Out of the Way, Ah-nold: Sensitive Man Is Here

A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. So goes the ethos of masculinity from the western right through to some of Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters. But a funny thing happened on the way to the box office this season: Nobody got “Carter,” Sylvester Stallone’s latest take on the man’s man role, and after yet another big-budget action flop, even the uber-masculine and once ultra-reliable Arnold Schwarzenegger may be reaching the end of his days.

Perhaps anticipating that Ah-nold will not be back, this season’s male box-office stars are charting an uncertain course. Without the secure footing afforded by a traditional code of masculinity, several of our movie heroes have found themselves adrift in their latest films. Literally at sea is Tom Hanks in “Cast Away” as a FedEx efficiency expert marooned on a deserted island. In “The Family Man,” Nicolas Cage is a Wall Street big shot who’s wholly ill-equipped for his sudden transfer to the unsettling environment of suburban New Jersey. And advertising executive Mel Gibson, meanwhile, is plagued by his sudden extrasensory ability to hear female thoughts in “What Women Want.”

They’re all fish out of water, of course, each plunged into an adversarial situation resulting from a catastrophic event: Hanks’ Chuck Noland survives a plane crash, Cage’s Jack Campbell narrowly evades a holdup, and Gibson’s Nick Marshall barely escapes a bathtub electrocution. But the ways in which these men grapple with their newfound challenges says a lot about the 21st century male, and perhaps a lot about what men--and women--want.

That Hanks, Cage and Gibson--three of our biggest stars--have all turned up in what one critic dismissively dubbed “male weepies” suggests that moviegoers are ready to embrace a different sort of hero. While it’s both reductive and premature to propose that the nearly simultaneous releases of “Cast Away,” “The Family Man” and “What Women Want” herald a shift toward a newly sensitive and fully sensitized male movie archetype, these successful films (cumulative domestic box office take is more than $400 million).

If there’s a godfather to this trend, it’s psychologist John Gray, whose “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus” metaphors have become pervasive fixtures in current gender ideology. Having evolved from best-selling books to board game and, recently, talk show, Gray’s notions have permeated our cultural conversation and opened up the dialogue on men and their self-concept. For these reasons, among others, Hanks, Cage and Gibson’s latest on-screen personae are postmodern heroes who resonate profoundly with American audiences.

It’s clear that the heroes of films such as “Cast Away,” “The Family Man” and “What Women Want” collectively herald a cinematic era of genre-stretching (if not gender-swapping) possibility. That each of those protagonists learns to privilege patience, introspection, tolerance, sensitivity, nurturance and self-awareness in place of once-vaunted attributes such as brawn, aggression, virility, control and professional success suggests we’re ready for a new kind of male hero.

And as each of them struggles to define exactly what a postmodern man’s gotta do to survive--whether it’s fighting the elements on an island, struggling with a suburban existence or learning to take women on their own terms--each man’s odyssey teaches him to understand his masculinity and, more importantly, himself.

Variations on a Theme

In “Cast Away,” Chuck Noland runs his job and even his dating schedule with the precision timing of a Swiss watch. But when a harrowing plane crash leaves him clinging to a tiny island in the South Pacific, his waterlogged timepiece is rendered obsolete. Forced to begin his life from scratch, Noland must learn the most basic survival skills: how to find shelter, make a fire, forage for food, pull a bad tooth and combat loneliness. He does the latter with the help of a Wilson volleyball, one of several seemingly useless objects that washes up on the island.

Painting a face--in his own blood--on the ball, Noland anthropomorphizes Wilson as a child would a favorite toy. More than one critic has pointed out that the film’s most magnetic relationship is not that between Noland and his girlfriend (played by Helen Hunt), but that between Noland and Wilson. It’s hardly the traditional definition of male prowess, but by falling back on his inner child and relinquishing the need to control his environment, Noland manages to beat the odds.

Just as Chuck Noland’s newfound dilemma means he’s no longer the master of his domain but merely an insignificant part of it, erstwhile cool cat Jack Campbell’s sudden downsizing to the Jersey suburbs in “The Family Man” is the stuff of his worst nightmares. After the calmly arrogant, meticulously attired Campbell averts a robbery, he offhandedly remarks to the would-be thief (Don Cheadle) that his own life is perfect. Not true, insists the stranger, apparently an agent of divine intervention, before dispatching Jack into the bizarro universe of New Jersey.

