented.”14
From the descriptions above, the fact showed that however, phenomenon of crime is kind of
the social problem which influence the life of the society and need the solution.
C. Definition of Crime
Literally, Crime can be defined as “activities that involve breaking the law”.15
Darrel Montero and Judith McDowell's said “We generally think of crime as abnormal condition
that intrudes itself on the orderly functioning of an otherwise peaceful society”.16
Based on the Book Social Problems and the Quality of Life Robert H. Lauer and Jeanette
C. Lauer, “Technically,crime is any violation of the criminal law”.17
14 Ric ha rd Quinne y, Crimino lo g y;Se c o nd Editio n (Bo sto n: Little , Bro wn a nd Co mp a ny, 1979), p .38
15Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, International Student's Edition, Oxford University Press, 2000.
16Montero and McDowell (1986),op.cit. p.385
In the other hand, In the chapter Development of Criminology on Richard Quinney's
Criminology has been explained that one of the early groups of criminologists saw crime as produced by the “disharmonious” way in which social forces or institutions were not soundly
constructed, or when their functions were not realized competently and responsibly, and when the
patterns of behavior characteristic of groups of people differed from predominating standards,
crime was a natural consequence.18
Phelps and Henderson in Contemporary Social Problem said that crime is the most readily
defined by an enumeration of the specific offenses that are considered by society as contrary to
public welfare. Crime is any violation against public policy, and especially against the criminal
law.19
Through those explanations, the writer sees that talking about crime is not only related to
the action that contradictory with the law and constitution. It is also related to the condition of
unstable social or political life in the country, for example when the parliamentary institution
doesn’t responsible to their duties causes the problems that couldn't be achieved by the government.
In this condition, crime is one of the consequences for that country as part of social problems that
need a solution to bring the country back to the peaceful condition.
18Richard Quinney (1979), op. cit. p.42
D. The Varieties of Crime
According to Social Problems and the Quality of Life by Robert H. Laurer and Jeanette
C.Laurer, there are some varieties of crime: predatory crimes, illegal service crimes, public
disorder crimes, crimes of negligence, computer crime, white-collar crime, organized crime
and Juvenile Delinquency.20
Predatory crimes is acts that have victims who suffer loss of property or some kind of
physical harm. Illegal service crimes is the action that do not involve a definite victim but rather a
relationship between a criminal and his customer. Public disorder crimes is a behavior that is
treated as criminal only when it occurs before some audience that will be offended. Crimes of
negligence is involve an unintended victim or potential victim. Computer crimes is computer
manipulation involve changing data or creating records in a system for the purpose of engaging in
some illegal activity. White-collar crimes is the crime of “respectable” people. The organized
crime is an ongoing organization of people who provide illegal services and goods and who
maintain their activities by the aid of political corruption and Juvenile Delinquency is the modern
one. Juvenile offenders were regarded as incapable of certain crimes or were treated as adults in the
criminal justice system.21
Montero said that Crime is a complex subject, covering a wide range of behavior. In this
section he discussed five special categories of crime; juvenile delinquency, victimless crime,
20Robert H. Lauer and Jeanette C. Lauer, Social Problems and The Quality of Life (New York: McGraw Hill Companies, 1978), p.94
1. Juvenile Delinquency
Juvenile Delinquent is perhaps most simply define as a child or nonadult who has failed to
meet the obligations or expectations of the society.23
As Montero and McDowell said, it can be assumed that Juvenile delinquents may be
children who have committed the criminal act. Then again, they may simply be children whose
behavior is in violation of the law only because they are children. Such violations are termed “status
offenses” and include running away from home, truancy, curfew violations, and liquor or tobacco
usage and sex offenses.
2. Victimless Crime
When Americans perceive a particular activity to be “sinful” or “immoral”, they often rush
to make it illegal as well whether or not such activity results in tangible harm to anyone. Obvious
examples of morality statues include laws that limit or prohibit the use of liquor or drugs and laws
that define the boundaries of acceptable sexual behavior. Although the case might be made that
prostitutes or drug addicts, for example, are they “victim” or their own crimes, unless they have
included unwilling or nonadult partners in their activities is difficult to determine who else they
victimize by their actions. They are participants in “victimless crimes”.24
22 Montero, McDowell, Social Problems (New York: Mcmillan Publishing Company, 1986), p.393
23 Ibid
From the description above, it might be generally defined that victimless crime is
contradictory activity against the moral that is accepted by the society.
