MovieChat Forums > Trainspotting (1996) Discussion > Best deterrant? Trainspotting, Requiem f...

Best deterrant? Trainspotting, Requiem for a Dream or others?


Just wondering - what film would you show someone to put them off drugs for life?

For me I'd have to say Requiem. While I love Trainspotting and don't think it glamorises drug use in any way I think it shows a bit more of the 'fun' elements of drug culture.

I seriously think an edited Requiem should be played to older school kids - would have more impact than all the 'drugs are bad' videos I sat through for sure.

Any other suggestions . . . ?

reply

I personally did not find "Kids" a good "deterrent". It is shocking, yes, and it teaches about the dangers of unprotected sex, but I feel like most people would miss the point of the film... I thought it was rather pointless in fact. Besides, all I could feel was disgust, and there was no connection with the characters whatsoever.
"Requiem for a Dream" is exaggerated and there might be some inaccuracies but overall it does a good job as a "deterrent" as long as you watch it with an open mind.
"Thirteen" is also great and I would recommend it to a teenage girl since they would identify with the characters and situations more. I am in the process of watching "Christiane F." but it is two-hours long so I tend to get bored. I also took a quick look at "The Basketball Diaries" and it is rather humorous. I'm not sure what to think of it now.
I was watching "Drugstore Cowboy" too but I never actually got to the end. It is nice.
"Trainspotting" does show the bad side of doing drugs but most people tend to ignore that.
I am looking for more "anti-drug" films, not just for my own benefit, but to help other people like me. I'm a teenager and I know some people that do this kind of thing, unfortunately. Dialogue doesn't help much...

reply

Traffik-the original 90s TV series-showed the sad,scuzzy side of addiction and its' effect on users and their families.And that a 'nice' background wouldn't make the addiction any 'nicer'.

reply

You can't compare the two, because Requiem for a Dream was definitely supposed to be a "drug deterrent" movie or at least be a very dark dark movie with the central theme being drugs and tragedy.

However, Trainspotting is a realistic interpretation of an average hardcore heroin addicts life and biography. It shows the users having a good time sometimes because that's what heroin does for the most part, and then it shows the inherently negative effects the good times have. Trainspotting, for the most part, is such a believable story that it's scary. Whereas Requiem is completely over exaggerated and far fetched, and any long term drug user would instantly be aware that the way the movie portrays drug use is so ridiculous and unrealistic.

I still think Requiem is a good movie though, just not the way most people are interpreting it in a literal way. It should NOT be interpreted literally, but instead should be seen as a sort of dream sequence or metaphor for the negative effects of drug use and dark connotation that it exhumes. However, in no way is it realistic and a literal interpretation of what drug use is like, or else why the hell would anyone ever do drugs in the first place if that was exactly what it is like for the average user.

reply

I thought Traffic and Sherrybaby were good gritty films that show many negatives

reply

I would say "A Scanner Darkly"... although I read the book first.

The preface to "A Scanner Darkly" is enough to put a person off drugs for life:


A Scanner Darkly, by Philip K. Dick

AUTHOR'S NOTE

This has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did. They wanted to have a good time, but they were like children playing in the street; they could see one after another of them being killedrun over, maimed, destroyedbut they continued to play anyhow. We really all were very happy for a while, sitting around not toiling but just *beep* and playing, but it was for such a terrible brief time, and then the punishment was beyond belief: even when we could see it, we could not believe it. For example, while I was writing this I learned that the person on whom the character Jerry Fabin is based killed himself. My friend on whom I based the character Ernie Luckman died before I began the novel. For a while I myself was one of these children playing in the street; I was, like the rest of them, trying to play instead of being grown up, and I was punished. I am on the list below, which is a list of those to whom this novel is dedicated, and what became of each.

Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car. You would call that not a disease but an error in judgment. When a bunch of people begin to do it, it is a social error, a life-style. In this particular life-style the motto is "Be happy now because tomorrow you are dying," but the dying begins almost at once, and the happiness is a memory. It is, then, only a speeding up, an intensifying, of the ordinary human existence. It is not different from your life-style, it is only faster. It all takes place in days or weeks or months instead of years. "Take the cash and let the credit go," as Villon said in 1460. But that is a mistake if the cash is a penny and the credit a whole lifetime.

There is no moral in this novel; it is not bourgeois; it does not say they were wrong to play when they should have toiled; it just tells what the consequences were. In Greek drama they were beginning, as a society, to discover science, which means causal law. Here in this novel there is Nemesis: not fate, because any one of us could have chosen to stop playing in the street, but, as I narrate from the deepest part of my life and heart, a dreadful Nemesis for those who kept on playing. I myself, I am not a character in this novel; I am the novel. So, though, was our entire nation at this time. This novel is about more people than I knew personally. Some we all read about in the newspapers. It was, this sitting around with our buddies and *beep* while making tape recordings, the bad decision of the decade, the sixties, both in and out of the establishment. And nature cracked down on us. We were forced to stop by things dreadful.

If there was any "sin," it was that these people wanted to keep on having a good time forever, and were punished for that, but, as I say, I feel that, if so, the punishment was far too great, and I prefer to think of it only in a Greek or morally neutral way, as mere science, as deterministic impartial cause-and-effect. I loved them all. Here is the list, to whom I dedicate my love:

To Gaylene, deceased
To Ray, deceased
To Francy, permanent psychosis
To Kathy, permanent brain damage
To Jim, deceased
To Val, massive permanent brain damage
To Nancy, permanent psychosis
To Joanne, permanent brain damage
To Maren, deceased
To Nick, deceased
To Terry, deceased
To Dennis, deceased
To Phil, permanent pancreatic damage
To Sue, permanent vascular damage
To Jerri, permanent psychosis and vascular damage

... and so forth.

In Memoriam. These were comrades whom I had; there are no better. They remain in my mind, and the enemy will never be forgiven. The "enemy" was their mistake in playing. Let them all play again, in some other way, and let them be happy.

reply

[deleted]