Before Midnight (film)

Before Midnight (Directed by Richard Linklater)/2013

This film is the final of the trilogy by Richard Linklater. It explores the themes of love and the fading nature of a long-term relationship. Jesse and Celine are the central characters of Linklater's romantic tale that spanned over a decade. Jesse left his wife and son and chose to start a new relationship with Celine 18 years ago. Fast forward to today’s time, Jesse and Celine are on a holiday on a Greek island with their young daughters and troubled by the battle with Jesses's ex-wife for the custody of his son . Early in the film we see the quotidian grind of the long term partners: work, children, planning, logistics etc. etc as if the earlier times of their relationship have melted away into a rose-tinted past.

At dinner, Jesse, Celine and their friends discuss love and relationships. We see people dancing around the topic of love: the rational human-beings at the table are unwilling to come out and openly admit their belief in everlasting love at the risk of appearing ridiculous. In the modern world, people fear appearing foolish for believing in the fairy tale of "love". They tell themselves to take a practical and cynical approach: all things come to an end, and so will love.

As the conversation peters out an old woman that was listening to everyone quietly starts to talk about her fading memory of her dead husband: how painful it is for her that her memory of him is fading. It is like losing him all over again, she says. The group suddenly becomes solemn. It is as if the heretics have witnessed a miracle. They saw the possibility of the magical force of love still lurking beneath us despite how much we tell ourselves that we’re guided by logic and rationality.

Jesse and Celine get to spend a romantic evening on their own. However they have a horrible time as they have a big fight about things that any couples fight about: juggling work and life, household chores, infidelities; tensions which get heightened by insecurities with aging bodies and fears of rejection. Debates on feminism and male and female roles in the relationship play a big part it provides neither guidance nor solution. The conversations are all too familiar. Linklater seems to be saying that despite knowing the greatness of love, couples still argue and bicker because we won’t be able to get anything done if we were in perpetual state of love: modern life is not that forgiving.

A Most Violent Year (film)

A Most Violent Year (Directed by J.C. Chandor)/2014

A Most Violent Year is set in New York during the 1980s: crime and corruption are high and it is a difficult time to engage in honest business. Abel Morales, played by Oscar Isaac, is the owner of Standard Heating Oil Co, an up-and-coming heating oil company. The company is routinely hijacked by competing businesses, and we learn that there is a mafia element involved.

The movie operates on two levels. We witness the drama of Morales trying to figure out who is threatening his livelihood. His drivers are held up at gun-point and thrown out of the fuel trucks and engage in lengthy chases. People show up to his family’s house at night to threaten them and leave a gun outside as a warning. There is a bit of mystery around who is performing these acts. We also learn that his wife is the daughter of a previous mobster and at times puts pressure on him to go down the less righteous path and fight back with violence.

What this movie is really about is the fact that Morales is not willing to engage in corrupt business practices no matter how bad things get. For him, it is the way we conduct our lives that is most important, and it is not worth living unethically in order to get the things that we want. He is the Kantian ethicist: what we do is what is important, not what happens as a result.  An alternative way to determine what is morally good is to base it on the outcome: this is the utilitarian view; for example, the kind of behavior that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people is the morally right behavior.

There is an irony to Morales’ strong moral stance. His unwillingness to arm his drivers or seek the help of his wife’s family puts his truck drivers at risk. They are routinely beaten and their lives are put at risk. Moreover, he seems willing to sacrifice them in the name of his sense of moral duty. We are left wondering whether Morales is doing what is morally right, and if so, why so many people are getting hurt in the process.

Morales has a strong sense of right and wrong, but his rigidity lacks a human element: it fails to be flexible enough to help people and reduce harm when it matters. What is the point of sticking to a moral code if so many people get hurt in the process? This is the question that A Most Violent Year asks of the viewer but does not answer firmly either way. Apart from the interesting philosophical question I found this movie fairly average. It was good throughout but never great. Nothing about it was particularly memorable of interesting.

Oscar Isaacs plays Morales well, but after recently watching Show Me a Hero, I felt I was watching the same person. Overall, this is a movie worth watching but will likely not leave one thinking about it for very long afterwards.

The Jinx (TV Show)

The Jinx: the Life and Deaths of Robert Durst (Directed by Andrew Jarecki)/2015

This show is amazing throughout, but what happens in the last episode will make it a timeless classic. Unfortunately, as this is a review and you may not have seen the show, I cannot tell you what happens. And don't under any circumstances read about Robert Durst on the internet before watching the show!