3. White-Collar Crime
A contemporary definition of white-collar crime includes at least three general categories: (1)
personal white collar crime, criminal behavior on the part of individual employees or executives in
pursuit of personal gain. (2) corporate white-collar crime, a collective criminal behavior on the part
of management in order to enhance corporate profits; and (3) the malfeasance of public officials,
corruption, graft, payoffs, and a general abuse of political power.25
4. Organized Crime
Organized crime is in the business of providing customers with illicit goods and services in
return for extremely high profits. Its illegal enterprises include gambling (probably its primary
source of income), narcotics, prostitution, pornography, and business and labor racketeering.26
5. Violent Crime
Crimes of violence include robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and murder. It is largely a
phenomenon of large cities. The offenders are young males, often between the ages of 15 and 24.27
25 Montero and McDowell, Social problem (New York: McMillan Publishing Company, 198), p.397
26Ibid, p.398
E. Montero and McDowell's Approach on Understanding the Crime as the Social Problem
Based on Montero and McDowell's perception in Social Problems, there are three
approaches in understanding the crime as the social problem. The approaches include the deviance
approach, functionalist approach and conflict approach.
1. The Deviance Approach
Until recent years, the deviance approach (particularly as it emphasizes anomie) has been
the primary focus in discussion of crime problems. Sociologist and criminologist have tended to
concentrate on deviant behavior as the cause of crime. This approach is also based on sociologist
Robert K. Merton's theory that the condition of anomie is chronic in our society. He has observed
that criminal behavior is not a product of an abnormal personality but represents logical adaptations
to abnormal social conditions.28
When culturally prescribed as goals are sought by all members of a society, certain means
to achieve those goals become institutionalized as right and proper. But when certain groups e.g.,
blacks and young people) are consistently denied access to those appropriate means, they either no
longer accept the goals themselves, experiencing a state of normlessness, or they turn to
unapproved ways to achieve those goals- that is, deviant behavior (Hartjen, 1978; Merton, 1956).29
From the explanation above, the proponents of this theory point out that officially recorded
crime falls heaviest among the poor, the minorities, and the politically powerless; yet violations of
the criminal law are to be found in all segments of society. Only the least powerful generally suffer
the stigma of the criminal label although the most powerful may violate the law just as frequently.
28Montero, McDowell, Social Problems (New York: McMillan Publishing Company, 1986), p.391
The emphasis on labeling has come about because many now recognize that much behavior that is called deviant is not necessarily defined as criminal. (The chronic abuse of prescription drugs, for example, may be considered deviant but not illegal behavior.) And the reverse is also true: Many criminal acts (tax fraud, for example) are not defined deviant by the general public. It is obviously a matter of labeling. In fact, deviance may be said to be in the eye of the beholder (Sykes, 1978).30
2. The Functionalist Approach
The concept of value consensus is a central theme of the functionalist approach. From this
point of view, the law is seen as a reflection of the consensus of most persons within a society. The
State, which has the responsibility for enforcing the law, is seen as value neutral.
French sociologist Emile Durkheim saw the function of crime as that of establishing and
maintaining the moral boundaries of society. According to Durkheim, crime is both universal and
normal. It is functional to society because rules and norms are essential to social life. The
occurrence of crime and our reactions to it remind us of these rules. Crime, then actually becomes a
stabilizing influence within society.31
Durkheim believed that people should only be concerned with drastic changes in crime rates, whether up or down, rather than with the absolute level of crime. Neither high nor low crime rates are “good” in and of themselves. Durkheim observed that when crime rates drop, it is because society has become overly repressive- not a good thing. Conversely, when society is in chaos and norms are no longer apparent, crime rates jump rapidly-not good either (Durkheim, 1964).32
The functionalist perspective is frequently used in attempt to explain correlation between
high crime rates and big cities. In a simple, homogeneous, agricultural society, controls are
maintained by primary group relationships. With the growth of urbanization and industrialization,
30Ibid, p.392
31Ibid
people are drawn to the cities and to employment by large corporations. In such a setting, the
neighborhood no longer forms a stable unit.
