Deep Thoughts About Stupid Sh*t: A Pop-Culture Podcast

Rain Man: Deep Thoughts About Buicks, Toothpicks, and Introducing Autism to Pop Culture

• Tracie Guy-Decker & Emily Guy Birken • Episode 102

Share episode

Send us a message! Include how to reach you if you want a response.

When I was a little kid and I got scared, the Rain Man would come and sing to me.

Join us this week as Tracie shares her deep thoughts about the 1988 film Rain Man, for which Dustin Hoffman won the Oscar for his nuanced portrayal of autistic savant Raymond Babbitt. This comedy/drama, written by Barry Morrow and directed by Barry Levinson, was singled-handedly responsible for introducing autism to American society, it also prompted Raymond's verbal tics to enter the pop culture lexicon as comedy shorthand and left much of our culture believing that autism is synonymous with math savantism.

While the film was careful to show Raymond's dignity and had at least one medical professional point out that his neurodivergence is a difference in psychology ("His brain doesn't work like other people's"), it also conflates "improvement" with Raymond acting more neurotypical--as if autism is something that needs to be cured. (In addition, Tom Cruise's Charlie Babbitt is a jerk who keeps yelling at Raymond which can't be good for his mental health.)

We agree that you are an excellent driver. Please listen along while you drive excellently.

Content warning: The film uses the R slur for disabled individuals, which we discuss in the episode.

This episode was edited by Resonate Recordings.

Our theme music is "Professor Umlaut" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Learn more about Tracie and Emily (including our other projects), join the Guy Girls' family, secure exclusive access to bonus episodes, video versions, and early access to Deep Thou​​ghts by visiting us on Patreon or find us on ko-fi: https://ko-fi.com/guygirls

We are Tracie Guy-Decker and Emily Guy Birken, known to our family as the Guy Girls.

We have super-serious day jobs. For the bona fides, visit our individual websites: tracieguydecker.com and emilyguybirken.com

We're hella smart and completely unashamed of our overthinking prowess. We love movies and tv, science fiction, comedy, and murder mysteries, good storytelling with lots of dramatic irony, and analyzing pop culture for gender dynamics, psychology, sociology, and whatever else we find.

Speaker 1:

And I think we are meant to really feel for Charlie Like he's our hero, he is our protagonist, and also like he's just a jerk.

Speaker 1:

Like even by the end he's just kind of a jerk, and that like causes some I don't know dissatisfaction in me. Have you ever had something you love dismissed because it's just pop culture, what others might deem stupid shit? You know matters, you know what's worth talking and thinking about, and so do we. So come overthink with us as we delve into our deep thoughts about stupid shit. I'm Tracy Guy-Decker and you're listening to Deep Thoughts About Stupid Shit, because pop culture is still culture, and shouldn't? You know what's in your head? On today's episode, I'll be sharing my deep thoughts about the 1988 Barry Levinson film Rain man with my sister, emily Guy-Burken, and with you. Let's dive in, em. I know you've seen this movie we probably saw it together but what's in your head about Rain?

Speaker 2:

Man. So we actually we were texting back and forth as you were watching it. You were saying, actually I kind of feel like maybe you should have watched this one, and I was like I don't think I'd have the stomach to. Because what I remember about this film is it was the first time I had any introduction to autism. Introduction to autism, as I recall. We saw it in the theater together with our dad. I had to double check with you. I couldn't remember if it was in the film or if our dad talked to us about it afterwards or both. Prior to this, the cultural lexicon was idiot savant, which is just horrifying to me. That way of looking at things. I kind of have this understanding of like before and after this film, like even though I was so young when it came out. But before this film, people didn't talk about autism. And then, after this film, it was something we all understood, at least in terms of how Dustin Hoffman portrayed it.

Speaker 1:

We at least knew it existed.

Speaker 2:

Culturally. What we knew was that it made people repeat things over and over again. As I mentioned before we started recording, something that became part of the lexicon was the way that Dustin Hoffman's character repeated the word definitely. That became something that people just did. The other aspect of it was we had this sense that, like if you drop toothpicks, you'd be able to know exactly how many there were. So those are the things that stick in my mind about it.

Speaker 2:

Now, why I don't think I'd have the stomach to revisit this is I have a dear friend whose son is on the autism spectrum and seeing a portrayal of what my friend's son lives with that I'm sure was well-meaning I'm sure it was a very well-meaning portrayal in a lot of ways, I think would just really rub me the wrong way, because Dustin Hoffman's a neurotypical actor and there's a lot of things, a lot of misconceptions and beliefs about autism baked into this film that are just not true, about the lived experience of people on the autism spectrum that I know.

