The Portrayal of Disabilities in Movies

Amber White8 December 2014STA144

Research question Has the portrayal of disabilities in

American theater released -movies changed significantly since 1970s until 2010, especially with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990?

Background 17 percent of Americans live with a disability of

some kind, yet a smaller percentage of movies feature disability significantly

The majority of those reinforce harmful stereotypes of people with disabilities

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 prohibits discrimination based on disabilities

This may or may not have changed the public cinematic perspective

Background - Rubric Movies included that feature disability in a

somewhat significant way (such as a major character or a noticeable scene)

Will use two sets: 1970 to 1990 and 1990 to 2010

Could only find 128 movies that meet criteria

Background - Modified Bechdel TestSCORE POINT OF EVALUATION 1 There's a disabled character visible

2 Who wants something, and tries to get it

3 Other than a) Death, b) Cure, c) Revenge, or d) by making a fool of themselves

4 Who is not portrayed using other common stereotypes, such as a victim, a mere prop to able- bodied characters, or a phony

5 Who is a developed character in the plot

Background - List of Disabilities List of disabilities for this project not comprehensive: for clarity,

only the disabilities that are the most noticeable Categorized in the following way:

A. Amputee B. Paralysis - includes paraplegia, quadriplegia, spina bifida C. Blindness D. Bone E. Deafness F. Developmental G. Disfigurement - congenital, acquired H. Dwarfism I. General - undefined fantastical, vague portrayal in movie J. Limb K. Motor disorder - cerebral palsy, Tourette’s syndrome L. Speech impairment - includes mutism, stuttering

Background - Disclaimers I did not watch all these movies personally, but

analyzed plot summaries and respected reviews

Although some subjectivity of the ratings is inevitable, I attempted to be as objective and specific as possible while formulating the rubric

The score does not indicate the quality of the movie - it only concerns the perspective on disability

Background - Figures Analysis of movies from 1970 to 2010 From the total number of theatrical releases

during that period (10,979 movies) was drawn a 17-percent set that most specifically focus on disabilities

This is the population from that set: 1,866 movies

The sample size is n: 128 movies (the most that could be identified using criteria of American, theater-released)

Null and Alternative Hypotheses Null hypothesis: The mean rubric ranking of disability-

related movies from 1970 to 1990 is not significantly different from the mean ranking of such movies from 1990 to 2010.

H0: μ2 = μ1

Alternative hypothesis: The mean rubric ranking of disability-related movies from 1970 to 1990 is significantly different from the mean ranking of such movies from 1990 to 2010.

H1: μ2 ≠ μ1

Decision Rule We reject the null hypothesis, H0, when the p-

value is more than +1.96 or less than -1.96. This would be a rare outcome (red).

We accept the null hypothesis, H0, when the p-value is between -1.96 and +1.96. This would be a common outcome.

Data Analysis Two mean t-test Excel data sheet Descriptives Histogram Scatterplots Pie chart

Data Analysis - Test Statistic Two sample t-test

t= .573 p-value=.5677 df=126

Involving the means of the two samples, the hypothesized difference between the sample means, the standard deviations of the samples, and the sizes of the samples

Data Analysis (example of Excel data)

•(converted all of this data, except for the year, into a numerical format for Rcmdr)

Data Analysis - Descriptivesa (1970-1990)

b(1990-2010)

total1970-2010

MEAN 2.937 3.047 2.992

MEDIAN 3 3 3

SD 1.037 1.133 1.079

VAR 1.075 1.284 1.164

N 64 64 128

Data Analysis - Histogram

• Year a= 1970-1990

• Year b= 1990-2010

Data Analysis - Scatterplot 1970-1990

Data Analysis - Scatterplot 1990-2010

Data Analysis - Pie chart of disabilities

a. Amputeeb. Paralysis

-paraplegia,quadriplegia, spina bifida

c. Blindnessd. Bonee. Deafnessf. Developmentalg. Disfigurement -congenital, acquired h. Dwarfismi. General

-fantastical, Undefined/vague portrayal in movie

j. Limb k. Motor disorder

-cerebral palsy, Tourette’s syndromel. Speech impairment

-includes mutism, stuttering

The decision and interpretation of the decision Since p-value= .5677 is between +1.96 and -1.96, this is a

common outcome and so we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Since we failed to reject the null hypothesis, we can conclude that the mean rubric rating of 64 American theater-released films from 1970 to 1990 that feature disability in a major way is not significantly different than the mean rubric rating of 64 American theater-released films from 1990 to 2010 that feature disability in a major way.

Thus, the overall portrayal of disabilities in American theater-released films has not changed significantly from the time intervals of 1970-1990 and 1990-2010.

