REVIEW: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Into a very white, sterile, and ordered existence struts uncertainty.  Balance and routine, with a backbone of ultimate will, sees before it an image of humanity in its imperfection.  Call it a Hollywood version of mental health from days of old, but thematically has time changed anything about the views people have of those with mental illnesses?  I would imagine that there is more knowledge and awareness, but go and visit a psychiatric ward in a hospital and try to tell me that some of those older images of a insane asylum don't creep into your noggin.

The institution for mentally ill patients in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest runs in conjunction with the personality of one of its nurses, Nurse Ratched.  Hers is a behaviour of following the guidelines, creating no variation or deviancy.  The sanity is in the black and white, it is clinical and definable.  However, it is that which is pitted against uncertainty as well as an unpredictable nature, a lack of order or rules, in new arrival McMurphy.  A new addition to a system that he does not quite understand, and one that conflicts with his being.

McMurphy (played by Jack Nicholson) comes from a prison and is assessed as a person who may be using the idea of having a mental illness to find a cushier accommodation for the remainder of his sentence.  The moment he shows up, it is clear through his swagger and body language that he sees himself as a big fish in a small pond, that he will be the king of the institution.  That's not necessarily far from how things turn out to be.

What the audience is presented in McMurphy is someone who has a record of violence, a person who we would see as potentially quick to anger and a little unhinged.  This is not the McMurphy that we see with our eyes.  While the others in the institution are treated merely as patients by the staff, McMurphy treats them as people, and his lack of judgement of them is shown off in the evolution of his relationship with Chief, a stoic and unspeaking native American.  McMurphy is polite with the staff at first, and he seems quite a long way from needing to be in such a facility.

But is all what it seems?  Is director Milos Forman putting in front of us a person who is sane, or someone with perhaps a complexity that is not easily diagnosed?  Within the walls of the institution, Forman creates Nurse Ratched (Louise Fletcher), a model of professionalism, but with a complete lack of empathy for the patients.  I believe that she is the manifestation of the system that Forman is introducing us to.  It is strict, unemotional, and at complete odds with McMurphy.

As the movie moves along, I got a feeling that we were being asked if perhaps instead of some internal illness it could be situation and environment that could cause a person to take an action that could be viewed as insane.  That perhaps any member of the audience could put themselves into the shoes of McMurphy and wonder if they would act any more sane under the same circumstances.  This is the meat of this movie.  I don't believe that the point of this film is to show terrible characters, but more what could happen to a person caught in an uncaring and soulless system.

The movie balances off of Ratched and McMurphy.  He seems to believe that he can breeze through anything, that he can act how he wishes.  The consequences catch him off guard.  Ratched believes that treating people with emotional ambivalence and exposing their emotions and playing with their fears will keep the line drawn between who is sane and who isn't. The consequences catch her off guard.

What is it actually that propels the story?  Is it Ratched's actions, or McMurphy's reactions?  Who is to blame for outcome?  Are they both being manipulated, or are they both victims of the other?  The relationship between these two that is the movie's plot.  McMurphy views the institution as his last stop to freedom, although that is quashed in a scene where he tries to pick up a plumbing fixture to throw through a window so he can escape.  His attempts, the straining of his muscles, are on display to the other patients who see how this brash and charismatic person is trapped in something bigger than him.  His ability to exit the institution on his own terms ends with that scene.

Yes, there are lots of different aspects that should be talked about.  I could mention the very unique score that bookmarks the film.  More could be said about the performances, and I sure could talk about sets and wardrobe.  In the end, those things are done really well, but for me they are lost and secondary to the story that is being put in front of us.  This, to me at least, is a film where the tale comes first, and its impact is what stays with me.  It is humanity versus the system, with a view that the system will win.

Rating - 4 out of 4 stars

REVIEW: The People Vs. Larry Flynt

The People Vs. Larry Flynt is a biopic about adult material publisher Larry Flynt (as the title so nicely points out).  Flynt made his name by publishing Hustler magazine, a nudy mag that took publicly sold pornographic material to levels that the already established Playboy didn't.  Hugh Hefner seemed to like the belief that Playboy was about sexual revolution and releasing the modern woman from the constraints that men and society had put on them.  Oddly enough, it was a magazine made by men, and made for men.  I would imagine that true liberation for women wouldn't be about lining the pocket books of males as well as satisfying their objectifying habits.

It is important to note that Forman isn't peddling a story that legitimizes the sexual exploitation of women, he is not creating a hero in Flynt, and it isn't a film about the first amendment.  It may, at first glance, appear to be along those lines, but this, in its truest form, is a tragedy.  Yes, people could look at the character of Larry Flynt, for good or for bad, and take away from his story a number of different things.  To me, Forman is not interested so much in the possible historical significance of Flynt, but the rise and fall of a person on the outside of culture.

Portraying Flynt is Woody Harrelson, previously known for playing small town boy Woody Boyd on the ever popular sitcom, Cheers.  After the show had run its course, it seemed like Harrelson was making some bold decisions to ensure that he would never end up being type cast as the innocent, soft spoken, and value guided country boy.  Roles in movies like the Oliver Stone directed Natural Born Killers and The People Vs. Larry Flynt (produced by Oliver Stone) made sure that nobody would think that Harrelson was going to ride the coat tales of Woody Boyd.  He took a massive risk in jumping into these types of roles, but it paid off.  Over the years Harrelson has been nominated for three Oscar movies and seems to make an imprint into whatever film he is a part of.

