MovieChat Forums > Wit (2001) Discussion > Some of it kinda pissed me off...

Some of it kinda pissed me off...

posted 19 years ago by jonadamora
19 replies | jump to latest

After reading the play a year ago (leveled me to tears...), I decided to watch the film adaptation... man, I thought it was pretty incredible, but one part of this movie just made me angry. First of all, though, I must say I enjoyed Emma Thompson and to a lesser extent Audra McDonald, but the person that pissed me off the most was Jonathan Woodward with his character choices. I read Dr. Posner's character as impetuous, but more scared and naive. But Woodward played him as an all-knowing *beep* in the end, with the turmoil of the false code, he just stood behind the action, guarded by his pride. This whole scene pretty much ruined the ending of the movie for me. The original play has Vivian standing up "amidst" the confusion among the code team, the nurse, and the doctor--everyone's freaking out. The contrast is shown in Vivan calmly walking away from the action (as it is still happening), towards a light in the full nude, making "death" just a pause, rather than an ending... I was expecting a shocker ending, instead it just leveled out.

Did anyone else who read the play feel similarly?

...plus, why was the sonnet narrated again in the end!? I felt that it simply defeated the purpose of humanity transcending above scholarliness. Margret Edson made the ending incredibly real for me when I read the play...quoting Donne after it's all over just takes away from the beauty of reality...

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Agrippina121 19 years ago

You didn't find the sonnet, and Ashford's interpretation of the sonnet, appropriate? Ashford tells Vivian that, according to Donne, all that separates life from life everlasting is a comma - a pause. To quote Ashford, "With the original punctuation restored...." I saw that as the point. If you interpret "original punctuation" as the metaphor for Vivian's acceptance of her own death, the sonnet is extraordinarily apt. That in some ways, with Vivian's original humanity restored to her through the process of her death (the humanity we see in her childhood), her own life mirrors the recreation of the actual sonnet. Moreover, Ashford makes the point that Gardner returns to the Westmoreland manuscript because she is a scholar, and that it takes a scholar's understanding to correctly interpret work as subtle as Donne's. This, too, parallels Vivian's transformation of understanding. Though she is exacting for the course of her professional career, only by restoring the balance of her humanity, with the insight of a scholar, does she restore the meaning of her life (work).

[–] simplypm2004 19 years ago

Bravo! "Uncompromising scholarly standards vs. simple human truth".

[–] jonadamora 17 years ago

Wow, I know it's been a couple of years since you wrote this, but thanks so much! You've inspired me to read and try to examine some of Donne's sonnets. You have such a deep understanding of the parallels in this movie.

[–] Church_girl 18 years ago

You know what angerd me? No last rites by a priest where givin during the film.

Jesus Saves, look to him for help look to him for a helping hand.

[–] PrariWolf 18 years ago

Of course, it was pretty obvious that Vivian had no formal religion, and non-Christians might be highly insulted to have such last rites, but Christians never seem to understand that not everyone in the world thinks or feels exactly! like! them!

Most of what pissed people off was meant to. I had a friend who went to a renowned women's college. She said there were students who constantly studied alone in their rooms, hated being around people, and instead withdrew (much like Vivian and, no doubt, her doctors) to the safety of their books and the library where they could enforce their solitude and quietude. Many earned straight As as a direct result of these antisocial personality traits. As seniors they were encouraged by their counselors that they were perfectly suited for the grind of premed coursework. No one ever considered whether, with their cold loathing of people, they would make anything but inhuman, inhumane doctors.

What brought up this conversation was our respective treatment by arrogant doctors who refused to listen, in hospitals where we were uncovered uncerimoniously like sides of beef to have our portions marked out for the students, drugged without our knowledge or consent (she had childhood leukemia, I have severe asthma, and we both had dealt with ill family members), our fears laughed at, our concerns brushed aside, our questions unanswered. Yes, it pissed me off, the treatment of Vivian in the hospital. It was supposed to, and Nichols et al got it absolutely right.

I was only able to watch this movie once. It is one of the most deeply moving artistic endeavors I have ever witnessed, and it is still too painful to go through again. Five years later, thinking about it can still bring me to the brink of tears and further. There were so many truths in it -- the coldness of "caregivers;" the urge to live fearlessly and the urge for safety, always in conflict; the small but hopeful bits of humanity and the agony of dying alone in a crowd of people and eventually, the oh-so-incidental comma of death itself. A masterpiece.

[–] blackeyedpea 16 years ago

To the post about the coldness of the doctors... My initial reaction was the same. I haven't seen the film, but after reading the play, I also thought that Jason's treatment of Vivian was pretty inhumane. I've been treated the same way, when I had an appendectomy my freshman year of college. There I was, a lone, scared, teenage girl, and all these people with cold hands and cold instruments are poking me in very personal places and throwing around a lot of jargon that I couldn't understand, while I'm doubled up in pain. Once, I asked about a term and was told that it meant I had a fever. But I had to ask to be told what was happening to me. Most people don't ask and consequently don't know. Vivian learns the terms, but still finds no real comfort, for the comfort of words can only go so far, and not as far a simple human touch or kind words.

Reflecting on the play, though, I think that the degree of study that is necessary to become a good doctor necessitates being comfortable spending long periods of time alone, studying, away from human contact (as does becoming a professor). Also, people in medical professions, especially in a cancer ward, must be used to seeing death on a regular basis. They cannot break down every time they lose a patient. If they do, they will not be in the field for very long. My mother worked in a nursing home for a while when I was a kid. She had to quit because she would get to know and like these people, and then they would die. She couldn't take it.

