Review
Identity Thief made me think a lot about the artifacts that represent who we are. From Social Security numbers to credit cards and driver's licenses, plastic carries much weight. The scene that jumps out at me is the intro, where this power dynamic is fully displayed. Right out of the gate, we meet Diana, or more like it, the many versions of Diana and her copious number of ids and credit cards in tow. Licenses from Florida to Colorado litter her room with fake names to match. Gazing at the dozens of fake driver’s licenses she has hung up on the wall reminded me of the one common denominator: Diana’s face. While names, states, and addresses were all up for grabs, the only constant was her face.
Faciality, as described by Deleuze and Guattari, plays a significant role in how authority and surveillance operate in modern society. The face becomes a key identifier, a surface on which power dynamics are projected and maintained. “ Faciality also produces the world he or she moves in and through. It produces modes of being through certain assemblages of power” (Austin & Rouse, 2022).
Identity Thief smartly uses this concept by showcasing the fluidity of identity. Diana's ability to assume multiple identities by changing her appearance and using forged documents underscores how faces can be manipulated to fit different social roles and expectations. Her face, when combined with the appropriate social signals (name, age, address), allows her to navigate various social systems without detection.
Diana's various disguises and manipulations illustrate the fluidity of identity. While her face is initially a tool for deception, it also reveals vulnerability and a backstory that humanizes her. This aligns with Deleuze and Guattari's idea that the face can both conceal and reveal deeper truths about an individual.
Reaction
In the name of honesty, this movie is very forgettable. I didn't love it when it came out and have come to the same conclusion this time. Putting my grievances aside, watching it using the lens of theory as an anchor has been interesting. It also has me paranoid. Identity theft is a lot easier to get away with in a post-globalized society. “As of 2021, about 1 in 5 persons (22%) had experienced identity theft in their lifetime” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2023). Hello - that is a lot of people. I would imagine that the reporting is missing the mark for the actual numbers. Fraudsters are given an edge because victims are less likely to report due to the shame and embarrassment that can accompany fraud. “Older adults are less likely to report a fraud because they don’t know who to report it to, are too ashamed at having been scammed, or don’t know they have been scammed. Elderly victims may not report crimes, for example, because they are concerned that relatives may think the victims no longer have the mental capacity to take care of their own financial affairs” (MyCreditUnion.gov). All of this makes me think back to societies of control and the mechanisms that can be used to silence people. Shame is an excellent secret keeper.
In addition, Identity Thief reminds me of the concept of ‘dividuals.’ In a sense, we are all recognized as vehicles for data. I am my social security number, my W2, and my driver’s license, as well as the many artifacts that signify my identity. These artifacts are the difference between signing for a mortgage, applying for a job, and even the ability to get a fishing license. They all come together to form a sense of who we are (where we live, how much money we make, where we are employed).
Interpretation
While there is much to unpack, I will focus on the film's commentary on power structures and how they are mediated through facial recognition and identity.The use of driver's licenses, credit cards, and other forms of identification in the film underscores how power structures rely on facial recognition to enforce control and order. Diana's ability to subvert these systems by changing her appearance and using Sandy's name challenges the rigidity of these power structures.
The heavy reliance on visual forms of identification underscores a society that values appearance as a primary identity marker, which can lead to both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, it simplifies processes like travel and banking. On the other, it can lead to issues like profiling. For example, Madison Square Garden has made the news for putting “lawyers who represent people suing it on an exclusion list to keep them out of concerts and sporting events” via facial ID technology (Hill & Kilgannon, 2022). While facial recognition systems are tools that authorities use to enforce laws and regulations and have been used for over a decade, private companies are setting a dangerous precedent. These systems rely on the assumption that a face is a stable and reliable marker of identity. By controlling and monitoring faces, private companies can exert power over individuals, ensuring compliance within their defined set of norms.
