yeah you surely dont know what a metaphor is and you dont know what a fregoli syndrome is.
A metaphor is a figure of speech that refers to something as being the same as another thing for rhetorical effect.[1] It may provide clarity or identify hidden similarities between two ideas. Realistic: representing things in a way that is accurate and true to life.Anomalisa has its realistic moments (the sex scene) but uses lots of metaphors to make its point (Everyone has the same voice, Lisa changing voices progressively as Michael sees her more and more as an average human being and not the godess he imagined), so it's not completely realistic. You can relate to the characters and what they are going through, as it is close to real life, but the WAY it is showed is not realistic, not true to life, not how we experienced it really, more like we reflect on it.
I don't really understand however why you bring the Fregoli Syndrom into this, as Michael is not suffering at all from this disease (he has none of the symptoms)
the movie wasnt trying to be that, it was trying to give a recreation of our lives through the eyes of a higher being.
No, not everyone can relate to what Michael is going through, though we can understand where he is coming from, and we just follow him for a very short period of time. So it's in no way a recreation of "our lives", just Michael's. It's not because you feel awkward at times (everybody does) that it represents everybody. It's not about "being awkward" either, it's about relating to people and finding enjoyment in their company, a connection. That's the big problem of Michael, that he isn't connecting with people, that he is unsatisfied with his life but doesn't really understand why, he can't explain it, which is showed in his conversation with his ex.
Michael is no "higher being" in any way or shape. He is in fact very average in the way he relates to people. He never reflects on himself, he always rejects the fault on the others, he can't find enjoyment in his relationship (friendship or family), and don't hesitate to cheat to feel something, a connection, and dismiss it as soon as it starts to get too real (the little thing that starts annoying him when Lisa is eating). He is selfish, manipulative, takes advantages of his status as a popular author, doesn't care about the impact of his actions and how he affects others people (he invites his ex just because he is lonely, he takes advantages of Lisa and then throw her away as soon as it doesn't feel right anymore, he treats badly his family and friends when he gets home).
So yeah, a very average human being, in fact.
It's not about "life being weird" either. Life isn't weird, it's messy, difficult, we don't always undestand it and it's never exactly how we want it, but the "weird" factor is not really showed in this movie at all.
also yeah, inside out was so deep and brings something new to the table.
Yes, the representation of the emotions and how the mind works, for one thing. Plus, the importance of sadness, though we would like to think we know how important it is, we really feel it in the movie, through an actual example/metaphor. It's a journey, there are bound to have more depths in the movie, while Anomalisa is more focused on showing us one character on a very short period of time.
yeah inside out didnt have to use animation either. please tell me why it had to, because it was creative and was about imagination?
You answered your own question.
it would have been better if the real world was live action and the inside the head parts were animation.
No, it wouldn't. "Osmosis Jones" tried that and it just didn't work that well. Both had to be animated for the sake of artistic coherence. The mind is not separated from what is happening outside, they are one entity. If the inside world was animated and the outside world live-action, it would have make it feel like aliens controlling the humans, which is not at all what "Inside Out" is going for.
also anomalisa had to have stop motion because the movie wants the audience to feel like gods like at humans and well the stop motion puppets are smaller and less powerful than us so they represent humans while the actual humans are gods.
That is such a completely out-of-the-world argument that the only way I can answer that is by telling you that there are nothing in the movie suggesting such things, nothing supporting your point of view on this matter, and that you're really pulling this one out of nowhere. Does it goes for every stop-motion movies in this case? Would you say that about Wallace & Gromit? Coraline? Corpse Bride? Fantastic Mr. Fox? I really doubt so. You're starting to sound really unreasonable and defeat your own point.
yes, inside out is so deep and shows depression PERFECTLY(i know people who have gone through clinical depression and have a 14 yr old and 11 yr old myself and i couldnt stop laughing about the way depression was portrayed in inside out).
Except Inside Out does NOT portray depression at all and NEVER pretends to. Riley is going through an emotional turmoil because of the move to California, because she lost everything that was familiar and couldn't cope with it directly. She repressed her emotions, which lead her to do stupid and impulsive things (like running away). It has NOTHING to do with depression, and the only people who would consider that "depression" are people who have no idea what depression is all about.
