"Million Dollar Baby" Is A Reactionary Movie

[Itsthetruth]

CounterPunch
March 1, 2005

Demeaning the Poor and Disabled
Million Dollar Bigotry
By SCOTT RICHARD LYONS

Scott Richard Lyons is Assistant Professor of Writing and Rhetoric at Syracuse University, where he also teaches Native American Studies.


Reality is unnecessary because stereotype is the film's point. For DREDF, "death before disability" is nothing less than "the most central stereotype fueling disability prejudice." That's not the only harmful stereotype in the film, however. There's another group kicked around in "Million Dollar Baby" that I haven't seen anyone rush to defend: namely, the stereotype of the white trash welfare queen and her Jerry Springer brood.

Maggie's southern family consists of an overweight and overbearing mama, a "loose" looking younger sister in tight pants with a dirty baby on her hip, and a greasy-haired redneck covered with frightening tattoos. Guess what? They sure do love their welfare.

When Maggie buys a house for her mother, Mama's initial response is to nag that her welfare might be cut. Later, when the family comes to visit Maggie at the nursing home, they don't care that she might never walk again, because they're too busy trying to hoodwink her out of her boxing earnings. Get it? Just like welfare fraud.

These two scenes, ­the only in the movie featuring Maggie's family--bolster cruel images of poor southern whites, society's last remaining ethnic group who can be belittled with impunity. The message here is two-fold. First, white southern trailer-trash types are worthless human beings. And second, given the chance they will rob you blind. Probably best to cut their welfare.

To drive that point home, in a moment of cinematic rapture Maggie finally stands up to Mama: "You never signed those papers like you were supposed to because you were worried about losing your welfare. I can still sell that house right out from under you. And if you show your fat, lazy hillbilly ass around here, that's just what I'll do." Fat, lazy hillbillies: what a convenient argument against welfare during an age of insurgent conservativism.



http://www.counterpunch.org/lyons03012005.html

[Itsthetruth]

1. So What Do You Think?

I haven't seen the movie yet so I don't have an opinion of the movie or article.

If you've seen the movie I'd like to know your take on it. But, please read the entire article at:

http://www.counterpunch.org/lyons03012005.html

[davidinalameda]

2. so saying I grew up with people like that

does that make me a reactionary as well?

and am I demeaning the poor by saying that these people do exist

as it has been pointed out so many times in the past couple of weeks, stereotypes do have a grain of truth in them

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Now I'm really confused. Wouldn't those hillbillies also vote Republican?

Or is this one of those trick questions?

[soleft]

4. Another example of how the left can be as whacked as the right

You take any villain from any movie and be offended by whatever group they might be associated with.

[Bunny]

5. How is the movie reactionary? n/t

[Emboldened Chimp]

6. Counterpunch is the one stereotyping...

Obviously Mr. Lyons knows nothing about writing drama. Clint was not trying to make a movie about euthanasia or how people from the south behave. He was making a movie about the relationship between Maggie and her trainer, Frankie. And that's it. If it's true to the characters--and for Maggie, choosing to life as a quadriplegic would have gone against her character and therefore would have made the movie unbelievable--then it qualifies as good drama, not some political statement or commentary about a group of people. Mr. Lyons doth protest too much, methinks.

[Itsthetruth]

7. Not So

CounterPunch hasn't taken a position on the movie. The article reflects the views of the author.

[Emboldened Chimp]

8. They tacitly take a position by publishing the article...

...but I see what you mean.

[jdots]

9. I have not seen the movie

All I can say is the writer opens his house for the peace and freedom movement all the time and works quite hard against what the reveiwer is acusing the movie of portraying.
seems like alot of right wingers hate the movie too,well it's only a movie put out by the bottom line brigade.

[Helga Scow Stern]

10. All I know is that movie affected me positively.

I did not have that slimed feeling I have had when I have seen propagandistic films like The Passion or Team America. Instead, I felt uplifted and transformed.

