Identity Thief
Objective Review
The movie "Identity Thief" provides and accurate depiction of the Lacanian psychoanalytic concept of the collapse of the symbolic through the character of Diana. This depiction is portrayed most explicitly when her and the character Sandy are having dinner at a high end restaurant in Saint Louis. In this scene, Diana is pressed by Sandy to tell him her real name, leading her to confess that she does not know. Diana reveals that she was abandoned as an infant, leaving her without a name or ultimately an identity. This abandonment created a lack of the symbolic, causing her to rely heavily on the imaginary making her a petty but effective identity thief. This revelation through a Lacanian perspective transforms Diana from simply being a thief to a vulnerable and fragile person that survives off of her utilization of the imaginary to earn a living. This scene is further illustrative of the collapse of the symbolic as Diana abruptly resumes the imaginary persona to comically escape their arresting officers. The plot is premised on Diana's effective use of the imaginary and her ability to develop an identity to create an impromptu alibi.
Diana's past and absence of any parental authority, leading her to have no real name, or identity eventually led her to create her own identities by stealing people's actual identities (Catlaw & Marshall, 2018). She was able to do this convincingly by creating elaborate back stories of her assumed identities, demonstrating her reliance on the imaginary in the absence of the symbolic. Presumably, Diana has stolen numerous people's identities and is able to maintain this elaborate facade. Prior to the dinner in Saint Louis, the audience is shown a character who is individualistic and seemingly narcissistic, but ultimately fragile as she discloses after becoming more acquainted with her last unfortunate victim Sandy Bigelow Patterson.
Reaction
For a large portion of "Identity Thief," we the audience find humor in the misfortune of both Sandy and Diana. It is the storyline around Diana though that evokes the greatest shift in perceived sentiment towards a character. Initially we view Diana as a petty thief, hellbent on indulging herself at the great expense of her various victims. She shows little to no remorse, and this is only emphasized through her creative punishment of Sandy on his attempt to bring her back to Colorado to free him from his erroneous criminal charges. She takes on the antagonist role easily. However, gravity is introduced to the plot with Diana's backstory. This pivotal scene shifts the audiences perspective from a negative view to a sympathetic one. There is heavy emphasis of the often overlooked luxury of a stable upbringing and an actual identity. This broadens the spectrum of emotions to move beyond cheap laughs, to a greater understanding of the complexities within the character of Diana that shape her into the extremely self serving person she appears to be. Upon Sandy reclaiming his identity and clearing his name of any wrong doing while landing his dream job, the plot makes us the audience feel a greater sense of elation towards Diana. Despite being in prison, Diana is able to finally create a stable and resilient existence, and this is shown through her friendship with Sandy and his family. Closure is created as a result of developing this significant relationship with the Pattersons. We are able to map this path for Diana from incessant desire to cultivate spontaneous unsustainable relationships to one that is meaningful.
Interpretation
Through the significance of the singular dinner scene in Saint Louis under the Lacanian perspective, we can begin to unpack the complexities of the character Diana. The audience is introduced to Diana at the beginning of the movie as a brash, hard partying person, who attempts to build relationships with complete strangers by buying them drinks on stolen cards. These relationships, though temporary, are extremely gratifying to Diana. This fantasy that Diana resides in is questioned when an irritated bartender claims that she doesn't have any friends because of her obnoxious behavior. When confronted with this stark observation, there is an immediate violent reaction from Diana. This leads to her subsequent arrest and the cascading series of events that consume Sandy Bigelow Patterson's life. After being caught and subdued by the actual Sandy, we the audience can see lavish but shallow lifestyle of Diana. This was afforded through numerous identities that she had stolen that is made obvious to us by the number of forged drivers licenses that she has in her possession.
The Lacanian perspective allows the audience to identify a person who has lived not in accordance with rules that govern a vast majority of society due to the absence of the symbolic in her life because of her abandonment as an infant. She has manufactured her own reality as a result to create a sense of stability. Arguably, Diana created her own personal governing laws after being disillusioned to reality and it laws after having moved around to various foster homes as a child, thus assuming a different identity in each of those respective homes. By creating her own reality and laws, it created stability that was more conducive to her very survival (Callen & Austin, 2016). Through this, she develops an impressive ability to morph into any identity that the given situation necessitates. This challenges the audience's initial assumptions that she was born with traits that make her shallow, manipulative and replaces them with the notion that her experience shaped her into who she is.
It's interesting to see how Diana's immediate reaction to any situation is self-defense. It definitely aligns with the traits you mentioned with the dinner scene in St. Louis, especially that she somewhat builds a wall around her that keeps her emotionally and physically secure, something that shows she may not have always been a terrible person and adapted to the life around her. It's also fascinating seeing how she eventually lets it down by the end in order to restore Sandy's life back to normal, willingly confessing to the identity fraud and being taken away compliantly.
ReplyDeleteI love this scene as highlighting the "both/and scenarios" that Callen & Austin talk about. Diana's story is the epitome of "both/and", she is both a troubled person with a sad past and a criminal who is negativity impacting the lives of innocent people. This scene exemplifies what they were discussing in their article when they say, "ethical problems are not resolved by references to a list of required or prohibited acts but are centered on one's attitude to oneself" (Callen & Austin, 2016, p.32). This dinner scene clarifies that Diana's violent and criminal reactions are a reflection of the negative self-image she has of herself.
ReplyDeleteI like this quote and also think it's very appropriate to compare. So does this mean Diana has grown in self confidence throughout the time with Sandy traveling across the country or perhaps hit a wall of reality?
DeleteI also was interested in the scene in the high end restaurant, and for part of my essay I discussed this as a crucial point in the movie. You bring up an important aspect of this scene that I missed, and now that I reflect on it it is an important part of Diana's character. This being the fact that in this scene she can quickly switch between a more vulnerable state, and a less serious facade. Anytime there is a confrontation that alludes to her underlying insecurities, being that she feels little connection with others, she uses this behavior as a defense mechanism. One example of this is the early scene at the bar, where she is paying for everyone's drinks and they are all nice to her because of it. When she claims that they are her friends the bartender tells her that people like her don’t have friends. Her instant reaction is to double down on her erratic behavior and assault him. When she starts to feel a closer connection with others, specifically Sandy, we see this facade slowly start to fade away, and by the end she appears to be in a much better position.
ReplyDeleteI always enjoy your posts, Ian! I loved that you used this theory to anchor the paper and touched on some very interesting points that I missed. The Lacanian perspective transforms Diana from a mere antagonist into a vulnerable figure, highlighting how her reliance on the imaginary is a survival mechanism rather than a conscious choice to harm others. This is especially poignant given the mental health field has slowly been explored more openly in the American psyche. The conversations we are entertaining about mental health are much different today than they were ten years ago, making this film all the more interesting. While Diana’s behavior is clearly problematic, her actions are revealed to be desperate attempts to create a semblance of stability in a life devoid of a stable identity. The film cleverly uses humor to introduce and then dismantle our initial judgments, replacing them with empathy as we understand the complexities of her character.
ReplyDelete