You just prove again that you really don't know what's you're talking about, and that you're just biased about Anomalisa, which for some reasons you absolutely want people acknowledging was better than Inside Out, as if it was going to make the movie better...
if you say it isnt really good
It WAS good, good animation, interesting story, good character study, just no masterpiece, just not as special as you say it is, just not as deep as you would want to make us think. It will not resound with everybody (nor is it trying to), it just tells its story without adding that much twist to it. Just life as Michael experiences it, just like anybody unsatisfied with his life would live it: cheating, always blaming the world, never enjoying what he has, alway searching for what is different, then throwing them away when he gets tired of it. Perfect definition of a cheater.
I really have no sympathy for the main character, as he is really not trying to change or make the most of it, not even accepting life as it is. Just being miserable and making others feel the same (his ex, Lisa, his wife and kid)
it can also be a representation of life, i mean there are paintings and books that do that and no one cares but when a movie does that, it is called pointless.
Not pointless, just not that interesting to me. You make it sound like "realistic" (which by that I guess means "perfect representation of real life moment that you have experienced" is a quality in itself. It's not, it's just a way to tell a story, nothing more. It's still need a point, and I see the one showed in Anomalisa, I just don't find it that enganging or interesting, nor particularly insightful.
Anomalisa is depressing because it reminds us that our lives is filled with horrible *beep* like routines, people, politics.
What are you talking about? There are no such things as "routine" display in the movie, and even less politics. Where are you getting that? How could there be any routine while we see him on a business trip for only one night? Where have you caught glimpse on anything political? But it is about people, sure. One type of people in particular, people like Michael, and there are a lots of them. His life is depressing, not all life in general.
the movie has kind of been my reason for keeping my distance from people and now even stay in my office overnight for more days. the movie has changed me, a 38 yr old man a lot.
I don't really know how to respond to that, just that it is sad for you and your family if you think that what is displayed in Anomalisa is the only way to see life. You should really see somebody for that, that's not healthy.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. i am sorry but that isnt true, you opinion isnt a *beep* fact.
Never say it was, it still my opinion, and I can fully support it based on Inside Out only and with actual example, not big leap of logic and without using argument that the movie can't support. I don't need to bring another film I like less and where the only link is to being animated for showing the strength of Inside Out. While you, on the other hand, feel so insecure about your opinion that you're trying to diminish the impact of Inside Out (that you clearly didn't fully get) just to make your movie seem better than it really is.
reply
share
lordDEMAXUS
9 years ago
It's not about "being awkward" either, it's about relating to people and finding enjoyment in their company, a connection.
it is about how awkward life is. i dont think Charlie Kaufmann(the writer) would make loneliness such a big theme in Anomalisa when it was just smaller themes in his previous movies. i am pretty sure it is about how awkward people are. it isnt trying to show micheal's life is awkward but our lives as a whole is awkward. the sex scene, the people who work in the hotel, the dream sequence all shows this.
You make it sound like "realistic" (which by that I guess means "perfect representation of real life moment that you have experienced" is a quality in itself. It's not, it's just a way to tell a story, nothing more. It's still need a point, and I see the one showed in Anomalisa, I just don't find it that enganging or interesting, nor particularly insightful.
that is completly subjective.
That is such a completely out-of-the-world argument that the only way I can answer that is by telling you that there are nothing in the movie suggesting such things, nothing supporting your point of view on this matter, and that you're really pulling this one out of nowhere.
the movie does treat audiences as higher beings. even Kauffman as referenced this in interviews. saying that they are shown as humans but not humans and are less powerful(dont know the right interview since i watch many Kaufman interviews). Also the way they look(like robots) shows that they might be you know, made by a human(like how god made a human). and you know why i think that way and i dont think that way when watching other stop motion movies? because of the lines on his face(which shows face plates like a robot) and scene with his bottom face plate getting messed up shows that he might be a faulty robot.i am pretty sure the director implied this.
