Category Archives: therapy thursdays

Therapy Thursday: Suddenly, Last Summer

Posted on by under carrie's faves, from stage to screen, lit adaptations, therapy thursdays

As I mentioned yesterday, today’s Therapy Thursday post will showcase Suddenly, Last Summer, with Katharine Hepburn and Elizabeth Taylor.  Oddly, I haven’t been able to come up with a good topic for this series in weeks upon weeks … I just had nothing. Then, yesterday, doing a brief tribute to Elizabeth Taylor, this movie came to mind and it was an obvious choice. It’s a great topic for this series, but the universe is an odd place, and this timing is better than had I done it earlier anyway. Now to the point.

Suddenly, Last Summer is adapted from the play by Tennessee Williams. I actually saw the play staged before I saw this movie. While I don’t typically find a filmed version of a play or book an improvement, this is one of the seldom exceptions. They add to the play significantly, but it really adds something to it. Should it have been done this way on stage? Probably not. The film had some acting talent  we seldom see, and the cast combination was pure magic. While on stage, the point of view is a little ambiguous: we clearly should identify with Dr. Cukrowicz (Montgomery Clift); as we meet Mrs. Violet Venable (Hepburn), we would probably identify with him, even if he had been poorly portrayed. However, this is not the case. Clift plays a rather good role as Dr. Cukrowicz.

Meeting with Catherine

Listening to Ms. Violet is quite the experience. At first, we see eccentric and aristocratic, but the more we listen, we can develop an idea of how completely insane she is. Her speech is kind of linear, and yet, not remotely linear. Before long, we begin to think “delusion,” perhaps. She explains to Dr. Cukrowicz that Catherine Holly (Liz Taylor) is insane, and she wants her to have a lobotomy (eerily, this sort of thing is true to life–some family members would push for lobotomies of other family members, for various reasons). The more Ms. Violet talks and tells her story, the more the careful ear can pick up that she and George Holly had had an enmeshed relationship; that she is very controlling–and not just with her money; that she creates her world purely as she wants it; that she is manipulative, and frankly, is good at what she does. Somewhere midway, I felt afraid … she was scary. Now, later scenes are more designed to be frightening and make the film a thriller, in the sense we usually consider. However, I personally found her much more frightening than the more visual scary scenes.

She sets us up beautifully for the second section of the movie as well. Her story is full of facts and plausiblilities, but her telling of it is so weird, so odd, so circular, and yet so convinced that we are willing to believe Catherine’s story, with its outrageous sounding content, because she tells the story in an actual line. If we were to simply look at the content, of course Catherine is insane–it’s an outlandish story.

And so, we meet with Catherine. In the play, this mostly is a single scene, but it’s expanded and spread out in the film a little more. We get an interesting picture of the hospital, the structure of the mental health system, and the idea of lobotomy. Elizabeth Taylor did an amazing job throughout this entire process; however, I am going to emphasize her telling of her own story (the part that is crucial in the play as well).  As the film progresses, we identify more with Dr. Cukrowicz, and we want to do so. He’s endearing, and Violet is scary. But then something happens “suddenly”–we identify with Catherine. This is unusual in film–usually point of view is pretty consistent, but here we make a massive switch. Elizabeth Taylor’s performance certainly convinces us, the audience, that she is traumatized–we’d expect nothing less, but she goes further than that. She pulls us into her character, and from nowhere, we now identify with Catherine, and hope that Dr. Cukrowicz will help her out. When I watched this the first time, her artistry with the scene, particularly her amazing monologue (I looked for it on YouTube, but didn’t have much luck) and thought, “Wow.”  It was easy to appreciate as a great scene, but when I looked at it some more, I began to realize how completely brilliant is really was. She doesn’t stop at convincing the audience, but involves them (and of course, we believe her story, which we normally … wouldn’t. Clearly, she’s the truthful one, and completely traumatized by actual events, and possibly this crazy Violet woman). That is what I believe they mean when they say “movie magic.”

Why do I love this movie? It’s not a happy one, that’s for sure. The basic “psychology” of it is interesting and fairly well done. Typically, that’s what I talk about in this series. But this film is rare in the way it involves the audience, pulling them into the family, into the insanity, and making them players, too. That is the work of brilliant acting. Then, for me, the roles of both of the primary women in the film fit real family dynamics so perfectly that I’m in awe. It’s simply impressive, and there’s no other way to put it.

