So there are numerous films and tv shows out there that portray mental illness/mental distress that I think further stigmatise mental illness. The example that springs to my mind are the way that the characters with mental illness are portrayed in "The Bird Box". Not having read the book (yet) I can't comment on the book's portrayal but for me, the film reinforced the negative stereotype that people with mental illnesses will harm or hurt 'sane' people. The fact that all of the 'insane' characters behaved erratically, committed violent acts against the 'normal'/'sane' survivors and were ultimately responsible for the death of Tom worries me as a 'mad' person who suffers from a mental illness.
There are countless other examples of mentally ill characters being dangerous to 'normal'/'sane' people and I am beginning to wonder if, like the LGBTQ community, those of us with mental illnesses should be asking for more than a vague stereotype based on outdated ideas of who and what 'crazy people' are.
What do other people think? Can you think of any examples that counter this argument? I'd love to hear your perspectives.
I didn't put as much weight on the issue in Bird Box because of the supernatural element blamed for everything and the driving force of the story. Their madness isn't necessarily their fault, and then neither are characters' suicide, so it's an interesting line to draw about stereotypes and enforcement. I definitely agree there's a problem in media with the portrayal of mental illness, although it has improved over the years with exposure, it is still not great. I can't think of any others off the top of my head but this article would be great with several examples-- one of poor (and probably cruel) misrepresentation of illness, Bird Box as the middle ground, and a positive example we can all be encouraged to watch and support for the rights of people suffering with mental illness! :) – Slaidey5 years ago
Hey Slaidey My main issue with Birdbox is the fact that all the mentally ill people in the film (who were immune to the supernatural creates effects) were mostly portrayed as people to be feared and overly violent. This could be seen as a reinforcement of years of 'mad' (I use the term as someone who is proud of their mental illness - if such a thing is possible) oppression where the insane were misunderstood and seen as a threat to the wider 'sane/normal' population. This is certainly the impression I got from Bird Box where the insane characters were largely to be feared. The same effect could have been achieved, in my opinion, without making the characters violent. Probably the most nuanced portrayal is by Tom Hollander whose character is the closest to how I would have like to have seen the other 'mad' characters portrayed. There have been some good portrayals of mental illness in the media lately, but in a world where representation is key to understanding, I think film and TV companies, as well as content creators, would do more. That said the BBC did some brilliant documentaries on mental illness in May but surely mad people are entitled to representation in a wider range of genres? One of the ways that media companies could improve their representation is by looking at what has been on the stage recently here in London (where the performers/creators of the pieces are people with lived experience of mental illness) and maybe work with performance makers such as The Vaccum Cleaner or Milly Thomas to film the work they have recently performed on stage. I guess the lack of representation is symbolic of a larger problem of diversity and representation and the possible in build risk aversion that most big media companies have when it comes to taking a chance on upcoming projects that might be seen to have 'small/ethnic/minority' audiences. Communities larger than the insane community such as the Black and LGBTQ+ communities have been fighting for equal rights for over 50 years and even with their campaigning, lobbying and calls for more equal representations they are still struggling towards fairer and more equitable representation on screen. Hopefully, things will get better (I think Netflix is doing some amazing work representing the LGBT community) over time as long as the people making the decisions move away from stereotypes. – Dewi Evans5 years ago
There is the inevitability that mental illness is overdramatized within film and television. This is because the way that entertainment has evolved over the past several decades has trained consumers to be interested in the big, moving, exhilarating things. There are some mental illnesses that have dangerous, intense, and scary attributes and behaviours to them. However, the majority of mental illnesses are in the details. They are about the personality traits that are seen as weird, or the behaviours that make people cock their heads because they are trying to determine what is off, or the person that is slightly socially awkward. These things are not blockbuster, do not catch people's attentions unless they have been educated to look and listen, and are not going to be the first thing someone picks to watch. The desensitivity to so much in today's society has made people cruel, especially towards things that could be seen as weird or weak (i.e. mental illness). This does not help or favour the notion of making a film or making a television show that highlights mental illness in both an accurate and positive way. So many movies or television shows that have accurately portrayed illnesses have taken them to the extreme and created a monster out of the person that has the illness. Take Split for example; This movie was created based on an individual having multiple personalities, who took three young girls because several of his personalities told him to. The stigma behind multiple personalities is that it is all within the person's head, and that each personality is a coping mechanism for a specific fear or anxiousness that the person carries with them in everyday life. This overdramatization plants ideas in people's head that are triggered when they meet someone in reality with the particular disorder. Instead of seeking to understand the condition from this real person's perspective, many refer back to the information that they have acquired from an unreliable source.