Except Inside Out does NOT portray depression at all and NEVER pretends to. Riley is going through an emotional turmoil because of the move to California, because she lost everything that was familiar and couldn't cope with it directly. She repressed her emotions, which lead her to do stupid and impulsive things (like running away). It has NOTHING to do with depression, and the only people who would consider that "depression" are people who have no idea what depression is all about.
the film was about depression. so you are saying you know better than psychologists because they say the movie IS about depression and are you saying you know more than a parent of two kids who have gone through the same thing. also people get mood swings, etc during pre pubescent depression and the movie deals with that(in sometimes stupid ways)
Perfect definition of a cheater.
but he didnt cheat because Lisa wasnt real. she wasnt real so he basically didnt cheat unless you call having sex with a sex doll cheating.
There are no such things as "routine" display in the movie, and even less politics. Where are you getting that? How could there be any routine while we see him on a business trip for only one night?
n
Micheal being in the same place in the end as he was in the beginning. the plainness of the world. the pointless conversation show tat life is filled with repetition of these things. not really a routine but a monotony. shows how derivative life is. we do live like that, we try to do something new everyday but fall into the same routine. Also politics and how *beep* it is was implied in the movie in one scene.
I don't really know how to respond to that, just that it is sad for you and your family if you think that what is displayed in Anomalisa is the only way to see life. You should really see somebody for that, that's not healthy.
I dont think that is the only way to see life but i am scared that this will happen to me. Not a lot of movies have done this to me other than Syncedoche New York(another film by Charlie kaufman) which made me get scarred of death, A clockwork orange which got me scared of the government and people in general(i watched the movie when i was 12 and was the scariest *beep* has seen back then) and eternal sunshine of the spotless mind(also a film by charlie kaufman) which got me scared of me getting a divorce with my wife.
While you, on the other hand, feel so insecure about your opinion that you're trying to diminish the impact of Inside Out (that you clearly didn't fully get) just to make your movie seem better than it really is.
I am not trying to diminish inside out but i see Inside Out diminishing Anomalisa which makes me sad. I dont care about the acclaim and awards/nominations Inside Out is getting but people forget about Anomalisa because Anomalisa is animated just like Inside out and people only care about like one animated movie a year(in 2014 it was the lego movie, in 2013 it was frozen, in 2012 it was none i guess and same with 2011). I think Anomalisa should have gotten WAY more attention for it's script because it really was the best script of the year but it's script didnt get attention because of Inside out and everyone basically cared about inside out and not anomalisa. if you though i was trying to say Inside Out should have gotten less attention then you misinterpreted me. i was trying to say Anomalisa should have gotten more attention.
reply
share
Therru_Babayaga
9 years ago
it is about how awkward life is. i dont think Charlie Kaufmann(the writer) would make loneliness such a big theme in Anomalisa when it was just smaller themes in his previous movies.
The life of Michael is not awkward, it's just miserable. And Anomalisa is very close to "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" in its themes: Loneliness, hardships to relate to others, not knowing who we are and how to live in this world, and yet searching for human connections despite everything else, fear of being ordinary or monotony... Relationships with others can be awkward, but it's not the theme of the movie.
it isnt trying to show micheal's life is awkward but our lives as a whole is awkward.
A bored middle-aged american caucasian heterosexual man that we follow for around 24 hours doesn't represent the lives of most people, nor his situation could resonate with most of us. So it's not about our lives, it's how Kaufmann see lives in a certain context.
that is completly subjective.
Sure, what's your point?
because of the lines on his face(which shows face plates like a robot) and scene with his bottom face plate getting messed up shows that he might be a faulty robot.i am pretty sure the director implied this.
Except that Anomalisa is originally a play, it was not meant from the beginning to be a long-feature movie, and that the stop-motion animation was used only because:
Kaufmann: Our larger question, when that question comes up, about why this is animated, is “why would it not be animated?” Why not? It’s just another way to make a movie. You can do anything with animation. It’s got its own set of characteristics that are apparent, especially stop-motion since it’s got a handmade quality, if you don’t erase that from the process. We felt that this added a soulfulness to that. So the choice of stop-motion animation is way less profound are what you're trying to sell it...