As the writer sees the observation above, the highest rates of crime are generally found in
slum neighborhoods near the center of large cities, decreasing as people move outward toward the
suburbs. This fact remains fairly constant despite changes over the years in ethnic composition.
Why does this pattern persist? From the functionalist perspective, the underlying cause of crime in
poor urban communities is social disorganization.
For most significantly, functionalist cite high rates of substandard housing, mental disorders, population changes, disease, and poverty as evidence of social disorganization- conditions of human wretchedness that seem to go hand in hand with crime (Shaw and McKay, 1942; 1929).33
3. The Conflict Approach
Some conflict theorists, in direct contrast to Durkheim, believe that when crime rates go up,
it is a sign that the powerful are becoming more repressive. They argue that the behavior that is
labeled as criminal is nothing more than conducts those conflicts with the values or interests of the
most powerful, dominant groups in society. 34
As evidence of this, they point out that most middle-and upper-class crimes are generally
not included in crime reports. Crime rates, rather than measuring the amount of criminality in a
society, measure the degree of conflict between social groups. Violations of the law are not due to
normlessmess, as Merton suggests, but to an adherence to an alternate set of norms. Thus, although
33Ibid, p. 393
conflict theorists tend to discount anomie as a cause of crime, we can see that there are marked
similarities between this perspective and the labeling approach.35
From the conflict perspective and other resource relate to this approach such Quinney's
concept on Criminology, the writer consider crime is seen as the result of the unequal distribution of
wealth and power in a capitalist society. Competing groups try to impose their will on each other,
and the social order is established not through consensus but through coercion. The rulers and the
ruled form a bureaucratic hierarchy, with those on top controlling the state and legitimizing their
own values at the expense of those on the bottom. It is the powerful who define what is right and
what is wrong, and they impose the stigma of criminality on the less powerful.
In this paper, the writer uses “The Conflict Approach” to analyze the phenomenon of crime
inside of this film. Conflict approach sees the phenomenon of crime as the result of the unequal
distribution of wealth and power in a capitalist society. It says that usually the dominant people has
the more power in capitalist society.
CHAPTER III RESEARCH FINDINGS
In this chapter, the writer describes two main discussions, they are; data description and
data analysis.
A. Data Description
In this description of data, the writer discusses the phenomenon of crime in American
Gangster movie. Here the writer tries to tabulate the collected data through the following table:
b. The types of crime
c. The indicators of each type
d. The corpus as the evidence of analysis
In this section, the writer limits the discussion about the phenomenon of crime that
were performed in American Gangster the movie based on Montero and McDowell’s approach,
they are Juvenile delinquency, victimless crime, white-collar crime, organized crime and violent
crime. But in this study, the writer only focuses on the kinds of crime that most often appeared in this movie; victimless crime, white-collar crime, organized crime and violent crime. The tabulated
Table 1, the Tabulated Data
No Types of Crime Indicator Corpus
1. Victimless Crime Prostitutes, drug
addicts, misuse of
narcotics, sex offences
(00:21:40), Frank’s Family and Colleagues were injecting heroin at each other in their own hidden post.
The Boy: Thanks Girl, it is America. The Girl: Thank Frank !
The Boy: Thanks Frank ! (While looking at Frank who was sitting beside him) The Girl: Just relax !!, you have to do this several times. Vice hauled down its quality and then sell it.
The Boy: I don’t wanna say anything because the price is right, but the heroin in Vietnam is better for me.
(00:37:15): The newest version of heroin which is called “Blue magic” that was bought by Frank from Vietnam was spread widely and rapidly in America. Peoples use it freely in their party.
2. White-collar Crime the malfeasance of Bank) Frank gave the bribe to the man (Bumpy’s banker)
Frank: get yourself a new suit (while gave him a lot of money)
00:29:06; Frank gave the bribe money to Nate
Nate: Fifty grand. In advance, that’ll cover them, the pilots and the guys on the other end.
Frank: Give them a hundred. Nate: Fifty, to cover them all.