Therapy Thursday: Psychology of a Tree

Posted on by under carrie's faves, classic cartoons, holiday picks, therapy thursdays

Psychiatric Help

Merry Christmas!  In the spirit of the season, True Classics will be doing a number of reviews of some of our favorite Christmas movies. This is not exactly the beginning of that series, but I have to say A Charlie Brown Christmas is still on my list. It’s a great Christmas movie, but that’s another post.

Trying to think of a good Therapy Thursday Christmas movie led me almost immediately to this one. After all, Lucy gives psychiatric advice, right? In all seriousness, though Charlie Brown walks through several of the most common themes that people find distressing. Well, that’s his job, isn’t it? And we love him for it.

Charlie Brown spends the movie trying to find out what Christmas means. Everyone has an opinion. In the end, Linus gives a beautiful rendition of the Christmas story- but it doesn’t end there. In his searching, Charlie Brown finds a sad, lonely Christmas tree. It was his job to find a wonderful tree, but he decides that he likes this one, “and besides, I think it needs me.” In that very moment, he finds his own meaning for Christmas, even though the other children find his tree a great disappointment. Good grief.

Charlie Brown gets a tiny tree that "needs" him.

While he searches for the meaning of Christmas, Charlie Brown feels depressed. He doesn’t see meaning, and he doesn’t feel he belongs anywhere- the story of his life, literally. In the end, however, everyone helps decorate his tree. He has a “family” of sorts- and the tiny tree, through hard work and some cartoon magic is truly beautiful. In truth, everyone loves Charlie Brown, even if they don’t really show it.

Hark the Herald Angels Sing

This is iconic, really. Most people know about Charlie Brown’s Christmas tree. We call small trees “Charlie Brown trees.” People buy them purposefully.  The character Charlie Brown has saved small trees everywhere- quite an accomplishment for a depressed animated character.

Charlie Brown speaks for tiny trees everywhere

Christmas, especially these days, means exactly what we believe it to mean. A Christian holy day. A day for family. A season for giving, where people remember that altruism might be for the greater good (a time when people might actually care about the greater good). A time to be thankful and help those less fortunate. A time for forgiveness or making changes. A day for magic. A day to remember those you love and those you’ve lost. 

Rehearsal interrupted.

Christmas seems empty to those who have found no meaning in it. Well, that’s true. Most things are empty if you find no meaning. Charlie Brown shows us that. But, since we can ascribe any meaning we like, and Christmas means what we think it means, the sky’s the limit. Christmas shows us that we can have any environment we want, if we choose to make it that way.  So, like Ebenezer Scrooge (jumping stories here…) can we choose to keep Christmas all year?

So, Merry Christmas, whatever it means for you, and enjoy the time, however you spend it.

Fun isn't always focused...

Therapy Thursday: You Can’t Take It With You and It’s a Wonderful Life

Posted on by under carrie's faves, holiday picks, therapy thursdays

Hello, Classic Film World!  I apologize for my absence from the blog (and especially to Brandie and Nikki for leaving them to keep things going so swimmingly without help- *pause for a moment of applause*).

So, I’m getting back in gear with Therapy Thursday again… and I’m taking it a different direction. Today, I’m doing both a TT blog and a comparison blog- we’ll see how this goes.

James Stewart as George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life

Now, I’m not personally a big fan of It’s a Wonderful Life, blasphemy, that I know it is. Still, I watched it with the family over the holiday. It’s good for a Therapy Thursday, for pretty obvious reasons. First, the whole karma-ness involved. George Bailey does everything he can to help those around him, trying to keep their lives from crashing down, eventually to the expense of his. Social work burnout, anyone? In the end, though, it comes back to him. We like this idea; it’s pretty warm and fuzzy. Also, it’s a pretty classic take on altruism. Many theorists don’t believe true altruism doesn’t exist- that we all want something in return, even if it’s just a “good feeling” about what we did. George comes pretty close to true altruism, but the moral of this story is that all his giving came right back to him, anyway, so it’s irrelevant. However, not everyone was like that, especially when he hit his low.