I saw no reference at all about what you're talking about in Kaufmann's interviews, so you will need to show a link to prove your point.
the film was about depression. so you are saying you know better than psychologists because they say the movie IS about depression
Inside Out was about emotions, like you will find in many many interviews with Peter Docter. And NO psychologists wrote that it was about depression specifically.
It's about emotions, about the mind, about the importance of sadness. NOT about depression specifically. Riley could have fallen into depression if her pain had not been adressed, on the long term. However, that didn't happen, because she expressed her sadness, which helped her relieve stress, pain and many others things, and to connect again with Joy.
A depressed mood, a childhood depression like it was portayed in the movie has nothing to do with clinical depression found in adulthood, and they didn't try to portray that.
And I don't really know how being parent of two kids give you any legitimacy on the matter...
Show me a link where a legit psychologist (not the opinion of a common blogger) says that Inside Out is about depression, if you're so sure of yourself.
also people get mood swings, etc during pre pubescent depression and the movie deals with that(in sometimes stupid ways)
There, yes, the movie talks about the hardship of growing-up, and the form of depression that ensues. I don't see what is "stupid", though, not really. Especially since Peter Docter, who is also a father, based the movie on his own experience watching his daughter change in attitude and moods.
but he didnt cheat because Lisa wasnt real. she wasnt real so he basically didnt cheat unless you call having sex with a sex doll cheating.
She was real in the movie, no contest about that. You can't make your own film in your mind and expect people to agree with you, it doesn't work that way.
not really a routine but a monotony.
Yes, he is bored with people, they all sound the same to him, which is why he was so excited to meet Lisa. Except they all sound the same because he is easily bored with humans interaction. It's not people's fault, it's his.
we do live like that, we try to do something new everyday but fall into the same routine.
Routines are not inherently bad. We need some in our life. It's when you're defined by your routines that is start to go downhill, but it doesn't have to be that way.
Also politics and how *beep* it is was implied in the movie in one scene.
No, it wasn't, not even imply or anything, except maybe in his little rant during his speech at the end, but it was an incoherent mess (as it was meant to, showing his unstable set of mind), so it's hardly political in any way.
I dont think that is the only way to see life but i am scared that this will happen to me. Not a lot of movies have done this to me other than Syncedoche New York(another film by Charlie kaufman) which made me get scarred of death, A clockwork orange which got me scared of the government and people in general(i watched the movie when i was 12 and was the scariest *beep* has seen back then) and eternal sunshine of the spotless mind(also a film by charlie kaufman) which got me scared of me getting a divorce with my wife.
You really should not be watching movies if you get so messed-up by works of fiction and if impacts your life so deeply...
I am not trying to diminish inside out but i see Inside Out diminishing Anomalisa which makes me sad.
Inside Out does not diminish Anomalisa in any way. The latter is an adult movie with a limited release that will not appeal to many people outside of cinephiles and has been financed by a kickstarter, while Inside Out has been created by one of the most beloved and respected animation studios in the world, is much more positive and colorful in its tone and has a much wider release and better marketing. I don't really know what else you were expecting...
I think Anomalisa should have gotten WAY more attention for it's script because it really was the best script of the year but it's script didnt get attention because of Inside out and everyone basically cared about inside out and not anomalisa.
Sure, it's Inside Out' fault if Anomalisa was not a blockbuster success. Not, you know, limited release, difficult subject matter, Rated R, depressing mood, clay animation. No, obviously, it was just Inside Out' fault
reply
share
lordDEMAXUS
9 years ago
Loneliness, hardships to relate to others, not knowing who we are and how to live in this world, and yet searching for human connections despite everything else, fear of being ordinary or monotony... Relationships with others can be awkward, but it's not the theme of the movie.
actually i feel those are smaller themes because they are there in other Kaufman films also. i think we both are wrong because in the opining credits, all the voices are disjointed, Micheal's voice get's disjointed and in the end Micheal starts spewing out random *beep*
Routines are not inherently bad. We need some in our life. It's when you're defined by your routines that is start to go downhill, but it doesn't have to be that way.
but the movie is showing that our adulthood IS defined by routines and that we go through routines everyday in our lives. this movie(and kaufman's other movies, especially Synecdoche) shows that out adult lives is consumed by repetition and routines.