Frank: a hundred. And it’s all I got left. So if that dope doesn’t arrive, for whatever reason (embraced Nate and whispered). Cousin no cousin – don’t let me down.
He holds out a business envelope fat with money. Nate hesitates, knowing Frank has just said he’ll kill him if things don’t go right, and then takes it.
Nate: I’ll let you know when it is in the air.
(00:23:49)
3. Organized crime illegal enterprises Bamboo dwelling in opium farm in the back country of Bangkok. He talked with the General and explained his purpose of coming then doing the transaction of heroin trading.
General: How would you get it into the states?
Frank: what do you care?
General: who do you work for in there? Frank: what do you care?
General: who are you really?
Frank: it says right there, Frank Lucas. General: I mean, who do you represent? Frank: Me.
The man doesn’t believe it, but lets it go. General: you think you are going to take a hundred kilos of heroin into the US and you don’t work for anyone? Someone is going to allow that?
Frank shrugs; the general regards one of men. Chinese, subtitled:
General: I don’t believe a word of this. The General regards the cash and paperwork again for a moment. And, to Frank:
General: after this first purchase, if you’re not killed by Marseilles importers – or their people in the States – then what?
Frank: Then there’d be more. On a regular basis, though I’d rather not have to drag my ass all the way up here every time.
moment, the cash and paperwork again. Finally –
General: of course not.
00:46:05, Frank and the Family is walking down the street. Frank told them about his business organization that has been existed for many years.
Frank: Man I worked for managed the biggest organization in New York city and even more than sixty years. 15 Years, 8 Months, 9 Days I worked for him, protected him, kept him and learn about many things from him. Bumpy was rich but not as rich as white man. He thought that organization was belong to him, but he was just organized it.
00:04:56; Detective Trupo rebuked Frank Lucas to remind him about the production sharing of their Business organization which they have done corporately.
The Lincoln and security cars and Trupo’s Shelby parked.
Frank: stay in the car (say to Ana)
As Frank and Doc climb out, Frank motions to his other security men to remain calm, he’ll handle this.
Trupo: Hello, Frank.
If Frank is surprised Trupo knows his name, he doesn’t show it, or anything else except an air of professional courtesy.
Frank: detective.
Trupo looks in at Ana in the back seat, smiles at her. She turns her away and closes the door. Trupo leads Frank away for a private conversation.
thing? She’s beautiful girl – there’s no question – but she’s got an attitude on (her) –
Frank: Listen to me. Before you say another word – about her – or me – remember that you’re saying iot on the most important fuckin day of my life. Trupo: man walks around in a fifty thousand dollar chinchilla coat and he never even bought me a cup of coffee? Something wrong there.
Frank: I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Trupo: you pay your bills, Frank?
Frank: you want to keep talking; talk to my lawyer, here’s his card. You call him, because we’re done here. –
Trupo: do you pay your bills, I asked you. Frank: if you’re not getting your share, it’s not my fault; go ask the chief of police.
Trupo: what’s my share? You don’t even know me. Maybe I’m special.
Frank: No, you’re all the fuckin same.
00:37:25 the doer of free sex in the institution of prostitution in Harlem
4. Violent crime Robbery, aggravated
assault, rape, and
murder.
00:48:04; Frank fired the pistol right on the Tango’s head.
Tango: Go away from here, what fuck you gonna do Frank?, you gonna shut me in front of every body? Hah? Come on.. !!
(Frank directly shut the pistol right on the Tango’s head) (The Tango now is fucking dead.)
00:26:29; a man tried to kill Frank and his wife when both of them in front of the restaurant for having dinner.
Doc: hey, are you alright? (Walked to help Frank)
Frank: Oh, shit! (While hold his wife’s body). Are you alright baby?, come on! (While got up and help his wife to get up and back home).
00:16:45/2; Huey (Frank’s cousin) was stroked by Frank because of hiding some heroin in the baggage to be sold (to get the profit for himself).
Huey: I’m sorry Frank!