The portrayal of Flynt here is one of a business man, along with his brother Jimmy Flynt (Brett Harrelson), who runs a strip club and comes up with an unconventional way of marketing it.  That marketing venture turns into Hustler magazine, and we follow Flynt through all of the obstacles and battles that he had to fight to get his magazine into the mainstream.  As I said before, Forman is not making this a story of a hero, a trailblazing patriot who looks to teach a message on the first amendment to audiences.  Forman is simply using events and Harrelson's powerful performance to eventually let us see how success can create a personality that eventually must end up crashing back to earth.

Flynt's girlfriend, Althea, is played by Courtney Love.  It is an inspired performance, and through it I believe we get an idea that perhaps one of Forman's best gifts was soliciting master efforts from the acting talents.  He would go on to use Love in his follow up film, Man on the Moon (as well as using Norm MacDonald and Vincent Schiavelli in both films), another film about a person who may not have taken everything seriously and gets zapped back to reality.  Love's Althea is a charming free spirit, a person who grows in dimensions as the film progresses, becoming a force that adds to the ultimate tragedy of Flynt.

The story dynamics that Forman seems to most heavily focus on are the phases of life that Flynt goes through, from entrepreneur, to religious man, to contemptible and unrestrained personality.  By the time we get to the end of the film, Flynt no longer resembles anything that he had in the past, acting like a petulant man-child who refuses to understand the gravity of his circumstances or decisions.  Ultimately he must pay the piper, and, forgetting anything that we felt towards the Flynt character leading up to it, there is sympathy to be had here.  This person who seems to proclaim themselves larger than life and above the law is shown to cry and bleed, in a wonderful humbling of the character.

Why did Milos Forman choose Larry Flynt of all people to create a biopic around?  I doubt that it was based off of his legal struggles to secure his rights.  I believe there are much richer stories out there if that was the simple design of the film.  Perhaps Forman identifies with the person who is on the edges of culture.  That would explain why he chose to tell the story of Andy Kaufman next.  Whatever his reason for choosing Flynt, Forman shows that he is courageous.  It would not be an easy task to make a wide release movie about someone who would be despised by so much of the population.

There are untold numbers of movies about the dangers of fame and fortune.  The People Vs. Larry Flynt does not take the easy route in this endeavour.  It is an unlikely person, who evolves into an overly unlikeable person, and we are tied to his fate.  Forman shows that there is something relatable in this tale for any of us watching.  No matter what happens in life to make us feel vulnerable or invincible, we all have the same needs and desires.  We all have the ability to laugh, to cry, and to make others cry.  It is a gem of a story wrapped up in a package that could easily be discarded, but to do so would be to miss out on something special.

Rating - 3.5 out of 4 stars

Celebrating Director Milos Forman

Just recently, director Milos Forman passed away.  The headlines at first meant nothing to me.  I knew the name rang a bell, but, in that initial moment, I could not figure out what significance the name had.  A cursory look showed me why this death was something to make headlines.  Forman had been a part of numerous Oscar nominated and winning films.  Attached to his filmography are titles such as Amadeus, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Hair, The People Vs. Larry Flynt, and Man on The Moon.

My first introduction to Forman's work was in grade ten, when my sociology teacher showed One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest to the class.  I was not mature enough to appreciate it fully.  To me, it was just another film, and there wasn't much standing out to me other than the fact that a water fountain is a good tool for an impromptu escape.  I couldn't grasp why this movie was such a renowned and important piece of work.  I also saw Amadeus at a young age and lacked appreciation for it as well.

The film of Forman's that I am most aware of is the Jim Carrey starring Man on the Moon, a biopic about comedian and ever so legitimate wrestler Any Kaufman.  Kaufman was a bit before my time, but the little that I knew of him fascinated me even though I didn't necessarily enjoy everything he did.  I was a young teen, so obviously Jim Carrey was awesome.  I had a great time with that movie, although I will admit that it probably didn't stand up to the passage of time and my maturing tastes as well as I would hope.

The good news is that I will soon have a chance to revisit that film, as well as numerous other Milos Forman's movies.  This is an important voice in culture that was lost, and for the upcoming Movie Breakdown podcast we will be reviewing five of his movies.  I plan on reviewing each one of those hear on the blog and to talk about the significance to them, should they hold any.

Very sadly, Forman lost both parents in the holocaust when he was young.  The awful thing is that the passage of time takes more and more voices of that horrendous tragedy.  These are the people who were witness to an event that showed the worst of humanity.  Their perspectives are so crucially important, as their world view holds the scars as well as the urgent reminder of why this must never happen again.

Over the next few days, I look forward to getting a glimpse into the mind of this Czech director.  From what I know and remember, I am sure that there will be at least a take away or two from each movie.  My hope is that my humble blog and podcast will do justice to such an important figure in the modern history of story telling.