Speaker 2:

I personally would have trouble watching and not being frustrated by so specifically things in the film. I remember Tom Cruise early on not remembering that he had an older brother saying that when he was scared when he was little the Rain man would come to him, and it was later he found out it was because his older brother, raymond, had been institutionalized because of his autism. I remember them. When Tom Cruise's character realizes that Raymond can like do math so quickly in his head, he takes him to like either Atlantic City or Las Vegas. There's one scene of them coming down an escalator in like tuxes, and I remember there's a point where I think it's Tom Cruise's in bed is having sex with a woman and Raymond comes in and sits down on the bed, is like completely unaware of the inappropriateness socially of what he's doing. He sits on the bed and watches TV, and those are kind of the like the snapshots of what I remember. So tell me, why are we talking about this today?

Speaker 1:

I also have a friend who has a son who's on the spectrum, and several months ago she and I were talking and talking about this project and she asked if we would ever, you know, do this film, because there's a lot of things that are great and a lot of things that are not great about this film, and so she just wanted. She asked me if we would do a deep thoughts treatment of Rain man, and so I put it on the list and so here we are. So that's why this is actually for Rachel. So let me give you a quick snapshot of the destination and then I'll do a synopsis. So I think we were not alone. I mean, we were kids, but we were not alone.

Speaker 1:

Like for much of American society, this movie was an introduction to the concept of autism and in 1988, I think it was somewhat revolutionary that Raymond is actually treated with full human dignity. And also, as you predicted, there are some sort of fundamental assumptions baked into this film that are problematic, the core of it being that the neurotypical way is right and good and better, and that we need to do everything we can to help the neurodivergent person behave as close to neurotypical behavior as possible, and that that is the goal and that is the good thing, to have that happen. So I think that's really the core. There will be different iterations of that. That is the core of sort of the problem, I think, with this film and we can get into some of the specific ways that manifests in this film. So let me give you a synopsis. So we first meet Charlie Babbitt. That's Tom Cruise's character. He is a slick wheeler dealer in Los Angeles. He has a small. So you said Tom Cruise's character, I think we got it Well.

Speaker 1:

Sometimes we play it tight. He runs a small car dealership where he's importing. He's currently importing four Lamborghinis from Italy and they are Stuck in Customs and EPA, and so we learned through the course. He has two employees Susanna, who is both employee and girlfriend. She's played by the Italian actress Valeria Golino. And then the other employee is Lenny. He's played by Ralph Seymour. These three people are in this warehouse, all three are on the phone. It's like chaotic and we see through this scene that Charlie Babbitt Tom Cruise's character. He does not break under stress, he knows exactly what to say. He is the consummate con artist. He's coaching Lenny on what to say to the customers who want to go with another dealer because they don't have their cars yet and they want their down payments back, which Charlie doesn't have to give them. So that's how we meet them. They decide to take a break. Susanna wants to go to Palm Springs.

Speaker 2:

So they're driving to Palm Springs and in the car they get a call One of those brick car phone car phones from the factory and the fact that he has one of those, I'm sure at the time would have indicated what a wheeler dealer he is too.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, exactly. So he gets a call from Lenny. Lenny's so sorry, charlie's dad has died. So they turn around. They go to Cincinnati to the funeral. Now we see again, like Charlie's watching from a distance, his father's estranged, like they were not close and he's just not affected. His dad has left him the prize-winning rose bushes and the antique car. It's a 49 Buick Roadster, like a convertible, and the $3 million of the estate are being left to an anonymous benefactor in trust.

Speaker 1:

And now we see Charlie get upset. So through various conniving and charming, he manages to discover who the anonymous, or at least where the anonymous benefactor is and who the trustee is. So he goes to this place, walbrook, and we discover that Walbrook is a home for developmentally and physically disabled adults. So we see several residents who have Down syndrome, we have several residents who are otherwise developmentally disabled, like watching TV or whatever. And we see Charlie sit down with Dr Bruner, who is the head of this place, and Dr Bruner says like I'm not getting any benefit from this. Walbrook is not getting any benefit from this. This is for this person, the anonymous benefactor. And Charlie is like what is this an ex-girlfriend of my dad's? Like what the hell, like that's my money, I should have that money. He's really upset. He doesn't get anywhere with Dr Brunner.

