By: Peter Agban
Reflecting on “The Upside”
Introduction
Bryan Cranston's choice to play Philippe, a man with quadriplegia, in the 2019 movie "The Upside" caused a lot of controversy among people with disabilities and called into question the authenticity of cinematic representation. To properly explore this, it is important to take into account the proposed reasoning and justifications for this casting decision while also addressing and respecting the legitimate anger and protests expressed by disability advocates. The decision to cast Bryan Cranston was made for a variety of reasons, which will be examined in this piece along with the complex and nuanced challenges in balancing artistic freedom and diversity in film.
Financial Considerations
The cost of filming a movie is one of the main arguments in favor of hiring Bryan Cranston as Philippe. Casting well-known performers can be essential in luring investors, as producers frequently face significant obstacles in raising money for their projects. The claim is that Cranston's stardom and popularity may have played a significant role in obtaining the funding required for "The Upside." Without sufficient financing, the movie might not have been produced, depriving viewers of the chance to interact with its topics. We have heard this concept before. Production studios can be exceptionally hesitant on funding unknown and/or disabled actors out of concern for mass appeal. Hiring an already famous entity, like Cranston, is seen as the surest return on investment for a big budget film. This reinforces the “catch 22” of needing to financially invest in minority stars to build their fame and produce more authentic value but they also don’t want to take the risk of a potential loss on a minor star’s lack of mainstream appeal.
Cranston's Acting Ability
Bryan Cranston is praised for his exceptional acting prowess and his versatility as a performer. He is an enticing choice to play a character as complicated as Philippe because he has received praise for his performances in both tragic and comedic movies. Cranston's great acting abilities, according to those who favor this casting decision, allowed him to successfully convey the character's complexity and emotional range. Cranston's performance is credited as giving the plot a sense of reality and emotional impact in a movie that tries to investigate the deep bond between Philippe and his carer Dell. While this doesn’t suggest that he was more or less apt to play this role than another actor, it aligns with the previous concept of studios trying to pick “safe” options that will draw an audience.
Limitation of Opportunities
However, disability advocates have raised a lot of concerns about the casting of able-bodied actors in disabled parts, particularly the way it limits the prospects for disabled performers. Because there are fewer roles that are specifically suited to their experiences and skills, disabled actors frequently face immensely limited opportunities in the entertainment industry. It creates a dilemma that limits possibilities for disabled performers when able-bodied actors are frequently picked as the “safe bet” to play disabled characters. This not only deprives disabled actors of roles that authentically reflect their own experiences but also reinforces misconceptions about disability. Therefore, the casting choices made in films like "The Upside" should be considered within this context, acknowledging the broader implications they have on the accessibility and inclusivity of the industry for disabled actors.
What Does Phillipe Think?
One aspect that I couldn’t explore with my research was Phillipe’s opinion and perspective. It’s a unique situation when you are not simply portraying a fictional character, but representing a real-life person and illustrating their life. Since the main character, Phillipe Pozzo di Borgo, was a real man who passed away this year, I was hopeful that I would find articles and/or statements about his enthusiasm for this casting choice. However, I found no indication about his public opinion. Unfortunately, this leads to many hypothetical assumptions. We could assume that since he said nothing publicly, that there was no lawsuit, and the movie was made, that he behind the scenes approved of these choices. Contrastingly, we could assume that his silence was because he didn’t fully approve, but wanted to maximize his profits and trusted the “business decision”. Lastly, we could assume that he was unhappy with the casting choice but chose for a variety of personal reasons to not engage with the issue at all. His voice, regardless of pro- or anti- would have held significant weight on the impact of this casting decision.
Raising Awareness
Raising public awareness of the multifaceted experiences of people with disabilities and encouraging empathy and understanding among viewers were two of "The Upside"'s main objectives. Some defenders of the choice of casting contend that Bryan Cranston's participation helped the movie reach a wider and more varied audience. According to this idea, using a well-known actor as the lead character can help draw in viewers who might not have been initially interested in the subject. As a result, the film's audience grew, potentially expanding its impact by promoting a better knowledge of issues relating to disabilities.
The choice to cast well-known, physically fit actors in disability parts is not always clear-cut, despite the legitimate concerns about representation and inclusivity in casting. In the world of filmmaking, a movie's popularity and audience appeal can be greatly influenced by its star power. A film might receive a lot of attention thanks to the large fan bases and media presence of famous stars. Such performers have the power to draw attention to significant issues and ideas that might not otherwise achieve public awareness when they take on roles in films with themes based around disability awareness. The issues experienced by people with disabilities may become more widely discussed and more widely known as a result of this greater visibility. Therefore, while the casting of well-known, able bodied actors in disability parts can pose challenges for representation, it can also be used to communicate essential ideas and promote discourse on important topics. The conflict between these two viewpoints highlights the difficulty of casting decisions in the film industry. The ideal solution would be authentic casting and ensuring mainstream celebrities represent all backgrounds, but this issue does not have an overnight fix. However, we cannot forget the frequently used disabled community mantra, “Nothing about us, without us”.
Broader Perspective: Considering Other Works
The Authenticity Success of "The Peanut Butter Falcon"
It is worth noting that in the film "The Peanut Butter Falcon," actor Zack Gottsagen, who has Down syndrome, played a prominent role as Zak. This film is celebrated for its authentic representation, as it cast an actor with a disability in a leading role. Zack Gottsagen's performance received critical acclaim, underscoring the importance of providing opportunities for actors with disabilities to showcase their talents on screen. This contrast highlights the diversity of casting choices in the film industry and the impact of such choices on authentic representation.
Conflicting Opinions around"Daredevil"
In contrast to the casting of non-disabled actors in disabled roles, there are instances in the entertainment industry where actors have received specialized training to portray characters with disabilities authentically. A notable example is Charlie Cox's portrayal of Matt Murdock, a blind lawyer with heightened senses who becomes the superhero Daredevil, in the Marvel series "Daredevil." Cox underwent extensive training and worked with blind consultants to realistically depict a blind character. His performance was widely praised by comic/Marvel fans for its authenticity, but objected by the disabled community, similar to “The Upside”. Intense arguments continue to follow this portrayal as it’s a continuing issue. This is a delicate issue that some disabled persons have chosen to boycott the character and related media. However, some defend the choice noting the superhero stunts and awareness of the character would be much more difficult and potentially dangerous for a blind actor. Again, this is not a definitive stance on the “right” or “wrong” of these choices, but rather bringing light to the nuances of the issue.
Conclusion
There is still discussion about Bryan Cranston's Philippe casting in "The Upside" among both the disabled community and the film business. While recognizing the value of real representation and the necessity for more diversity in casting, it is crucial to take into account all of the different aspects that go into a particular decision. A variety of justifications for the casting choice is woven together by financial factors, Cranston's acting talent, the movie's awareness-raising objectives, the character's history, and the overall success of the movie. It is hoped that these conversations would result in more inclusivity and chances for disabled actors as the business develops while also appreciating the complex dynamics involved in producing a film. As an industry and a society as a whole, we will work toward “nothing about us, without us” and inclusive mainstream success.
Sources:
https://backbonesonline.com/the-upside-of-representation/
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/16/opinions/bryan-cranston-wrong-actor-choice-upside-blake/index.html
https://boldentrance.com/charlie-cox-intentionally-blinded-himself-to-play-daredevil/