B. Data Analysis
1. The Kinds of Crime Presented in American Gangster Movie and How do Their
Connection with Montero and McDowell’s Theory
From the data description above, the writer would like to analyze them by using
Montero and McDowell’s approach.
a. Victimless Crime
Based on the approach of Montero and McDowells, Victimless crime might be categorized
as a sinful or immoral behavior which does not engage directly object as the victim but it is still a
kind of action that breaking the law of the society or constitution of the country.
The phenomenon of Victimless crime that could be analyzed in the movie is shown by the
picture below;
own hidden post.
The Boy: Thanks Girl, it is America. The Girl: Thank Frank!
The Boy: Thanks Frank! (While looking at Frank who was sitting beside him)
The Girl: Just relax! You have to do this several times. Vice hauled down its quality and then sell it.
The Boy: I don’t wanna say anything because the price is right, but the heroin in Vietnam is better for me.
It was categorized as victimless crime because the scene showed the Frank’s colleagues
used the drugs and narcotics at their secret place. Based on the theory of Montero and McDowell,
the action was not directly included a person as a victim but it was still kind of crime because
breaking the law and norm which majority of society know that is such kind an “immoral” or
“sinful” behavior.
The other performance of the Victimless crime in American Gangster is in the action
00:37:15. The capture of the action could be shown by the picture below;
The scene showed since the coming of “Blue Magic”, the use of Drugs, narcotics and Heroin in America was going crazier than before. They inserted and mixed it into the kinds of food
such as Milk for Baby, Flour, Wheat, etc that caused the increasing number of disease and death in
Harlem.
This case caused unstable elements of the society, be it in Economy and Social condition.
Many Companies experience the total loss, the babies died, the teens became addictive and
experience mental illness, the broken social stabilization and the number of crime also increased
because of many people murder at each other to get the money to buy heroin and consumed it in
their daily activities.
It was also kind of victimless crime because based on Montero and McDowell’s theory,
although the action didn’t have a direct person as a victim, but it causes the various loss of the
society, especially the Economical loss because person uses all the kinds of method to get the
narcotics when they were addictive and they loss much money and other financial loss.
b.White Collar Crime
According to the explanation of the theory of Montero and McDowells, White Collar Crime
could be defined as the malfeasance of public officials, corruption, graft, payoffs, and a general
abuse of political power.36
Those actions such corruption, graft, payoffs etc might be done by individual or collective. This
phenomenon could be seen in the action when Frank was in the International Chemical Bank, in the
safety deposit Room with the man looks like a banker. The movie captures is in the evidence below:
00:20:13; Frank gave the bribe to the man (Bumpy’s banker)
Frank: get yourself a new suit (while gave him a lot of money)
That was keys turn the locks of safety-deposit box, the lids lifts revealing decks of cash.
Frank takes it all out, slips one slender packet into Bumpy’s banker’s jacket pocket.37 He did it in
order to make easier the process of the procedures of his travelling to Bangkok to buy much number
of high level heroins, called Blue magic.
That was the kind of White-collar crime because Frank bribes the man who was a banker or
the person that can make his process of going to Thailand to be easier. According to Montero ad
McDowell, bribe/graft, corruption and other illegal money are the kinds of white-collar crime
because it seems to benefit the person who was bribed or received money but actually it was crime
because actually it is something unfair let people to breaking the law to do their illegal business. It
can cause the bad reputation of the country if the case was known by the government of other
country that will be visited by the doer of crime.
The other performance of white-collar crime was Frank when in Bangkok. After he did the
agreement of heroin transaction with the General, before left Bangkok, He gave Nate bribe money
to cover the fee for the process of delivering heroin from Bangkok to America.
It could be shown by the performance and the dialogue below;
00:29:06; Frank gave the bribe money to Nate
Nate: Fifty grand. In advance, that’ll cover them, the pilots and the guys on the other end. Frank: Give them a hundred.
Nate: Fifty, to cover them all.
Frank: a hundred. And it’s all I got left. So if that dope doesn’t arrive, for whatever reason (embraced Nate and whispered). Cousin no cousin – don’t let me down.
Nate: I’ll let you know when it is in the air.38
Besides of it, there is the other performance to show the phenomenon of white-collar crime
presented in this movie. It was shown by the dialogue between Frank and Charlie in Frank’s
penthouse in the Christmas night.