Speaker 1:

He comes back outside and Susanna, the girlfriend and employee, is sitting in the passenger side seat of the antique car and Dustin Hoffman is sitting in the driver's seat and he's saying like Susanna's, like this isn't your car, this is my boyfriend's car. And Hoffman's. Raymond is like no, this is my. I drive this car. I drive it slow on the driveway, but only on Saturdays, never on Wednesdays. Today's a Wednesday, whatever. Like that riffing that we know from Dustin Hoffman.

Speaker 1:

Charlie comes out and is like what is happening? Who is this guy? Get out of the car. But then Raymond says something about the car that is accurate. It used to have brown leather seats. These red ones aren't as good. And Charlie's like wait, it did use that brown leather seats.

Speaker 1:

And Raymond says what kind of car it is, which we have heard Charlie say like all the full description. I don't remember, it doesn't matter. Raymond says it all. It says how many miles are on it and Charlie says whose car was it? Raymond says it was dad's car. Who's your dad? And he says the same name it's his dad's name. What was your mom's name, says his mom's name and she died and it's like the exact date and like Charlie's like what the heck is happening.

Speaker 1:

So they go back inside and he says to Dr Brunner, who is this guy? No-transcript with him to LA. But like Raymond says yeah to like everything, without fully understanding the implications, travel montage ensues that takes about I don't know two million hours of movie time. Raymond's going to fly them to LA. I mean, excuse me, charlie's going to fly them to LA. Raymond has a freak out because it's not safe to fly. So they drive in the Buick, they're on the highway and they are going past a crash and Raymond like freaks out out, gets out of the car and says, like highway travel is unsafe, so now they have to go on like roads, surface roads from Cincinnati to LA.

Speaker 1:

Raymond has all kinds of quirks and things. He needs things to be in a certain way to feel comfortable and safe. So like the bed has to be near the window, he he eats his food with toothpicks. He does all the things. So in these two million hours of road trip, effectively we watch Charlie abuse Raymond, not on purpose, not with malice, but he doesn't get it and he just keeps yelling at him to like stop being an idiot, don't be a retard.

Speaker 1:

She uses the r word oh my god and like, wow, he freaks out and yells and then he does the thing to accommodate, to watch judge wapner at three like in fact, at one point they knock on a farmhouse door and end up watching the people's court in these people's living room with all these kids around. Meanwhile the business stuff is going really poorly. The cars are stuck in EPA, the cars are stuck in customs. It's going really really poorly and in fact now the cars have been taken back somehow they lost the cars as well. That's when we've seen him.

Speaker 1:

We've seen Raymond with the toothpicks. As you say, he counted the exact number of toothpicks that fell on the floor. And then, in the middle of Texas, charlie's like at his wit's end and he wants something to like fix I'm putting quotes around that His brother. So he takes him to a doctor and the doctor's like this I mean the doctor actually gives one of the best, by today's standards, explanations. His brain just works differently than ours. You know this. It's not a thing you can fix, it's just he's just wired differently.

Speaker 1:

But the doctor's the one who actually points out the, is curious about the savant nature and asks him to do a bunch of like really complicated arithmetic that he does very quickly in his head. The doctor confirms with a calculator, but then he says, raymond, how much does the candy bar cost? And he says, oh, I don't know about a hundred dollars. And he says, well, how much does a brand new buick cost? He said I don't know, maybe a hundred dollars.

Speaker 1:

So we see that he is a savant with some math, but like, actually like getting around, like living on his own, he doesn't have. He doesn't have those skills like a light bulb goes off over his head and he buys a deck of cards and asks and like, throws down like almost the whole deck in front of Raymond, face up and then says what do I have left in my hand? And Raymond accurately names all of the cards that are left in his hand. So they hightail it to Las Vegas, which we saw them drive through previously. And, as you remember, charlie buys Raymond's. It's a suit, not aux, but a very nice 1988 suit With the big stripper pads.

Speaker 1:

I'm sure, yeah. And Dustin Hoffman. They're wearing kind of matching suits in this gray, shiny gray material and Dustin Hoffman's is double-breasted and Tom Cruise's is not. And they sit down at a blackjack table and Raymond bets two if it's a good, if the next card is good, and one if it's bad, and they win tens of thousands of dollars. They come to the attention of security who are like watching the video and they don't see a counter, they don't see like a computer, they don't know how he could possibly be doing this, because no one could count cards that are six, like a six deck set of cards they they're told to like. Eventually they're told to leave, like security says, get out of the state and don't come back, but we're not going to take your winnings from you.