When George Bailey became hopeless, the world agreed with him.

Which brings me to my next thought: when he felt hopeless, the world became that way. No one helped him. People were mean to him. He made poor decisions. Things spiraled and got worse very, very quickly, until he hits rock bottom- and who likes to see Jimmy Stewart like that? However, after his “time of reflection” with Clarence, George Bailey realizes how important what he has is to him. It’s his life affirming moment; after that small change, his world puts itself back into place. Interestingly, this is how a lot of depression works. You can’t see the solution if you’re staring at the problem, which is the reason behind the now popular solution-focused therapies. People viewed him as crazy in the film when he was unhappy/miserable. However, they also were concerned with his ecstatic exclamations at “obvious” things. How could he be suddenly happy with so many problems?

Mr. Vanderhoff encouraged everyone to live for fun and what they truly want.

Interestingly enough, Frank Capra has an answer to this another of his films: You Can’t Take It With You. I love this movie for it’s humor and over the top characters. It’s just lovable. Again, we see Jimmy Stewart and Lionel Barrymore in film together, but this time Barrymore plays his future father-in-law. Martin Vanderhoff (Barrymore) has essentially come to the conclusion that George Bailey comes to at the end of It’s a Wonderful Life: that life is meant to be lived, and that’s what matters. However, he phrases it more along the lines of “Life should be fun.” The corporate world also finds Mr. Vanderhoff quite odd, because he is dedicated to living life for fun, not financial gain. It’s true- his family is very unusual. However, something very interesting happens with this family: the neighborhood adores them.

Martin Vanderhoff even enjoys his crutches, because he had "always wanted to try to walk on crutches," and now was able to give it a try.

Mr. Vanderhoff is always kind to others, is even a local leader, and lives his life of fun not at the expense of others, but in encouraging others to be happy. Not unlike George Bailey, who sacrifices himself for others’ well-being and happiness.

Is happiness having what you want or choosing to be happy?

So, how do we become happy? By having what we want or deciding to be that way?

Therapy Thursday: Holiday

Posted on by under 4-star films, best.films.ever., therapy thursdays

I thought I’d pick things up a bit this week and talk about Holiday with Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn.  As a quick review, I loved this movie. It’s fun. It’s charming. It’s Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn. I really don’t need to say much more than that, do I?

I’d like to look into Katherine Hepburn’s character Linda, in particular. Linda is the family black sheep, refusing to obey their “rules.” The family works to make more money, and that seems to be their primary goal. Linda wants a freer life and is more focused on  how you can use money to live a fun life instead of using money to beget more money.

Linda spends a great deal of time in their old playroom, reminiscing and enjoying the toys, while she dreams about her mother, who was, according to Linda, a free-spirit. The playroom was her mother’s idea. She is greatly attracted to Johnny (Grant), because he represents the freedom in life and openness to experience that she has craved for years. She proclaims that he brings life into the house.

The time Linda spends in the playroom is pretty indicative of her character. On some level, she is an adult who simply won’t grow up. Because in her world, growing up or being an adult means working in a stifling job and focusing only on money. Fun has no place in adulthood, so she refuses to participate. She holds the fun for the family. By staying in the playroom, she can try to recapture those old feelings. Proponents of the “inner child” would say that Linda nurtures and encourages all of the inner children in the family, especially her own. It’s clear in that she wants her siblings to enjoy the playroom with her, wants to give her sister Julie and engagement party and marry Johnny and be happy, wants so much for the family members to actually enjoy themselves and participate in her world, much as a child would.

Johnny provides her that very outlet. He is very willing to participate in her inner childhood, and also has the ability and inclination to put both childhood and adulthood together in some sort of cohesion. So, when she goes with Johnny she may grow up and merge childhood and adulthood, because in his world, it is safe, acceptable, and possible to do just that.

Therapy Thursdays: The Snake Pit

Posted on by under carrie's faves, drama, therapy thursdays

You may have seen my recommendation of The Snake Pit for the Olivia de Havilland edition of the SUtS series. I recommended it, but had not yet seen the film. Part of the joy of the project was getting to see films I hadn’t watched or reviewed, yet, and this was one of them.

