Mental Illness in Modern Films

Throughout the past century, movies have gained an increasingly tight grip on the eyes of the consuming public, with it now being one of the most popular forms of entertainment. Because so many people view movies, that many people are affected by movies. In not all cases is this true; people suspend a certain amount of disbelief when it comes to more far-out concepts, but in somewhat grounded movies, audiences may often take what they see as fact, regardless of its scientific backing. This effect gives the movie industry a responsibility to portray certain topics correctly, namely mental illness. Mental illness has long had a place in film, from early on often being used as a convenient plot device, to years recent with more in-depth studies of the effects of mental illness and the people they inhabit. Some attempts are very damaging, misrepresenting an illness and often perpetuating stereotypes, while others provide valuable insight into the life of the mentally ill. By discussing and critiquing the use of mental illness in recent films, one can analyze how faithful the landscape of portrayal is both in the context of now and relating to films past.

One of the most recent and popular examples of mental illness in a movie is 2012’s Silver Linings Playbook, directed by David O. Russell. Bradley Cooper stars as Pat Solitano, a man with bipolar disorder, while Jennifer Lawrence plays Tiffany, a girl with an unspecified but definite history of mental illness. The film is largely excellent in its portrayal, capturing many moments and facets of a life with mental illness that many films neglect. Pat’s bipolar disorder is very often shown on the manic side of things, which while some may argue isn’t great for not showing as much of the depressive side, it actually allows for an interesting and accurate look on the manic state not often seen in film.

Pat is just released from an eight-month stay at the mental hospital, due to him beating a man relentlessly when he catches him sleeping with his wife. It’s revealed during a therapy session that he had believed them to be plotting to embezzle money from the school, but realized too late that that was a delusion associated with his disease. He comes out of the experience with a manic, “can-do” attitude, resolving to do whatever it takes to get back with his wife, truly believing she’s just waiting for him to get better. He adopts the mantra “excelsior”, to rise above the negative energy, turn it into fuel, and find a silver lining. He attempts to read his wife’s entire high school teaching syllabus, which is where the real negative aspects of the manic state are introduced. After finishing Hemingway’s Farewell to Arms, he goes on a screaming rampage through the house into his parents room about the unfairness of the ending and the sheer nerve of Hemingway himself, waking up the neighbors and getting the police called in the process.

Soon after, he meets Tiffany at a mutual friend’s house for dinner, and their initial interaction is very well done. They get onto the topic of their mental illness experiences, due to their mutual distaste of normal small talk, and go back and forth comparing the medications they’ve been on, complaining about certain experiences with each in a lighthearted way. While some may see this scene as putting down the usefulness of medication, it actually applies a necessary tone of normalcy to a topic that is typically seen as very serious and often taboo. The medications are all pronounced correctly and the feelings associated are factually common side effects, so the portrayal is by all accounts correct, but it’s the casualty with which they discuss it that gives it such an honest and real tone.

When Pat returns home, he gets a sudden urge to watch his wedding video. He storms through the house, laying waste to his surroundings, but it is to no avail. His parents enter the room incredulous at his behavior, and as he starts to interrogate them about hiding it from him, thinking he can’t handle it, he accidentally strikes his mom. His dad, Pat Sr., launches after him, entering into full fisticuffs. The fight is broken up by his mother and the police officer; another private instance made public. This scene is so successful for the way it honestly portrays a manic episode. It starts as a simple, sudden desire for something and snowballs into the violent, obsessive ordeal it resulted in. Pat recalls the incident in therapy the next day, saying he feels terrible about hurting his mother, and noting how the whole situation seemed to get away from him. The scene is so special because the manic side of bipolar disorder is often the most difficult to understand; after all, how could feeling overly optimistic, energetic, and excited be a bad thing? This scene perfectly illustrates the destructive nature of a manic episode in a very realistic, intimate setting that everyone can relate to.

Pat and Tiffany’s friendship progresses into the climax of the film where Pat chooses Tiffany over his ex-wife. They realize their love at once in the street, sharing a passionate kiss as the camera swirls around them and then zooms away from them. It’s a heartwarming story, yes, but the way that final scene is executed sends the complete wrong message, one that diverts from the overall message of the film. For such a realistic portrayal of the damaging effects of mental illness, this Hollywood cliché romantic ending is a complete departure from what was so successful preceding it. It sends the message that falling in love can easily cure mental illness, which is a very dangerous and false message to send.

