T

Movies reviewed here...
Tootsie.
Traffic.

Tootsie

Reviewed By Martin L. Abbott, Seattle Pacific University

(Teaching Sociology, Vol. 17, #1, January 1989)

In order to escape a spoiled image with the film-making establishment, a struggling, unemployed actor assumes a female identity and wins a television "soap opera" role. Through this role performance, Michael Dorsey (as Dorothy Michaels) surreptitiously experiences relationships and the vicissitudes of work life from the point of view of a woman in a man's world. While at the outset this is simply an attempt to survive economically, the performance "acts back" upon the actor, resulting in a change of consciousness with respect to gender.

The changes in the protagonist that ensue from his performances are evident in the final scene. After he exposes his ruse, Michael confront Julie (an actress with whom he has fallen in love while enacting his role as Dorothy). In an attempt to dispel Julie's anger toward his subterfuge, Michael confesses. "I was a better man with you as a woman than I ever was with a woman as a man. I just have to learn to do it without a dress." In this scene, one of the central premises of the movie is established--that gender is a facade, a "filter" through which people interpret other people and by which we construct the meaning of others in everyday life. Michael is a changed person, one who becomes more genuinely sensitive to others, regardless of their sex.

The other male characters do not fare so well, however. They are essentially unchanged in their behavior, and in their attitudes toward women, by movie's end. the womanizer-director remains a roue; the widower-father clutches tenaciously to his traditional gender values; the inept, aging soap opera star is oblivious to the implications of Michael's performance.

The female characters, on the other hand have become more assertive, more congruent, and more forthright in their behavior and attitudes by the end of the film. Sandra, a struggling colleague to Michael (and in many ways the biggest victim of Michael's subterfuge), is better able to direct her anger, and is more autonomous. Julie is much more assertive and is able to resolve her dependence upon men, so that she "is her own person." Even the female soap opera characters assume less obsequious roles.

It is the way in which the central premise is developed, however, that makes the movie ambivalent as a statement about gender issues. That people become more genuinely appreciative of others as a result of playing the others' parts is positive indeed. More pernicious, however is the fact that it took a man acting in the role of a women to change the gender role behavior of the women (e.g., towards more assertiveness, more self- initiative, more dependence, etc).

If the movie is approached critically as a vehicle to discuss the subtle dimensions of gender roles and identity, it is an excellent pedagogical device. It appears to work most effectively in concert with lectures on stratification in introductory sociology and social problems courses. However, because of the many nuances of the script dealing with communication patterns and interpersonal interaction, it works well in social psychology courses.

For introductory sociology courses, the following questions are helpful for class discussion:

What do you consider to be the main message about stratification and women's roles in American Society?
How are social rewards distributed in the occupations represented in the film?
How is power unequally distributed among individuals of different sex?
Cite instances of sexism and discrimination.
What stereotypes about women are present in the movie?
Document the extent to which false consciousness is represented in the film.
How do the primary roles of men and women change as they are enacted?
In the final analysis, what is "gender," and how does it affect the way we see ourselves and relate to others?

For social psychology courses, it is useful to add questions such as:

What role does language play in the relationships presented? How can ethnomethodology help to illustrate the effects of language?
What instances of impression management are presented? (Cite examples of similar dynamics such as frontstage/backstage behavior, etc.)
What is the role of media in sex role socialization?
How can exchange theory help to illustrate the extent to which interactions take place within a context of power?
Discuss the extent to which identity is dependent upon, or independent from sex.

The movie would also appear to be useful in marriage and the family courses. Much of the story line is devoted to interpersonal attraction, dating and romantic attachments. Interrelationships with children also play a part in the film in that these scenes provide bench marks for concomitant changes in the attitude of the main character. As the movie progresses, the way in which the main character responds toward children from complete disregard to active involvement.

The film uses role reversal as a vehicle for humor, including a number of scenes in which the main character is depicted as acting contrary to gender expectations (e.g., while disguised as a woman, Michael physically ejects a man from the taxi cab that Michael had hailed). The success of the film is the combination of this strategy with excellent performances by Dustin Hoffman. Jessica Lange, and Bill Murray. The danger, however, is that this may further entrench traditional sex roles.

As a whole, the movie is instructive and can be used successfully in group discussion exercises. However, it cannot be uncritically accepted as a statement that challenges traditional approaches to gender.

Traffic

Reviewed By Caroline Clamon, Pepperdine University

Traffic follows the typical Hollywood values in that it is both "conservative and liberal," but is "more liberal than middle America" (Gose, 19). It is conservative according to Christensen's standards of "individualism [...], self help, hard work, family," and that it criticizes "moral decline, bureaucracy, and big government" (Gose, 19). Each character is given close to equal amounts of screen time, so that each individual can be developed. Self-help seems to be suggested as the ultimate source of recovery for those with addiction. Douglass' daughter and his family find assistance in one of these programs. Hard work is also espoused, as Douglass' character has worked long and hard in his career, and again, as he will not give up until his daughter is found in the later part of the movie. The family structure is amazingly typical, one mother and one father, still married, with a heterosexual daughter. Family problems are of course still sources of conflict, but the family unit itself is from a conservative mold. This movie serves as an obvious critique on the moral decline of our country, in terms of drugs and the problems of bureaucracy and big government. On the liberal side, Christensen explains that an emphasis on "tolerance," the criticism of "discrimination, greed, and [...] capitalism" is present (Gose, 19). The tolerance issue is seen in terms of discrimination issues. This multi-cultural cast addresses the issue of poverty and drugs, and discusses why drugs are sold in poor, predominately black neighborhoods. Greed is the ultimate cause, which drives the production and sale of narcotics. Capitalism is the system that seems in some ways to be held responsible for making greed possible. Christensen's definitions of liberal and conservative can both be used to describe this film in its entirety. In the end, family and values are lauded, and seem to finally overshadow the issues of greed and discrimination, which are at one point brought to light.

