Nominated: The Accidental
Tourist, Dangerous Liaisons, Mississippi Burning, Working Girl
Should have Won: Who
Framed Roger Rabbit
Be sure to see: Big,
Killer Klowns From Outer Space, Pumpkinhead, Scarecrows, Terror at
the Opera
“Ray,
do you know what autistic is? You know that word? Are you
autistic?”--Small Town Doctor
“I
don't think so.”--Raymond Babbitt
When fast-talking, self-centered Charlie Babbit's estranged father dies, he is left his father's car and rose bushes. $3 million (though later in the movie it is said to be $2 million) was left to someone else. Upon investigating, Charlie discovers that that someone is Raymond, his older brother he never knew who is a patient at Walbrook. Raymond is autistic and every part of his life is a routine. Charlie takes Raymond (kidnaps in a way) to figure the situation out. The buddy road trip movie is a tired genre but Rain Man takes on a whole new direction with the matter.
Years ago I watched Rain Man in a film class and I remember the teacher telling us every story should have a hero's journey. The intro, call to action, faces the challenge, journeys back, etc. that follows the hero through the story. Some people in the class thought Charlie was the hero and others figured it was Raymond. I don't remember who I said the hero was but one thing I look for in a flawed character is if he or she has an arc. Charlie is flawed in a way because he is selfish and wants, or in his mind, deserves his father's money. He especially doesn’t feel his brother, who has no concept of money, deserves it. Who is the real hero on this journey?
Raymond can memorize a phone book from A to G, knows what 4343X1234 is, and knows the square root of 2130 but he can't comprehend a car and a candy bar wouldn't cost the same. When he gets nervous he recites “Who's on first” and Charlie doesn't understand why Ray doesn't grasp that it is just a routine and there is nothing about the bit to comprehend. Ray keeps a very strict schedule because his mind doesn't know how not to keep it. This is the cause of many frustrating outbursts from Charlie,one in particular is on the side of the road when Ray wants to drive all the way back to Cincinnati to buy boxer shorts instead of the nearest store. Charlie pulls the car over, gets out and goes on a tirade about being able to buy them anywhere and all Ray has to add to the conversation is “K Mart. Boxer shorts.” I think the audience is supposed to shun Charlie for not being more understanding of Raymond's needs but I don't see it that way. He acts the way anyone would. It is new to him, like autism was for most people then, and reacts honestly.
There is a big revelation of what the words “rain man” mean and here is where we see Charlie start to arc but it also leads to my biggest complaint of the movie. Charlie has been a selfish, temperamental man to his brother. After the scene when he understands who the rain man is, we see he begins to accept and perhaps love his brother. But then, after Raymond recites all the placements of songs on a jukebox and picks what cards Charlie is holding after throwing most down, he takes Raymond to the casinos to abuse his divine intellect to win money. They walk away from that casino with $86,000 and I suppose we are supposed to feel happy for them but I didn't because it wasn't their money, it was only Charlie's; Raymond just doesn't know to argue for his share. So Charlie's arc from selfish to caring for his brother went right back to money again.
Rain Man is a great movie though, and Dustin Hoffman's performance will go down as one of the best of all time. It made me think, though. I had a psychology teacher tell us that everyone has some sort of compulsion. Not that autism is a compulsion but that strict schedule keeping is in a way. I can't remember all the things Raymond can but, though his mind is brilliant with numbers, my number memory has to be triggered by using years or sports numbers. Unnecessary statistics will stick with me forever and I can't explain it. Inside Raymond's simple mind is a complex system of repetition and structure that can't be explained either. But can we accept it? Probably because he is just a movie character. The real question I had even after the movie ended is whether or not Charlie really accepted it.
This is a movie that incorporates so many emotions and thought processes. I think that is why I like this movie so much. It is about a real life situation with real life reactions. Movies can be fantacized so much that we lose site of the human nature part of things. We all want to say Charlie is taking advantage of his brother and isn't being very compassionate and understanding. From an audience perspective, yes, that is true. But in real life, most of us would probably react the same way at first. Then, as the audience, we realize this about ourselves and take a lesson from it. This movie hits an emotional button for the audience that could be life-changing for that person. Great, great movie.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot in this movie I omitted like Charlie's girlfriend and so on. I didn't see it necessary to include. It is a good movie, one of roles that define Dustin Hoffman who is widely considered to be one of the greatest actors. To my taste he is kind of a ham though, especially in interviews.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how you can put "Who Framed Roger Rabbit? as your should have won here. I liked it as a kid, but I re-watched it about a year ago and while not terrible, it was definitely not great either. It's greatest achievement was mixing animation and live action, and possibly also managing to license both Warner Brothers and Disney cartoon characters in the same movie.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how you can put "Who Framed Roger Rabbit? as your should have won here. I liked it as a kid, but I re-watched it about a year ago and while not terrible, it was definitely not great either. It's greatest achievement was mixing animation and live action, and possibly also managing to license both Warner Brothers and Disney cartoon characters in the same movie.
ReplyDeleteThe fact it mixed live action with animation is the reason along with the story. It was new (kind of) so it seems that at the time it would have been picked. Sure, a cartoon bird sat on Uncle Remus' shoulder but in this case the actors and the cartoons legitamately looked like they were "acting" together. So many movies I've disagreed with being good had the defense of "Well at the time it was revolutionary". I'm using that argument here
ReplyDelete