Love is a big part of some people’s recovery, but it shouldn’t be so constantly reinforced as the cure-all for mental illness as it so often is in movies. Mental illness is something to be solved with a combination of medication, therapy, and personal fortitude, not romantic companionship alone. Romance movies often have a common trope of resolving any personal issues through finding love, so Silver Linings had a great opportunity to subvert this and show an optimistic, yet imperfect ending, but they squandered it. The popularity of the movie along with its reputation of being a realistic portrayal of mental illness makes the ending especially damaging, as audiences will subconsciously lump it together with everything the movie did get right.

Another fault found within the movie is the lack of emphasis on and development of Tiffany’s character. Even though her mental illness history is unspecified, she may need serious help and recovery even more than Pat. While Pat verbalizes and proves his desire to do better and right himself, Tiffany has consistent struggles throughout the entire movie, including in the ending scene. She acts rashly when anything seems to be going wrong, sleeping with any random person if she feels alone or unwanted, and no progress is made on this. One might argue that Tiffany is only there to further the development of Pat and act as a foil, but the film as a whole would have been much more effective at capturing the themes it pursued if it showed them helping each other work through their respective problems, showing that their influence on each other to get the help they needed was what made them such a unique pairing.

In one scene, the film makes a slight attempt at addressing another mental illness when Pat Sr. demands all sorts of specific rituals as good luck charms for his favorite football team. Pat comments that his father has a problem, likely OCD. The claim isn’t really substantiated enough throughout the movie to give it validity, but it certainly adds another layer to having some possible history of mental illness within his family. A film that addresses OCD alone is 2004’s The Aviator. Directed by Martin Scorsese, Leonardo DiCaprio portrays Howard Hughes, a famous director and aviator who had his life ravaged by his struggle with OCD.

The film portrays OCD with great accuracy; both in the illness and the way it develops. It starts initially with subtle hints, different aspects of Hughes’ lifestyle that one might dismiss as simple peculiarities, not uncommon in geniuses such as him. These peculiarities increase in severity throughout his life, from demanding two more cameras to add to his twenty-four camera shot and always requesting fresh, unopened milk, to reshooting his entire film, already the most expensive film ever, to add sound, and washing his hands so fiercely he drew blood. Hughes is ultimately crippled by the disease, locked away from the public eye, alone with his own filth. He often gets stuck repeating phrases with no way to free himself, first repeating “show me all the blueprints” and ending the movie stuck saying “the way of the future.” Before the ending, he seems to make a largely successful rehabilitation, appearing to the press in admirable fashion and righting the state of his company. The film ending on the note of him once again stuck on a phrase addresses the everlasting struggle with mental illness. Even when it seems like he’s finally set his life back on track, his disease haunts him, threatening his success. The film isn’t a perfect example of the average case of OCD, as not everyone deals with it to the extent that he did, living in a single room, obsessively re-watching his own movies, cleaning everything with tissues, drinking milk, and urinating in jars, but it definitely gives a much-needed perspective of OCD as a serious illness, and not as something that should be thrown around lightly.

Another biopic that has received acclaim for its treatment of mental illness is 2001’s A Beautiful Mind. Directed by Ron Howard, it features Russell Crowe as the brilliant mathematician John Nash. Nash suffers from schizophrenia and the movie deals with it very well for the most part. Like the gradual descent into mental illness, Nash starts as a skittish, socially anxious student and descends into a paranoid shell of his former self. He develops an obsession with code breaking, believing himself to be secretly employed by the government to help fight communism. While these events all seems a bit strange to the viewer, at no point do they really question the truth of them, seeing as Nash is also quite overwhelmed by the impossibility of them. It comes as a huge surprise then, when Nash is revealed to be schizophrenic, with his entire livelihood and his longtime college friend revealed to be hallucinations. He denies it initially, but overtime realizes the truth, but even then swears he will work it out on his own. The desire to fix it independently without therapy, let alone medication, is a common reaction from people with newly realized mental illnesses.

