![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 17 to 41 of 55. Go back in thread:
Posted by CarolAnn on January 8, 2000, at 16:10:12
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Annie on January 8, 2000, at 14:14:22
My turn:
All Of Me - with Steve Martin & Lily Tomlin, totally hilarious and an incredible tribute to Steve's expertise at physical comedy.
I also like old movie musicals, "Meet Me In St. Louis" with Judy Garland is a favorite.
What I simply cannot tolerate is *any* movie that has an emotionally "bad" ending. Even if the whole movie is sad, scary, ect., If there's a happy or at least uplifting end, I will watch it. I just feel extremely strongly that I have too many unpleasant emotions on a general basis to ever choose a form of escape that doesn't give me an emotional lift, as I head back into my own life!CarolAnn
Posted by Noa on January 8, 2000, at 23:42:38
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by CarolAnn on January 8, 2000, at 16:10:12
Funny you should mention Steve Martin, because I was thinking about adding another suggestion: The Man With Two Brains. That movie cracks me up, especially the oddball poetry.
I also love his physical comedy in All of Me. The man is positively fluid.
Posted by Renee N on January 9, 2000, at 1:56:45
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by CarolAnn on January 8, 2000, at 16:10:12
> My turn:
>
> All Of Me - with Steve Martin & Lily Tomlin, totally hilarious and an incredible tribute to Steve's expertise at physical comedy.
>
> I also like old movie musicals, "Meet Me In St. Louis" with Judy Garland is a favorite.
>
> What I simply cannot tolerate is *any* movie that has an emotionally "bad" ending. Even if the whole movie is sad, scary, ect., If there's a happy or at least uplifting end, I will watch it. I just feel extremely strongly that I have too many unpleasant emotions on a general basis to ever choose a form of escape that doesn't give me an emotional lift, as I head back into my own life!CarolAnnI like a good tearjerker now and then. I find the tears to be cleansing. I see how relatively small some of my own problems are. Terms of Endearment, Love Story, Stepmom, Titanic, One True Thing. For a good laugh I give **** to The Jerk(Steve Martin), Blazing Saddles, The Trouble With Mary, and Twins(Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwartzenegger--SP?).
Let's think for awhile, and then somone get a new thread going about bibliotherapy making use of novels and poetry.
Posted by dove on January 10, 2000, at 10:39:57
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Renee N on January 9, 2000, at 1:56:45
For laughs how about "I Love You to Death" with Kevin Kline and Tracy Ulman, I laugh so hard I think I'm going to die everytime I watch it. William Hurt as the ex-con druggie is beyond hilarious. "Arsenic and Old Lace" with Cary Grant is another one that keeps me rolling. And "Homegrown", especially the part where the helicopter pilot has them all in the grave and is screaming at them not to make deals with the mafia, they cry and scream like they're gonna die. The facial expressions are so real, petrified out of their minds, what a total hoot! I rewind that part up to five times just to laugh 'til I'm breathless.
"Brazil" is another favorite, though I have trouble watching it on a down day, too bleak.
My two fave's for tear-jerkers (one's you can watch more than twice and don't push you over the edge) are "The Professional" and "Pi". Two unique flicks in my opinion. The first has so much humanity, seeping with gut-level emotion tangled with morals/intellectual emotion, real human texture in an unlikely plot. The second movie makes me feel "normal", and yet I recognize familiar aspects in the middle of the bizarre sequence of events. I really related to the main character and his motivations and reactions to the circumstances handed to him, though by his own admission he could have left them alone. Anyone else like "Pi"?
dove
Posted by Noa on January 10, 2000, at 11:28:38
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by dove on January 10, 2000, at 10:39:57
I saw Pi and liked it, but it was unsettling, so it wouldn't be one I'd watch to feel better.
Posted by Adam on January 10, 2000, at 18:33:48
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Noa on January 10, 2000, at 11:28:38
Sometimes when I'm feeling down, I like to see a good comedy. Sometimes when I feel really down, for some reason, I like to see the most depressing, head-kicker of a movie I can possibly find. Sometimes I like movies that are full of sadness, but somehow uplift with a redemptive message...