This is the way art is supposed to be. There is something much deeper in the film than these political considerations.

[Stirk]

11. Umm... wasn't Maggie a southerner, too? And kind of... you know...

the fucking hero of the whole movie?

[LisaM]

12. I agree with this article 100%

it sums up a lot of what I found wrong with this movie. I completely agree that the family was an obnoxious stereotype. I thought the whole movie was mawkish, cliched, and second rate and couldn't believe the buzz after I saw it - though the audience where I saw it all seemed to be completely taken in by it. And I too couldn't understand how he could walk in, pull the plug, then walk out. Where was the outrage and the manhunt? Very odd movie with many unresolved questions like that.

Thanks for finding that article - I'm going to forward it around.

[von Staufenberg]

19. I agree, as well

The film was extremely ham-handed in many ways. As a social worker, I immediately picked up on the over-the-top (and factually inaccurate; remember: 'the welfare' now has a 60 month clock) portrayal of Maggie's family. And although more a stylistic critique, the film was replete with formulaic and telegraphed elements: Big Willy's foreshadowed managerial decision; Danger's little bout; Maggie's boxing foil (actually call her "East German" throughout the film, uggh); the list goes on.
Walking back from the film on Sunday, I noted these criticisms and summed up to the wife: In other words, it will win Best Picture.

[LisaM]

25. What about the dog?

When her father took the sick dog off in the truck so that he could - well, you know. Can you bark, "FORESHADOW?"

I told someone the only way the scenes could have been more telegraphed was if carrier pigeons had dropped missives.

And I could tell there was no way it would end happily, because there was an overwhelming feeling of dread the whole time.

[von Staufenberg]

34. Ah yes, Axle, the crippled dog

A two-fer: Telegraphed, AND an echo of the "death before disability" meme. That should have been my first example.

[LisaM]

38. And I was thinking at the time.. DON'T DO IT!

Sounded as if the dog was fairly happy.

[Johonny]

13. As Scott Adams questioned

is it possible to make a non-stereotypical character?

[Itsthetruth]

14. I Think So

Sure. Go see Hotel Rwanda and Ray. Two terrific movies I did see. I was glad they both were up for awards and won some big ones! If either of them had won the academy ward for best movie most progressives would have supported that.

[Johonny]

15. You mean Ray

The movie with its stereotypical african american entertainer that sleeps around and has a drug probelm. No stereotypes there...

I haven't seen hotel Rwanda and I'm not up on my African stereotypes, but I'm willing to bet its full of them.

[Itsthetruth]

21. It Was True

It was true, not fictional stereotyping. It's a documentary on Ray Charles. But, Ray overcame his drug addiction and it's also true that drug addiction has been a serious problem among many entertainers, white and Black. And yes, many rock and music stars have played around a lot on the road. And Ray Charles was a lot like white entertainers and just average white workers who play around. No better or worse. Tens of millions of white people from all classes have "fooled around" and used drugs. I didn't see any racial stereotyping at all in the movie. I don't think any Black people were offended by the movie.

Ray Charles was portrayed in a sympathetic and positive way.

[Bridget Burke]

24. You saw "Ray" & thought it was sympathetic...

But you pass on a critique of a movie you haven't seen.....

[Itsthetruth]

36. What's Wrong With That?

I wanted to read the views of those who have seen it, including those who might not agree with the one review I posted.

I did see Hotel Rwanda and thought it was a great movie. Reading one writers critical review of Eastwood's movie made we wonder if Hotel Rwanda was slighted and if others who saw Million Dollar Baby also shared the writers criticism.

[Johonny]

27. Stereotypes

are of course in a sense true. They depict true traits that people can and do have. Good and bad. The problem I would argue is not that a person in a movie has a stereotypical trait(is there in fact a trait that has not been stereotyped), but when a movie generalizes an entire class a person by a given trait. If Clint Eastwood had depicted all southerners as lazy, fat cheats then maybe I'd get interested. Instead it includes a very small cross section of the south. Basically one family and we don't spend much time with the family. The family certainly depicts a real family that could exist in the south. In the family you've got 1 southern women who acts differently than the rest of her family. Does the fact that this family contains members with negative character traits that could be associated with "southern stereotypes" mean Clint is stereotyping all southerners. I think thats a big stretch.

