Strictly Ballroom: Who cares if it's not Strictly Ballroom?
Should you have the talent to innovate something new and come up
with eccentric ideas, only for it to be disproved by your superiors who value
tradition and non-plasticity, Should you maintain the status quo or do what you
think is the best?
Hello, and welcome back to another movie review blog entry. This
time, instead of summarizing the plot and giving a review of the film, I am
going to both review the film and discuss the elements of social psychology
behind the film to create a better understanding of it.
"Strictly Ballroom",
a 1992 Australian Romance Comedy film about Scott Hastings, a talented
Australian ballroom dancer who had innovated his own personal dance moves and
defended it to the end despite being reprimanded by many. The film begins as a
mock documentary regarding Scott as a competitive dancer, where Scott's peers
and family members were being interviewed. Scott's mother Shirley Hastings and
his uncle Les, both ballroom dance instructors, talked about his prestige
in dancing and commented with disapproval at his knack of performing his own
dance moves at the competitions. Scott’s moves, while original and
crowd-pleasing, was denounced by Barry Fife, the head of the Australian
Dance Federation, due to it not being "strictly ballroom".
This film showed the social aspects of psychology, mainly
regarding social influence.
Conformity is when a person
alters their own behaviour to match how the majority was expected to act. It is
also a shortcut mechanism created to produce the most effective solution with
the least mental effort. (Chartrand & Bargh 1999)
Almost every dancer in the ballroom studio (with the exception of
Scott and Fran) were conforming with the standards set by the Australian Dance
Federation, which is what makes Scott more special as he refused to conform to
the traditional way and created his own eccentric but awesome dance moves. Barry
himself was also conforming to the status quo, as his ultimate goal in the plot
was to maintain it with desperate measures (lying to Scott about his father’s past)
if necessary.
Compliance is one person’s
agreement response to a request, be it implicit or explicit (Cialdini &
Goldstein, 2004). One of the scenes showed the aftermath of Shirley’s discovery
of Scott and Fran’s secret partnership, in which Shirley responded by trying to
reason with Fran to give up and forget about partnering with Scott so Scott can
win the competition using traditional dance moves that the federation approves.
Compliance was shown when Fran agreed to step down, albeit reluctantly. Scott
also complied to stop using his eccentric dance moves when Barry lied to him
about how his father Doug lose the previous Pan Pacific by dancing his own
original moves, which he reasoned that if he made the same mistakes, it would
cause his family heartbreak.
Obedience is similar to
compliance, with the difference in the request being an order from someone of
higher authority (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004). Ken (Scott’s old rival) and
Tina Sparkles (Scott’s supposed dance partner for the Pan Pacific) were paired
together for the Pan Pacific and were ordered by Barry to dance with the best
of their abilities whilst informing them to keep quiet about the fact that the
competition was rigged for them both to win no matter the outcome. Ken and Tina,
despite knowing how unethical it is, obeyed for Barry is the head of the
federation (adding the fact that they will be rewarded with a guaranteed win at
the championship). When Scott and Fran were ordered by Barry to leave the dance
floor due to their “disqualification”, they initially obeyed and bowed to the
audience. The only thing stopping them from leaving was the slow clap created
by the audience, creating a rhythm which allowed them to fully express their
dance moves, and thus creating a crowning moment of awesome for the finale of
the film.
Now, onward to the criticisms.
Most of the defining moments of hilarity in the film involved Liz’s
high pitch shriek of rage and Doug’s goofy dancing moments, which while considered
hilarious in the past, was only mildly amusing in my point of view. Adding to
the Scott’s rough and determined character devoid of any humour, the film felt
more like a drama than a romance comedy.
The scene before the climax of the film, where Scott had to convince
Fran to dance with him one more time after learning the truth of his father’s
past also felt a bit rushed. You would think that Fran would not trust Scott
after being betrayed by him…but nope. She beamed the moment Scott asked her to
dance with him, despite the competition already in progress and despite the
fact that Scott abandoned her to partner with Liz in the Pan Pacific
championship. Maybe you can back out of a promise and expect to be forgiven in
a flash as long as you’re a handsome and talented dancer protagonist.
Despite the criticisms, this
movie had his remarkable qualities. All the actors and actresses of the main
characters in the film were actual trained dancers, hence their ability to
perform those awesome dance moves during the course of the film. The costume
design was also wonderful to the point it earned the film awards. The courage
exhibited by Scott by not conforming to the traditional dancing movements
despite the reprimands, expectations and challenges created by his family,
peers and the Dance Federation was inspirational. He defended his own original style
of dancing and disregarded everyone’s disagreements, only to reconsider reusing
the traditional ways when he thought was necessary. His courage was also shown
when he was confronted by Fran’s father, and decided to show him his Paso Doble
to ease his suspicion despite being bad at it. He’s the walking message of “be
yourself and be creative no matter what other people might say”.
Overall, the film was mildly entertaining, but inspirational. Highly
recommend it to dancers (professional or just as a hobby) or romance comedy
enthusiasts. Thank you for reading.
References:
Bargh JA, Chartrand TL. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. Am. Psychol. 54:462– 79
Comments
Post a Comment