Comedies:
Something About Mary: Totally crass. Laughed my butt off.
A Fish Called Wanda: "Don't call me stupid!"
Annie Hall: Not exactly bust-a-gut laughs, but... Y'all know this was supposed to be called "Anne Hedonia" I'll stick "Manhattan" in too.
Head Kickers:
"A Clockwork Orange"
"My Own Private Idaho"
"Last Exit to Brooklyn"
"Naked"-This may top the list as the single most depressing movie I have ever seen.Sad but Redemptive (way too many to list):
"Sophie's Choice"
"Gandhi"
"Schindler's List"-Not a Spielberg fan, but he got it right this time.
"Kundun"
"Three Seasons"-This one esp. grabbed me. Partly the gorgeous ambience of the soundtrack, perhaps, and the sweetness of the most downtrodden characters.
"
Posted by Cass on January 10, 2000, at 20:58:33
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Adam on January 10, 2000, at 18:33:48
Okay, since Adam started this category, I have a few to add:
"The Color Purple"
"Savior"
(A somewhat recent movie which it seems no one in the world saw except me. It was profound and incredibly redemptive. I have not been so moved by a movie since, guess, The Color Purple.)
"The Piano"
Posted by Noa on January 10, 2000, at 21:11:01
In reply to "Sad but redemptive", posted by Cass on January 10, 2000, at 20:58:33
how about To Kill A Mockingbird?
For some reason, when I am sick, my traditional movie to watch is an old version of Great Expectations.
Posted by Elizabeth on January 11, 2000, at 1:32:51
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Adam on January 10, 2000, at 18:33:48
My mom the movie buff suggested _A Simple Plan_ as a "head kicker." I haven't seen it yet so can't say much more.
Posted by Deb R on January 11, 2000, at 8:06:17
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Elizabeth on January 11, 2000, at 1:32:51
I had been looking forward to seeing the movie "Grand Canyon" and each time I planned to go, something would stop me, like kids being sick, work (gotta grab that when I can!) and so on. Finally it was being advertised as "last days" so I knew I had to go, and soon!
Finally got there, paid my money and entered the theatre - I was the only person in the whole theatre! (this theatre is in a complex of about 8 cinemas in total.) Wow - I ran out to the kiosk and bought lots of munchies, ran back in and was still the only person there! I sat back (even put my feet up on the seats in front....never done that before!) and proceeded to have the best time ever.
I think the movies are very important, as well as the memories of the times when we see them, the people we are with, how we are feeling at the time. Grand Canyon was a pretty good movie, not the greatest, but when I saw it, alone in the theatre, it made it that much more memorable.
Deb.
Posted by Morc on January 11, 2000, at 14:41:54
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Noa on January 8, 2000, at 0:52:57
Good God! I watched some Three Stooges shorts on AMC the other day and laughed my ass off. I tend to prefer innocent, heart-warming stuff to lift me up. "Court Jester" with Danny Kaye is an all-time favorite. ("The pellet with the poison's in the vessel with the pestle...")
Posted by anna on January 11, 2000, at 17:34:25
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by Morc on January 11, 2000, at 14:41:54
> Good God! I watched some Three Stooges shorts on AMC the other day and laughed my ass off. I tend to prefer innocent, heart-warming stuff to lift me up. "Court Jester" with Danny Kaye is an all-time favorite. ("The pellet with the poison's in the vessel with the pestle...")
My mom refused to let me watch The 3 Stooges"--she felt they were violent. I think that must be why I am now a testement to modern pharmacology!
(And hide everytime someone says curly or moe.)
Posted by Cass on January 11, 2000, at 23:37:42
In reply to Re: Movie Therapy, posted by anna on January 11, 2000, at 17:34:25
> My mom refused to let me watch The 3 Stooges"--she felt they were violent. I think that must be why I am now a testement to modern pharmacology!