Certainly as big a stretch as saying Ray's depiction of an african american entertainer that abuses drugs and sleeps around is a bash on the African american community as a whole by the movies producers.

[Bridget Burke]

16. Is political purity the only criterion for art?

I haven't seen any of the movies you mentioned.

However, isnt' "Ray" about an African-American who does drugs & messes around with women? But he's got rhythm!

[DrGonzoLives]

37. For some people at DU, yes

In fact, for some people here, every aspect of their lives revolves around politics and being offended at things. I really don't understand how those people function in normal society.

[BrklynLiberal]

17. Is it possible to write without stereotypes...?

even the classics have some...

"Tom Sawyer"
"Grapes of Wrath"
"In Cold Blood"
"To Kill A Mockingbird"
"The Heart is A Lonely Hunter"

the list goes on. We are ALL stereotypes of some sort.

[sleipnir]

18. He needs to pull his head out of his ass and academia.

It's all well and good to criticize from the classroom, but perhaps he should get out into the real world.

Since when did a professor of Native American studies become a film critic? Did I miss a memo? Though, to be honest, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but you don't see Roger Ebert publishing long tracts on the Trail of Tears or Andy Jackson's crusade against Native Americans.

Point being, Prof. Lyons is getting too hung up on the "stereotype" of the poor white family. WTF did he expect? That Maggie would come from a Rockefeller-elite family? Pull your head out of your ass, Lyons.

Once again, another talking head misses the point of the film. It's not about Maggie, it's about Frankie and how every relationship in his life is eventually destroyed due to Frankie's actions.

I thought the portrayal of Maggie's family was spot on to a certain demographic that actually exists. I'm sick of people trying to pretend that evil only exists in the rich and not the poor. Why can't the poor be greedy, selfish and inconsiderate? I think perhaps the characters could have still been from a middle class family and it would have worked.

I felt that the subplot of Maggie's family (yes, guess what, she's just a subplot to further Frankie's story) was almost a reverse tale of Tennessee Williams "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." Perhaps I'm just drawing too much from the name Maggie, but I don't think so. Maggie has become Big Daddy, the generous, wealthy person, who is trying to reach out to their uncompassionate family. Brick, from COHTR, becomes the family and their desire just to gain from a family member's success.

Prof. Lyons needs to step back and see a story with it's devices for what it represents. Not just a stereotype, it's a story with truth and the ugliness of human greed painted with a dark brush.

[Itsthetruth]

23. There Is A Profound Difference

"I'm sick of people trying to pretend that evil only exists in the rich and not the poor"

There is a difference. The "evil" rich have the economic and political power to ruin millions of lives. Working people, especially poor ones, don't.

[DivinBreuvage]

35. Surely you've heard of Lynch Mobs and the Ku Klux Klan

Poor people have plenty of power to ruin lives... they just need to pick the right targets.

[ComerPerro]

20. Well, thats what conservatives do

I mean, people like this normally vote GOP. Especially now.

So...

[gottaB]

22. What I think

About Maggie's family and the portrayal of them as "trailer trash," I partially agree with Lyons. I think in a couple of particulars Eastwood crossed the line into politically charged stereotyping. However, I recognize that for the story it was important that Maggie's mother had failed her, and also that she had a "fraudulent" child. That establishes interesting parallels with Frankie which complicate the audience's reading of the relationship between Frankie and Maggie, and make it difficult to pass judgement on Frankie. At one point in the film, Frankie explicitly acknowledges that his motives may not be pure, but he has mixed feelings. There is no resolution of the conflict except through the unfolding of the plot.

