I think I'm going to end up going way hard on "The Blindside" because although it is a well executed, finely acted, and emotionally rewarding film i feel that there is a sort of evil magic at play that totally bypassed the subconscious. Perpetuating a lot of things that the movie feels like it goes out of its way to sidestep.
What I instantly loved about "The Blind Side" was how it takes the time to not only create, but observe and allow to play out the small but meaningful moments that expose character. Inevitably, these small moments we observe with Michael sort of reaffirm a sense of structure and order that may have been missing from the Tuohy household before his arrival. And likewise, the small moments Bullock's character get to have inevitably make Michael a more fulfilled, less guarded human being. However, the major problem I have with "The Blind Side" is a fundamental one; if you are going to proudly proclaim "Based on the Extraordinary True Story" at the top of the key art, then shouldn't you make the movie about the person at the center of said story.
This would be Michael Oher, an All-American who later went on to be the offensive tackle for the Baltimore Ravens. The movie kicks starts at a point in Michael's life where he is coasting on the fumes of the goodwill of others as a stranger Michael is living with convinces a coach at the private shool at the center of "The Blind Side" that Michael's athleticism would be a great barter for admission. From this point on, Michael is treated less than a human being (by the conventions of the story) and more like a prop that gets pulled from one point in the story to another. We get flashed of his past, of the disparity this young man witness at a young age and the poverty he was born from, but never any kind of proper exposition or examination of how it has all affected Michael. Instead of this, we get some lip service in the beginning of the story about how he scored 98 percent on protective instincts or whatever that plays way too much into the rest of the story and lazily is used as a device to explain his general demeanor to the audience. Its basically a way for everyone to like Michael without him having to say very much.
And why doesn't he say much. Its important to note that Michael was born in 1986 so at the time the movie takes place, what we are watching is a snapshot of 2003, but if feels like the 50's. The Tuohy's are filthy rich people and there is never a moment the film doesn't remind you about all the Taco Bells they own (how is that for product placement). But on the flip side, the only people of color in the film reside in "the Ghetto" and they paint it as a place to exist in complete opposition to the grand sweeping halls, shiny cars, and expensive salads that signpost the extravagant lifestyle of the Tuohy's. The movie plays out this particular bit of racial politics as if the civil rights movement hasn't happened at all and that post modern apartheid instead is the model of modern living.
And maybe this is the other problem I had with "The Blind Side" is that it plays to be a bit of poverty porn. Many accused "Precious" of the same thing, but where that film differs is that it didn't use poverty as a device for sympathy. Yes, Precious was poor and abused, but she didn't let those things define her spirit and who she was as a person and instead used EDUCATION as a means of bettering herself and her situation. The conditions she had to endure explained the battles that she faced and overcome - not to be used as just a backdrop. In "The Blind Side" this is exactly the case, Michael's poverty is expressly used as a device to make Leigh Anne Tuohy more saintly and your heart goes, "look at this well meaning well off white lady helping out this poor black prop...i mean boy." But a prop he is as Michael's size leads him to a natural affinity for football and a desire for education or just enough education to get him to the big leagues. If you think about that too hard....its insulting on its own terms.
Again, there is a great deal of attention payed to how everyone else deals with Michael, but no real understanding of how he must be interpreting the whole thing. SJ, the youngest of the Tuohy clan, takes to Michael instantly and they have a very natural, very fitting relationship in the film. However, even Bullocks character initially is uneasy just over not knowing him and having him spend the night for the first time (something she comes to grips with) as does the patriarch (an understated Tim McGraw). There is a great deal of time played to how Michael's teachers learn to help him, how the coach must learn to communicate with him, and how Collins (the daughter) learns to live with him. The whole Collins thing was very awkward in the story because it subversively paints an incorrect picture of Michael's intentions, then doesn't even bother to allow him to voice any difference. To cut to the chase, its not just that Michael doesn't have a voice in the story, its that the story vehemently refuses to even give him the time and consideration to have one. As if its trying to make a life story from someone life they don't have the rights to...so they tell it from everyone Else's perspective. With Michael just looking happy to be there most of the time.
Its funny to me that Michael really doesn't get a voice until the whole bit with the NCAA happens and then the questioning is oddly done by the only other African American you see in the story that doesn't stay in the projects. Which leads to yet another racial snafu - now you are essentially turning your movie on its ear asking if these good meaning white folks were taking advantage of a situation for personal and/or financial gain. Something that I didn't really think about until then. But then again, This is the point in the movie that the catharsis takes place and the movie itself admits to making Michael just a prop. Michael isn't asked for his input or opinion on anything involving him in the story. The decision to adopt Michael seems to be something that happened independent of his knowledge, its not clear (by the story) if Michael had any real interest in football (at the beginning of the film, his passion seems more basketball than anything) the decision to have a car felt like it wasn't his at all (I mean he mentions wanting a drivers license because from what i understand, any kid that didn't grow up having a bed would just love to have something to identify their place in society). But it seems like the car thing came into play to perfectly set up the scenario in which Michael proves his loyalty to SJ and the Tuohy family.
So when Michael is shown a mirror essentially by the NCAA big wig and actually questions Leigh Anne's intentions (of which we know are good) then it feels a little late in the game. Its as if the prop suddenly woke up, looked around, acknowledge that it was a prop and then went "Okay, I have something to say now". This is the first time that we hear Leigh Anne ask Michael if he even wanted to play football. Glad we got the basics out in the third act.
Like I said, this story is a great great testament to the power and meaning of family. I really really wish it didn't play the racial politics as two extremes on a page....especially since what we are looking at is 2003!! But hey, this wouldn't be the first or last film that had negative things to say about a particular group of people. If you grew up in the 80's and 90's then you know good and the hell well that movies like "Colors," "South Central," "Dangerous Minds," "Boyz N the Hood,"Higher Learning" and a slew of others committed way worse or way less offenses (really depends on how you look at it). I guess with this case, I didn't expect to get so Blind Sided by something so heart warming.
PS. Bullock gives a very good performance, but I kept scratching my head as to how this translated into a Best Actress Nod at the academy awards. Its her best acting to date, but its standard Bullock all the way.