The dialogue is below; (00:23:49)
Frank: bribed Johny Law the police is important, it’s no problem. I have paid on the police since I was ten years old, but my money could send more their children to school than National Marriage Award, it was different (while arranged the Christmas tree).39
The Dialogue told that Frank himself has realized that he has done the practice of bribe
(kind of white collar-crime) since he was child. He spoke that bribing the police was something
usual for him, even more it could help the police to pay the study of their children in the school.
Those two evidences also showed the phenomenon of bribe in America that was done by
Frank Lucas when he was at Bangkok. It was being his habit even since he was a child as he said in
the dialogue above.
d. Organized Crime
Another kind of crime based on Montero and McDowell’s theory is organized crime. As the
writer stated before, based on Montero and McDowell, Organized crime is the business of
providing customers with illicit goods and services in return for extremely high profits. Its illegal
enterprises include gambling (probably its primary source of income), narcotics, prostitution,
38 ib id
pornography, and business of labor racketeering.40
It means that all kinds of collective and organized illegal enterprises in purpose to get high
profits from the customers could be classified as organized crime.
There are some performances of organized crime shown in the movie. They were almost all
kind of Heroin and narcotics Business related to Frank Lucas. The scene and dialogues are below;
00:27:47; Frank Lucas entered the Bamboo dwelling in opium farm in the back country of Bangkok. He talked with the General and explained his purpose of coming then doing the transaction of heroin trading.
General: How would you get it into the states? Frank: what do you care?
General: who do you work for in there? Frank: what do you care?
General: who are you really?
Frank: it says right there, Frank Lucas. General: I mean, who do you represent? Frank: Me.
The man doesn’t believe it, but lets it go.
General: you think you are going to take a hundred kilos of heroin into the US and you don’t work for anyone? Someone is going to allow that?
Frank shrugs; the general regards one of men. Chinese, subtitled: General: I don’t believe a word of this.
The General regards the cash and paperwork again for a moment. And, to Frank:
General: after this first purchase, if you’re not killed by Marseilles importers – or their people in the States – then what?
Frank: Then there’d be more. On a regular basis, though I’d rather not have to drag my ass all the way up here every time.
The man regards frank for a long moment, the cash and paperwork again. Finally – General: of course not.41
It was in the processing center for the entire region. The Thai translator is with frank to
negotiate with a vanquished Chinese general. Other Americans and Thais guard them while the
Chinese with their CIA advisors guard them.
In the Bamboo Dwelling – later – day, the Chinese General examines Frank’s papers –
passport, visa, bank receipts – and lots of cash – then studies Frank. He questioned about Frank’s
profile and his purpose of coming. The General didn’t believed that was Frank Lucas, a Godfather
who was very brave as representation of himself heroin business, directly coming to his opium farm
in Bangkok to bought a very huge number high class of heroin.
Those dialogues represent the kind of organized crime in Bangkok. It was an opium farm in
the back country of Bangkok and nobody knows that is an Opium Farm who looked a very
professional and simple company completed with the main General, the translator, and the other
staffs with all of the procedures of coming and transaction of heroin trading.
Another performance of organized crime is related to the main job and business of Frank
and Bumpy (the X-Frank’s Boss). The scene and dialogue could be seen in the evidence below;
00:46:05, Frank and the Family is walking down the street. Frank told them about his business organization that has been existed for many years.
Frank: Man I worked for managed the biggest organization in New York city and even more than sixty years. 15 Years, 8 Months, 9 Days I worked for him, protected him, kept him and learn about many things from him. Bumpy was rich but not as rich as white man. He thought that organization was belong to him, but he was just organized it. 42
In the evidence above, Frank told his family about his Bumpy’s organized business in
selling heroin that has been existed for more than 60 years. In the other words, it could be assumed
that Bumpy is a very professional person in doing this job until more than 60 years and he want him
and his family continues what Bumpy has done for more than 60 years and he has worked there for
15 years, 6 months and 9 days.
He wants this organization still exist and become the big resources for getting income in
their life to be rich man as many white men have done.
