It is hard for me to wrap my head around the article I just read entitled “Fast, Furious, and Out of Control: The Erasure of the Natural Landscapes in Car Culture Films” by Robin L. Murray and Joseph K. Heuman. I believe I understand what they are saying as the “Fast and the Furious” franchise, follows and aids in the car culture ideology of going against the system and having freedom through the outlet of speed. I also understand how Car Culture and therefore the “Fast and Furious” films do not acknowledge the issue of the effect automobiles have on the environment. However, I personally feel that by attacking a film for utilizing and conveying car culture, and in a way criminalizing the films as aiding in the degradation of the environment is a little bit far fetched. I say this because there are hundreds of films out their that though they may not be centered around the car culture, and racing worlds, still do not shine light on the issues of the environment and also depict images that go against the “natural” landscape and highlight the power of man’s creation.
As I have learned through this course I know that media and in this case a film can make a huge impact on the spread of pop culture, and therefore I’m sure there were thousands of viewers of the “Fast and Furious” films who were inspired and became interested in car culture following a screening of one of the films. But to me I wish the authors wouldn’t have only listed over and over again this link to how car culture and the “Fast and the Furious” films have furthered the old belief that Earths natural rescources aren’t running dry, or that the vehicles in which are on display are not impacting the environment. Instead I wish they would have followed up their argument with information on how car culture and the films could become (if there are any further sequals in the franchise) more “green” friendly.
The other issue I had with the article that didn’t set well with me due to the fact that it hits close to home, is the incrimination of Jimmie Johnson and bootleggers. I agree that some were lawless men just looking for a thrill when they took jobs running illegal moonshine throughout the country. However I have family members and ancestors who made and ran moonshine. Therefore I know their intentions were not to chase some sort of freedom by breaking the law but in reality was a tool for survival, and a way to feed hungry mouths. I feel the article could therefore have directed its words towards those that are actually exploiting our natural rescourses and harming the environment. Why not go after the the automobile industry who until recently did not care about making cars that were environmentally friendly. The same industry who along with the oil industry were responsible for “killing the electric car” in the last decade of the 20th century. The documentary that explains the history and the reasoning behind the death of the electric car is stated in the article in question, however their is zero elaboration on the documentary itself.
I do not completely disagree with the entire idea of the article however just something about it rubbed me the wrong way.