> (And hide everytime someone says curly or moe.)Just a little note: My mother didn't let me watch the 3 Stooges for the same reason, nor did she let me watch frightening things. The irony was that my mother was psychologically abusive and rejecting to a pathological degree. People never understand the contradiction. I don't fully understand it myself. Well, anyways, to this day, I can't enjoy the 3 Stooges either. It seems sadistic.
Posted by JohnB on January 12, 2000, at 9:25:46
In reply to Anna, movie therapy, posted by Cass on January 11, 2000, at 23:37:42
I think if I had to choose just one comedy to take with me to a desert island, it would be "Harvey" starring Jimmy Stewart (late 1940's). The story is about a small-town eccentric who is either a genius or a lunatic, depending on who you ask, (he has a 6 foot 3 1/2" invisible white rabbit as his best buddy). Classic is an overworked word, but this movie is a classic.
Posted by dove on January 12, 2000, at 9:32:04
In reply to Cognative Movie Therapy - "HARVEY", posted by JohnB on January 12, 2000, at 9:25:46
This is one of my daughter's favorites. She also had an invisible friend, a giant bunny named "Bekka Boo Bunny" and she completely related to Jimmy, as scary as that is for me to think about :-)
dove
Posted by Morbius on January 16, 2000, at 4:12:47
In reply to Re: Cognative Movie Therapy - "HARVEY", posted by dove on January 12, 2000, at 9:32:04
Anybody see the forbidden Planet?
Posted by Noa on January 16, 2000, at 7:04:58
In reply to Re: Cognative Movie Therapy - "HARVEY", posted by Morbius on January 16, 2000, at 4:12:47
A bit of a digression from the "therapeutic" aspects of movies....
On Friday afternoon, after I left work, I did not want to go home. I was in a pissy mood for some reason. And those of you who have read the "transitions" thread know I have a hard time with them. So I went to the movies. I thought the theatre would be empty, as it was only 4:15, but it was about half full. Anyway, what I saw was Girl Interrupted. I really liked it. But it is not something to see if hospitalization issues are still raw. For example, a friend of mine had a terrible experience at the hospital that the story is based on (they changed the name, of course). They kept her there and gave her the diagnosis de jour, a controversial one (like in the movie). That is, they kept her there as long as they thought (assumed) her father could pay the bills. As soon (and I mean within minutes) as they discovered that he couldn't, they shipped her to the state hospital, where the psychiatrist discharged her after 2 days of observation, telling her she didn't need to be in the hospital any more. I certainly wouldn't recommend this film for my friend--it would be too evocative.
I really liked it.
Posted by juniper on January 17, 2000, at 14:49:16
In reply to Re: Movies, posted by Noa on January 16, 2000, at 7:04:58
noa, i am glad that you gave a mini review of girl, interrupted. the book is one of my favorites. i was weary of seeing the movie because movies based on books are often pretty dissapointing; everything that matters, the literature, gets lost. and i don't often enjoy movies depicting characters with mental disorders because they never get it quite right--movies seem to glamorize or humorize these disorders. but i saw an interview with winona ryder where she talked of her own depression, not in a whiney or self-sacrificing way, but very straightforward, so i did want to see what she did with the book.
thanks!
Posted by noa on January 17, 2000, at 16:37:42
In reply to Re: Movies--girl, interrupted, posted by juniper on January 17, 2000, at 14:49:16
I had hoped to get to read the book before the movie, but went to see the movie on a whim. Not having read it, I don't know if you will be frustrated by the book=>movie transformation.
I have been thinking about the movie more. I liked it, primarily because the acting was very good, so I cared about the characters. But there is something unsettling about the gestalt of the film, the big picture, how the essential conflicts are resolved. I guess I shouldn't get so hung up on this because the conflicts were within and among the patients, and the staff and hospital play a very minor role. They are just a backdrop, in fact.