Speaker 1:

They make it to LA and Dr Bruner, charlie has requested like he wants custody of his brother now, or that was the idea from the beginning. And so Dr Bruner has flown to LA and they're going to have a meeting with a court appointed psychiatrist who will make a recommendation to the court, like the night before, and offers him 250, meets charlie, thank you, and offers him 250, 000 to just let it go and let raymond go back to the institution in cincinnati and a week ago charlie might have taken that deal. But now he actually feels connected to his brother. So he says forget it, I'm not even mad about the money anymore, I'm mad that you kept my brother from me like I would have liked to have known him more than these past six days in the actual meeting with the court-appointed psychiatrist. It's actually kind of painful. This is a thing that I think the movie maker was trying to like. This is the there'sicism, I think, in the movie makers of the institutional.

Speaker 1:

Because this psychiatrist says okay, well, let's ask Raymond what he wants. Do you want to live with your brother, charlie, in LA? And he says yeah. And he says do you want to go back to Walbrook? And he says yeah. And then the psychiatrist like that made his point. But he like keeps doing it to the point that Charlie says enough already, doc, his point. But he like keeps doing it to the point that Charlie says enough already, doc, you made your point, you don't need to humiliate him.

Speaker 1:

And the doctors both leave and Charlie and Raymond have a moment where Charlie says like I'm probably not going to see you as much anymore and I just want you to know. I'm really glad that you're my brother and they have a moment. They're sitting close and Raymond kind of leans in and rests his forehead on Charlie's forehead, which is the most sort of physical touch that Raymond, raymond's very touch averse, very touch averse. The very final scene Charlie puts Raymond with Dr Brunner on a train to go back to Cincinnati. So in the middle there, the bit that you named, that he realizes that Rain man, his imaginary friend who he mentions in the beginning after the dad has died, was in fact Raymond. That was how he said Raymond when he was a child, because Raymond was only two when he was put away.

Speaker 1:

Charlie was only two when Raymond was put away. Raymond was a teenager. No-transcript of the two of them from when Charlie was a baby. For these 20 years or 25 years I guess, there are moments like it goes from Charlie being a total dick to him, like not treating Raymond as a human, calling him names and things, to the end where, like he's like happily accommodating the specific needs because he cares about him. So that's the basic, like gist of the thing. Susanna plays a small role, she actually.

Speaker 1:

The scene you remember is the very first night of the kidnapping and Charlie and Susanna are having sex and Raymond hears their like moaning and is curious and whatever. He follows the noises and is sort of mimicking them and ends up in the bedroom the TV's on. He sits down on the end of the bed and whatever. He follows the noises and is sort of mimicking them and ends up in the bedroom the TV's on. He sits down on the end of the bed and watches. Charlie freaks out because of how inappropriate it is and like yells at him. Susanna says he doesn't understand, he has no idea what this means. You need to go apologize to him. And he goes to Raymond's room and instead of apologizing. He like yells at him some more. Susanna leaves. She's like you just use people, you're using him, you're using me. I can't take it.

Speaker 1:

She comes back in Las Vegas and so she is there for the redemption, like Charlie's redeemed moment. She also has a moment with Raymond where he met like there was a prostitute at the bar. He was like Raymond was fascinated by her necklace that she was playing with and so she thought he was a potential John. And she comes over and she's chatting with him and then she realizes he's not all there and she leaves. But he says what time is our date? And she says 10 o'clock. So he thinks he has a date with this woman. And of course she doesn't show up when he goes to the bar to meet her. So Susanna like sort of comforts him and says were you going to? He and Charlie had learned to dance for the date. So Susanna dances with him in the elevator and then gives him a kiss and she says how was that? And he says what? Which she says again to the doctor later in the interview. So that's the gist.

Speaker 1:

There are other specific moments but we don't need to go into them, so I'll just get it out of the way, because we almost always do this. This film does not pass the Bechdel test because there are not. There's only one named female character in that Susanna, that's it, that's all there is. The dead mom has a name, but we never see her on screen. So I don't have anything else to say about that, but I like sort of noting it. So, as a reminder, listeners, the Bechdel test are there at least two named female characters? Do they talk to each other? Do they talk to each other about something other than a man or a boy? This one doesn't even pass the first question. So there's that.

Speaker 1:

I think I want to delve a little deeper into the assumptions about autism and neurodivergence in general that are sort of baked into this film.