I think the film may have been better without the sister's boyfriend. The sister I think was needed, baby and all. Her character showed that Maggie's mother was capable of affection, and therefore that her meanness towards Maggie was a matter of her own choosing, for reasons not completely transparent. The sister also played into a theme that the need for love and acceptance is universal. And the baby showed that Maggie's sacrifices on behalf of her family had a kind of urgency.

Eastwood could have portrayed those relationships with more compassion. Overall I don't think his portrayal was either heartless or reactionary. The scene with the family in the hospital was the crudest, but even in that scene many essential story elements were revealed.

It's a good movie.

[AP]

26. Million Dollar Baby takes both sides. It's good and bad on class, race,...

...disability, religion.

Race: all the cheating, backstabing characters are black (the guy who leaves Eastwood in the beginning, the guy who punches the dumb guy, and the Berlin ex-prostitute boxer). Yet you have Morgan Freeman.

Class: the family is white trash. But then again, so is Hillary Swank's character -- she eats other people's garbage in the movie, yet becomes the hardest working, most successful character.

This movie is either confused or is intentionally taking both sides of these stereoptypes.

It is definitely not monolithic in its representations of these issues.

[Javaman]

28. I don't think it's taking either side...

It's a story, period.

If you take the example of her fictional family as a stereotype then you have forgotten that her dad, who passed away, appears to have been a loving, hard working father, that she missed. He was southern. Or the people who run the restaurant that served the best homemade lemon pie, they were southern.

If you have ever lived in a trailer park you will understand there are two types. The nice ones and the scary crappy ones. She obviously lived in the latter. Having experienced the latter myself, let me tell you something, those people weren't all that far from the truth. There are welfare scammers, prescription drug dealers, family violence, spousal abuse, many people who have family members in prison, prostitution, etc...

As far as the portrayal of blacks in the movie, if you have ever been to an inner city boxing gym, you will know, such as the one in the movie, which I believe is supposed to be L.A., you would know that the population of such a gym is predominately black and hispanic. A white guy, like the one that is picked on in the movie, would be picked on in real life. Like dropping Bambi in a combat zone.

And regarding the fact that it was a story, given the linear concept, if any of you know anything about character development, you will realize, typically, not always, but typically, when you have a linear story, the supporting characters tend to be on the stereotypical side, this results because, through this avenue because with the lack of developed subplots, you have to convey your stories various plots, through lines, conflicts, points, etc via the characters rather than events. Thus the stereotype. Stereotypes deliver the information fastest to the audience.

With a developed story line with detailed subplots the writer can have the luxury of developing the complexity of the various characters. This wasn't that movie.

Given that, I thought it was an excellent movie based upon the model of a linear story. Not all stories have to be deep thinkers to be good. Sometimes the simplest story makes a great film.

We empathize on some level with the various characters. That is the secret to good film making. Telling a story with compelling characters.
We feel the rise of the old lion via Morgan Freedman's knocking out of the young punk and defending the defenseless.
We see Clint Eastwood's capturing something he lost, his daughter and finding a new one.
And we see Hillary Swank, finding the father figure that she so desperately wants.
This wasn't a movie about life or death, it was about finding something we all miss or once had and had lost.

[Johonny]

31. taking both sides

I think moral ambiguity is an Eastwood movie trait. Eastwood seems to like making movies in which the characters have an ambiguity and the themes of the movie are ambiguous. I personally love Eastwoods last Dirty Harry film which makes a strong statement against glorification of film and news violence. Yet does so in a film filled with Dirty Harry cartoon cop violence. Certainly Eastwood understood he was making the exact kind of film that he in fact is certain could have a negaitive impact on society.

[DeaconBlues]

29. "Eastwood lobbied against the Americans with Disabilities Act"

A good thing for many to remember for all those people here who like to say, "Clint isn't really a republican."

[Johonny]

33. I thought his

objection as stated by him were not unreasonable. Although it was never clear to me how to better write the law in Clints mind.

[ben_packard]

30. Don't forget the pathetic irish and english stereotypes as well

They're just as lazy and offensive. An OK film in my mind but nothing more, certainly the worst of the 5 Oscar nominees.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. Dumb white rednecks?