Extending beyond a legal framework, surveillance technology is as pervasive as the phone in your pocket. We are increasingly surrounded by these technologies, from face ID to ring cameras. However, as the film helps point out, it can also uphold inequitable power structures. Diana’s character is at the peak of invisibility within American society (aka a middle-aged white woman), so she subverts the idea of a singular, stable identity tied to a face. Her actions suggest that identity is not inherent or fixed but can be constructed and deconstructed based on social contexts and needs. Taking on the identity of a middle-aged white man certainly has its perks that aren’t handed over to women. The white man’s face is the ultimate signifier of power. Beyond gender, “faciality becomes a basis for racism where race is topographically categorized in relation to the White-Man’s face” (Austin & Rouse, 2022).
The film raises ethical questions about using facial recognition and surveillance technologies. Central concerns are the potential for upholding inequitable power structures and abusing individual freedoms. Diana's subversion of these systems critiques systems' overreliance on visual markers and the potential for exploitation.
References
Austin, E. K., & Rouse, R. (2022). Faciality and the Assembly of Organizational Subjectivity: Considering the Possibilities of Emancipation in Management Theory. Tamara Journal of Critical Organisation Inquiry, 20(1), 24–43. https://doi.org/10.7206/tamara.1532-5555.11
Hill, K., & Kilgannon, C. (2022, December 22). Madison Square Garden Uses Facial Recognition to Ban Its Owner’s Enemies. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/nyregion/madison-square-garden-facial-recognition.html
Savanna, to be a little punny, your post is right on the money! First, I also didn't really like this movie, but your observations and interpretations fall right in line with my own feels from watching this film. Even the fears about how seemingly easy identity theft appears to be. Second, I really appreciated both your considerations of the social imbalances when it comes to identity, and the prevalence of technologies capable of identifying an individual simply by their facial features.
ReplyDeleteYour post prompted me to consider the element of faciality, particularly in your description of the opening scene and all of those drivers license. That opening is so reinforcing your thoughts on Deleuze and Guattari's notion about the face being a key identifier; it is Diana's face on the physical licenses that allows her to assume those identities. Two sides of the same coin, perhaps the lack of facial connection to our data (at least from the time the film was produced) that aided the ease at which she could steal those identities.
One of your opening statements, "plastic carries much weight," really stood out to while I was reading your film blog. These pieces of plastic, such as a drivers license, carry so much weight concerning our identity, and yet all of their meaning is socially constructed. Although, our lecture this week also pointed out that a significant portion of our identity is also socially constructed, whether this be the institutions we grew up around, the way other people see us, or the people we have surrounded ourselves with. Faciality was also an important part of the film that I think you integrated well. With increased surveillance, Face ID, the pictures of us on our ID, etc. our faces are closely tied to our identities. Though I believe the film may have gone a different direction, partially. I agree with Tracy's point that, perhaps, our faces are not connected to our identities enough, which is the reason Dawn was able to steal so many identities.
ReplyDeleteI fully agree with your assessment of Diana being "the peak of invisibility", to me this relates to Catlaw & Marshall's discussion of how neoliberalism has denied dependency needs and coded them as shameful (Catlaw & Marshall, 2018). Diana has some pretty clear needs that she doesn't feel comfortable admitting need to be met, she instead feels shame for having those needs at all and fills that void through other channels.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this review and specifically appreciated you pointing out how Diana's various disguises connect to the fluidity and vulnerability of identity in a society heavily reliant on visual markers. The idea that our faces, while completely unique can be both a means of control and a tool for subversion opens up some ethical considerations that I did not pick up about privacy and surveillance. It is really sad to me that the older population is more likely to be attacked but also wont report the fraud if found, I am sure most people today have an anecdotal story about something similar happening to their own grandparents or older loved ones. I also found it intriguing to consider how our identities are constructed from data points and how these can be manipulated exactly like Diana does in the film.
ReplyDeleteI am gonna be honest I may differ from you a little bit, because I kind of enjoyed the film but i agree that at times it may have been trivia, I guess i just enjoyed a classic American road trip movie that provoked a more intellectual discussion when examined through the right theoretical framework like you did here.