Speaker 1:

This film was written by a man named Barry Morrow, who apparently got the idea from two things. One was he had a friend who was, I don't believe, on the spectrum but was developmentally, intellectually, disabled. This friend of his was slated to go to be institutionalized, and so Morrow actually kidnapped him that's the word that he used in the little research that I did to prevent him from needing to go back into the institution. And then, apparently, the filmmaker, the screenwriter met a man called Kim Peek who was a savant, who it's unclear to me whether he was also on the spectrum, but he was in fact a savant. So he had that eidetic memory, he had that super quick math skills and when Morrow met Mr Peake, that sort of mashed up with his experience of trying to save his friend from the institution and the idea for Rain man was born. So it's not based on a true story, though there were sort of true vignettes that got mashed up together.

Speaker 2:

But it was written by someone who did not have any direct experience of autism.

Speaker 1:

That is correct and in fact the original screenplay didn't have the word in it and it's important to remember. Today, in 2025, that seems unimaginable because I think everyone knows someone now. But in the movie, even when they're in texas at the doctor's office, the nurse who's like sort of the intake nurse is like he's artistic and like even the word and charlie says I don't know what that word means when dr bruner first says it and that's when actually bruner says we used to call them idiot savants. So the movie does name what you remember, so like.

Speaker 1:

It's worth kind of remembering that in 1988 the, the cultural understanding and comfort with, or at least familiarity, if not comfort with, the spectrum was not there and Morrow didn't know anyone personally. Now he did. He and Hoffman, and maybe even Levinson and Cruise, did research with people who were on the spectrum. So Dustin Hoffman spent a year preparing for the film. He met Mr Peek. He met multiple people who are on the spectrum to see how they interact with others in the world, to see their mannerisms, so that he could deliver the performance that he does. But there was no one neurodivergent on the writing team, on the creative team. All of the neurodivergent folks who were involved. If you can say that in the making of this film were objects of study, they weren't active. Participants in the making of this film were objects of study.

Speaker 2:

They weren't active participants in the creation. I'm thinking it's kind of like how the Pixar team went to Australia to look at fish or how the Disney animators went to Hawaii Right Exactly, rather than interviewing and including and having them be part of the writer's team Right Exactly. Something I mentioned before. We started recording in 2005,.

Speaker 2:

When I was getting my master's degree in education, I had to take a course on inclusion in the classroom and one of the things I learned in that course which horrified me as late as I think the 70s autism was thought to be caused by refrigerator mothers that was the term that was in my textbook as in cold mothers, as in mothers who were not nurturing enough to their children, caused their children to be autistic.

Speaker 2:

Which boy, howdy? Is that going to make it hard to get diagnosis, because you're not going to want your child to be diagnosed with that? And then with my experience with my friend who has a child on the spectrum she has a younger child who is not on the spectrum, but they have been much more vigilant about testing, testing, and so there's a lot of stuff that with this second child, that would have been the 80s and be like wow, what a quirky kid which pings radars now, in part because of his older brother, but also in part because we have a better understanding of autism. And so when you say there was no neurodivergent in the writer's room, there probably was.

Speaker 1:

That's fair. That's a fair point.

Speaker 2:

The other thing that I think I want to kind of like dive in on a little bit with. Like you mentioned before, we started recording that Dustin Hoffman won an Oscar for this. I'm sure that, like he's an excellent actor he really is and he's very exacting the fact that he spent a year doing research, this movie, I think, is well-meaning. Hoffman brought dignity to that character, and even the Tom Cruise slick-wheeler-dealer prick, who learns to recognize that his brother, who's autistic, is actually human and loves him and he loves his brother too, is all very well-meaning too, is all very well-meaning. And that immersion even though it's kind of like going to Australia to look at the fish to learn how to draw them I mean, on the one hand I feel like that's what the best you can get in the 1980s from a neurotypical actor who takes his craft very seriously and does want to bring humanity and dignity to a character, on the other hand it's just like, oh man, seriously.

Speaker 1:

I mean I actually think they did as well as they could have in 1988. I genuinely believe that In the 40 years since, the ways in which it's done a disservice right, I think there's many ways. I mean one of them is the savant component of Raymond's character is actually fairly rare and to the extent that Raymond has it is extremely rare. And yet it was the first introduction that most of America had to this condition. And so there's like, as you said, there was this sense that like we all neurotypicals, or at least not autistic, holistic if we're neurodivergent, thank you holistic people who you know then expect that kind of savant behavior and are disappointed, like like dance, monkey dance. You know, I think that is a disservice that was done to folks on the spectrum by this movie, something.