I think you've summed up a sizeable contingent of Bush voters.

You forget, it's not welfare if it's not going to black women having babies, buying vodka and eating bon-bons with the hard earned spoils of AM Radio rage-drunk freepers. You forget that one thing that is the matter with Kansas is that millions of "red state" voters don't understand that they are hurting themselves by supporting Bush's anti-poor policies, screwing themselves out of any chance at affordable health insurance and a liveable minimum wage. All they seem to be able to cram into their pointy little heads is that Jeebus wants them to vote for the GOP.

Seriously, you know what I think all this means?

That some people -on both sides of the aisle- need to stop reading so much into what are, after all, damn movies.

[Stop_the_War]

39. This article is reactionary

"These two scenes, ­the only in the movie featuring Maggie's family--bolster cruel images of poor southern whites, society's last remaining ethnic group who can be belittled with impunity. "

Then why the FUCK do southern whites control EVERYTHING in this country and why the FUCK are they the ones that are always saying racial slurs?

[Itsthetruth]

41. Poor Southern Whites Control Everything??!!!

That's news! And it couldn't be farther from the truth. I thought CEO's and corporate tycoons pretty much controlled the economy and politics of this nation.

All but a tiny minority of them happen to be white.

And if you compare the racial attitudes of most white working class people today to half a century ago you would see a tremendous change, especially in the south! And poor working class whites are "always saying racial slurs" unlike the educated rich white folks in the south who are so very, very, very "liberal"????

You are racial stereotyping .... in this case whites .... poor southern working class whites.

[Stop_the_War]

42. I did not say that

I said "southern whites". there are many other groups of people that are discriminated against, NOT southern whites.

[Itsthetruth]

44. Please Clarify

Your comment followed the quote: "These two scenes, ­the only in the movie featuring Maggie's family--bolster cruel images of poor southern whites, society's last remaining ethnic group who can be belittled with impunity."

So naturally when you followed that with "southern whites control EVERYTHING" I thought it was in reference to the previous quote.

So did you mean rich southern whites or all southern white people?

[Stop_the_War]

45. I was trying to say...

The author of the article would do better to actually look at the REAL discrimination that is going on against African-Americans, Muslims, and other minorities. I myself do not see Southern whites being discriminated against and I rarely ever see them "belittled with impunity".

When I said "they control everything" I was talking about "rich and upper class whites". This person is trying to say that whites are "society's last remaining "ethnic group" who can be belittled with impunity". This is terribly inaccurate and just plain wrong to say because this person is ignoring the discrimination against minorities. I found it outrageous that someone might think white people as an "ethnic group" are discriminated against, because they're not at all and it is absolutely ridiculous to say so.

[Itsthetruth]

46. It's About Class

Poor southern, northern, eastern and western whites face class
discrimination and "bias". Not racial. They are, like poor Blacks, Hispanics, etc., victims of an economy and political system run by the ruling rich. And now a significant number of Black and other minority ethnic group members are part of that ruling elite.

It's all about class!

[Blue_In_AK]

40. I saw the movie, I enjoyed it...

...to me, it was thought-provoking. I liked that the older gentleman, Clint, was able to have a loving relationship with Maggie that didn't involve sexual overtones. (Something I also appreciated about Lost in Translation -- the relationship between Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson was so sweetly innocent.) I don't know, you can read whatever you want to into almost any movie. This one, to me at least, was far from the worst as far as stereotypes go.

[KamaAina]

43. Yes! We've been on this in the Disability Issues forum for some time.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=250&topic_id=648&mesg_id=648

For whatever reason, disability issues never seem to be on the front burner, at DU or in the progressive movement generally, despite the fact that we make up 20% of the population, and have good progressive "street cred": astronomical unemployment rate, civil rights under atack by Bush** Federalist judges, etc., etc.

edit: I just founded the "pogressive" movement :dunce: