On Thursday night my friend and I decided to watch Mrs. Doubtfire (1993), a movie we have watched far too many times as kids. The movie revolves around a loving father who is willing to do anything to spend time with his kids after the divorce, including dressing up like an old English woman and applying for the nanny position. Although my friend and I didn’t grow up together, watching the film made us realize we had some shared experiences as kids, including watching this film and memorizing every scene and line (my friend was constantly laughing before the scene ended because she knew what was going to happen.) Nonetheless, watching the film again after so many years, and so many gender and film courses, it seemed completely different. As a start, the uncle is homosexual and has a partner who seems to be loved by the mother, which could possibly mean the relationship is serious and the mother is accepting of her son’s sexuality:
As a kid, that flew right over my head. All I could remember is that the uncle had an interesting voice and was a makeup artist. That’s of course because of the culture I grew up in, where homosexuality is a topic to avoid. While that plot point seemed to be a clear positive comment on homosexuality, the Hillard family’s situation was more implicit. Daniel is too immature for the father role, and Miranda isn’t able to take it anymore. However, Daniel’s contribution in the family as Mrs. Doubtfire later on made it seem like they were the prefect family. Two women in the position of authority in the house helped the kids get better grades and finish their chores on time. It seems as if Daniel was only able to be an effective member of the family through his disguise as a woman. One of the interesting shots was the medium shot of the Hillard family, while the father was disguised as Mrs. Doubtfire, standing by the pool:
Regardless of the plot, this image says a lot about a loving family. Yes it is possible to think that Mrs. Doubtfire is a grandmother rather than a partner, but the lack of the male figure in the image raises doubts. Possibly another comment on same-sex households? It is interesting to see how a certain text can change meaning if consumed in two different times (almost 10 years apart.) As a kid it was funny watching Robin William’ character getting into accidents and changing voices, but now the film can be analyzed and interpreted differently, considering the the culture, the history, and the audience.