Speaker 1:

There's a line of films and another pop culture or media that we could draw of sort of questioning skepticism around institutions right, like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and there are others where we sort of see institutions and we say like that's not what he needs, he just needs some time with family, and at one point Charlie even says he's made more progress with me in the past week than he did with you in 20 years, sort of the implication that the institution just was a holding place and enabled like. The undercurrent of this that I think is potentially dangerous is Charlie's implication is that by allowing Raymond to have his rituals and the things the way he wanted them, that the institution was enabling bad behavior. That should have been corrected and that's the thing that feels unhealthy Like. Institutions can be bad and they can do a disservice to their participants. 100%, no question, maybe even most of the time.

Speaker 1:

But the reason that this film is suggesting that I take on bridge at, because again what I said at the beginning, the fundamental assumption is that Raymond will be better I'm putting quotes around that word if he could learn to behave more like a neurotypical, if he could learn to make eye contact, if he could learn to stop repeating who's on first all the time, if he could learn to like accept hugs when they're offered. And that's not better. That just makes neurotypical people more comfortable. Yeah.

Speaker 2:

Well, and we even so, when I was teaching, there were a few kids who would come through who, because of their IEP, would have like special dispensation to like maybe have a cell phone because one of their, one of their stims was to check the time or something like that. And I would have colleagues who would be like you know well, they should do what everyone else does and the thing is like to have this be part of their iep. And if you're not familiar, that's a individual education program. I think plan, individual education plan for students with special needs, special education program, that sort of thing, that sense that this child needs to conform, because that's what everybody does when having like getting to the point where they're, they are in high school, because that's what I was teaching and this is on their IEP. This is a need.

Speaker 1:

Well, we wouldn't say that about a kid who had a hearing deficiency if they needed an desk, but because of how she got around she needed to leave early. She was not like fighting through the halls with everyone else.

Speaker 2:

No one had an issue with that. Some of it has to do with what appears to be invisible, and I don't like autism. This is another aspect of what you're talking about. It's not a disability, it's a different way of brain wiring. There is a place for that kind of brain wiring in our society, as long as we are open to it. Now there are some people on the autism spectrum who, for whatever reason, are going to struggle in our society and will need more structure, will not be able to live independently, will need to live in, will not be able to live independently, will need to live in an institution for whatever reason. But again, that doesn't make them disabled or wrong and it just makes them brainwired differently.

Speaker 1:

This film. Actually, I think in some ways it portrayed Raymond as like the audience has no question I don't think that Raymond can't live independently. Like near the climax of the film he tries, he's like in Charlie's home and he's like trying to make himself a snack and he turns on the toaster oven and he can't get the door open because he's doing it wrong, whatever, and he gets distracted and he goes into something else and then there's smoke and it sets off the smoke detector and he has a major freak out as a result. I mean, anybody would. But then because of his autism, the way that he freaks out is big and loud and self-harming. It's a tense moment. Charlie wakes up and has to turn off the toaster oven and take down the smoke detector and then try and calm Raymond who is touch averse. So the ways that he goes to try and calm him are not calming.

Speaker 1:

I think the audience is left with the sense that Raymond can't live on his own and also that he has value. The value piece is like a push me, pull me, because Charlie doesn't start to really warm up to Raymond until they win enough to get him out of the hole, like just enough, like he needs $80,000 for the cars to return the down payments and $3,500 to reclaim his pawned Rolex, and they win $86,000. And that's when he really starts to like seems to genuinely warm up to him. And so, yes, this film, dustin Hoffman's portrayal, gives Raymond human dignity and value. And, yes, our hero so-called doesn't actually warm up and doesn't actually start to see his brother as something more than either a meal ticket or a burden, until he helps him make $86,000, which is the precise amount that he needs.

Speaker 1:

So it's like if Raymond's hyper fixation had been like train schedules right, or if he had been one of the most of the people on the spectrum who don't have the savant piece of raymond's diagnosis like and counting card was just not a thing.

Speaker 1:

Well, yeah, yeah, yeah. So this film is like it's complicated and now, taken in context, like in some ways it did amazing things for the community of those on the spectrum and those who love them, because a lot of money went into research after this, after 1988 I don't think that's a coincidence right, and like a lot of Americans were introduced to this condition, introduced to this condition by a beloved actor who gave the man dignity no-transcript of what allowed that grifter to get a toehold right right, yeah, the fear, yes, agreed, agreed.

Speaker 1:

I'm running out of time but I really want to quickly sort of also name, like on deep thoughts. We define the protagonist as the person who grows and changes through the course of the story and by that definition Charlie is most definitely the protagonist. He definitely grows and changes. He sees that he was a prick. He names himself as a prick.