Through this evidence, it has been clear what the business organization that Frank has done
with Bumpy and he wanted to continue and exist is the kind of organized crime. It was classified
as organized crime because based on the theory of Montero and McDowell, it is the business of
providing customers with illicit goods and services in return for extremely high profits. It is an
illegal enterprise of narcotics and heroin. They bought, produced and mixed it into the milk and
other kind of food.
Lately, the American society life became very dangerous, many of Americans became
addicted users of heroin and the number of disease and death was dramatically increased.
The third performance of organized crime also could be seen in the scene and dialogue
below;
00:04:56; Detective Trupo rebuked Frank Lucas to remind him about the production sharing of their Business organization which they have done corporately.
The Lincoln and security cars and Trupo’s Shelby parked. Frank: stay in the car (say to Ana)
As Frank and Doc climb out, Frank motions to his other security men to remain calm, he’ll handle this.
Trupo: Hello, Frank.
If Frank is surprised Trupo knows his name, he doesn’t show it, or anything else except an air of professional courtesy.
Frank: detective.
Trupo looks in at Ana in the back seat, smiles at her. She turns her away and closes the door. Trupo leads Frank away for a private conversation.
Trupo: are you sure you done the right thing? She’s beautiful girl – there’s no question – but she’s got an attitude on (her) –
Frank: Listen to me. Before you say another word – about her – or me – remember that you’re saying iot on the most important fuckin day of my life.
Trupo: man walks around in a fifty thousand dollar chinchilla coat and he never even bought me a cup of coffee? Something wrong there.
Frank: I don’t know what you’re talking about. Trupo: you pay your bills, Frank?
we’re done here. –
Trupo: do you pay your bills, I asked you.
Frank: if you’re not getting your share, it’s not my fault; go ask the chief of police. Trupo: what’s my share? You don’t even know me. Maybe I’m special.
Frank: No, you’re all the fuckin same.43
The evidence above shows the cooperation of heroin business organization which leads by
Trupo is unfair. Trupo who has an agreement with Frank to share the profits from that business, was
disappointed because Frank didn’t share it with Trupo, even he forgot him.
This is also the kind of organized crime in the business of producing heroin between Trupo
and Frank. Both of them cooperated to do this business together, even include the police (like frank
said in the dialogue). Why this is the kind of ‘crime’? Because they cheated the society by mixing
the heroin into the product of foods suck baby milk, drinking water, etc.
In addition, in relation to their kind of business organization, caused by their business is an
illegal enterprise of narcotic and heroin. In doing this crime, the police also include in it.
Another performance of Organized crime also could be seen in the scene 00:37:25 below:
00:37:25 showed the phenomenon of prostitution in Harlem.
Beside consumed the heroin, they also often did free sex party in Prostitution Place in
Harlem. They often celebrated the heroin and sex party with their friends and community. The
doers include adults and teenagers.
The writer analyze based on Montero and McDowell’s approach on their “conflict
approach” which explained about the influence of dominant group in the society that has a power
within the society, those scenes and dialogues of organized crime above were caused by the
organization of Bumpy managed by Frank Lucas in Harlem.
The writer thought, Frank Lucas could be exist in Harlem and influence the society through
the business of drugs and narcotics, manipulate the other companies, built the prostitution place,
influence almost the society to work with him to do that illegal business, and other cause of his
organization could be happened because Frank Lucas (Bumpy) in 1971 in the Film, is the most
Why they were considered as the “dominant” people? Because the business organization of
Bumpy has been exist for many years ago and the society knew it was the organization that benefit
them because could give them the job, no matter what kind of job they got, what they know is
Bumpy is the “hero” that brought them to the freedom, happiness and to do all kinds of crime
without the prohibition from any people.
They didn’t realize that their cooperation with Bumpy causes the loss in their life. They got
the financial loss when they were addicted by narcotics and drugs, their life seems without
civilization by prostitution and violence everywhere, even they loss their colleagues and family
because they often murdered at each other.