The Jinx is a documentary miniseries that was made and released by HBO. Due to the almost unbelievable content of the show, the whole thing seemed like a case of life copying art. Throughout my viewing, I thought to myself ‘how could this really happen?’ If it were a purely fictional drama, a viewer would likely dismiss it as too unrealistic. The blurring of life and art is also intensified by Jarecki’s use of classic HBO drama stylistic tools: the beautiful, abstract introduction and the clever use of music throughout.

Robert Durst is an heir to a wealthy family. He was first suspected of killing his wife in the 80s. Then his best friend was shot in the back of the head, and some people suspected him of that murder too. He was eventually arrested for a third suspected murder where a body was decapitated and thrown in the ocean. While he admitted killing the third person, he claimed it was self-defense and that he decapitated the body and threw it in the ocean as he knew he would be suspected as guilty of murder due to his profile.

The Jinx excels largely due to Robert Durst’s participation in it. He is interviewed extensively about all of the allegations, and speaks candidly in an strangely likable way.  He never denies anything that is too unreasonable and intersects his explanations with subtle witticisms. Throughout the show it was hard to tell whether he is a psychotic murderer or an extremely unlucky eccentric that is treated unfairly by a tabloid-like media.  I leaned toward the former, but at times gave him the benefit of the doubt, as it was hard to fathom someone could lie consistently for such lengthy periods.

The Jinx implicitly questions the criminal justice system’s demand to prove a case ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ in an adversarial setting where there are no limitations on resources used in telling one’s story. Durst could afford close to $2 million to pay for the two best lawyers in Texas.  This brings to light the inequality of a justice system where wealth can obtain superior skill in developing a more convincing story.

The case of Durst’s third suspected killing of Morris Black is the most poignant one.  Durst admitted to dismembering the body, he admitted to fleeing town under an alias, and he was already suspected for two other murders.  However, it is difficult when there are no witnesses to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Durst was not acting in self-defense. Some of the jurors found his story and testimony so compelling that at the time of The Jinx’s filming they still thought he was the victim of a vicious smear campaign.

The Jinx made me dwell on the fragility of truth. It can often be hard to tell whether someone is lying or not, and even in extreme cases such as Robert Durst, it can be very hard to know whether we are encountering a case of extremely bad luck or pathological lying. This is made particularly difficult when money and/or the media becomes involved, and other motives begin to erode people's desire for truth.

Challenging the Stigma of Mental Illness (book)

Challenging the Stigma of Mental Illness (edited by Patrick Corrigan)/2011

The debate around the stigmatisation of mentally ill people revolves around this question: is it the label of being mentally ill that leads people to be shunned by others in workplaces and housing or is it the behavior caused by the mental illness which leads people to turn away from them? This question is dealt with extensively in this unique set of essays edited by Patrick Corrigan. This review will cover a few of the ideas outlined in that book and then present Corrigan's conclusions.

It is no secret that mental-health labels are often accompanied by negative stereotypes, and that the labels are at least partly the driving factor in producing stigmatisation. The label might come from a psychiatrist, from the person themselves, or be obtained through association, such as being seen coming out of a psychologist’s office. These stereotypes might not bind to the labels by necessity, but cultural history has so deeply entrenched them into the meaning of psychiatric diagnosis that for all practical purposes they are bound together.

According to labelling theory, when a psychiatric label is applied to an individual, the individual suffers social rejection in various subtle ways, and that this leads to further deviance from the norm as the individual begins to play the role of a mentally ill person as established by social convention. Being ‘mentally ill’, according to this theory, is a role that persons may be cast in.

Multiple studies have shown that the general public were more likely to stigmatise a person labelled mentally ill even in the absence of any negative behaviour (Link, Cullen, Frank and Wozniak). The study by Bruce Link found that psychiatric labelling affected patients’ income and employment twice as much as other status (marital status, education, age, and occupation).

Moreover, being labelled, or experiencing rejection leads mentally ill individuals to self-stigmatise. This self-stigmatisation contains a cognitive element, as the individual begins to view himself as inferior to “normals”, and a behavioural element, in the form of acting less confidently, more defensively, and at times avoiding potentially threatening contact completely.

It is not difficult to imagine the impact such a process would have on the life of a mentally ill individual. In searching for employment, the mentally ill person may face a combination of periods out of the workforce due to hospitalisation, expectations of rejection, low ratings of self-efficacy, and lack of social contacts. Moreover, an inability to gain stable and reasonable employment impacts the ability of individuals to gain satisfactory living conditions, start families, and improve feeling of low self-worth.

Patrick Corrigan notes the difficulty for mentally ill individuals in achieving the two most important life goals: obtaining competitive employment and living independently in a safe and comfortable home. He notes that American surveys consistently show that less than 15% of people with serious and persistent mental illness are employed, even though the majority desire regular work. Moreover, he points out that studies have also shown that the majority of Americans considered ‘long-term mentally ill’ live in inadequate housing, lack needed supports, or are homeless. In a powerful conclusion he states:

‘In part, these problems occur because of the disabilities that result from serious mental illness. Many people with serious mental illness lack the social and coping skills to meet the demands of the competitive work force and independent housing. Nevertheless, the problems of many people with psychiatric disability are exacerbated by labels and stigma. People with mental illness are frequently unable to obtain good jobs or find suitable housing because of the prejudice of key members in their communities: employers and landlords.’

The final part of this quote is fundamental: if stigmatisation of mental illness is going to reduce on a practical level, it needs to reduce in the minds and actions of employers and land owners. It is social and political power that allows stigmatisation to occur. For example, patients in a hospital might have stereotypes about their carers; however, these do not lead to stigmatisation, as the patients do not have the power to deprive those in control. It is only when those holding significant power implicitly or explicitly exclude a groups for having a certain trait that stigmatisation can truly occur.

Show Me a Hero (TV Show)

Show Me a Hero (Directed by Paul Haggis)/2015

Show Me a Hero follows the development of a housing complex in the city of Yonkers, New York in the late 80s. It follows the cross section of political dynamics that is involved in an operation of a city.  The federal government requires the city to build a housing complex for low income families in the projects majority of whom are black.  The city withstands this as long as it can.  Its constituents do not want this. The reality is that it has no power to push back; nevertheless, various city counsellors make false promises to their constituents in order to get elected and once elected, repackage the message and proceed with the housing development.

The citizens are outraged. The white middle-class folks do not want people from the projects to come and turn their neighbourhoods into a ghetto. The black folks don’t want to move to a place where they’d face discrimination and hostility. Some decide to get off the couch and get out to better inform themselves.

Norma and Doreen, two women from different sides of the issue, go to a gathering, initially to listen and observe but eventually to voice their concerns in protest.  We see Norma and Doreen towards the end of the series actively participating in the formal governing structures in their locality.

People like Norma just want to achieve one thing – to improve her neighbourhood. For others, once they get a taste of politics they crave more.  There is an interesting section in the series, where one of the city counsellors Vinni (played by Wynona Ryder) laments to another, Nick Wasicsko (played fantastically by Oscar Isaac) that she doesn’t want to be a normal citizen after being a counsellor. She craves being someone special.  By exercising political power, an individual feels empowered; for some this creates the possibility of a change for the better, for others it's fame and recognition.

The show is neither idealistic nor pessimistic about the political power that is at play. I would say it is a thorough examination of the various stages of political power; participation, exercise and manipulation: themes which, one of the writers, David Simon explored in the Wire series.  The show paints politicians as essentially self-interested careerists that the system does not allow to engage in meaningful action.  It appears to be saying that improvements to society can be made by grassroots movement and advocates for activism at the individual level and often in the most immediate local environment: getting out and talking to people; getting involved. It is essentially a participatory view of democracy: citizens involved in the decisions that impact them.

Democracy is a unique form of governance in that it gives people choice whether or not to participate. People can participate directly or as a representative, the show seems to be favouring the former model. Some like John Stuart Mill have argued that direct involvement with democracy enhance the moral qualities of citizens as a whole because by getting themselves involved and serving the interest of others they come to think of the common good which in turn changes their own perspective and behaviour. This is clearly reflected in Norma and Doreen’s story and it is a more positive aspect of democracy.

"Show me a hero and I’ll write you a tragedy", said F. Scott Fitzgerald. Wasicsko certainly wanted to be a hero; he wanted to be recognised and admired. We would never truly know whether he did what he did for the good of the city or for his egotistical desires. Perhaps even he didn’t know and that may not be so different from any other politician. When it comes to politicians, the show appears to be saying that a political career is a grueling journey with its ups and downs and while you may think going up in the polls makes you a hero, tragedy can await you at the come down.