A CRITICAL ANALYSIS PAPER

ABOUT THE MOVIE

EMPERORS CLUB

SUBMITTED TO
PROF. RICO D. BLANDO

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN PHILOSOPHY 1A

SUBMITTED BY
MICO BENJO V. NOVECIO

July 16, 2015

The Emperors Club movie of Michael Hoffman stresses out different and varied issues which are
practical yet very felicitous to discuss and argue within the parameter of ethics. Mostly, in the movie, you can see
actions and decisions that we think were right but later falls into wrongness by which highlights ambiguity. The
purpose of this critical analysis paper is to introduce various principles in application to some ethical-raising
issues; however, before proceeding, I will present series of events that happened in the story: a synopsis.
The story mostly revolved on Professor William Hundert and a son of a senator; a spoiled lad named
Sedgewick Bell. Professor Hundert is a Classics teacher who sees his subject matter as means to influence and
instill moral characters among students. On the other hand, Bell is somehow a kind of a teenager who mostly
devoted himself breaking rules while luring other students to do the same. Along the movie, Hundert noticed
Bells potential towards academics albeit his attitudes were uncontrollable, and so Hundert bends the rules as a
teacher to allow Bell to compete in Mr. Julius Caesar with his intents of molding and changing Bells attitude
and character. However, Bell was caught by Mr. Hundert cheating during the game but was not exposed. Twenty
years later, Bell was already a business tycoon, offered a donation to the school only if Hundert will hold a
rematch of the game with the same competitors, but later on was again caught cheating and thwarted his triumph
by the same man who caught him before. With these, Hundert found himself disappointed of the results and
more importantly to the things he did before that bore these results.
Looking back in the movie, I have formulated some issues that I think I should at least give my stand to
whether it may be ethical or not. One of them states: Was it ethical for Prof. Hundert to give Bell the final slot
rather than to Martin Blythe in the Julius Caesar game because of his intention to divert Bells bad
attitude and make him realize hes worth better? Basically, no based on the principle of deontological ethics.
Deontology rigidly asserts that an action can only be morally upright only if it is hinged on the sense of
duty and obligation. Hunderts attitude towards this situation was disappointingly unethical because primarily his
action did not conform into fulfilling his duty to give the slot to Blythe who was actually the deserving one and
whose performance outstand Bells. He automatically resorted into his intentions and to what it would bear (that
Bell will change his attitude) which contradicts deontologicals view to disregard intention because consequence
doesnt matter. Hunderts actions only bore none other than surprise and disappointment until to another

disappointment twenty years later: Bell, who was caught cheating by Hundert in their academic days even after
twenty years. His expectations failed because he only relied that the results of his action would turn out good
which eventually were no good after all. Consequence itself is unpredictable and indefinite.
Thus, using deontological perspective, Prof. Hunderts action and decision were unethical because he
does not derive his reasons unto duties and obligations and even violated the tenet to disregard intentions in
doing an action because what makes sense is not the consequence but the act itself that should conform to the
sense of duty and to the moral law that should be obeyed.
Another issue was the influence, status, and the position of Bells father in the society as senator which
triggered St. Benedicts Headmaster to encourage Hundert to ignore the fact that Sedgewick Bell was cheating in
the game because they will eventually receive a financial support from the father. Exposing Sedgewick would
mean the loss of financial benefits. So, does the act of the Headmaster to discourage Prof. Hundert in
exposing Sedgewick for monetary reasons ethical? In virtue theorists view, it is no.
The Headmasters act is unethical in the perspective of virtue ethics. The Headmaster failed to
determine what kind of person he should be and therefore did not develop justice in this situation. He was
tolerating Sedgewick for the sake of money. In virtue ethics, the focal point is not what would benefit the school,
which is the Headmasters thinking of the right thing, but rather on what will an individual develop or manifest of
doing such action which the headmaster lacked. He derived happiness the wrong way because according to
Plato, a man who strives to live in discovering the ethical world seeks to also discover the good, to attain
happiness. When the Headmaster forbade Hundert, he lost the character that strengthens justice, fairness,
equity.
To this regard, therefore, using virtue ethics, the Headmasters action and decision can be considered
as unethical because his action did not yield character traits ought to develop in him. He was defeated by what
would he gain (money) which is just superficial and temporary rather than acquiring a long-term virtue that will
eventually bring more than just money, and that is doing the morally good.
Lastly, the most appealing part of the movie that turned on my ethical radar is when Sedgewick Bell
responded to a statement of Prof. William Hundert after the rematch in Mr. Julius Caesar. Bells statement

goes, I live in the real world where people do what they need to do to get what they want. If its lying and if its
cheating, then so be it. This statement points out attaining pleasure and happiness at any cost. The issue can
be that, is it ethical to attain happiness and pleasure in any way you can obtain it? May it good or bad?
Hedonistical approach, it is ethical. According to this principle, pleasure is the norm of morality and it is
the only good and; bad acts are those by which brings pain. It is also the idea that all people have the right to do
everything in their power to achieve the greatest amount of pleasure possible to them. What Sedgewick is trying
to hit in this statement is that no matter what you do, even if its bad, as long as it brings you happiness and
pleasure, then the act is good because thats what hedonism is all about. That is maybe why even before in St.
Benedict during the Julius Caesar he was strong-willed to cheat because he knew it would bring him glory and
that would bear happiness because his father would be proud of him. Doing such action defies the conventional
thinking that happiness can only be attained in doing what good. Sedgewicks act, even if it seemed bad, is good
to him as long as it gives him pleasure and not pain.
Thus, Sedgewicks act in the perspective of hedonism is ethical as it promotes pleasure as the norm for
morality. Cheating and lying is good as long as it gives you happiness and pleasure disregarding what the law
may say about it. Sedgewicks aforementioned statement can be also a basis for what is good because in
hedonism, it is not being compelled with consequence, law, or duty; it is all about you who will make the choice
may it be good or bad.

Overall, the movie depicts the rampant social ethical issues taking place in school and even life after
school. What sparks my reaction about the film is that no matter how easy the problem is and no matter how we
do to it, its just that things happen because there is something behind the action. Take for instance cheating.
Cheating is indeed bad in conventional thinking, but there are still some people who opt to do it because of some
reasons. Another thing is lying. Lying according to deontology is prohibited but why does people still do it?
Reasons. Therefore, I can argue that these things have connection to me as a student in Social Philosophy as it
serves as the vessel that I can understand reasoning of rational people using different ethical principles; that an
individual reacts on varied and different circumstance. Human inclination to his ways of reasoning defines him.