One of the best aspects of the film is the way the hallucinations interact with Nash, especially after he is revealed to be schizophrenic. They’re aware of his diagnosis and refute it to him, which lends them even more validity as far as their existence in Nash’s mind. The government agent hallucination, Parcher, forces Nash to separate and withdraw from the important, loving people in his life, warning him that attachments are dangerous in his line of work. One scene in the latter portion of the movie has the hallucinations attempting to convince Nash to kill his wife, saying she knows too much about his work and will alert someone about it. This scene perfectly illustrates the gripping, controlling effect schizophrenia has on someone’s life. The pairing of the two hallucinations is also very effective, as Parcher acts as a negative force of influence, with his friend, Charles, acting as a positive force of influence. Even if Nash were to rebel against one, he would end up going to the other, truly being trapped by his illness.

The major complaint people have with this movie is its portrayal of Nash’s hallucinations as ones of a visual nature. It is true that in most cases of schizophrenia, auditory hallucinations are much more common than visual ones, so from one point of view, the film is inaccurate and misleading in that sense. However, I argue that making the hallucinations visual was a successful creative decision in that it succeeds in a much more important endeavor than perfect accuracy: it makes the viewer feel what it’s like to be schizophrenic. Visual hallucinations are much more suited to the medium of film, and they are more believable and convincing as being part of reality. To a schizophrenic, hearing voices speak out to them is very real and terrifying, but experiencing it secondhand in a movie would not have been nearly as dramatic. The turn of events in the reveal of Nash’s schizophrenia has the viewers doubting themself, knowing they really did see those characters, knowing that they had interacted with Nash like real people. The sense of paranoia created when Nash sees a silhouette sprinting off in the distance manifests itself in the audience, making them feel as if it could have just been their imagination, but they swore they saw something more.

Another film that so accurately captures the feeling of having a mental illness is 2009’s Melancholia. Directed by Lars Von Trier, Kirsten Dunst plays Justine, a girl suffering from depression, about to be married. The movie takes place in two parts, the first being the day of her wedding, and the second being some weeks or months after the wedding. The film has a looming feeling of tension; everything seems to be just holding up for the moment, threatening to shatter at any moment. Depression is very similar; there is a constant struggle just to hold up the façade of being okay. Justine is depressed, but she tries to put a smile on for everyone, because she knows she “should” be happy on what’s supposed to be the happiest day of her life. Dunst’s performance is fantastic, in happy moments you can sense trouble bubbling beneath the surface and in difficult times every word is a struggle to put out. Her husband seems to be very understanding, even apologizing for not paying her enough attention the past couple days, but the same cannot be said about the rest of her family. Her brother-in-law sternly demands that she be happy, her mother insults her in a toast, proclaiming love isn’t real and she doesn’t believe in marriage, and at the end of the night, her sister tells her that sometimes she really hates her. This part is a great example of how someone dealing with a mental illness needs the support of those around them, so if those people are actively working against the person, all the problems are made even worse.

In the second part, her depression has gotten much worse to the point that she is almost catatonic, unable to bathe herself or eat. In the course of the plot progressing, the world is threatening to come to an end, but she responds apathetically, saying the world is evil and nobody will miss it anyway. This is a great example of how often a huge component of depression is a lack of feeling about anything, even in this case, the most traumatic event possible.

Acting as a foil to Melancholia, we have 2007’s Lars and the Real Girl, directed by Craig Gillespie. Ryan Gosling stars as Lars Lindstrom, a man with social anxiety. He has trouble talking to women, especially ones that seem interested in him. One day, much to the surprise of his brother and sister-in-law, he introduces to them a girl named Bianca. Only Bianca isn’t really a girl; she is a sex doll. Lars treats her as if she is a real human, and acts very sweetly to her at that. After meeting with a psychologist, they learn that nothing they do will convince him she isn’t real, they just have to play along until Lars gets past it himself. Unlike the antagonistic family in Melancholia, Lars’ family and even his extended community come together in a heartwarming fashion to welcome Bianca into the community as one of their own. In the end, Lars ends up moving past his delusion, in the process becoming a much more sociable person with many friends at work and around town, all because of Bianca. This film serves as an excellent example of how much easier it is to recover from a mental illness with a strong support structure in one’s life.