No, it wasn't, not even imply or anything, except maybe in his little rant during his speech at the end, but it was an incoherent mess (as it was meant to, showing his unstable set of mind), so it's hardly political in any way.
well the rant was actually about what is wrong with the world as a whole and not just politics and it also shows how these things can make a person unstable.
She was real in the movie, no contest about that. You can't make your own film in your mind and expect people to agree with you, it doesn't work that way.
but people do agree with me. it is a fact that Lisa wasnt real in the movie. she was the sex doll. you want proof? Michael hears Lisa's voice after his lower face plate messes up. Lisa has the same voice a the sex doll. Lisa in the end says anomalisa means "goddess of heaven" in japanese(which is not true because it is actually Amaterasu) which might show that Lisa has something to with something japanese. Also who's semen do you think came out of the sex doll? Michael's. there are some threads explaining this in detail. Also you CAN make the film your own in your mind because there is no definitive answer to a film(just like any other form of art). I mean some people think Anomalisa is about the problem with Identity in America. is there something in the film that says he is wrong?no. is there something that says that he is right?no. Also you called Micheal a hetrosexual which i disagree with but again, your interpretation so i dont care.
You really should not be watching movies if you get so messed-up by works of fiction and if impacts your life so deeply.
a good work of art should be able to affect people deeply. that has always what good art has been. A great movie or any form of art is supposed to impact you deeply and must make you rethink about your life and what you are doing with it(which is subjective, it affected me but it didnt affect you). I mean there are movies that make people cry so does that mean they shouldn't watch movies also? my reaction to Anomalisa is similiar to that(but i didnt cry, just shocked and scared like a horror movie). i see the clear difference between you and me and why i like this film more than you do. it is because i look at film as art and you look at it as fiction(you also kind of said that there is a definitive way to view film).
you know, limited release, difficult subject matter, Rated R, depressing mood,
yeah, H8ful 8 and the revenant didnt have a limited release, a difficult subject matter, r rating and a depressing mood.
is much more positive and colorful in its tone and has a much wider release and better marketing.
by Anomalisa getting distinguished i didnt mean in the BO, i meant in award ceremonies and things like that. the script got HARDLY noticed because of Inside Out's. I mean when people talk about a charlie kaufman movie they talk about the script but no one gave two *beep* about Anomalisa's script because Inside out got more buzz. Same thing could be said about the directing.
I am sorry i didnt explain everything(like the Inside Out thing which i left to the end so i could find quotes supporting my argument but i seriously have to get some sleep). That is because i dont have the time and i dont care. This will also be my last reply to you because my holiday is finished.
reply
share
Therru_Babayaga
9 years ago
all the voices are disjointed, Micheal's voice get's disjointed and in the end Micheal starts spewing out random *beep*
To show how much the world is overwhelming, simply. Too many voices, too much noise, too many thoughts.
but the movie is showing that our adulthood IS defined by routines and that we go through routines everyday in our lives.
The movie shows nothing like that, but whatever. It would have been true if Michael had done the same things for a couple of days, but he didn't, as he just stayed one night and a day. You can't show routines in such a short amount of time.
but people do agree with me. it is a fact that Lisa wasnt real in the movie.
I mean some people think Anomalisa is about the problem with Identity in America. is there something in the film that says he is wrong?no. is there something that says that he is right?no.
You can't tell that something is a fact while defending that anybody has the right to see whatever he/she wants in a movie.
I could have considered your theory if Lisa had been alone, without her friend. However, it seems very far-fetched, considering we also see her at the conference, and at the end. The Japanese sex-doll scene at the end is indeed messed-up, but that doesn't prove that Lisa wasn't real. He could have as well bought it after the conference to relieve himself and forget about his experience with Lisa and to reject human interaction (the store is open all day, as the taxi driver said it at the beginnning). Or it could show how he sees sexual relationship, as real as a relationship with a doll.
it is because i look at film as art and you look at it as fiction(you also kind of said that there is a definitive way to view film).