I'm not defending his actions or motives. No, he should not view Vivian as just a case study. (I also think he takes pleasure in causing her discomfort - after all, she was the toughest professor – she can take it, right?) At the end of the play, he is distraught, not for the loss of Vivian's life, but for the loss of his research. That's all he sees her as. I don't think it's fair to think all or most doctors (or professors) are like Jason (or Vivian), but I am supplying a reason as to why the aloofness is there.

[–] ineedextradough 18 years ago

Church_girl,
As a Christian myself, I was disappointed by your comment. The character was clearly presented as a supreme intellectual. I don't remember her religion (or lack of it) being a central issue of the movie.

I respect that you feel strongly about your religion, but you must understand that different people have different values & beliefs. They all deserve the same respect.

[–] cinnamonbrandy 17 years ago

First of all, would just like to say 'Me and God, we're like *that*' (crosses fingers) 'we are!'

'I'm like (crosses fingers) "God, I hope he gets my sense of humour..."'

and he's, like, (crosses fingers) 'Jesus, I hope she gets over that sense of humour..."'

Hands up who thinks God *gets* Donne? *Gets* Billy Connolly? *Gets* Eddie Izzard...?

Yep, I thought so, too.

Helen

[–] tramky 18 years ago

You were angered because this story did not include a priest performing last rites. I'd suggest that you need to visit your priest for counseling and suggestions for anger management. If you want a priest to perform in a story, you write it.

[–] ThePinheads 18 years ago

Would you try and convert a dying woman rather than let her pass in peace Church Girl? You cannot force someone to believe and if she didn't before than she certainly won't just because she is dying.

If you truly believe in God and forgiveness and acceptance you would surely think that God would accept Vivian into heaven as a good person. If he wouldn't accept her that says more about your beliefs than any major religion.

Stupid comment to make about such a beautiful film and ruined a thread which actually may have had some relevant comments in it. I suggest you keep religion out of a website that deals with films and tv and find someone else to bother.

[–] pensivepoetbabblingbard 18 years ago

While I agree that the comment was out of line, I might as well suggest that you keep your anti-religious sentiments out of such a website.

Moreover, your assumption that "If you truly believe in God and forgiveness and acceptance you would surely think that God would accept Vivian into heaven as a good person. If he wouldn't accept her that says more about your beliefs than any major religion" shows a complete lack of theological knowledge, and other things. But we won't discuss that.

[–] xtopher10 18 years ago

I am not trying to be difficult, but is there such a thing as "theological knowledge" ? If there were, it would certainly solve a lot of problems.

But all this has nothing to do with the film. It was beautiful and powerful
and just let it be that. I was crying, not for Vivian's disease or death,
but for the graphic and accurate depiction of what has become "modern medicine".
I am glad I have a living will with a DNR clause.

Very early in my life it was too late.
-Marguerite Duras

[–] NortonAddict 17 years ago

I consider theological knowledge to be theological theory - it's based on faith.

Nort

"You must LOVE the little birdies to give them this to perch on."
- "Roxanne"

[–] ThePinheads 18 years ago

Did I annoy someone? If there is freedom of speech then I have a right to say I don't believe. Also, did I say that I didn't believe or was anti-religion? How do you know what I think? Are you psychic as well as 'chosen'? I may well be a theologian or I may just be an innocent person wanting to share how much I enjoyed a film. I may be a devout Christian or a Muslim or a Pagan. Are you going to try to tell me which is right and which is wrong? I may have just thought that a gentle reminder to keep the thread on topic about the film was in order. Or I may just be spoiling for a fight with any arrogant person willing to rise to the bait. So do you fancy your chances?

[–] pensivepoetbabblingbard 18 years ago

I said that your sentiments were anti-religious, not that you were anti-religion. You can not deny that you expressed sentiments that were anti-religious, at least to some extent: you said to keep religion out of a website about films, television, and the like (even though certain films raise religious questions).

Moreover, you insult religious beliefs of another poster, saying that "If you truly believe in God and forgiveness and acceptance you would surely think. . . ." What this is doing is saying that your religious beliefs, or lack thereof (I never claimed to know whether you were religious) are valid, where the beliefs of Church Girl are foolish.

Your post was not a "gentle reminder," as you claim it might be, but a rather harsh and condescending rebuke. I didn't try to tell you which is right or wrong; you don't know what my beliefs are, either. However, I still believe that your comment shows more arrogance than my response: you, my friend, are the one who tried to tell someone what is right and what is wrong-- not I.

[–] chris30269 18 years ago

Replying to the original question, I too thought Jason was scared and naive, but only because this is his first time really in the real world persuing his own ideas. I'm playing the character now, and that's how I'm doing it. Even though he's taken a course in Bedside Manner, he didn't pay attention and doesn't practice the little he learned because, in the play, he is unintentionally cold to Vivian because he's never really had contact with humans before like this. (Was that a run-on sentence? I worry only to try to keep grammer, in the throes of the death it suffers ubiquitously on this site.) In the begining of the play, I don't ienify Vivian as a person, simply a human being. In the end, I see the mistake I made and how horrific it is to Vivian as a person.

[–] cleggson 17 years ago

about the Donne, although I haven't seen the play, the Donne reading provides the reflecting final temporal space where the plays' impact settles in (...and flights of angels...") and also provides the modern gloss on "...death thou shalt die" where death's death is witnessed in the time right after Vivian's death where her death has itself "died" as her lifeless body and the final blackout attest.

[–] hollankreil 17 years ago

I was more angered by how she was treated in the hospital, how she seemed to be pretty isolated.

"You're from the 60s! Peace love dope! Back, back to the 60s! No place for you in the future!"