Philadelphia (1993) film plot summary
The film is about a Philadelphia lawyer, Andrew (Andy) Beckett, who contracted AIDS and was conseuently fired from the presti!ious "yant "yant "heeler law firm because of the illness# The company co mpany he worked with insisted that he was fired not because of the knowled!e of his disease, but because his o$erall performance in the company alle!edly de!raded to the point of mediocrity# Andy howe$er, was con$inced that the real case is ille!al dismissal because his bosses found out about his condition and panicked# The constitution of the %nited States !rants protection to workers or employees of any !roup or company for cases when they become inflicted with any form of illness# This means that company owners or mana!ers cannot fire anyone simply because they ha$e a disease or e$en decrease or cease all the benefits they are entitled to# This fact ur!ed Andy to pursue in filin! a lawsuit a!ainst his former e&ecuti$es with the help of 'oe iller, who is Andys African*American lawyer# r# iller at first, hesitated and e$entually initially declined Andys case for personal reasons# +e (iller) is in fact preudiced a!ainst both b oth homose&uals and persons with AIDS and his reection of Andy haunted him# +e e$entually comes to reali-e that the discrimination Andy Beckett is facin!, is both unethical and ille!al in all respects# +e became more informed about the nature of the disease and a!reed to take the case# The trial became an e&haustin! course especially for Andy whos deterioratin! deterioratin! health, barely mana!es mana! es to perform at a minimum# Andys Andys collea!ues collea!ues also !a$e their testimonies on how the work en$ironment they are in also discriminates them based on their ethnicity, health, health, and se&uality e$en e$ en if it may seem subtle at at first# 'oe iller e$entually throws a fit on how the real case is not ust about AIDS but also about se&uality and o$erall discrimination and how the fears of society ha$e led to such unethical treatment of affected indi$iduals# .ther pa!es in his (Andys) life before the conclusion of the trial are also shown to si!nify that persons with AIDS (or with any other disease) can li$e full li$es when they are still able# The last few hearin!s portray how Andy really felt when he was still workin! with his former company# +e (Andy) showed no true bitterness or remorse for his life especially durin! his e&perience with the company# At the conclusion of the trials, the truth became apparent and Andys case was won howe$er, he had to be rushed to the hospital because his illness was at its worst# Andy succumbed to his illness
howe$er in the end, it tau!ht iller and the world a $ery important lesson about life# The lawsuit will come to represent a maor fi!ht a!ainst preudice, and thus a fi!ht for ustice# “It's that every now and again - not often, but occasionally - you get to be a part of justice being done. That really is quite a thrill when that happens.” -ndrew !ec"ett
Main Issues in the Film
#iscri$ination .ne of the central themes portrayed in the film is discrimination based on +I/ (AIDS) status and se&ual orientation# This ethical issue is inar!uably the most important that it becomes a maor pillar in the messa!e of the film# The library scene in particular hi!hli!hts this as the librarian who reali-ed that the prota!onist was sufferin! from a disease, abruptly su!!ested that he must reside at a pri$ate room where he may be 0comfortable1 with his study# This insensiti$e beha$ior landed Andrew cold stares from the surroundin! people which indicates that they became uncomfortable, knowin! that someone with +I/*AIDS is sharin! a seat with them# Andrew comments on this and asked the librarian if it would make him more comfortable instead# The portrayal of discrimination is $ery e$ident in this film e$en in the subtlest of ways# A drinkin! parlor scene shows a bartender sayin! that 0!ays make him sick1# This hi!hli!hts the preudices of society thats based merely on the fact that a person has di$er!ent preferences or simply in the idea that this person is !ay2lesbian and not on who this person really is or what they ha$e done for society# "hat is seen as blatant and unethical discrimination by the Philadelphians, merely became an e&pression of their thou!hts and feelin!s based on their moral code that seems to dero!ate homose&ual indi$iduals# The $ery saddenin! part of this is the fact that some people do not reflect on the matter e$en if their personal e&pressions attack on the principles of morality and ustice#
Illness