Speaker 1:

We hear the story of why he became estranged from his father. That amazing car he was never allowed to touch it. When he was 16, he brought home an almost straight A's report card and he said hey, dad, can I deck out the car? And dad said no, so he took it anyway and dad called the cops on a stolen car and he and his friends all got stopped and pulled over and put in jail and his dad left. The other guys the other guys he was with got bailed out in a matter of hours and his dad left him there for two days and he never came out.

Speaker 1:

So that's the story that he tells of, like why they were estranged. But then his dad has tried to reach out to him many times to like at least talk, and he has not called him back. So he says I was a prick, by the end he definitely grows. He grows to see Raymond as a human being. He realizes that Raymond was his imaginary friend, rain man, who used to come and sing to him when he was sad and scared, and he feels a certain amount of responsibility for Raymond's institutionalization because they put him away to protect Charlie. I think that's worth noting and I think we are meant to really feel for Charlie. He's our hero, he is our protagonist and also, like he's just a jerk.

Speaker 1:

Like even by the end he's just kind of a jerk and that like causes some I don't know dissatisfaction in me. There's also, like a number of moments of like I don't know plot holes. Plot holes like burner should have called the cops and he says he didn't. Like charlie calls him and he says he didn't, because raymond has always been a voluntary patient, but then they make the point over the two million hours of road trip that he's he actually needs structure and care, he needs people who know how to care for him.

Speaker 1:

The las vegas casino guys like know that they were counting cards and like let them keep their winnings. Like there are several sort of plot holes that were meant to just kind of keep going with. Were meant to just like embrace charlie, even though he's kind of a dick. We're meant to just like embrace Charlie even though he's kind of a dick. We're meant to like cheer that Susanna comes back, even though she should never have come back. She was right to leave in the first place. There's a lot in this film that's like surface level. It's just a feel good film about how proximity and love overcome difference in disability, because that's the way the film thinks about it. But underneath of it there's just there's a lot churning. There's a lot we can see about society at that moment in 1988 and what we valued and how we thought about people who are different. That, I think, is I. Just I wanted to name all this.

Speaker 2:

I mean some of it like we started with. You were saying like Tom Cruise, is this wheeler dealer slick? And I'm like, so he's Tom Cruise and some of that is I'm realizing. Watching films and media from the 80s and 90s is like we're just supposed to accept. Like you're a good looking, charming guy, so I accept whatever you do. Yeah, and I mean charming guy.

Speaker 1:

so I accept whatever you do. Yeah, and I mean this film. It's interesting because Raymond doesn't. Charlie cannot charm Raymond into accepting not putting the bed by the window or eating with a fork. He eats with toothpicks and it doesn't matter how charming.

Speaker 2:

Charlie is.

Speaker 1:

Yeah.

Speaker 1:

To the filmmaker's credit, that gives us a way in to understanding something that had been so stigmatized for so long yeah, yeah, and that is what, like by the end, in the interview with the court-appointed psychologist or psychiatrist, charlie's saying like I'm telling you the truth. Do you not understand that I'm telling you the truth? Like it's a really big deal, because he doesn't usually, you know, and we see that in thehouse, like he comes and he's trying to like con her into letting them watch the show, and she's like get out, and then Raymond starts to have you know, to freak out, and so he's like look, I lied to you before, I'm sorry, this is my brother, and if he doesn't get to watch it like and so there's that sort of the protagonist movement of him like just being authentic, because Raymond can't take it Like Raymond requires that Like the $250,000 to give to Charlie.

Speaker 2:

I don't even understand how that's supposed to be Like. That just doesn't. Is it 250 of the, the money that was left to? Oh?

Speaker 1:

yes, that is the implication, cause the Brunner's the trustee, so he gets, he has discretion.

Speaker 2:

I got to use the funds, getting into that as well, just like. That's also worrisome in that, if he's got discretion of how to use the funds, is he being a fiduciary right there?

Speaker 1:

You know, the implication of the movie is that he just really wants Raymond to be where he's safe and comfortable, which is Walt Brook, and that paying court fees. If Charlie really wants to fight, it could potentially you know whatever. I don't think there was any. There didn't seem to be any question, even in Charlie's mind really, that a court would side with Charlie. Okay, so.

