2e: Twice Exceptional Movie Review

2e: Twice Exceptional is a low-budget documentary with heart. There’s nothing fancy about this peek into the lives of twice-exceptional teens, their parents, and their teachers.

But just the existence of this documentary is revolutionary enough.

2e?

The average reader’s first question is obvious: 2e? What’s that? I wrote a long discourse on the topic which you can access here. However, the short answer is that a twice-exceptional child is both gifted and has a disability. That disability could be physical, emotional, neurological. But no matter what the disability, the end result is that the disability often masks the giftedness.

There have been some movies made about 2e people without identifying them as such. The most prominent that comes to mind is My Left Foot, about a child so physically compromised, he couldn’t communicate what was happening in his very active brain. It is a dramatic and beautiful movie.

In contrast, this documentary focuses in on real, everyday teens fighting the battle between their intellect and the issues that compromise their ability to access education, communicate, and achieve. There’s not a lot of drama here, just a clear look at the hard work of supporting these students into adulthood.

What you’ll see

This one-hour documentary is long on direct interviews. Parents explain their journey from thinking they were raising typical kids to being plunged into the chaos of raising a child with special needs. Teachers talk about their experiences working with this difficult, but rewarding, population.

The focus, however, is on the kids themselves. And in this movie, they make a compelling argument for why we need more educational flexibility. Many of these students argue that without their 2e-dedicated school (Bridges Academy in Los Angeles), they would have been lost in a system not equipped to handle them.

The drama centers on Pi Day, when the students compete to memorize Pi to the furthest amount of digits. Punctuated with students struggling to perform the digits they have memorized, we hear from the students themselves about their challenges and their dreams.

Limits exposed

The limits of this documentary mirror our society as a whole. With its dense population and surfeit of wealthy donors, L.A. is the sort of place where such a school can exist. In most places, such as my county where our only school serving 2e students just closed, there is neither the large number of 2e students nor the concentration of wealth to support such a school.

The limits of this documentary point out the limits in our society as a whole. In most places in this country, a 2e student is lucky to get a couple of teachers throughout their school years who understand and connect with them. It’s hard enough for gifted students to find teachers trained in the special needs of giftedness. (Most teacher trainings do not require study of gifted learners.)

But most teachers have absolutely no training in how to serve the needs of gifted students with disabilities.

Awareness is key

Documentaries like this one can help by spreading awareness of these students’ existence, their great potential, and their educational needs. By the end of the movie, it’s clear how much these kids have to offer society. Many similar kids, spread around the world, are not receiving the support they need. They are languishing in special education programs that do not support their academic needs. They are bullied and emotionally harmed by fellow students and teachers in regular education. Their parents are told they need medication and therapy.

The teachers in the documentary make a strong case for an educational approach that is sadly rare in our society: instead of focusing on these students’ deficits, they focus on their strengths and interests. This is messy, complicated education. It’s expensive and the payoff is sometimes not obvious. It’s very hard to quantify.

But when you see these students move past their disabilities as they shine in their abilities, you can see that it’s all worth the trouble.

Learn more:

Visit the film’s homepage to learn more, join their email list, and find out about screenings.

This isn’t what we meant when we said ‘equal’

I was inspired to muse on the changing way we depict women when my family went to see the most recent Star Wars film. The previews, of course, were geared toward audiences that might see a Star Wars film. Given the new emphasis in the Star Wars series on female characters, we got an ample preview of action movies featuring “strong” women.

Women shooting, women fighting, women yelling, women killing.

Now, please don’t get me wrong: I love seeing physically strong, active women on screen. The days of helpless women being tied to train tracks and dancing on chairs in fear of a mouse are over, and good riddance. Women’s bodies should be valued and celebrated as much as men’s.

However, these suddenly ubiquitous depictions of “strong” women have a problem:

Women aren’t the same as men.

The Star Wars movie progressed as they always do, and our heroine was pitted against a pack of weapon-wielding guards. Yes, I know that this is movie violence and that she was assisted by The Force, but she was depicted as resisting several large, well-trained male fighters with the force in her rather small, light-boned female body.

In She’s Not There, Jennifer Finley Boylan’s memoir about her transition from male to female, she writes that as her body’s testosterone was suppressed and she added estrogen, she could see daily changes in her body. She started to lose upper body strength and needed men in her band to help load her amp into the van.

This was a woman who had spent decades as a male. She has the heavy bone structure that testosterone created, the larger, stronger muscles. But within months, she started to experience the reality of being a woman:

Women are equal to men, but we are not the same.