I do see movie-making as art, it's just that I never take a movie at face value, or take it as a truth. How the director view the world, the emotions displayed by the actors and actresses, how the lightning, the editing, the sounds makes a vision come to live, those are the elements I am the most sensible with, the art of story-telling, the art to tell something with images, dialogues, editing and music. Story-telling and music, those are the elements that can make me think, reflect and cry.
However, I am always aware that what I am being told is only one point of view of the world, and by no way absolute, and most importantly not real. I reflect on it, it brings me something, it can make me very emotional and make me dream, or make me scared or sad. I empathize very easily with good written characters, and I adore movie's score. However, this is not the world I live in, this is not my experience, and I don't let a movie tell me how the world works and how I should live my live.
yeah, H8ful 8 and the revenant didnt have a limited release, a difficult subject matter, r rating and a depressing mood.
Are you kidding? You couldn't have found a worst comparaison.
Hateful Eight is a movie of Quentin Tarantino, a very popular director with a strong fan-base. It was released worldwide, its subject matter was in no way difficult, r-rating didn't matter and it was in no way depressing, even too violent for some viewers taste.
The Revenant is from the director who won a Oscar last year, its release was in no way limited, the subject matter was very clear and easy to follow, the photography amazing, and it was not depressing at all, more contemplative than anything. And most of all, it had freaking Leonardo di Caprio and Tom Hardy starring in it!
the script got HARDLY noticed because of Inside Out's.
Again with that? Seriously, you have nothing supporting that argument, so you may as well let it go...
like the Inside Out thing which i left to the end so i could find quotes supporting my argument but i seriously have to get some sleep This will also be my last reply to you because my holiday is finished.
You would have a hard time finding a quote supporting your argument anyway, because there aren't any, so you might as well give up and go to sleep, that's the sensitive thing to do. And don't worry about not responding, it wasn't particularly interesting anyway.
reply
share
lordDEMAXUS
9 years ago
I could have considered your theory if Lisa had been alone, without her friend. However, it seems very far-fetched, considering we also see her at the conference, and at the end. The Japanese sex-doll scene at the end is indeed messed-up, but that doesn't prove that Lisa wasn't real. He could have as well bought it after the conference to relieve himself and forget about his experience with Lisa and to reject human interaction (the store is open all day, as the taxi driver said it at the beginning). Or it could show how he sees sexual relationship, as real as a relationship with a doll.
We also see Lisa in the conference but didnt you see? her face looks completely different(except for her hair). Also Micheal bought the sex doll before meeting Lisa. he was about to have sex with the sex doll right before he heard Lisa's voice. Another thing is that the sex doll has a dent in the same place where Lisa has a bruise. Not just a coincidence. Also this song the sx doll sings,
Momotaro, Momotaro
Those millet dumplings on your waist
Won't you give me one?
I'll give you one, I'll give you one
From now, on a quest to conquer the ogres
If you come with me, I'll give you one
if you dont know the story of Momotaro, then it is about his boy named Momotaro who befriends a dog, a monkey and a pheasant to fight demons. the symbolism here is that Micheal is Momotaro, Lisa is the dog and his life is the demons. the movie is basically trying to show the Lisa was just a form of escapism. Also in the end they cut back to Lisa when Micheal was staring at the doll. And then there is also the song in the credits(important for a charlie kaufman movie) and the last few lines say:
In a dream you came and held my hand,
our love was perfect in that sphere...
...No I never met you, my sweet dear,
and my friends, they say you don't exist.
But friends are cowards, full of fear,
afraid to look at what they missed.
and then everything gets drowned by other voices which shows that Lisa, the only other real person in this world is a fantasy.
Hateful Eight is a movie of Quentin Tarantino, a very popular director with a strong fan-base. It was released worldwide, its subject matter was in no way difficult, r-rating didn't matter and it was in no way depressing, even too violent for some viewers taste.