One recent surprising presence of mental illness in a film would be 2013’s Iron Man 3, directed by Shane Black. Robert Downey Jr. stars as the titular character, Tony Stark, in this summer blockbuster from Marvel. Tony Stark is left dealing with PTSD after the events in The Avengers, where otherworldly forces attacked New York and he barely escaped with his life. At multiple points throughout the movie, Stark is practically paralyzed with flashbacks of the attack, heavily breathing, experiencing something akin to a panic attack. These actual instances are executed very well, but the problem is that his issues aren’t solved through any gradual work, but through a supporting character telling him to relax and stop worrying about it. A phrase that would typically enrage someone with a mental illness ends up fixing all of his problems and making his struggles with PTSD an afterthought for the rest of the movie. While this is a serious fault, there is definitely some good to come from this. The fact that mental illness is even being addressed and included in such a high-profile blockbuster film such as this speaks highly about how far film has come as far as mental illness goes. Perhaps this will lead to more films like it, but ones that go more in-depth with the character study and the struggles they face.

A movie that portrays PTSD much more accurately would be 2007’s Reign Over Me, directed by Mike Binder. Adam Sandler plays Charlie Fineman, a man whose wife and children died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks. For the majority of the film, Charlie lives in complete denial about his family’s death, ignoring his past life and avoiding any situation where his family is brought up. Over the course of the movie, his old friend from college, Alan (played by Don Cheadle), helps him to move toward getting help for himself with therapy. He has trouble talking about things the first couple sessions, leaving abruptly each time. Eventually, he starts to soften up and speak about his family to Alan and his therapist. At no point does he ever seem like he’s truly over the issue, ready to take on the world with his newfound happiness, like is so common in movies that involve mental illness. Rather, the movie is ended with him very much still struggling, but in a place that he, as well as his family and friends, knows that he will continue to work at it productively. It’s a great ending for the movie, as it addresses the fact that mental illnesses are not something you solve overnight and are fixed forever. They’re often a lifelong battle, one that this film speaks to.

Additionally, a movie that successfully comments on PTSD from the perspective of war veterans would be 2005’s Jarhead, directed by Sam Mendes. The film is an excellent one, but the most poignant commentary on and explanation of PTSD come in the film’s first and last lines. In the first, a narration from the main character says, “A story: A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he’s finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands, love a woman, build a house, change his son’s diaper; his hands remember the rifle.” In the last, a narration from the same character again says, “A story: A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterwards he comes home, and he sees that whatever else he may do with his life – build a house, love a woman, change his son’s diaper – he will always remain a jarhead. And all the jarheads killing and dying, they will always be me. We are still in the desert.” These lines perfectly summarize the long-lasting effects of PTSD and how war is something that truly changes a person forever.

While movies tend to vary on a case-by-case basis as far as how accurate their portrayal of mental illness is, it’s certainly possible to review the entire landscape of films at a time to make an overall judgment of them. While the films reviewed her certainly have their share of flaws, it’s fair to say that overall they show a resounding success in portraying mental illnesses. When one looks back at the films of years past, full of damaging and stigmatizing images while perpetuating stereotypes, there has undoubtedly been a growth of responsibility in the media dealing with mental illness. There is definitely still room for improvement with regards to accuracy and issues with dramatization, but as a whole, the films of recent years have addressed mental illness with an admirable quality.

86th Oscar Predictions

Writing this up with minutes to spare, here are my predictions and hopes for this years Academy Awards. I’ll be going through the major categories that I know enough about to weigh in on, including both my personal winner and who I think will actually win.

BEST PICTURE NOMINEES:
American Hustle
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
Her
Nebraska
Philomena
12 Years A Slave
The Wolf of Wall Street

Some really great movies this year, but the clear race here is between Gravity & 12 Years a Slave, with American Hustle having an outside shot. Her was my favorite of the year, but my choice is based on who I want to see win that has a real possibility, and Her doesn’t really have a shot. I’d be happy with either of the two main contenders winning, but I lean 12 Years for both of my picks.