I chose this film to begin the Therapy Thursday segment because it was the first film to approach mental health as a social issue. Olivia de Havilland plays Virginia, a young woman who has a “nervous breakdown,” a common euphemism for the psychotic break or flare-up in schizophrenia. In this film, schizophrenia, Paranoid Type, Chronic/Recurring is probably what they were trying to portray (although they never say anything beyond nervous break-down).

I have to say that I was impressed with the film. Contrary to the worrying trend in film and television to demonize individuals who suffer from mental illness, this film humanizes them. It is remarkably honest in both the environment of the institution and the nature of the delusions and symptoms that the patients portray. A few of the details are a little unlikely, but most of them serve to move the plot forward or increase sympathy for the characters, which makes these minor deviations quite forgivable.

The film leans heavily on psyhoanalysis as a therapy, which it was at the time. Although Freud’s methods are not typically used in modern treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic cases (although there are always exceptions), psychoanalysis was the first attempt to use talk therapy to help the mentally ill. Similarly, the clinical use of electric convulsive therapy was well-portrayed (not designed as a terror tactic but cruel or mad doctors, but as a genuine attempt to alter the nerve firing within the brain. This is typically not used anymore, and has generally been replaced by psychotropic medication regimens. However, at the time of this film, ECT was much more common.)

The staff at the state hospital were really quite believable, although a distressing number of the staff were quite misguided. However, considering the point of view was from a patient, this works well. People don’t generally enjoy being patients in institutions, and there was a lot of judging and harshness in earlier institutions. Some staff were burnt out and impatient, but others were sympathetic and dedicated. Her primary doctor was an excellent example of a mental health ideal, possibly ahead of his own time.

As a pro-social film about mental health, this is a good one, even for today. The images surpass many of those today in sympathy, humanity, and honesty. Add to that it’s endearing characters and well-constructed plot, and I must give it two enthusiastic thumbs-up.  I must add the book (written by Mary Jane Ward) to my reading list.

Ch-ch-ch-changes

Posted on by under feminist fridays, maudlin mondays, saturday morning cartoons, therapy thursdays, wacky wednesdays, welcome!

Those of our readers who have been with us for the past several months–or even the past few weeks–may notice some changes on the blog very soon … some occurring this week!

First, we’d like to welcome a new blogger to True Classics. Nikki has been a frequent commentator on the blog and is joining our blog family as a regular contributor. To get to know Nikki, take a look at her About Me page linked above.

We’re getting ready to unveil several weekly series on the blog, in addition to our random, general posting habits. We hope that this will inspire us to post regularly and keep the momentum we achieved during Summer Under the Stars, but not with quite that frequency. We won’t feature every series every week, but you’ll see them recurring throughout the foreseeable future!

Maudlin Mondays: We’ve all seen them–the tearjerkers that make you bawl like a Detroit Lions fan during football season. With this series, we’ll be taking a look at some of the most notorious weepies in the annals of classic moviedom.

Wacky Wednesdays: This series pays homage to the best of the best (and the just plain fun) screwball comedies. Classic films have a unique formula with this genre that deserves to be exalted.

Therapy Thursdays: There’s a couple of themes going on in this series. We’ll take a look as some of the films that discuss or use psychology, mental health, insanity, and bizarre behaviors or interpersonal dynamics. Secondly, Carrie will have some hypothetical “psychosocial interviews” with characters from classic film. This section is very open for suggestions, so if you have someone you’d like to see interviewed, let us know!

Feminist Fridays: This series features feminist commentary and interpretations of classic films, from themes to characters, plot to actions. We will rant about and riff on some of the not-so-woman-friendly elements in classic movie history. So yeah, basically, this is Brandie’s playground.

Saturday Morning Cartoons: We just love our cartoons–old and new. So we’re dedicating Saturdays to classic animation, starting with an in-depth examination of the Disney animated catalog, and later expanding to other classic animated favourites, including both feature-length and short features. It’s childhood nostalgia at its most fun!

Lastly, we’re just a few posts away from our 100th post! We’re very pleased to have gotten to this milestone. We’d like to send a thank-you to all of our readers for taking this journey with us. Be on the lookout for our commemorative Post 100!

Thanks to our regular readers and subscribers! We hope you enjoy all of these  new developments and projects as much as we do!