– heck18605 years ago
Analyse how travel is important to the films' plot. For instance, it helps broaden the horizons for both viewer and characters. If one travels, one's mind is highly likely to broaden to what lifestyle someone can live in. In the case of the films' characters, it brings more interest to their story, they see new places, have constant change.
This is an interesting propostion. I would suggest defining the genre of what movies will be taken into account. There is, I believe, a very essential difference between realism and sci-fi for example which, in relation to travel, will entail diverse approaches and methods for analysis.
– Kaya6 years ago
Thank you, Kaya, for your feedback! I was not focusing on any genre specifically when I wrote this. If I had to choose, it'd be action, drama, comedy, and/or fantasy, since it is with those films that the setting has a tendency to change. – Yvonne T.6 years ago
I agree with Kaya. Focusing on a specific genre or even a specific film would make the topic very interesting to explore. I think you're right to focus on both the character and the viewer, as both experience the journey and are affected by it. – JamesBKelley5 years ago
A teen movie has to be one of the easiest go-to scripts to write. Whether it is about high school or finishing high school, there will always be the elements of love, family and finding yourself along the way (if you're really lucky *cue wink face at the camera*). But there are some that aren't just merely entertaining to watch and actually touch on original topics or come to original conclusions when faced with a typical 'teen' issue. For me, the ones that instantly came to mind are the Perks of Being a Wallflower and Clueless. What are some more? And what are some that don't fit this topic and why?
I feel that Perks of Being a Wallflower was groundbreaking film in several ways. It addresses questions of gender, sexuality, and mental illness in distinct and meaningful ways. For me, the book and film are both groundbreaking. – Sean Gadus6 years ago
For me The Breakfast Club is a great movie. – youngmollflanders6 years ago
It would be worth expanding this topic to include teen films from outside America. Take a look at some of the Japanese teen films for example - off the top of my head I'd suggest 'Hana and Alice' (2004). Regarding the idea that 'A teen movie has to be one of the easiest go-to scripts to write' - that's quite a generalisation. Even a film aimed at a teenage audience can handle some weighty issues, which require sensitive writing and directing. – Amyus5 years ago
I believe "Cruel Intentions" (1999) has a bit of originality. It takes the classical theme of high school, mean girl/good girl and a bad boy but turns it into a very sexually driven tragedy. For me, it's a teen movie that you shouldn't watch in your teen years. – bulatovskayae5 years ago
Scientists have spent a lot of time shaping films concerned with space flight in science fiction. NASA spent a lot of time advising the producers of the 2015 film Martian. Kip Thorne, a theoretical physicist, shaped Nolan's Interstellar (2014) to make it an accurate depiction of time dilation consistent with Einstein's Special Relativity. Kevin Grazier, a planetary physicist who worked on the Cassini/Huygens Mission to Saturn and Titan, also advised the producers of the 2013 film Gravity. How have the interactions between scientists and filmmakers shaped the depiction of space travel in science fictions films on different occasions?
