Injustice often breeds opposition. There is not always an immediate violent outburst, but a sense of alienation and anger towards those in power builds up over time. Even when the first signs emerge, those in power are often unwilling to give up their power. And so the oppressed unite in a common frontier, often putting their differences aside. Instead they merge into a crowd, where the goal is the absolute and divergent thinking can be stifled. They set out to right the wrongs and establish the right, to establish their version of morality. In the three films I analyze, Battleship Potemkin, Matewan and The Square, riots occur when a group of people perceive that they have been wronged by those in power. The riots depicted in these films are framed as justified protests. While violence is present in different parts of each film, these are seen as a necessary conduit for change or a side effect that is part of the overall package. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Both Battleship Potemkin and Matewan feature a crowd protesting the wrongs committed by their superiors and violently rebelling. Battleship Potemkin is a silent film by Sergei Eisenstein that dramatizes and propagandizes the events of the mutiny on the Soviet battleship Potemkin. In the film Potemkin's sailors are outraged by meat full of worms. They refuse to eat it and are destined to be executed for their disobedience. However they successfully mutiny, although the leader of the rebellion symbolically dies in the fighting. The crew lands in Odessa to mourn their leader alongside civilians. However, they are found and shot by the Tsar's soldiers who mercilessly shoot civilians, without discriminating against children and women. The sailors react and leave to fight the reinforcement fleets of the tsarist army. However, the Tsar's soldiers refuse to fight them and the battleship Potemkin is allowed to pass waving a red flag. Matewan is set in a small town in West Virginia, from which the film takes its name. The coal miners are initially outraged by the black workers imported by the mining company as scabs. However, Joe Kenehan, the protagonist, manages to convince the white and black workers to strike together. The company, which owns the city where the workers live, tries to dissuade the workers by threatening their resources and living space. The strike is apparently ineffective, prompting some members to resort to violence. After a series of intrigues, accusations and other small ploys, the conflict turns into a full-blown confrontation. Kenehan is killed as are various members of both sides. There is an epilogue narrated by one of the surviving characters who tells the audience that life goes by without significant improvements for the miners, but they still maintain their spirit. Both films are sympathetic to the rioters. They describe rioters as those who are wronged by those in power. And the reason why they rebel against those in power is also seen in a sympathetic light. Although both films present, as a narrative device, catalysts from which conflicts obviously arise, the underlying tensions are made evident. The battleship Potemkin shows the attitude of the officers to the sleeping sailors, the deception of the ship's doctor and the captain, as well as the awareness of the sailors of the revolution taking place at home. In Matewan the workers' low wages and discontent can be revealed by the characters' dialogues, aunlike the silent film Battleship Potemkin. The workers fear for their jobs, their homes and their daily needs, as the coal company owns all these things in their town. Both films portray the rioters as people who no longer know what to do, who rebel because they are driven by the source of injustice. Furthermore, both films portray the embrace of a common identity in a positive light. Individualism gives way to a core group identity as members set aside differences and some freedoms. It should be noted that Battleship Potemkin was a propaganda film that promoted the views of communism and the Russian Revolution. Communism espouses above all the power of the crowd, the power of class unity, of common workers against the elite or, in this case, officers representing the old regime and tsarist ideals. Solidarity emerges above all at the end of the film, when the tsarist soldiers let Potemkin pass without fighting. And while Matewan doesn't promote communism like Battleship Potemkin, it embraces and even ennobles the idea of ​​group solidarity. Kenehan is seen giving an encouraging speech to the workers regarding the unification of all workers, be they black, Italian, Hispanic. His phrase “This is what a union is” idealizes the setting aside of differences to form a common front against those who have done them harm. The crowd is therefore idealized in both Battleship Potemkin and Matewan in a way that criminalizes opposition while framing the crowd sympathetically. The third film I saw was The Square, a documentary by Jehane Noujaim. The film covers the Egyptian crisis starting with the Egyptian revolution of 2011. The film begins at the end of Hosni Mubarak's 30-year reign. The protesters are happy to act as a catalyst for a historic change in Egyptian politics. However, with Mubarak's resignation, the country was placed under military rule. Another round of protests begins, and this time is met with much more violence than before. Many civilians are injured and even killed. The military strikes a deal with a group that had been a key player in the first round of protests; the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists take control of the newly formed parliament, as Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate, assumes the presidency in 2012. Morsi grants himself an almost unprecedented amount of power, angering civilians. However, he has the support of the Muslim Brotherhood. Secularists, Christians, and some Muslims who were alienated by Morsi's presidency start another mass uprising in 2013. Although violence erupts once again, Morsi is ousted from power. The rioters rejoice, but this time they are more cautious about the celebrations. The square clearly speaks of the pitfalls of a revolution. A revolution, often driven by sentiment, is vulnerable to weakening once an objective has been achieved. Although the insurgents wanted Mubarak to step down in 2011, they were unable to play a role in broader politics by helping draft a constitution or overthrowing the rest of the regime's system. Although Battleship Potemkin did not discuss these pitfalls, Matewan does so in its epilogue. The film's narrator, Danny, says the workers bore the brunt of the damage. This chillingly reflects Ahmed's words in The Square, where he says protesters suffer beatings while the elite plays their political game. While riots have been shown to set precedents that will influence future events, they are not a panacea for the problems people face. This is not to say that the riots are portrayed as ineffective. He comes.