My Choice: 12 Years a Slave
My Guess: 12 Years a Slave

BEST ACTOR NOMINEES:
Christian Bale – American Hustle
Leonardo DiCaprio – The Wolf of Wall Street
Bruce Dern – Nebraska
Matthew McConaughey – Dallas Buyers Club
Chiwetel Ejiofor – 12 Years a Slave

The race here is really only between McConaughey and Ejiofor, with McConaughey being the slight favorite, but I really would love to see Ejiofor win here.

My Choice: Chiwetel Ejiofor
My Guess: Matthew McConaughey

BEST ACTRESS NOMINEES:
Amy Adams – American Hustle
Cate Blanchett – Blue Jasmine
Judi Dench – Philomena
Meryl Streep – August: Osage County
Sandra Bullock – Gravity

Cate Blanchett was supposedly incredible in Blue Jasmine, and I’m a big fan of her as an actor, so I’m going her on both.

My Choice: Cate Blanchett
My Guess: Cate Blanchett

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR NOMINEES:
Jared Leto – Dallas Buyers Club
Michael Fassbender – 12 Years a Slave
Barkhad Abdi – Captain Phillips
Jonah Hill – The Wolf of Wall Street
Bradley Cooper – American Hustle

Jared Leto wins this no question, but personally I want Fassbender here, I think he went somewhere as a slave-owner that people just don’t go anymore.

My Choice: Michael Fassbender
My Guess: Jared Leto

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS NOMINEES:
Sally Hawkins – Blue Jasminne
Jennifer Lawrence – American Hustle
June Squibb – Nebraska
Julia Roberts – August: Osage County
Lupita Nyong’o – 12 Years a Slave

It’s between Lupita and JLaw here, and I want so bad for Nyong’o to win, I have a bad feeling Lawrence might swing this because of how much the Academy(and everyone) adores her, but I think Lupita still will pull it out.

My Choice: Lupita Nyong’o
My Guess: Lupita Nyong’o

BEST DIRECTING NOMINEES:
Alexander Payne – Nebraska
Martin Scorsese – The Wolf of Wall Street
Steve McQueen – 12 Years a Slave
Alfonso Cuaron – Gravity
David O. Russel – American Hustle

Cuaron wins this easily, the technical achievement of Gravity is too great to ignore. Also, those long shots: damn.

My Choice: Alfonso Cuaron
My Guess: Alfonso Cuaron

Out of time, so here’s the rest I was gonna do!

BEST ANIMATED: Frozen

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:
My Choice: Before Midnight
My Guess: 12 Years A Slave

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Her(tends to go to the more cerebral type films, and this deserves it)

BEST ORIGINAL SONG: Let It Go(obviously)

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE:
My Choice: Her
My Guess: Her(Gravity is right there with it, but I think they’ll give it to Her with Gravity winning every technical award probably)

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS: Gravity

Watchmen – Movie Review

I want to preface this review with this: Watchmen, the original graphic novel, is my favorite book of all time. I’m not a huge reader, but it’s far and above my favorite thing I’ve ever read. The story itself is absolutely brilliant, very entertaining at surface level with a ton of depth that improves the overall work the more you look into it. Keeping that in mind, I will be reviewing the movie less so based on story, theme, etc.(which are great) and more so on its translation to film from its original medium.

The characters are an extremely important facet of Watchmen, and easily the area I was most concerned about going into the movie. After having created these characters in my head completely fleshed out and brought to life off of the pages, I thought it might be a tough adjustment to whatever Zach Snyder’s vision of these characters was. Turns out some of the casting choices were brilliant, but others not so.

If any character was to be adapted perfectly, Rorschach would have been my wish, and it was granted. Jackie Earle Haley perfectly embodies the tone and spirit of the character and brings everything to the screen that made him so great in the book. The gruff, growling voice he used matched up very closely to the one I read his lines in in my head. Jeffrey Dean Morgan as the Comedian was a great choice, both visual and as an actor. Dr. Manhattan was also very well done, portrayed by Billy Crudup. At first I was a bit put off by the soft, quiet voice he used, as I imagined something a bit deeper and more powerful, but it quickly grew on me, reflecting the character’s humble and objective nature.

I’m still a bit undecided on how I feel about Patrick Wilson as Nite Owl/Dan Drieberg. When I first saw the casting choice, I thought it was perfect; Wilson had both the look and acting ability to do a great job here. in execution, I wasn’t as big of a fan. In the book, Drieberg comes across as depressed, hopeless, just a generally downtrodden guy. Whether it was Wilson’s or Snyder’s choice, he was portrayed as more socially awkward and peculiar than I was expecting, which I wasn’t a big fan of, though I suppose that comes down to preference.

The problems start with Matthew Goode as Ozymandias and Malin Akerman as the Silk Spectre. Neither were bad perse; their acting never took me out of the movie. It was more that neither really did much with the character, neither brought it to life. I had less of a problem with the Silk Spectre as to me, she was never really a standout of a character compared to the rest in the book, but Ozymandias was originally one of the most interesting of the bunch and Goode’s portrayal is simply flat. While in the book he came across as powerful, confident, yet quietly superior, he was more condescending, cocky, and holier-than-thou in the film.

Visually, the movie is perfect. Snyder is one of the best at adapting comic book style visuals and this is easily the best I’ve seen from him thus far. The costumes were adapted without a hitch. Many of the scenes were frame-for-frame translations from the book, which was smart on Snyder’s part as it has some incredible compositions to begin with. The world is bursting with splashes of color, popping with the contrast of the natural grit of the scenery. Like in the book, Doctor Manhattan’s mars scenes are particularly beautiful. The standout scene of the movie is easily the montage to Bob Dylan’s “The Times They Are A-Changin'”. If you never intend to watch this movie, watch this scene here, it’s extremely well done.

My main fault with the movie comes in it’s pacing. The theatrical cut has a 2 hr 30 min runtime, which seems quite long, but the way the plot progresses just feels rushed, like it’s all going from scene to scene and wrapping up too quickly. I hate to keep comparing it to the book, but originally, just due to the medium, it took a lot longer to get through and progress, especially with “Tales of the Black Freighter” a seperate plotline with parallels to the story breaking it up between chapters. However, there are two additional cuts available to watch: the director’s cut and the ultimate cut. Director’s cut includes 20-40 minutes of extra scenes, and the ultimate cut includes that plus an animated “Tales…” between “chapters” in the movie. Whenever I get around to watching them, I may make a separate post comparing all three editions.

Overall, this was a very solid movie. I was a bit picky coming in due to my bias towards the book, but most of my fears were reasonably assuaged. Watchmen was long considered an un-filmable project, and though the movie mostly succeeds, it isn’t hard to see why. I give it 3.7 stars out of 5, with a very definite possibility for improvement in the extended cuts. In the case that I don’t write a review for it in the future, if the movie sounds like it might interest you, get your hands on the book as soon as you can. It’s the better of the two mediums for Watchmen, and it’s truly an experience not to be missed.

Watch the trailer for the movie here (great trailer, no spoilers at all, avoid other ones since they include some plot points):

Her – Movie Review

Synopsis: Her is a 2013 American science fiction dramedy romance film written, directed, and produced by Spike Jonze. The film stars Joaquin Phoenix, Amy Adams, Rooney Mara, Olivia Wilde, and Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Samantha. The film centers on a man who develops a relationship with a female voice produced by an intelligent computer operating system. (Wikipedia)

As some background, this film had me interested from the moment I saw the first trailer. The second had me convinced even further: I was going to love this movie. Everything I saw of it felt like it was right up my alley. In tone, it seemed quite similar to two of my favorite movies: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Lost in Translation. Now I hate to build up expectations like this before seeing a final product, because disappointment is inevitable with that sort of mindset, but I couldn’t help it. Against my own will, I built up sky-high expectations, ones I feared might be beyond the movie’s reach. It’s with great pleasure that I can say it somehow managed to meet these expectations.

