Asperger’s syndrome is an internally dramatic condition. Outwardly, the person comes off as antisocial, but that’s not the inner truth. Aspies don’t provide facial expressions that cue the insight into their minds. Also, they have trouble reading facial expressions and understanding language subtleties.
It doesn’t diminish my admiration of Hugh Dancy any to say that he doesn’t quite get it in the indie rom-com “Adam” (now on DVD), about a young astronomy buff who has never left New York City on his own, and rarely leaves his apartment … until he meets schoolteacher Beth (Rose Byrne), who has problems of her own but still tries to bring him out of his shell. (Yes, “Adam” casts a Brit and an Aussie as Americans, but you’d never know they are foreign until you watch the special features interviews and their accents are revealed.)
I think Dancy is a fine actor — he’s great in “The Jane Austen Book Club” — but I don’t know if “Adam” really gets at the truth of Asperger’s. Rather, Adam comes off as a toned-down Rain Man or Forrest Gump, with a pinch of Holden Caulfield mixed in.
Adam is a dramatic character portraying a syndrome that isn’t outwardly dramatic. For example, when he uncovers a white lie from Beth, he explodes and rips apart her apartment, grabbing his head in frustration that neurotypicals commit small lies that he doesn’t catch. (I’m looking forward to exploring the phenomenon of lying further when I watch “The Invention of Lying,” which also recently hit video.)
In the end, Adam is likable, but more as a caricature than a character.
My criticism is a little silly, because it’s totally possible that an Aspie could have the personality of Adam, including the tantrums (for the sake of simplicity, my comments about Asperger’s in this column are broad). It’s just that it seemed like such an easy way out to give Adam a temper.
Another problem is that when Beth asks a psychologist about Asperger’s, the doctor explains it like she’s reading directly from a textbook. That’s a little too After School Specially. Also, Adam’s tendency to ramble on about astronomy is a bit cartoonish. Talkativeness about topics that aren’t of interest to the listener is a common (and easy to portray) Aspie trait, but Adam is 29 and he knows he has Asperger’s, so I’m not sure why he keeps launching into spiels on telescopes, Saturn, etc. Beth always has to butt in and stop him; he should be able to stop himself just by exercising basic self-awareness.
Still, some scenes are such gems that “Adam” will always have a place in the catalogue of Asperger’s films (another, the Claire Danes-starring “Temple Grandin,” comes out later this year). For example, Beth helps Adam by showing him a series of typical, relaxed postures as they sit in chairs opposite each other (Aspies learn to blend in through mimicry, since they lack the mechanism to develop body language naturally). In another scene, Beth and Adam stare at each other in a mirror together (those with eye-contact troubles can fake it by looking at foreheads).
And after Adam’s tantrum, Rose says “F*** Asperger’s. You’re a child.” That brings up an interesting point. Asperger’s is unquestionably a real thing, but Aspies are human beings, so they have the capability of acting childish or using a condition as an excuse for behavior. In that scene, is Adam acting like a child (a pathetic trait) or is he genuinely a child (a sympathetic trait), socially speaking? It’s hard for Beth to know, and it’s hard for a viewer to know, but it’s a fascinating question.
I feel bad for saying that “Adam” didn’t quite connect with me emotionally. After all, it’s about a person who has trouble connecting emotionally, so it’s kind of a ridiculous criticism. Yet I feel there was a better film to be made, and they didn’t quite get there. I applaud the effort, though. If nothing else, “Adam” is an entertaining introduction to Asperger’s.
Comments
I agree with most of what was said. As someone who objects to the generalization of AS people being childish (versus child like), I have known plenty of NTs (most it seems) who are more childish than I would ever dream of being. Many seem to have a difficult time accepting responsibility for themselves.
Additionally, as for the talking part, I was only recently diagnosed and yet I’ve been aware of my talking issues (and the ADD that adds to that). It’s only been in recent years that I’ve begun to understand better ways to get a grasp on it. I have tried many of the suggested techniques most of my life to no avail when social anxiety or even excitement kicks in. I could use someone to get my back, to give me a code word to help me better catch myself when excessive talking is triggered.
And so there I am, able to manage anger without blaming but having extreme difficulty in controlling my talking (despite really really disliking this aspect of my behavior and having success in modifying other behaviors).
Thanks for the good article. 🙂# Posted By Claire | 9/3/11 4:06 PM
“Adam” is a frustrating film. Overall, the film and the actor don’t seem to understand Asperger’s, yet a few scenes apparently ring true (I’m saying that after re-reading my post, although truthfully, I don’t remember many good things about this movie). Adam could be a real person, but some of his traits should not be attributed to his condition (or, at least, shouldn’t be considered universal to his condition). I think Max on “Parenthood” is a much better portrayal of an Aspie, and I suppose Claire Danes’ “Temple Grandin” would be an extreme-but-textbook case (I haven’t seen the movie, but I know a bit about Grandin), but until there is a variety of Asperger’s characters on TV and film to compare and contrast, we won’t really have a clear picture of the definition and range of traits associated with the condition. Good for “Adam” for trying, at least. Thanks for the comment.# Posted By John Hansen | 9/3/11 10:25 PM