sasha_feather (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sasha_feather) wrote2012-07-16 02:15 am
sasha_feather) wrote2012-07-16 02:15 am
Entry tags:
The Amazing Spider Man
I loved this movie, but I think it had one big glaring error.
The anatagonist of this movie is Dr. Curt Connors, who accidentally turns himself into the Lizard via an experimental serum aimed at limb regeneration.
We know about Dr. Connors that he is a brilliant scientist with great equipment and resources; that he worked with Peter's father and was probably at least someone complicit in the deaths of Peter's parents; and that he has one complete arm (his left). It looks to me like Dr. Connors wears a wedding ring, but we never see or hear of a wife or family of any kind. We also know that he is unhappy with having a missing limb and dreams of being able to regenerate his own limb.
As a disability activist I had a mixed reaction to this. During a nice exposition scene, Dr. Connors explains to a group of interns that his experiments would also potentially help Parkinson's patients and those with macular degeneration. He says that he also wants to fix himself, and that he does not think of himself as a cripple but as a scientist. That is all well and good, but it's interesting what he doesn't do, and what we are not shown.
We don't know why Dr. Connors is so obsessed with this mission. Plenty of people lose limbs and go on to live their lives just fine with or without protheses. I heard an interesting story on This American Life yesterday about a dancer and Pilates instuctor who hides her missing limb quite successfully, partly in order to not get type cast. Dr. Connors, as a principal investigator (PI) in a lab, is not only able but actually expected to delegate all of his lab work (things that might require two hands) to people who are technical experts. As PI most of his duties would be in an office, writing grants and papers (which presumably he could dictate using a speech-to-text software or by hiring a typist), designing experiments, supervising his employees, and going to conferences and meetings. His work doesn't really require two hands and arms.
So what else might drive this obsession to regenerate his limb? Perhaps we would know if we were given any more back story on Dr. Connors. Did his wife leave him, and he feels like he would be a better husband/man with two arms? Did he lose the limb traumatically? We just don't know.
In this movie Dr. Connors is representing the medical model of disability, which focuses on fixes and cures, which makes sense given that he is a scientist. What is not represented in this film is the social justice model of disability, which focuses on the fact that disabled people exist and are OK just as they are, and it is the world that needs to change. These two models are not always in opposition, but can work together. For instance, most people would agree that preventable illness should be prevented. But if prevention fails, then the social justice model can step in and help you get on with your life.
Dr. Connors ends up taking the serum even though he knows he should wait, in part because he's pressured by evil people above him regarding human trials. Thus, he turns into a lizard and also goes kind of crazy.
Part of me really liked seeing a character with a disability in a movie. The character turns out to be a mad scientist type, which is rather a tired trope. And the mad, disabled scientist? Even worse. However, he is somewhat redeemed at the end when he turns back into a human and expresses remorse for his violence. I just don't need to see this in a movie or show anymore-- a disabled person driven by a need to be fixed-- although for a while as I was watching I was like, oh, but it's OK, he's *evil*... except that didn't really work. This character is not umambiguously evil. And it's not always wrong to want to be fixed. It would just be so, so, nice to see the other perspective--surely a more common perspective!-- of, "OK, I've got one arm, but so what? We're working on trying to cure Parkinson's Disease here which is a serious problem!"
Another problem is that he is played by an able-bodied actor, Rhys Ifans.
I remain conflicted about this movie and this portrayal. Mostly I think it would have been better with more backstory and more information about Dr. Connors.
The anatagonist of this movie is Dr. Curt Connors, who accidentally turns himself into the Lizard via an experimental serum aimed at limb regeneration.
We know about Dr. Connors that he is a brilliant scientist with great equipment and resources; that he worked with Peter's father and was probably at least someone complicit in the deaths of Peter's parents; and that he has one complete arm (his left). It looks to me like Dr. Connors wears a wedding ring, but we never see or hear of a wife or family of any kind. We also know that he is unhappy with having a missing limb and dreams of being able to regenerate his own limb.
As a disability activist I had a mixed reaction to this. During a nice exposition scene, Dr. Connors explains to a group of interns that his experiments would also potentially help Parkinson's patients and those with macular degeneration. He says that he also wants to fix himself, and that he does not think of himself as a cripple but as a scientist. That is all well and good, but it's interesting what he doesn't do, and what we are not shown.
We don't know why Dr. Connors is so obsessed with this mission. Plenty of people lose limbs and go on to live their lives just fine with or without protheses. I heard an interesting story on This American Life yesterday about a dancer and Pilates instuctor who hides her missing limb quite successfully, partly in order to not get type cast. Dr. Connors, as a principal investigator (PI) in a lab, is not only able but actually expected to delegate all of his lab work (things that might require two hands) to people who are technical experts. As PI most of his duties would be in an office, writing grants and papers (which presumably he could dictate using a speech-to-text software or by hiring a typist), designing experiments, supervising his employees, and going to conferences and meetings. His work doesn't really require two hands and arms.
So what else might drive this obsession to regenerate his limb? Perhaps we would know if we were given any more back story on Dr. Connors. Did his wife leave him, and he feels like he would be a better husband/man with two arms? Did he lose the limb traumatically? We just don't know.
In this movie Dr. Connors is representing the medical model of disability, which focuses on fixes and cures, which makes sense given that he is a scientist. What is not represented in this film is the social justice model of disability, which focuses on the fact that disabled people exist and are OK just as they are, and it is the world that needs to change. These two models are not always in opposition, but can work together. For instance, most people would agree that preventable illness should be prevented. But if prevention fails, then the social justice model can step in and help you get on with your life.
Dr. Connors ends up taking the serum even though he knows he should wait, in part because he's pressured by evil people above him regarding human trials. Thus, he turns into a lizard and also goes kind of crazy.
Part of me really liked seeing a character with a disability in a movie. The character turns out to be a mad scientist type, which is rather a tired trope. And the mad, disabled scientist? Even worse. However, he is somewhat redeemed at the end when he turns back into a human and expresses remorse for his violence. I just don't need to see this in a movie or show anymore-- a disabled person driven by a need to be fixed-- although for a while as I was watching I was like, oh, but it's OK, he's *evil*... except that didn't really work. This character is not umambiguously evil. And it's not always wrong to want to be fixed. It would just be so, so, nice to see the other perspective--surely a more common perspective!-- of, "OK, I've got one arm, but so what? We're working on trying to cure Parkinson's Disease here which is a serious problem!"
Another problem is that he is played by an able-bodied actor, Rhys Ifans.
I remain conflicted about this movie and this portrayal. Mostly I think it would have been better with more backstory and more information about Dr. Connors.
no subject
Hollywood, idiots they are, seem convinced that anyone with a disability will stop at nothing to be normal again. This is all while failing to comprehend that A) normal does not exist, B) disabilities are not abnormalities to be cured/fixed, and C) many people have disabilities and are very successful in adapting their worlds to fit what ever change in mobility/function/processing they have.
Because of this, they feel no need to provide the backstory, or clarify the reason for the obsession. Because obviously (to the idiots of Hollywood) all people would be obsessed to be 'whole' again.
That's just my view of looking at it, having weighed and measured and debated the idiots of DC comics in re: Oracle for many years. I do love the post here, and hope many read it so they actually THINK about the idiots of Hollywood before it gets worse.
no subject