Conclusions Comparatively, there are few American theater-

released movies that feature disability, and even fewer represent them accurately

The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 did not seem to make a noticeable difference

The time period 1990-2010 merely contained slightly more ratings of 5 and slightly fewer numbers of the other ratings

Future Directions Larger sample size if possible Somehow take into consideration the intent of the movie

and its genre for example, comedies favor making fun of everything

Increase awareness about the true nature of disabilities, as well as people with disabilities relationship between movies and society (a reflection either

way) Help improve this situation and move toward a more

accurate portrayal of this under- and misrepresented minority group

Bibliography Darwood, M. (n.d.). Representation of Disability. In Media Studies A2. Retrieved December 7,

2014, from http://mdawood.weebly.com/disability.html

Disability Movie Stereotypes and Cliches. (2014). In Disability Movies. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://disabilitymovies.com/disability-movie-cliches/

Ebert, R. (2014). Movie Reviews and Ratings. In RogerEbert.com. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.rogerebert.com/

Nash Information Services, LLC. (2014). Top Movies of Each Year. In The Numbers. Retrieved from http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/#tab=year

Timmons, J. (2003, March). Movies with Characters with Disabilities. In Teaching FIlm, Television, and Media. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.tc.umn.edu/~rbeach/teachingmedia/student_units/module5/disabilities_timmons.pdf

Steele, S. (2014). More on the Bechdel Test. In Pass the Bechdel Test. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.passthebechdeltest.com/what-is-the-bechdel-test/

Annotated BibliographyDarwood, M. (n.d.). Representation of Disability. In Media Studies A2. Retrieved

December 7, 2014, from http://mdawood.weebly.com/disability.html

Darwood explains, in staccato essay format, the protrayal of people with disabilities in film and other media avenues. The most common stereotypes that she lists are ten in number and are taken from the work of Paul Hunt. Darwood also explains two different theoretical models of disability and analyzes two specific movies about characters with disabilities.

This is a valuable resource in viewing cinematic portrayal of disability without going into excessive detail. Darwood is brief, but precise, and her site aids as a launching pad for futher research.

Annotated BibliographyDisability Movie Stereotypes and Cliches. (2014). In Disability Movies. Retrieved

December 1, 2014, from http://disabilitymovies.com/disability-movie-cliches/

This website, written “by, for, and about people with disabilities,” serves as a commentary on specific movies about disabilities, as well as general observations of such movies overall. It focuses on a number of specific movies and also explains some common movie stereotypes and examples. Also listed is a “Hall of Shame” of disliked films and a “Favorites” page.

Disability Movies serves as a useful resource of the perspective of individuals with disabilities themselves, critiquing the current state of movies factually and creatively.

Annotated BibliographyEbert, R. (2014). Movie Reviews and Ratings. In RogerEbert.com. Retrieved December

1, 2014, from http://www.rogerebert.com/

Roger Ebert, the late film critic, still offers his extensive array of reviews on this website. In each review, Ebert interweaves the movie summary with his own observations, opinions, and humor. Ebert was not only a film critic, but also a voice from the disabled community, especially in his later years.

He takes a solid perspective on disability-related movies, and serves as a credible source given his experience in, and respect from, the disabled community. An insightful, articulate, and entertaining writer, Ebert’s words offer rich and understanding to many films.

Annotated BibliographyNash Information Services, LLC. (2014). Top Movies of Each Year. In The Numbers.

Retrieved from http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/#tab=year

This is where “data and the movie business meet.” True to its tagline, The Numbers contains a myriad of information concerning box office sales, dvd/blu-ray sales, theatrical records, theatrical release schedule, movie budgets, and latest news. It also has a movie index, which lists all the movies released in theaters since 1915, as well as the highest-grossing movie per year.

This is a good place to collect solid figures, especially when one wants to know the number of movies released during a specific time period and how well, financially, they were received by the public.

Annotated BibliographySteele, S. (2014). More on the Bechdel Test. In Pass the Bechdel Test.

Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.passthebechdeltest.com/what-is-the-bechdel-test/

In this website, Steele promotes the campaign Pass the Bechdel Test, which she calls a “grassroots campaign appealing to the film industry.” As a filmmaker, she includes different aspects of the campaign on her site, including research, questions, information from filmmakers, ways to get involved, and, of course, the quiz itself, which is a rubric designed to evaluate movies based on their representation of women.

Steele gives rich information on this quiz and seems willing to put forth the effort to enact change. She also includes information on the instances during which the Bechdel Test would be impractical to use.

Annotated BibliographyTimmons, J. (2003, March). Movies with Characters with Disabilities. In Teaching FIlm,

Television, and Media. Retrieved December 1, 2014, from http://www.tc.umn.edu/~rbeach/teachingmedia/student_units/module5/disabilities_timmons.pdf

Timmons lists the title of the movie, the year, the disability featured, and a summary condensed into one or two sentences.

In this simple, but valuable list, one can launch into further investigation. Skimming through the bare-bones descriptions Timmons writes gives one a way to narrow down which movies to research and which to skip, if one is focusing on specific time periods and disabilities.