It might be worthwhile to make a distinction between the types of films you're addressing versus the types you aren't, for example space flight in "science fiction" like "The Martian" as opposed to "space fantasy" like "Star Wars." The more "grounded-in-science" films certainly benefit from a realistic representation of space flight; even more "fantastic" sci-fi films like "2001: A Space Odyssey" or "Battlestar Galactica" emphasize the technology level of the humans by more realistically depicting how their ships maneuver in space. Stories like "Star Wars" or even parts of Star Trek (especially "Wrath of Khan") that are rooted more in fantasy, however, usually aim to be more exciting than completely physically accurate, so Kirk and Khan circle each other like 18th-century warships exchanging cannon fire in ships that are capable of faster-than-light travel (which is what audiences prefer). Collaboration between scientists and filmmakers in depicting space flight seems more and more useful, but ultimately is more important to science fiction than to space fantasy. – CulturallyOpinionated5 years ago
What stands out to you about a movie that will most likely make it a memorable experience? Is it the score, characters, dialog, camera shots, etc? What are some of your favorite movies and why do they stand out? Example: "The Shawshank Redemption" is regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time, but why do you personal think it is (or isn't)?
It's very hard to pin point just one movie to be considered the greatest of all time. In movies, the characters relationships both on and off screen make a huge impact in what stands out the most. As an audience, you can pick up on certain characters relationships which also set the tone and flow for a movie. Also character development, which is a huge part that writers and producers should work on. There are many movies where characters are introduced and then you're left asking, "and then what?" What happens to this character? How are they relevant and how do they progress further on into the film? – tahneemaxwell5 years ago
Threads (1984) depicts a small town in England, grappling with the ramifications of a nuclear war breaking out. The movie is full of raw footage of human suffering and is said to have left audiences numb in horror. So much so that audiences of its initial release reported: "that people had just sat there thinking about it, in many cases not sleeping or being able to talk." Ronald Reagan, the president of the United States at the time, was said to have watched the film as did many British politicians. Given the research done to make the film as close of a depiction of a real nuclear exchange, how did this and other depictions of nuclear war – like The Day After (1983) – shape the public's view of mutually assured destruction (M.A.D. theory) as a military strategy, if at all?
'Threads' was one of those moments in TV history, like the release of 'Edge of Darkness' (1985), that made me wonder if people were finally beginning to wake up to the real horrors of the nuclear arms race. Maybe they did, for a while, but then everyone seemed to go back to sleep. – Amyus5 years ago
Thanos was a break out character from Marvel's Avengers: Infinity War. Despite being the villain/avenger's enemy of the story, the film treated the mad titan as a pseudo protagonist. Thanos must go on his own "hero's journey" to attain his ultimate goal and achieve his dreams/desires. This was an unusual choice for a villain, but was effective in many ways, with critical time spent developing/examining the characters powerful (if twisted) worldview. With this in mind, it is important to examine how Thanos is treated in Avengers: Endgame, Infinity War's follow up, and to discuss whether Thanos is further developed or if the character now takes the more stereotypical/traditional "villain" role within the narrative.
I think it’s important to note how in Endgame, there was no other way but for Thanos to be the traditional villain because his actions had already occurred, thus giving the Avengers a little more advantage because now instead of him risking everything, they had to do the same even though they win in the end. So his role made you think that no matter the outcome, sacrifices and death had to unfold – AccordingtoJazz6 years ago
Thanos has a long history in the original Marvel comics universe where he has moved from out and out villain, to a more tragic figure, even to hero (or anti-hero). It would be interesting to hear more on how the movies drew from this history. – AlephZeroHeroes6 years ago
The Room, an American romance film directed by Tommy Wiseau has been labeled one of the worst films in history. And yet, the film has a cult following and is watched from the view of what some call Camp, a taste towards terrible cinema. What can one make of the viewing experience of those who enjoy a film that is reviewed by critics and audiences as terrible? What does this tell us about how people watch and enjoy a film?
Terrible movies such as "The Room" and "Troll 2" are entertaining because they turned out to be comedies, when they were supposed to be anything but. Maybe the directors really did want to make some sort of satire or comedy with these films, but in all likelihood they had serious intentions. Because of these intentions, we get amusing films. – Jusmey19835 years ago
The Room is a common example of the irony in any sort of creative production, where something is just so bad, that people are attracted to seeing it. In an industry with blockbuster films that take months to make and millions of dollars, viewing The Room is almost like a collective laugh at the ridiculousness and incredulity that something so bad could make it to the silver screen. – Huntforpurpose5 years ago