The Revenant is from the director who won a Oscar last year, its release was in no way limited, the subject matter was very clear and easy to follow, the photography amazing, and it was not depressing at all, more contemplative than anything. And most of all, it had freaking Leonardo di Caprio and Tom Hardy starring in it!
Kaufman has a HUGE fanbase also. dont you know that many people loved eternal sunshine of the spotless mind(including casual film goers), many cinephiles hail Synecdoche as the one of the greatest films of all time. The movie wasnt released worldwide until January, same thing with revenant. those two movies, just like Anomalisa had limited releases in the last week of 2015 so they could be eligible for the Oscars. The revenant has an actual worldwide release in the 8th of Jan and not in 2015. Anomalisa had a release date right before the oscars and again I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE *beep* BOX OFFICE. i am talking about awards and things like that.
Seriously, you have nothing supporting that argument, so you may as well let it go...
and you have nothing against my argument also. Like i said, most people love Charlie Kaufman's scripts and this one is no exception but it didnt get nominated because it was animated and only one animated movie will get buzz every year.
You would have a hard time finding a quote supporting your argument anyway, because there aren't any, so you might as well give up and go to sleep,
oh really? there is no quote supporting my argument?
“I think what the character was trying to portray was what we call Childhood Depression,” said Judith F. Joseph, a child and adolescent psychiatrist with a practice in Manhattan
As a therapist specializing in depression, I’ve pulled a lot of hair out over how the popular culture—not to mention sectors of my own field—looks at and maps depression. For the large part, both see depression as analogous to a fungal rash: surface deep, without essential meaning, without development or unfoldment, and best treated topically. I don’t quite know what it means that an utterly mainstream, ostensibly kid’s movie, has one of the best readings of depression that’s been presented in pop culture—but I guess you take it where you can get it.
Here’s what “Inside Out” gets so right: in essence, depression results from an obstruction in grieving, from experiencing the futility of holding onto what is gone, but not being able to let go.
However, this is not the world I live in, this is not my experience, and I don't let a movie tell me how the world works and how I should live my live.
I am not saying the details in the movie is true. we dont live Michael's life exactly like him but the concepts and the things shown in the movie are very much true and honest. Also right after i watched the movie(in a screening in TIFF), everything felt closer to me. i felt like i could notice everything. i was looking at random people. speaking to people i never met before. going into the wrong screenings because my life just felt uneven. the movie was able change me lot, not just by getting scared for the future but enjoying every minute of my present, looking at every detail, discovering vulnerable people(who are living a life like us) and just enjoy this uneven and flawed life. Not a lot of movies could do this to me other then well the films of Kaufman and Anomalisa is no exception. I dont think the film was trying to say all life is SH!T but i think it as trying to say that life is uneven and you are going to have bad times but worrying about it is going to make it happen closer(i am not worrying about ti but deep underneath i am scared). our life is repetitive and flawed but just dont look at it is a tool because that just means our life WILL be empty like Michael's if we look at life that way.
I dont think the movie is as negative as you think. the movie is depressing for sure but i think Kaufman was trying to say that. I think Lisa was supposed to be the role model for us. She was someone who was pushed around easily but never loses her self and well she has fun with her life, enjoys it. Michael keeps asking what it means to be human and guess what? Lisa is the answer. Michael's fantasy is the one human in this world. This also i think answers your question for why it is animated and it has a thematic purpose. In this world full of puppets who doing everything in perfect timing and does everything in rhythm? what makes us different to these puppets? i think that was the use of the puppets. to ask the question. how are we different to puppets like these? and i think the answer is Lisa. i am pretty sure this was one of the purposes for the movie being animated. to ask this fundamental question in life yes, Kaufman never talked about this in an interview but then that would be a spoiler and a director/writer should never say what a movie means because then there is no meaning to the movie.
ok this really is my last reply. i think i have answered everything you probably wanted to know.
reply
share
Block-Busted
9 years ago
Kaufman has a HUGE fanbase also. dont you know that many people loved eternal sunshine of the spotless mind(including casual film goers), many cinephiles hail Synecdoche as the one of the greatest films of all time. The movie wasnt released worldwide until January, same thing with revenant. those two movies, just like Anomalisa had limited releases in the last week of 2015 so they could be eligible for the Oscars. The revenant has an actual worldwide release in the 8th of Jan and not in 2015. Anomalisa had a release date right before the oscars and again I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE *beep* BOX OFFICE. i am talking about awards and things like that.
That is still a false equivalence. Quentin Tarantino has been popular with mainstream audience for years, so 'The Hateful Eight' getting a lot of success shouldn't even come as a surprise to begin with.
Same goes with 'The Revenant'. The director of that film just won Best Director for 'Birdman', so the film would get a lot more hype. Not to mention that the film actually had to be marketed heavily because the budget got skyrocketed. Kaufman's fanbase is infinitesimal when compared to that of Tarantino or Inarritu.
reply
share
Therru_Babayaga
9 years ago
if you dont know the story of Momotaro, then it is about his boy named Momotaro who befriends a dog, a monkey and a pheasant to fight demons. the symbolism here is that Micheal is Momotaro, Lisa is the dog and his life is the demons.
This is a terrible explanation based on the whole story of Momotaro. Why Lisa would be the dog? Is life itself really the demons or is what we make of it?
No, if you really want to use the story of Momotaro here, it's Lisa who is Momotaro. Why? Because Momotaro was sent
from heaven in a peach, which refers to what she writes at the end in the letter, and that makes much more sense.
Lisa was sent to fight the demons of Michael. However, she fails in her quest, and Michael get back to his original state, even more depressed, because he refused the cure, he refused that Lisa fought his demons for him.
In a dream you came and held my hand,
our love was perfect in that sphere...
...No I never met you, my sweet dear,
and my friends, they say you don't exist.
But friends are cowards, full of fear,
afraid to look at what they missed.
Yes, he never met her. He only met
the idea he had of her, putting aside everything else that make her human, like the way she eats.
He superposed the image of the doll and Lisa together, perhaps, because this is all she ended up to be in the end for him the moment he saw her as a human being, but that doesn't make the character not real. If Lisa is not real, than Michael is just a nutjob who imagined everything in his head and had sex with a doll, and not a sad man who can't connect with anyone and his bored with his life and the people in it. It's a very weak cop-out, as weak as "everything was a dream" for the audience.
Kaufman has a HUGE fanbase also. dont you know that many people loved eternal sunshine of the spotless mind(including casual film goers), many cinephiles hail Synecdoche as the one of the greatest films of all time.
Liking a movie and liking an artist is not the same, and visually and all, it's a Michel Gondry's film, not Charlie Kaufman. I'm not sure that many people knows he participated in the script. As for Synecdoche, it's a confidential movie that not so many people have seen, so if Charlie Kaufman had such a huge fanbase as you pretend, this movie would have been a big hit too, especially since it came out 4 years after Eternal Sunshine.
I'm not talking about quality here, I'm talking about the number of people who know and appreciate an artist, the fanbase. In share numbers, Tarantino and Inarritu win hands down over Kaufman, that's not even a contest.
oh really? there is no quote supporting my argument?
Not about clinical depression, no. They talk about depression as a state of profound apathy and shut down of emotions, or a big emotional change that cause grief and confusion (Childhood depression, so the struggle of growing up, which is not even close with clinical depression) and how they could use Inside Out to explain depression in a visual way.
Riley NEVER suffered from clinical depression, nor was it intended to by the screenwriter. She might have, but expressing her sadness made sure that didn't happen. She could have been a very depressed child, however she was not in the movie, because of Sadness and the empathy she gained from expressing her feelings.
What the therapists say, it's that they could use the world of Inside Out to EXPLAIN how depression works, because of the visual support. They don't judge the movie for the storytelling, but just for the representation of the mind, which they think is pretty accurate.
The rest is an incoherent mess and digressions of you getting contradictory, so I will stop there.
reply
share