Rain Man (1988)

May I admit to having never been that impressed with Rain Man, which won the Oscar for Best Picture of 1988? It has always seemed far too slick a film, too certain of itself, too smug, to make me feel any true emotions about its characters and their situations. Even the much-lauded lead performance by Dustin Hoffman as an institutionalized autistic person who is taken out into the real world by his brother leaves me cold. I do understand that it's all well-made ("slickly produced," I'd suggest), but to me, it just doesn't have that much of a heart.

Charlie Babbitt (Tom Cruise) is an importer of cars who's having some difficulty getting his latest purchases into the country when he hears of the death of his estranged father. He's left only two things in the will, the automobile he was never allowed to drive and the family rose bushes. The rest of his father's estate goes into a trust, a fact which infuriates Charlie, sending him in search of the lucky recipient of all of this wealth. By a series of rather unbelievable circumstances, he meets Raymond (Hoffman), his brother who has lived most of his adult life in an institution. Charlie decides to take Raymond to California with him, contest the trust, and use the money (or, at least, half of it) to solve his own financial problems.

What follows is a road movie that makes very little sense, frankly. If Charlie would listen even briefly to any one of the numerous health professionals who try to counsel him about Raymond, he would know better than to assume control of his brother's caretaking with so little preparation and understanding of autism. The reason they drive across America is even more astonishing; Raymond won't fly any airline that has ever crashed, leaving them only with Qantas, hardly a feasible option for getting from Ohio to California, at least directly. Time and again, Raymond's familiar patterns get interrupted, causing him to have some very violent and loud outbursts. You'd think Charlie would develop a sense that he isn't doing right by Raymond, but that never seems to happen.

I know what you're thinking. I've misunderstand. You see, this film is about the development of Charlie's conscience. He does indeed become a better man because of his contact with his long-lost brother. And they do build a relationship with each other. They just had to have the time to do it slowly so that Raymond could learn to adjust. Yeah, I got all of that. I'm still not buying it.

Perhaps the problem lies in Hoffman's performance most of all. I know he's considered one of the greatest actors of his generation, and he has certainly turned in any number of performances that I do like, but this isn't one of them. I just found it gimmicky. It's as if he learned one trait that is associated with autism and sticks with it for more than two hours of film time. There's no real sense that this is a person; it's a cardboard figure of someone with autism. And even the moments that are played for laughs--like the one about the airlines--are, to me, rather condescending to the struggles that real people with autism must endure.

Cruise, on the other hand, does what I consider to be some of his strongest early work. He seems to be at his best when he has to play shallow, self-centered characters, men who need to have something taken away from them so that they can begin to appreciate and understand life better. In Rain Man, he demonstrates a pretty remarkable range of emotions, and his performance rings truer for me than Hoffman's does.

I know my reaction to the film might strike some as odd. It's just that this film is a good example of the kind of movies that Hollywood started making around the middle of the 1980s. Actually, "making" might be the wrong word; "packaging" might be more accurate. Major stars? Check. Plot line sure to tug heart strings? Check. Serious topic being addressed with gravity? Check. Beautiful cinematography of the parts of the country that don't usually appear in movies? Check. A funny line every few minutes to break the monotony of seriousness with which we must handle the subject matter? Check. It's movie-making by committee, and it dominates too much of the product coming out of the studios these days. Rain Man just happens to be one of the first major examples of this trend, and I'm not a fan. Sorry about that.