What is bugging me is this impression that the main character gets better because she "gets with the program", rather than fighting it. But we never really find out what led her to have the problems she has. We see her struggling to define herself through her relationships with those around her--in the hospital. But we never really see or hear why she is such a mixed up, depressed kid. And, although they hint at family tendencies (I think the line is, "Borderlines are five times more likely to have an immediate family member, usually a parent, who is borderline"), biology is not on the table at all. So the idea is that this mixed up kid developed her problems environmentally and will recover through psychoanalysis. Ok, assuming for the sake of the film we accept this, we don't really learn more about her problems. We don't even get to eavesdrop on the analysis sessions even though we see them (we dont hear what she says).
In the end, it really seems more like a movie about adolescence and coming of age than about mental illness. And maybe it is a true portrait of how young people make the decisions they make.
Here's the thing: Despite how well portrayed the action among the patients is, it is the message hovering in the background that bothers me: In this movie the message is that the powerless need to accept what the powerful have to offer. Fighting it means death, either sudden or drawn out. This is classic conservative hollywoodism, although subdued, thankfully, by being in the background, while the really intersting stuff is in the foreground. I should say here that I would not want a classic Disneyesque, puss-in-boots type story, either, where the powerless triumph ever so tritely over the powerful.
Posted by Cass on January 17, 2000, at 18:11:29
In reply to Re: Movies--girl, interrupted, posted by noa on January 17, 2000, at 16:37:42
noa, thank-you so much for that critique. A story of the powerless giving into the powerful is definitely not what I want to see. I am repulsed by the thought of it.
Posted by Noa on January 17, 2000, at 18:41:14
In reply to Re: Movies--girl, interrupted, posted by Cass on January 17, 2000, at 18:11:29
Cass, I hope I didn't overstate it. That is really in the background, and it happens to be something I am alert for in films--the metamessages, political messages, etc. Kind of radical of me.
Really, mostly the movie takes place in the foreground, between and among the patients. As I said, the background of the hospital is just a setting, it doesn't play much of a role. My reading of the political message is from look for it in the background. It really isn't there in the foreground.
In a way, the main character finds and exerts her power through the course of the film. She finds out how to choose her own path.
Just wanted you to know this, because it might be a film you would value seeing.
Posted by Noa on January 17, 2000, at 18:47:14
In reply to Re: Movies--girl, interrupted, posted by Cass on January 17, 2000, at 18:11:29
Another thought--
Although the film ends on a hopeful note, there is definitely upsetting material at points in the film that should be considered when deciding whether or not to see it. For anyone dealing with raw issues of suicidality, trauma, incest, hospitalization, etc. this film could be very upsetting.
Posted by Elizabeth on January 17, 2000, at 23:13:20
In reply to Re: Movies, posted by Noa on January 16, 2000, at 7:04:58
> For example, a friend of mine had a terrible experience at the hospital that the story is based on (they changed the name, of course).
Wow, everybody's been there! :)
> They kept her there and gave her the diagnosis de jour, a controversial one (like in the movie). That is, they kept her there as long as they thought (assumed) her father could pay the bills. As soon (and I mean within minutes) as they discovered that he couldn't, they shipped her to the state hospital, where the psychiatrist discharged her after 2 days of observation, telling her she didn't need to be in the hospital any more. I certainly wouldn't recommend this film for my friend--it would be too evocative.
Read the book _Mount Misery_, which also takes place at McLean.
> I really liked it.
Cool! Some friends and I have been trying to organize a movie mob to see it, so I'm glad to hear it was good.
Posted by Noa on January 18, 2000, at 0:13:18
In reply to Re: Movies, posted by Elizabeth on January 17, 2000, at 23:13:20
Thanks, Elizabeth, I'll look for "Mount Misery".
I am impressed that you are rounding up a group of friends to see a film.
Posted by JohnB on January 18, 2000, at 2:55:04
In reply to Re: Movies, posted by Noa on January 18, 2000, at 0:13:18
Speaking of movies on this subject, one of the first was "The Snake Pit" with Olivia DeHaviland (1946?). Despite the melodramatic title, it is really quite good in parts, and for it's time it was a breakthrough.
Some parts are a little dated, like the god-like, pipe-smoking psychotherapist, and the too-easy "cure" after a whirlwind theraputic tour of DeHaviland's early childhood.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.