They are examples of the clear influence of “dominant people” in the “conflict approach”
according to Montero and McDowell’s theory. It was true that “dominant people” has the power to
do everything within the society, because they could greatly influence other people especially the
people which was called “minority” in the society.
d. Violent crime
According to Montero and McDowell’s theory, Crimes of violence include robbery,
aggravated assault, rape, and murder. It is largely a phenomenon of large cities. The offenders are
young males, often between the ages of 15 and 24.44
Talking about violent crime could be the most often appearance performed in this movie
because the movie itself talked about the phenomenon of crime in America, especially in Harlem in
1971. But in order to be more effective, the writer will not take it all into this paper. There will just
several of the most important evidences, performances and dialogues to show the kinds of violent
crime in this movie.
The performances of violent crime in American Gangster the movie could be shown by
these cut of movie picture and dialogues;
00:01:15; after flushed by kerosene, Bumpy and Frank burned the man’s body then fired a pistol right on the man’s head.
There’s not much dialogue in this action, because it is the first performance in the beginning
of the movie. This horrible performance showed directly the character of Bumpy and Frank in the
movie. It showed that Bumpy and frank were cruel people or the godfather who are very brave to do
the murder. So, it is easy to be classified that it is the kind of violent crime.
assumed that violent crime is the action of crime who engage the direct object as the victim of the
crime action, because it was clearly seen that there is a people hurt directly. For more detail
explanation of the scenes and their correlation with the theory could be read in the end of the last
scene of violent crime.
The other performance of violent crime showed in the movie is in the performance and
dialogue below:
00:48:04; Frank fired the pistol right on the Tango’s head.
Tango: Go away from here, what fuck you gonna do Frank?, you gonna shut me in front of every body? Hah? Come on…!!
(Frank directly shut the pistol right on the Tango’s head) (The Tango now is fucking dead.)45
The picture and dialogue above also showed the kind of violent crime that was done by
Frank Lucas to the man called Tango. The Tango at first looked like didn’t believe and didn’t afraid
of Frank. He looked like thought that Frank will never brave to shut him in front of the peoples in
the market, but everybody there was so frightened by Frank’s action who shut the Pistol right on the
Tango’s head.
The other performance of violent crime that writer thought as an important data to be
inserted is in the evidence below;
00:26:29; a man tried to kill Frank and his wife when both of them in front of the restaurant for having dinner.
A man shut the gun to Frank’s car, and there was his wife inside of it, Frank directly run to
cover and hold his wife. Doc ran to the outside of the restaurant and shut the pistol to 2 men in the
car but they rapidly ran away.
Doc: hey, are you alright? (Walked to help Frank)
Through the picture above, it could be seen that there was also the kind of violent crime.
Although Frank himself was a godfather and the doer of crime, but in that night he and especially
his wife became a target of victim by the people who wanted to kill them. They shut the gun to
Frank’s car to kill Frank’s wife, no matter they did it caused of revenged, angriness or something
else.
There was still another violent crime that presented in this movie. It could be shown by this
picture;
00:16:45/2; Huey (Frank’s cousin) was stroked by Frank because of hiding some heroin in the baggage to be sold (to get the profit for himself).
Huey: I’m sorry Frank!
That was also the kind of violent crime because Huey was stroked by Frank after frank
knew that he had hidden some of heroin in the baggage to be sold and to get the profit for himself
only. Although Huey was still Frank’s partner in crime, but in this case he was being the victim of
Frank’s violence when Frank knew that Huey wasn’t fair to him as his Boss.
From those four scenes of the kind of violent crime, it was very clear that Frank Lucas did
violence to almost people easily. Because of his cruel action, his colleagues that want to revenge
because of manipulated by him. So they also want to murder Frank Lucas.
Violent crime is the most often and easiest action to be categorized as the crime because it
includes direct people as the victim. It even doesn’t need the more detail explanation because
violence could be seen easily through see the action. For example, without telling anything, people
easily know that “murder” is the kind of violent crime when they see the evidence and when they
see the victim directly.
The writer found that was the most often phenomenon of crime appeared in the movie.
Back to the “conflict approach” of Montero and McDowell’s theory, the violence in Harlem in the
film often happened also because of Frank Lucas organization as the people which was considered
as “dominant people”. Because of the assumption as the “dominant group”, Frank seems to be
arrogant because of the power that he has as the head of Gangster in Harlem.
The writer argued that because of he felt he has the power and influence in Harlem and
nobody stronger than him, he easily murder people, even in front of everybody. He was not afraid