When Jack awakens the next morning, he’s shocked to find himself in blue-collar hell, toiling as a tire salesman and married to the woman (Tea Leoni) he ditched at an airport 13 years earlier. Worse, he’s saddled with a mortgage, two kids and a wardrobe that wouldn’t make the cut at Kmart (the look on Jack’s face when he opens his closet: priceless). Like Chuck Noland trying to crack open a coconut or build a fire, Jack initially finds the most simplistic challenges of his new lifestyle both excruciating and inscrutable. Diapering a child seems a Herculean task, while a night at the bowling alley is an exercise in humility: Desperately trying to keep the ball out of the gutter, he exhorts himself, “You ran with the bulls in Pamplona; you jumped out of an airplane. . . . you can do this!”

For Jack, the moral of the story is a lesson in sacrificing and yielding control. Through his trials, he becomes a selfless partner, a loving father and a charitable employee. Given the chance to return to his slick corporate lifestyle (evocatively filmed by cinematographer Dante Spinotti in harsh blue hues that contrast with the warm earth tones of Jack’s New Jersey life), he’s not so sure he wants to go back.

Likewise, Nick Marshall’s sudden ability to perceive “What Women Want” at first seems less a blessing than a curse. Before his transformation, Nick is a smug and egotistical cad, according to his ex-wife, “a man’s man who doesn’t get what women are about.” After his ill-fated encounter with a blow-dryer, Marshall’s new alternate universe is a cacophony of feminine thoughts, many of which criticize him. Once he begins to see the potential of his new gift, however, Nick turns it to his advantage.

Though he initially uses it to pilfer the marketing ideas of his rival, Darcy Maguire (Helen Hunt), Nick eventually realizes that professional success means little compared with the opportunity to become a caring dad, a kinder boss, an adept lover and a more sensitive soul. Nick’s lesson is about opening his ears as well as his heart.

It seems no accident that these films’ success coincides with the decline in popularity of the action movie, once a staple of the male moviegoing diet. Former box-office champs Schwarzenegger and Stallone, at 53 and 54, respectively, are no longer credible as action heroes: Both “End of Days” and “Get Carter” bombed at the box office. As yet unable to find much success in movies where they play mere mortals, Schwarzenegger and Stallone have seen their fan base erode; unless they can reinvent themselves on screen, they may be in the twilight of their careers.

Action Still Lives, but Matures a Bit

By contrast, Gibson (“Lethal Weapon”) and Cage (“Con Air”) have also found success as action heroes, but as these actors get older and the action genre less forgiving, they are finding themselves better suited to more earthly entertainment. Ditto Bruce Willis, whose recent success in psychological thrillers (“The Sixth Sense,” “Unbreakable”) and family films (“Disney’s the Kid”) indicates that his “Die Hard” days may be a thing of the past.

Which doesn’t mean the action genre is dead altogether, but it may be taking on more humanistic shadings. Two of last year’s big action films, “Gladiator,” (starring Russell Crowe) and “The Patriot” (with Gibson) feature reluctant warriors, family men who would rather farm than fight. Even Cage’s character in the deplorable “Gone in 60 Seconds” makes a reluctant return to bad-boy action stunts merely to save his little brother. (Only “M:I-2” and “X-Men” hold to the traditional action formula; both of those films had a built-in fan base).

The forthcoming “Spider-Man” appears to be avoiding the predictable pitfalls of testosterone-driven action movies: Witness the nontraditional casting of the introspective and physically slight Tobey Maguire in the title role. At the same time, it’s worth noting--and much ink has already been expended on this point--that we are finally seeing strong women succeed in action movies. Both “Charlie’s Angels” and “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” depict heroines as agile as they are intelligent.

And since movies often reflect our zeitgeist, then consider this: The nation’s first lady was recently elected to political office in her own right. Not incidentally, her husband earned his highest presidential approval ratings when he was at his most vulnerable. Note to Sly and Arnold: Maybe boys do cry after all.