I’m not sure why this concept is a problem for the human brain to grasp. We can offer equal opportunity to all people at the same time as acknowledging that we are different. For example, people with African ancestors have a higher risk of sickle cell anemia. To say so is not racism. To deny them healthcare—equal treatment—is racism.

It is not sexist to say that women are generally physically weaker than men. Yes, there are physically weak men and physically strong women within the spectrum of humanity. But in general, if you give a physically average woman and a physically average man the same martial arts training, the woman will have no chance in a test of pure physical strength. It is not sexist to say this. It is, however, sexist to deny women the opportunity to use their bodies however they wish, including training to be Jedi warriors.

So what’s the problem with showing women as physically equal to men? These are just movies, right?

The problem is that when we insert women into roles that are basically written for men, we depict them in the same violent way we depict our male “heroes.”

We should celebrate women and the strengths we bring.

Here are some facts about how violence breaks down by sex:

  • Nearly all stranger-on-stranger murders are committed by men.
  • Mass murders are overwhelmingly committed by men.
  • When women do kill, they are most likely to kill in self-defense.

When we create movies showing women acting like men, is it equality? Or is it another way of putting on our cultural blinders?

Rebecca Solnit’s Men Explain Things to Me, the essay and then the book of the same name, hit people with its bluntness about the problem: Our culture doesn’t face and name the real issue. We don’t have a problem with violence. We have a problem with male violence. If we suddenly only had the violence that women commit, we’d feel we had been transported to some sort of pie-in-the-sky utopia.

Everyone from historians to social scientists to biologists offer partial explanations for this state of affairs, but devising a solution seems beyond us. And one reason we haven’t found a solution is that we’ve gone from ignoring male violence to pretending that violence has no gender. We put an automatic weapon in the hands of a female action hero and call it “equality.”

We need to depict women’s real stories, even when they are fictional.

What we can gain from seriously depicting women’s stories is the experience of people who have spent their lives with less physical power than half of the human race. When you know that other stronger, more violent human beings could be targeting you on a daily basis, it changes your relationship to the world. I know some males who would disagree with this, but remember: they’ve never lived as women. If you’re male and you don’t believe me, ask a few transgender women, and you’ll hear the same story. We have an undeniably different relationship to the world than cisgender men do.

What if women suddenly had more physical power?

In her novel The Power, Naomi Alderman posits a near future in which girls start to be born with the power to kill anyone without using brute physical force. In other words, suddenly the balance is shifted. The world we live in is one where if an average male gets his hands around the neck of an average woman, the fight is over. But what if she could zap him with an electrical charge strong enough to stop his heart before his hands can even get near?

In Alderman’s fictional world, the power shifts everything, and women start to behave like men. But in our real world, no such power exists. Yes, on screen Rae may be able to throw a 6-foot, 200-pound male off of her small female body, but in our real world, that’s not the usual end to things.

We have to work with what we’ve got, which is that women are not the same as men.

But we are equal.

Luckily, Star Wars didn’t stop there. In the movie, an incredibly tall, long-necked, purple-haired Laura Dern actually does show that women are different—and equal. Instead of blasting back at a bigger, stronger opponent, she tries to outfox them. It’s the hotheaded “flyboy” at her side who foils her plan, which is beautifully female while also demonstrating strong leadership.

When the time comes for violence as a last resort, Dern’s character does what women have done throughout the ages when a stronger aggressor won’t let her have agency over her own body. She turns her body into a weapon.

Solnit writes, “…Violence is first of all authoritarian. It begins wth this premise: I have the right to control you.”

Giving women physical power over other human beings is no sort of equality.

These depictions simply extend the problem of male violence with a fantasy that female violence is some sort of parity.

The reality is the women are not men, and that’s good. Diversity makes us strong. Our value as human beings should not be measured on the basis of our physical strength alone. It’s not progress to get more women in movies if they are simply acting in parts written for men.

Movie Review: Everything would be fine if you just got over that homeschooling thing….

A number of friends have recommended the film “Captain Fantastic” to me. None of them were homeschoolers, and when they recommended it they didn’t even mention the homeschooling angle.

Perhaps, given where I live, they were more riveted by the Buddhism and the “stick it to the man” angles.

However, upon reading the reviews, I was looking forward to this film. It sounded like a magnified version of so many homeschoolers I know:

  • trying to raise their kids away from the corrupting influence of popular culture
  • trying to get back to what was good about traditional culture
  • trying desperately not to replicate the mistakes that they think their parents made

“Captain Fantastic” was all that. The film starts with a comic book version of what I know to be the days of many homeschoolers I am acquainted with: The dad is spending real, focused time with his kids. They are in nature. He has borrowed a tradition that he feels had value in the past and updated it [sorta] for his own modern uses.