Speaker 2:

So just that aspect of it as putting my money expert hat on. Fiduciary, by the way is someone who has the responsibility of making sure that the beneficiary's interests are upheld ahead of anyone else's when it comes to special needs trusts and things like that. Because the beneficiary is so vulnerable and may or may not be able to make their own financial decisions, trusteeship is so important, and if you have a single trustee which Tracy and I have a doozy of a story about that that's a whole podcast on its own.

Speaker 2:

But if you have a single trustee, that can be like really worrisome. You really need two people at least and it's better to have a corporate trustee, meaning like a bank or like a lawyer or something, who has like zero personal interest in it to sign off. And that gets into a whole other thing about the financial vulnerabilities of someone who thinks that a candy bar and a car both cost $100. That just also, like mm, that concerns me too, in part just because I don't think we culturally as a society spend enough time thinking about what happens financially when caretakers are no longer available. It's a big, worrisome problem.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, yeah, all right, so very last thing, and then I'll wrap up, is that in some ways it is mind-boggling that Charlie didn't know he had a brother in many ways. And also there's to a certain extent, like I kind of bought it that in the 60s, because he was put away in like 65, in the 60s they would have sort of shuffled away a neurodivergent kid from this very well-to-do family.

Speaker 2:

That's what happened with one of the Kennedy kids.

Speaker 1:

So Rain man, 1988, barry Levinson directed. We had Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise in the lead roles, and this film in many ways, was revolutionary for 1988. It was the first time that many, many, many Americans were introduced to the concept of autism, and Dustin Hoffman's portrayal of Raymond afforded human dignity to the character, which that's the bit that's revolutionary that prior to this film, the R word was the way that we spoke about people with neurodivergence, and they were disposable. They were what I just said shuttled away, not to be seen from or heard. Not to be seen from or heard, and the ways in which it was not revolutionary. It continued to have this fundamental assumption that Raymond could get better I'm putting quotes around the word better if he could only learn to behave in a more neurotypical manner, if he could only learn to stop repeating words over and over, if he could only learn to make eye contact, if he could only give up his fixation around where the bed is or when he watches if and when he watches the people's court, and whether or not the maple syrup is on the table before the pancakes court, and whether or not the maple syrup is on the table before the pancakes and that even the people in this movie, even the characters who care deeply about Raymond, see his autism as an illness that unfortunately cannot be fixed, and that is the bit that feels very much status quo. It's also the case that since it was many Americans' first introduction to the condition the fact that Raymond was also an autistic savant, many of us sort of expected that savantism to come along with this particular brand of neurodivergence and did a sort of like do math, monkey, do math in the direction of folks who are on the spectrum, which is very unfortunate.

Speaker 1:

I talked about Charlie as a protagonist, because he does change and grow and yet even his grown state he's kind of a jerk. He's not a guy that Susanna should be coming back to like girl. You can do better. And we're meant to sort of part of him as protagonist, as our hero is meant to kind of underscore this skepticism of institutions as the right spot for folks who are wired differently, which I'm not suggesting that institutions are always the right place. Institutions have done a lot of harm to a lot of people, but not for the reasons that this film suggests.

Speaker 1:

This film suggests that, again, if he could just spend more time with his family and learn to act like them, he would be better, and that's the piece that feels a little bit dangerous. Interestingly, I didn't name this in the initial thing, but I read that there was the original ending was the Charlie won custody and the brothers live together, and that got changed to what I think is more realistic, but also like the ending as we received it in the theaters, where the train ride back to Cincinnati undercuts a little bit that skepticism, because we saw that Charlie is ill-equipped to actually care for his brother and also there was that skepticism. So the two things are like in tension with one another, which I think is the case for society, especially in 1988. What did I forget?

Speaker 2:

we talked a little bit about, like the, how much there was well-meaning behind creating this, and like dustin hoffman's year of research, which on the one hand is commendable, on the other hand is similar to animators. No-transcript. It's important that there was like, because I really do feel like there was a before and after in terms of autism for sure, and not just in society, like also, as I mentioned in research funding.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, yeah, some. Well, what are you gonna bring?

Speaker 2:

next week.

Speaker 1:

I'm bringing you my deep thoughts on the truman show all right see you then this show is a labor of love, but that doesn't make it free to produce. If you enjoy it even half as much as we do, please consider helping to keep us overthinking. You can support us at our patreon there's a link in the show notes or leave a positive review so others can find us and and, of course, share the show with your people. Thanks for listening. Our theme music is Professor Umlaut by Kevin MacLeod from incompetechcom. Find full music credits in the show notes. Thank you to Resonate Recordings for editing today's episode. Until next time, remember, pop culture is still culture, and shouldn't you know what's in your head?