Traffic does influence views to become politically apathetic, as Christensen suggests. The government in the United States is depicted as irrelevant and far removed from the reality of the everyday life and problems of its citizens. Even the politicians who are elected to make changes, seem to be so busy playing games, nothing truly valuable or catalytic can be accomplished. Douglass' character is so busy trying to make good first impressions on senators and other important officials and the give the right speeches, he cannot be real, and thus, he is unable to implement any real changes. He and his advisors are some how unable to "think outside to box," as he puts it on the plane. The government portrayed in Mexico is even worse, as it is corrupted on every level. Or perhaps it is in reality better, because the only option for renewal would be to toss out all of the old and corrupt, and begin again. If I were a Mexican citizen, I would feel completely under the power of the system, and would everything possible to avoid the police and jail, as officials are only held accountable by their own conscious. Why should citizens become involved in either government? Change, at this point in history is unlikely at best, and impossible at worst.

In terms of human nature, there is also an obvious cynical sting that lingers. Douglass' daughter is the perfect example for this. She is "exceptional, instead of the common" (Gose, 22). We all have heard of high schools like the one she attends, typical and upper class. Her classmates were like her, children with too much money, education, and not enough personal attention from their parents. She was seemingly the best: class president, athlete, good grades, and a volunteer to boot, and she fell. But she is not typical. Using her as example allows the writer to uncover a gaping wound that society wants to pretend is not there at all. She is an example of the corruption of the best, a fall without excuse of ignorance of lack of opportunity. If she is susceptible, a young, educated, upper class, female, in a stable family, then all humans must be capable of similar behavior. This is the cut on human nature that Traffic offers, an emotionally charged portrayal.

The violence in Traffic is explicit and somewhat excessive. Given what the American Psychological Foundation has discovered as a result of research (Gose, 26), it would be wise to have knowledge of this before viewing the movie. Many shootings at close range are witnessed and the nature of the film is violent in and of itself. This however, would dissuade few viewers from actually watching the film. It must also be taken in to account that the subject of the movie, the drug war, is in real life violent and gory.

Olsen's model for categorizing families applies to Douglass' family and can be described as "rigidly engaged" (Gose, 27). There is a "maintaing of appearances, since Douglass is a high-ranking government official. There is little time or involvement seen between the parents and their daughter, or between the spouses. For example, the mother waits six months before telling her husband that their daughter has drug related issues. Once he finds out, Douglass implements rules, but no emotional understandings are established. The family cannot be open and real with each other, and Douglass is not even there to implement the rules he set forth for his daughter. Everyone just makes superficial efforts to fix the problem, but no one is around to make any lasting change. Other politicians assure him that the problem will go away, and everyone has promised to treat the news of his daughter as a personal issue. In the end, Douglass cannot live a lie; he cannot even deliver the speech he wrote. Time and support are found to be the ties that bind family together, as all three members of the family are present at the daughters AA meeting. Douglass finally chooses family over work, the right decision.

Women in Traffic assume the normal roles assigned them in film. Jones is disillusioned when her husband is suddenly arrested, and she admits that she is completely helpless without him and his money. She even tries to seduce his second man in charge to find some kind or reassurance, both in herself and monetarily. She is the faithful wife, even when she finds out her husbands illegal business dealings. She even tries to get him off by having the witness killed. Her strength is displayed when she takes over her husbands business while he is in jail, but she is not thinking for herself. She only finds this strength for a short time and then falls back into her same role upon his release from jail, thus proving she had no realization or self-discovery during this trying experience. Douglass' wife is an unimportant character, and serves no real purpose other than to be the mother of his child in the movie. His daughter is independent only in that she is rebellious. She is reliant on men for both drugs and sex, and is subservient to them, eagerly saying yes to all they propose. Once on crack, she becomes a mere lifeless toy at their disposal, a "sex machine available to men," an age old stereotype for women (Gose, 28).

Traffic discusses some stereotyping, bias, prejudice, and racism. The most obvious time when this is discussed is when Douglass is driving his daughter's friend, and trying to find his daughter. Her friend makes a statement about the relationship of blacks to whites and the nature of drug dealing that makes the viewer think. He says that white people drive into black neighborhoods asking for drugs, and if the situation were reversed, how many white kids would be trying to become lawyers instead of dealing. Ironically, the movie itself plays on some old stereotypes, that drugs are found predominately in these black areas and that their source is Mexico. Other interesting issues to consider.

Home | Back | Next