The movie starts with homeschool bootcamp. (Admit it, homeschoolers, haven't you wished your kids would go along with something like this?)
The movie starts with homeschool bootcamp. (Admit it, homeschoolers, haven’t you wished your kids would go along with something like this?)

Keeping the expectations low

I’m not concerned about the comic book nature of the film. By virtue of the medium, films need to present concentrated versions of reality, the same way that haute cuisine reduces an honest broth to a concentrated perfection only served by professionals.

The homeschoolers in this movie are to homeschooling what superheroes are to police officers with their feet on the pavement.

That said, couldn’t this one movie, which is quirky and wonderful in so many ways, have risen above the obvious cliché that it ends with? Really, can all our problems be solved by sending our kids to school?

Apparently, they can.

What’s great about this movie

Here’s a recap of how this movie progresses:

  • Homeschooling family comes out of the woods to attend Mom’s funeral
  • Homeschooled kids find out how essentially weird they are
  • Homeschooled kids also find out how well-educated they are in comparison to their schooled peers
  • Well-intentioned grandparents attempt to take kids from loving, though misguided, father
  • Kids decide to stick with dad

All dressed up for Mom's funeral!
All dressed up for Mom’s funeral!

This is all pretty good, yes? It hits the major points:

  • Yep, homeschoolers are weird and guess what? We don’t care!
  • Granted, though some homeschoolers are ill-educated louts, homeschooling can be more effective than school for motivated learners.

It doesn’t sugarcoat things, but also doesn’t demonize parents who made admittedly weird decisions.

Then… the dénouement:

  • As a result of seeing The Real World, the oldest homeschooler, who has been accepted into “every top university” and clearly loves learning, decides to forego college entirely. Wha’?
  • As a result of seeing how great his children have turned out in comparison with kids in The Real World, the dad decides to… move back to The Real World and… send his kids to school? Double-wha’?

Really, I don’t think a movie has ever gone so wrong in the last few short minutes than this one did. The ending of this movie seems more intent on sticking it to anyone who has ever tried to live up to their ideals than on faithfully bringing the characters to a sense of closure.

Rewriting Hollywood, courtesy of Suki’s script-rewriting service

So, for my homeschooled readers, I am going to rewrite the ending for you. Please do watch this movie because you will laugh and cheer this quirky family of super-homeschoolers. But turn it off once the kids return to their dad, and imagine my ending instead:

  • As a result of seeing The Real World, the oldest homeschooler chooses the university that will allow him the greatest opportunity to learn and explore, while also growing as a human being amongst other humans. During the summers, he volunteers around the world, and is eventually able to marry his ideals with his life’s work, hopefully a bit more successfully than his dad did.
  • As a result of seeing how great his children have turned out in comparison with kids in The Real World, the dad realizes that yes, he is weird, but really, it’s OK. Maybe he’s lonely (he has lost his beloved wife, after all) and he decides to move closer to other humans. That’s great. But he also re-embraces the educational method he and his wife chose, seeing that his children are becoming the strong-willed, thoughtful, morally guided humans that they had hoped to raise.

But that wouldn’t be Hollywood, would it? We can’t celebrate real humans’ real achievements and real quirkiness. We have to force our world of soft greys into the black-and-whites of popular culture.

With this movie, at least, I had hoped for better.

Some very real (non-super-)homeschoolers learning in nature and celebrating their own, quirky selves.
Some very real (non-super-)homeschoolers learning in nature and celebrating their own, quirky selves.

My Aha! Moment

A while back I was contacted by the Aha Moment crew about taking part once they got to Santa Cruz. I had never heard of them, so of course my first instinct was that this was some new kind of phishing invented to fool Internet-savvy homeschooling moms. It turned out it wasn’t—it’s a real thing and a real job. This really nice group of young people travel the country in a trailer tricked out as a TV studio, interviewing locals at each stop and putting their interviews up on the Web.

I had two reactions to the idea of taking part:

1) I don’t really have “aha moments,” so it wouldn’t be authentic

2) Why would I bother?

After watching videos from the first location that popped up, I decided to watch videos from San Francisco. That’s what sold me. I realize that this is just another way for Mutual of Omaha to try to make us like them, but it’s insidiously wonderful in a weird little way. As soon as I switched to San Francisco—though the trailer, the lighting, and the editing were the same—it was a whole new experience. Those were San Franciscans I saw on the screen. It was so cool to see my former city of residence, the place that I always wanted to live until I lived there, and then always wanted to go back to when I could, represented in this funny little modern sociological experiment.