3ets temporarily $iew illness (AIDS in this case) as a crime that deser$es punishment for a moment and try to analy-e# "e must then first in$esti!ate further on human nature# It is without a doubt, true that society has always in$esti!ated, cate!ori-ed, and se!re!ated thin!s relatin! to identity, personal condition and e$en social conduct that we now ha$e many names and descriptions for the many acti$ities and 0sins1 of modern li$in!# The film hi!hli!hts a bi! chunk of these concerns which is manifested in ways on how society $iews people who are different or who are unable to perform on what is e&pected of them due disabilities or illnesses# In the film for e&le, there are people who made a hate rally callin! his (Andrews) illness a sort of 0!ay pla!ue1 and that it was a punishment well*deser$ed# The AIDS problem made e$eryone $ery much afraid and the fears that came with it brou!ht about $arious sti!mas and discrimination associated with this illness# .n the bri!hter side of thin!s, there are memorable scenes in Andys life before the conclusion of the trial which si!nify that persons with AIDS (or with any other disease) can li$e free and full li$es when they are still able# Identity The main son! that was made specifically for the film titled 0Streets of Philadelphia1 by Bruce Sprin!steen reads, “when the secrets ca$e unfurled% Tell $e I&$ not to bla$e% I won&t be asha$ed of love.” This sin!le line summari-es the stru!!le of indi$iduals specifically homose&ual and the ill especially when their personal identity or true cond itions are re$ealed# It personally asks that they should not be faulted for who they are# That no one should be afraid of our own identities and how we conduct our personal li$es#
Dissecting the film through Sociological Theories
The film hi!hli!hts many of the inner workin!s of todays society especially in the corporate and ustice system# 3et us first describe the role of the case that Andrew Beckett decided to file a!ainst his former employers# The paramount case, which was later won, ser$es as a model for future udicial decision makin! re!ardin! similar cases# The intention that the film may ha$e, especially with that scene, is to !uide public opinion and deter wannabe offenders in committin! ille!al dismissals# The
disproportionately lar!e fine for the case may ha$e also been intended for the purpose of instillin! the idea that such acts of discrimination especially when committed by bi! companies, are condoned and !reatly dealt with# Another important aspect of the film is the concept of homose&uality# It is reasonable to belie$e that the function of this form of de$iance on the perceptions and beha$ior of the public is related to discrimination and its functions# To put it simply, the reason why preudices e&ist is to put positi$e (it creates solidarity for persons with the same line of thinkin! and sti!mas) and ne!ati$e (people elated at hearin! that a particular homose&ual person is dyin! for e&le) feelin!s at others# A symbolic*interactionist approach in understandin! the film can also be used here since the $ery sti!ma and preudices that are e&hibited in the film are based on the perceptions or labels that indi$iduals in a society perpetuate# There is a scene in the film where 'oe iller e&plains to Andrew Beckett on how he and the people he knows are tau!ht on how ueers beha$e and how they interact with other people# They are said to be labelled as se&ual predators and I uote, “et $e tell you so$ething, ndrew, when you&re brought up the way I a$, the way $ost people are in this country, there&s not a whole lot of discussion about ho$ose(uality or what do you call it, alternate lifestyles. s a "id you&re taught that queers are funny, queers are weird, queers dress up li"e their $other. That they&re afraid to fight, that they&re a danger to little "ids and that all they want to do is get into your pants. That pretty $uch su$s up the general thin"ing out there if you want to "now the truth about it.” This, I belie$e, is the reason why r# iller initially declined Andrew and it is clearly represented in the film on how these sweepin! !enerali-ations o$erwhelm indi$iduals with sur!in! emotions, blockin! out critical thinkin! and sound ud!ement# 3astly, it can be ar!ued that it may ha$e been for the best interest of Andys employers that he be fired# 4eepin! him at the company may ha$e increased the or!ani-ations health insurance costs and he may as well be considered a health ha-ard# There is conflict when the two !roups (the side of Andy and his former employers side) are analy-ed# A $ery faint or subtle line is drawn of the perceptions of the ("yant "heeler) !roup towards homose&uals and people with the illness of +I/2AIDS# An e&le would be how one senior e&ecuti$e treats one of his workers who contracted the $irus throu!h blood transfusion# The worker simply described the e&perience with the senior official to be filled with dis!ust in an 0.h*my*!od, !et away from me51 way# This created a conflict in the work en$ironment especially
on the worker (as elissa Benedict) and this !oes a!ainst their common interest of mutual welfare and benefit#
