Using Marxist theory to Critically assess the Class structures portrayed in Chief Daddy

 Using Marxist theory to Critically assess the Class structures portrayed in Chief Daddy

The film Chief Daddy shows wealth as something that gives people power and respect even when they don’t deserve it. From the start, we see that Chief Beecroft is multibillionaire with big houses, fleet of cars, and plenty lands making his wealth seem desirable to all. His family and workers never seem to question the source of the money, they all just want to enjoy their share of it. The workers all mind their business quietly showing how the film is all about the rich and their complicated lifestyles. The film shows us the family members fighting over his property after his death. His wives, children, and secret lovers all want a share of the wealth. In a Marxist view, this shows how the upper class focuses on keeping wealth in the family rather than sharing it with the workers who helped build it. For example, when the lawyer starts to read the will, you can see how anxious they all are. Nobody talks about how the workers or ordinary people will be affected by the death of such a powerful man No one really cared about ‘Chaffeur Donatus’ or ‘Madam Pat’. If chief daddy hadn’t put their name in his ‘codicil’ not one of the family members would even have thought of their existence. Through out the movie, the family’s greed, crazy drama and arguments is shown but it also portrays their luxurious lifestyle as fun e.g the parties, clothes and exotic cars. In this critique, I will use Marxist theory to look at how Chief Daddy  presents wealth, work, and inheritance to show the difference between the rich and the poor, how it treats labor, and whether it questions or supports the power of the elite. I will also discuss how the film handles ideas like commodification, class mobility, and economic inequality, and whether it shows any hope for change or keeps the class system as it is.

In Chief Daddy, Labor is shown as something worthless. All the rich ones know nothing about working so hard to make ends meet like the workers in the house. The workers of the Beecroft family are shown, but they are not the focus of the story. They mostly stay in the background as we don’t get to see their personal lives, struggles, or dreams like the other rich characters in the movie. From a Marxist view, this shows how the film ignores the working class and focuses on the upper class. For example, when Chief Beecroft dies, his workers are just as affected as the family, but we don’t really see their emotions or what will happen to them after his death. Instead, the movie focuses on who will inherit the wealth, but not who worked for it. This means the film does not actually challenge the class system where the rich control everything and the poor work for them rather it keeps the workers as silent helpers, which if interpreted using Marxist theory, supports the idea that the working class should stay in their place. Also, we would notice one of the main plot in Chief Daddy is inheritance. In fact the whole drama started each family member both legitimate and illegitimate wanted to know their share of goodies from chief daddy’s multibillionaire inheritance. But the film does not show any plan for sharing this wealth beyond the family. There is no idea of giving back to society or helping the poor. They were all so scared when they found out if they couldn’t cooperate, all the wealth would go to church for a charity organization. I mean, what’s wrong with that?! From a Marxist view, this shows that the film supports keeping wealth in the hands of a few, and it does not question if this is right or wrong.

Furthermore, throughout the course of the movie, there is no show of class mobility. Madam pat and Chaffeur Donatus didn’t get rich as they had to depend of the family no matter how they were treated. Through a Marxist eye, this is an issue because the makers of the movie made it seem like this class structure is normal. They even disregard economic equality. It was obvious the gap between the rich Beecroft family and the poor is quite large still there was no focus on the poor’s life or any thing that shows that they later got their life back on track. The focus was just on the rich giving the impression that only their lives were interesting and worth while. When we look at everything together, Chief Daddy seems to glorify the elite more than challenge them. The movie shows the problems of the rich, but it does so in a funny, light-hearted way. We are invited to laugh at their fights over wealth, but at the same time, their lifestyle looks attractive. The fine clothes, the cars, the big houses — all these things are presented in a way that makes us admire them. If the film wanted to show a way to eradicate unfairness in the elite society elite power, it would have shown more about the workers’ lives. It could have shown the unfairness in how the Beecrofts got their wealth or how they treated their staff. But it does not do this. Instead, it keeps the focus on the family’s personal drama. In the end, the movie acts as if the rich deserve their position when they never did. Most of the family members, if not all did not earn any right to get from the inheritance when they don’t know the real source or how much chief works hard for them. Even when they act badly, they still come out on top. The workers stay in the background, loyal and quiet. From a Marxist view, this means the film supports the current class system rather than questioning it.

In this essay, I have looked at Chief Daddy through the eyes of Marxist theory. The film shows wealth as something powerful and desirable, but it does not question how it is gained. The workers are there to serve, but their lives are not explored. Inheritance in the film turns even love and family into things to fight over, and there is no sign that wealth will ever be shared with the poor. The film does not offer a way for poor people to rise or for the rich to lose their power. Instead, it makes the elite look good and their lifestyle something to admire. This means that Chief Daddy 1 supports the class system and does not challenge the unfair sharing of money and power in society.I feel producers of Chief Daddy could have done more to tell the stories of the working class not just the elite society. Instead of only focusing on the rich family and their fight for property, the film could have shown how the workers’ lives were affected by Chief Beecroft’s death. It could have given them a stronger voice, maybe showing one of them trying to start their own business or asking for better pay. This would have made the story more balanced and shown that wealth and success should not only belong to the elite. That way, the message would not just glorify the rich, but also show that wealth can be shared to make society better for everyone. So, in the end, the movie does not really challenge the idea of elite privilege. It shows that the rich have problems, but it does not suggest that their wealth is unfair It simply states they fact that the rich stay rich, and their power stays in their hands while the poor is left with nothing