It felt cool. I decided to do it.

Then I had to find my “aha.” As I said, I don’t really think that way. But once I did, what I wanted to talk about became obvious.

I’m not saying you should go watch me, but I will say that this is a fun and curiously interesting portrait of America that those fuddy duddy insurance guys are bankrolling. I got very little time to chat with the crew, but I could see why they enjoyed their jobs so much.

Choose a city and watch! It’s lovely in a weird, millennial sort of way.

And, OK, you can watch mine here:

“Inside Out,” a tour of modern parenting

One of the benefits of parenting now rather than in previous times is how much more we know about human brains and how they work. Before the 21st century, advice to parents and teachers was pretty much based on inference—”we see that lots of people who have done xyz have had good results, so you should do it, too.”

These days, parents are benefiting from—and in some cases, freaking out because of—a huge influx of hard data about how brains work. So it’s not surprising that Pixar has come out with a movie that’s not only for kids, but for us adults who are worrying about how our parenting is affecting our children’s brains. [Read an interview with the director in which he talks about how his 11-year-old daughter inspired the film.]

The freak-out at the dinner table. We’ve been there!

A movie for kids and adults

“Inside Out” is a truly brilliant film in several respects. The aspect most important to me as an adult is that it’s a kids’ movie that adults can not only enjoy with the kids, but enjoy separately from the kids. As we sat in the theater, I noticed a striking pattern of laughter: The kids were laughing at the funny lines, the goofiness, and the nutty action sequences.

True, the adults were laughing at those, too. But we were also laughing at the adult level inside jokes (did they really sneak a joke about San Francisco “bears” into a mainstream movie?), the pained and loving relationship between the two parents (oh, ouch, I think we’ve had that actual discussion, dear), and the uncomfortable recognition of feelings from our own childhoods.

True to life

Not all films have to be “real” in the sense of sticking to objective realism. However, any good story is “real” within its own context. Whether the characters are fairies or girls attending a new school, their experiences and especially their reaction to those experiences need to seem “real” in context. We have to believe them.

The temptation with kids’ movies is to make things happen just because kids think they’re funny, or because it was time for some action in the plot, or because the animator always wanted to animate a wild mass of curly, red hair. “Inside Out” never feels like it’s veering off-center; this is a movie that knows what it’s about.

Modeling a healthy parenting style

Did the makers of this film really portray a loving, modern family that lets their 11-year-old daughter [gasp!] walk to school in a new city? Well, yes, they did. I wonder if Pete Docter has read Free-Range Kids

I appreciated that this film featured neither the sappy parent-as-role-model nor the damaging parent-as-natural-adversary tropes that are common in children’s films. These parents are real. They don’t make decisions only for their daughter—they have needs, too. They don’t try to control their daughter or even to completely understand her. They just love her and do their best, which isn’t always quite good enough.

A healthy theory of mind

Let’s face it: this is a cartoon, and the representation of the brains and how they work is cartoonish. But it’s also beautifully constructed both to reflect the state of modern brain research and also a healthy modern view of how to manage our ideas and emotions. In the movie, each person has a “control room” that is run by the emotions happiness, sadness, anger, fear, and disgust. But that’s where the brains’ similarities end. Each character in the film has a control room that works differently, depending on the character’s personality and life experiences.

Some of the funniest moments in the film are when we briefly step into the minds of the minor characters and see their control rooms as a metaphor for how they approach the world. Every character, we are reminded, is a person, and has the same emotions as the next. How those emotions behave and interact is what makes each of us unique.

Two thumbs up

I have to admit that I’m generally loathe to go to popular children’s movies. I am deeply grateful when another parent offers to take my child. And now that my youngest is old enough to go on her own, it takes a lot to get me to spend my dollars and my precious two hours on something that will, at best, bore me, and at worst, offend me.

But this is one film I can heartily recommend to parents like me who are done with stupid kid films. I left the theater feeling like I’d actually received more than I paid for, an unusual result of watching a hit summer movie.

Mom’s efficient control room—calm, cool, and collected!

Her daughter’s control room is rather more chaotic.

Dad’s emotions are remembering a great hockey game before they realize that their daughter is having a crisis.

Aside: Interesting how the filmmakers chose to portray Mom’s emotions as all women, Dad’s emotions as all men, but Daughter’s emotions as mixed male and female. Intentional? Hm…

Now available