First off, the acting in this movie is phenomenal. Joaquin Phoenix plays Theodore Twombley, a divorced loner having lost any real sense of joy in life, and Phoenix portrays him fantastically. His performance is never flashy, but it doesn’t need to be, and actually benefits from that. He displays so many real emotions and qualities of the character with ease, showing humor, insecurity, love, fear, and sadness all so naturally. Theodore is very likable, yet flawed, and he really comes alive as character because of it. He doesn’t feel like a movie protagonist, he feels human, imperfect and real. The film rests heavily on Phoenix’s performance, and it is a stellar one. The other main acting element of the film that must be mentioned is Scarlett Johanssen as the voice of Samantha, the Operating System and love interest of Theo. While Theodore may be the audience’s vehicle for immersion, the film’s premise relied on Samantha to be a convincing presence, making us feel as Theodore does. Simply put, Johanssen is fantastic in the role. Without a visual of her, all emotion must be transferred through voice only, which she does marvelously. The supporting cast of Rooney Mara, Chris Pratt, and Olivia Wilde are all great, but Amy Adams is a real standout among them. She plays a close friend of Theo’s, serving as his go-to for advice, while still remaining her own character with problems and dimension. She steals every scene she’s in, and I’m typically not even that big a fan of her. Overall though, the cast is fantastic, with great performances all around.

The film occurs in what Jonze calls “the slight future”. It’s very aptly-described, and honestly such an interesting future he creates. It’s tough to call it sci-fi, because that evokes totally different imagery to most, but it certainly features elements. The remarkable thing about his vision is that it’s so well-realized and different from any future we’ve seen in film, and you don’t have to suspend too much disbelief(outside of the complexity of the OS) to feel like it really could be possible. As for the OS, while it may seem so advanced that it’s beyond our reach, that’s partially the point. It’s posed as a “what if” rather than a prediction. The whole world manages to feel so much like our own, yet developed slightly further, just a bit down our timeline. This is seen in a variety of ways, from the games Theo plays to the fashion of the population. The fashion feels similar to the current trends in ways, but in a way that it’s quite plausible to progress that way. Men are shown wearing button down shirts(like today/always) but they are often either buttoned to the top button, or feature banded collars(google it). High-rise pants(think bellybutton-level) are the norm in the movie, usually composed of textured fabrics like wool. I read recently that the director of cinematography, Hoyte Van Hoytema, made a point to exclude the color blue from the movie as much as possible, sticking to reds and yellows, the warmer of the three primary colors. This was done to give the film a warm, unique look, but it also adds to the slight abstractness of the world. These small touches support the overall feel of a world quite like our own, yet futuristic in small ways.

I’ll be the first to admit, the premise of the film is certainly an odd one. If all you know about the movie is that it’s about a man dating an operating system, it’s understandable that it might seem weird or creepy. In general, the reaction I’ve seen from many people I know is a similar one. While it frustrated me a bit before seeing the movie that people wrote it off while I was so excited for it, I’m actually glad it turned out that way after having seen it. The idea of how people react to the concept is actually addressed within the movie, with some treating it as no big deal at all, and others seeing it as very weird, showing some lack of maturity or ability to handle a “real” relationship. That duality between the real life reaction to the movie’s concept and the in-movie reaction to the new technology makes it feel so much more real in the movie. It doesn’t take an acceptance of the tech for granted, which is likely how it would happen if this technology were to exist.

In its closed bubble of the romance between Theodore and Samantha, it’s a really lovely story. It’s when you stop to think about what this all means, what questions it asks about love and relationships and humanity, that you realize how much more there is to it and how great of a film it really is. What really is love? Can that question even be answered? How important/neccessary is the physical aspect of relationships, if at all? Is love bound between humans, or is it more than that?  The movie uses the small story of Theodore and Samantha to draw us in, but leaves us to realize how much bigger it is, beyond just them, beyond ourselves. Her analyzes the very concept of love, something so central to the human experience. It doesn’t question it’s existence, but rather invites us to take a deeper look at it, and furthermore, ourselves.

I don’t have a rating system that I’m gonna stick to yet, but for now, Her is a 5 out of 5. It now ranks high among my favorite movies of all time, and I strongly encourage anyone skeptical to try to be open to it and allow yourself the experience. It might not be for everyone, but it’s worth seeing to find out if it is.