******SPOILERS******SPOILERS*******SPOILERS
Robdemanc wrote:
I liked parts of that movie and I thought it was good they were trying to show what Autism was to mainstream audiences. But I thought the end where Bruce Willis gets the boy to look him in the eye and then they hug was a bit out of place.
But I liked the bit where he had to cover the child between those two thundering trains. That bit really put across the sensory issues I sometimes get in busy traffic.
I just saw it for the first time.
As far as the sensory issues they showed touch aversion also.
They showed wandering, a big issue with classically Autistic children
They explained he was not "ret*d" but his problem is he takes too much information in, another word the "Intense World Theory" a dozen years before that theory was published.
The ending did make my skin crawl but the NT's in the film tried to get him to look them in the eye a number of times.
Simon adjusts to radical changes in his life much better than most NT's, which is unrealistic.
The scene on the ledge where he picks up the gun and shoots the bad guy is totally unrealistic but also shows the autistic boy knows good from bad.
From a 2018 perspective, the autism portrayal is on a scale of 1 to 10 is a 5 maybe a 6. But this film was released in 1998, just before HFA/Aspergers became mainstream, before the Neurodiversity/Autism Rights movements, and before we were sick of male autistic savant portrayals. The film was not made to spread autism acceptance, it was a Bruce Willis vehicle, a Hollywood action flick. So for is time and purpose it was a pretty good portrayal.
_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity
“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman