![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 14 of 14. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by sid on January 1, 2002, at 10:14:11
I saw the movie yesterday and liked it a lot.
I read the book a few years ago and liked it a lot too (even more because it is much richer - there is only so much you can put in a 2 hour movie).
It's about John Nash, a mathematician, 1994 Nobel Prize in Economics, whose PhD dissertation lead to incredible new developments in economic theory. After his dissertation however, he did not produce much for a long time because he suffered from schizophrenia. He still does, but now manages it so he got back on the faculty at Harvard. The movie is well done and seems like a good step towards demystifying mental illness. Go see it !
Posted by Cruz on January 1, 2002, at 22:18:49
In reply to A Beautiful Mind - movie and book, posted by sid on January 1, 2002, at 10:14:11
On a scale from 1 to 10 I would give this movie a 4. Just to slow paced. Now a movie like Conspiracy Theory with Mel Gibson and Julia Roberts was entertaining. Just because a movie is based on a true story does'nt mean it is entertaining.
> I saw the movie yesterday and liked it a lot.
>
> I read the book a few years ago and liked it a lot too (even more because it is much richer - there is only so much you can put in a 2 hour movie).
>
> It's about John Nash, a mathematician, 1994 Nobel Prize in Economics, whose PhD dissertation lead to incredible new developments in economic theory. After his dissertation however, he did not produce much for a long time because he suffered from schizophrenia. He still does, but now manages it so he got back on the faculty at Harvard. The movie is well done and seems like a good step towards demystifying mental illness. Go see it !
Posted by sid on January 2, 2002, at 11:45:07
In reply to It was to slow paced and boreing for my taste, posted by Cruz on January 1, 2002, at 22:18:49
> Just because a movie is based on a true story does'nt mean it is entertaining.
I completely agree, I just happened to like this one. I must say I expected it to be very bad, so anything above that was a good surprise. I can't stand Russel Crow in general. The book is much much better, especially for economists and mathematicians, although as I said before, it does have universal appeal.
Posted by Noa on January 4, 2002, at 6:48:01
In reply to Re: It was to slow paced and boreing for my taste » Cruz, posted by sid on January 2, 2002, at 11:45:07
I heard that the movie is pretty good as a movie but not a factual accounting of his life. Was the book more factual?
Posted by sid on January 4, 2002, at 12:03:46
In reply to Re: It was to slow paced and boreing for my taste, posted by Noa on January 4, 2002, at 6:48:01
Yes. The book has lots more details, and also it talks about the people he evolved around in school, the eras, politics, etc... at the time. It is about him and people and events around him. It is a very good book that won awards all over the world. I usually don't like biographies much, but this one is very nice. It also makes clearer his contribution and why he got the Econ Nobel Prize. If I remember well, he got married twice and he had a son with another woman while still being married - to his first wife I think. The movie only pictures him with one woman - romanced somewhat. His life was tougher than the movie shows I think, and he was at times quite a handful to deal with, to be polite. He is more endearing in the movie than he was in reality. I recommend the book, warning you that it's not just about him, but also the people around him - people who loved him and also important people that he worked with or studied with.
> I heard that the movie is pretty good as a movie but not a factual accounting of his life. Was the book more factual?
Posted by bob on January 4, 2002, at 23:56:58
In reply to A Beautiful Mind - movie and book, posted by sid on January 1, 2002, at 10:14:11
Well... I saw the movie just a little while ago. I'm kind of on the fence about it. Maybe I missed something, but at one point in the movie, he stops taking his meds. He starts to have his delusions again, and they say he has to go back to the hospital. He never does, and they never show that he starts to take his meds again. What is that? He just wills himself out of severe paranoid delusions? I think it does a slight disservice in that respect by leading people to believe they can will themselves to be better. Near the end of the movie he mentions that he takes the "newer" drugs. I don't know, maybe I missed something, but there seems like a real long period there when he wasn't being treated. Ahhhh, if the mentally ill only really did have that luxury!
If you really look at his life once the disease took over, it was kind of sad. He basically hung out in the library of Princeton for decades, being made fun of by the students. This story never would have been told by Hollywood if he hadn't won the Nobel prize. There would have been very little happiness there.
Posted by Noa on January 8, 2002, at 18:20:20
In reply to Re: A Beautiful Mind - movie and book, posted by bob on January 4, 2002, at 23:56:58
[WARNING: ABM is a good movie, I recommend it, BUT it might spoil it for you if you haven't seen the movie and want to see the movie, if you read what follows]
Bob, I had a bit of a problem with that part too--he chooses not to go back in hospital, and had been off meds, totally tormented by his demons, and then somehow, through the love of his wife, he tames his demons, although, as you said, at the end, he refers to taking newer antipsychotics. Like you, I wondered about the intervening years--had he been off meds until the newer meds appeared on the scene? Was he able to tame his demons through the "power of love"? Or were they tormenting him until he started the newer meds?
Until the scene where he refuses to go back into the hospital, and his wife pledges to help him through with love, they pretty much had me engrossed in the story. But that scene came too suddently on the heels of the one where she goes wild with sexual frustration and also talks to the colleague about thinking of leaving him. I just couldn't buy her committment to him at that point, which would have helped me believe that maybe he was able to manage with her support (still something of a stretch, though).
Also, immediately prior to that scene, when the doctor reappears, I had difficulty with the logistics of it. Dr. Rosen was his doctor when he was in Cambridge, MA, working out of the "McArthur" hospital near Boston. Then, in the crisis scene, his wife calls Rosen and he somehow appears in Princeton. Did he fly down? Did Nash really not have a doctor following him in Princeton after his move there from Massachusetts? Or was this sloppy filmmaking? In any case, it was one of those inconsistencies that has the power to break the "trance" for me. Before the inconsistency appeared, I was able to let myself be absorbed by the story, now the trance was broken and I was no longer "in" the story, and it was an interruption in my ability to be engrossed, to go with the flow.
Another inconsistency that had that effect was the variable make-up work. Nash's make up artist was quite good--I believed the aging process. But Alicia's make up was not always so good. There were decades when she looked late 30's to his late 50's, while earlier and later in the story there was not, apparently, such a big age differential. Again, maybe not a big deal, but it's the kind of little inconsistency that breaks the movie trance in an otherwise good film.
Another thing I found myself wondering about--and why I now need to read the book--is how true to the real story did the movie stay in terms of the nature of his delusions and hallucinations? I kept thinking about how rare visual hallucinations usually are, but then was thinking about how he probably is very much a visual thinker, and that his mind is not a typical one.
I thought Russell Crowe did a fantastic job of acting the part. I especially felt the scenes where he tries to evade and ward off the hallucinations seemed realistic--the mannerisms seemed real, the speech patterns, etc. At least from my limited experience observing/interacting with the all-too many homeless mentally ill people I've encountered on city streets. In many ways, I felt his performance helped me see beyond these ways of behaving. I also liked the way they dealt with his one episode of violence--his conflict seemed believable to me, and I also found his epiphany -about why the hallucinations couldn't be real- was plausible to me, especially given his logical mind.
[OK, if you are reading this post and you haven't seen the movie yet and would like to see the movie, that wasn't such a good idea, but REALLY now is the time to stop reading. I've given away a lot already, but it just might ruin your moviegoing experience if you read the rest of this message]
And, I really was pulled into the delusional system. I thought that part was very well done! I was totally taken. I thought that, while some aspects of it were his paranoia, etc., that his paranoia was somehow a result of some of these events being real, and that the nature of the business he was in made it plausible that he would be involved in some cloak-and-dagger work, and that kind of work could easily induce paranoia, or at least trigger it in a susceptible person, and that we were seeing it develop, rather than seeing it already full blown.
Posted by sid on January 8, 2002, at 20:05:47
In reply to DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET, posted by Noa on January 8, 2002, at 18:20:20
> Bob, I had a bit of a problem with that part too--he chooses not to go back in hospital, and had been off meds, totally tormented by his demons, and then somehow, through the love of his wife, he tames his demons, although, as you said, at the end, he refers to taking newer antipsychotics. Like you, I wondered about the intervening years--had he been off meds until the newer meds appeared on the scene? Was he able to tame his demons through the "power of love"? Or were they tormenting him until he started the newer meds?
I don't know if it was the power of love, or the power of his rational mind... In reality he did get a divorce from his first wife, so that part is romanced, and yes, rather unrealistic. I don't remember the details from the book (read it with major depression, hence don't remember much of it!).
> Another inconsistency that had that effect was the variable make-up work. Nash's make up artist was quite good--I believed the aging process. But Alicia's make up was not always so good.I noticed that! It was awful at his Nobel Prize speech! I barely recognized her. And indeed, prios to that, she pretty much looked in her 30's.
> And, I really was pulled into the delusional system. I thought that part was very well done! I was totally taken. I thought that, while some aspects of it were his paranoia, etc., that his paranoia was somehow a result of some of these events being real, and that the nature of the business he was in made it plausible that he would be involved in some cloak-and-dagger work, and that kind of work could easily induce paranoia, or at least trigger it in a susceptible person, and that we were seeing it develop, rather than seeing it already full blown.Me too ! That was very well done indeed.
Posted by bob on January 9, 2002, at 0:15:41
In reply to DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET, posted by Noa on January 8, 2002, at 18:20:20
> [WARNING: ABM is a good movie, I recommend it, BUT it might spoil it for you if you haven't seen the movie and want to see the movie, if you read what follows]
>
> Bob, I had a bit of a problem with that part too--he chooses not to go back in hospital, and had been off meds, totally tormented by his demons, and then somehow, through the love of his wife, he tames his demons, although, as you said, at the end, he refers to taking newer antipsychotics. Like you, I wondered about the intervening years--had he been off meds until the newer meds appeared on the scene? Was he able to tame his demons through the "power of love"? Or were they tormenting him until he started the newer meds?
>*** If he was able to "tame is demons through the power of love", he is a rare bird indeed. That makes for an extaordinary story, but not a good thing to tell the general public: "See, if you find someone who loves you and try hard enough and just about anything will go away! I told you it was your fault, and that if you tried hard enough everything would be better." I suspect in real life that he went back on the drugs that they show him not taking. Of course, if he did, then how did he function at all, after they showed the effects on that front porch scene, or the scene of him holding the crying baby? ***
> Until the scene where he refuses to go back into the hospital, and his wife pledges to help him through with love, they pretty much had me engrossed in the story. But that scene came too suddently on the heels of the one where she goes wild with sexual frustration and also talks to the colleague about thinking of leaving him. I just couldn't buy her committment to him at that point, which would have helped me believe that maybe he was able to manage with her support (still something of a stretch, though).
>
***I hate to appear shallow, but what would this beautiful woman have seen in this guy -- especially at that point. The juxtaposition of a modelesque woman with aplomb and poise head-over-heels for a nerdy freak seemed unrealistic to me. I wonder what drew her to him in the first place in real life? In the movie he has everything to gain in that relationship, and she has everything to lose. The only real bond they show is when he's pointing out star constellations to her.***> Another thing I found myself wondering about--and why I now need to read the book--is how true to the real story did the movie stay in terms of the nature of his delusions and hallucinations? I kept thinking about how rare visual hallucinations usually are, but then was thinking about how he probably is very much a visual thinker, and that his mind is not a typical one.
>*** I have to admit I struggled with the nature of his delusions also. Do schizophrenics really have hallucinations that are akin to actual life experiences that last for long periods of time etc? How realistic were those elaborate delusions? I suppose the mind is capable of some pretty wild things. ***
> I thought Russell Crowe did a fantastic job of acting the part. I especially felt the scenes where he tries to evade and ward off the hallucinations seemed realistic--the mannerisms seemed real, the speech patterns, etc. At least from my limited experience observing/interacting with the all-too many homeless mentally ill people I've encountered on city streets. In many ways, I felt his performance helped me see beyond these ways of behaving. I also liked the way they dealt with his one episode of violence--his conflict seemed believable to me, and I also found his epiphany -about why the hallucinations couldn't be real- was plausible to me, especially given his logical mind.*** I did have one problem here. Once he is able to recognize that he has delusions/hallucinations, they continue to persist, but they almost turn into "friends" by the end of the movie. I have a hard time imagining that an unwanted hallucination/delusion would become so benign. ***
>
> [OK, if you are reading this post and you haven't seen the movie yet and would like to see the movie, that wasn't such a good idea, but REALLY now is the time to stop reading. I've given away a lot already, but it just might ruin your moviegoing experience if you read the rest of this message]
>
> And, I really was pulled into the delusional system. I thought that part was very well done! I was totally taken. I thought that, while some aspects of it were his paranoia, etc., that his paranoia was somehow a result of some of these events being real, and that the nature of the business he was in made it plausible that he would be involved in some cloak-and-dagger work, and that kind of work could easily induce paranoia, or at least trigger it in a susceptible person, and that we were seeing it develop, rather than seeing it already full blown.*** Yes... they did a good job with that. ***
Posted by Noa on January 9, 2002, at 8:21:16
In reply to Re: DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET » Noa, posted by bob on January 9, 2002, at 0:15:41
> *** If he was able to "tame is demons through the power of love", he is a rare bird indeed. That makes for an extaordinary story,
Yes, truly a *hollywood* film.
> >I suspect in real life that he went back on the drugs that they show him not taking. Of course, if he did, then how did he function at all, after they showed the effects on that front porch scene, or the scene of him holding the crying baby? ***
Well, I did notice he developed a shuffle walk, which I wonder whether it is an extrapyramidal side effect of the neuroleptics. I don't know, maybe he took a lower dose? They purposely, I think, seem to have left this ambiguous.
> ***I hate to appear shallow, but what would this beautiful woman have seen in this guy -- especially at that point. The juxtaposition of a modelesque woman with aplomb and poise head-over-heels for a nerdy freak seemed unrealistic to me.Well, first of all, it is a fairly common scenario in hollywood films for the leading man to be "interesting" and the leading woman to be beautiful. Think of all the older men with yonger, gorgeous women, or the kind of pudgy or ordinary looking guys with such women. I guess you see that in real life, too, sometimes.
Plus, she was his student when they met. She was an unusual woman of her time, if you think about it. A graduate student in math at MIT in the early 1950s. And he was portrayed as a brilliant, well-built, nonconformist. He was also a "project" which appeals to some women. But he was also soft in some ways, perhaps appealling because he lacked the usual sophistication of the men she was typically courted by. And, he had a great wry wit!
> I have a hard time imagining that an unwanted hallucination/delusion would become so benign. ***Yes, I wonder about this too, although I don't know enough about hallucinations/delusions.
Posted by Noa on January 9, 2002, at 8:23:20
In reply to Re: DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET » Noa, posted by sid on January 8, 2002, at 20:05:47
>
> I don't know if it was the power of love, or the power of his rational mind...Yep--that too. Like his ability to reason that the hallucinations couldn't be real because the little girl never gets older.
Posted by bob on January 9, 2002, at 10:40:58
In reply to Re: DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET » bob, posted by Noa on January 9, 2002, at 8:21:16
> Plus, she was his student when they met. She was an unusual woman of her time, if you think about it. A graduate student in math at MIT in the early 1950s. And he was portrayed as a brilliant, well-built, nonconformist. He was also a "project" which appeals to some women. But he was also soft in some ways, perhaps appealling because he lacked the usual sophistication of the men she was typically courted by. And, he had a great wry wit!
Wow! That's some serious insight. Are you male or female? I like the "project" statement.
Posted by Noa on January 9, 2002, at 15:55:15
In reply to Re: DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET » Noa, posted by bob on January 9, 2002, at 10:40:58
I'm female.
Posted by bob on January 9, 2002, at 17:37:23
In reply to Re: DONT READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ABM YET, posted by Noa on January 9, 2002, at 15:55:15
Ahhhh! So that's where your amazing insight came from. I was thinking... "Man, if this is a guy, he sure knows his stuff!"
Maybe someone could take me on as a project. I'd be a real fixer-upper!
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.