MovieChat Forums > Shut In (2016) Discussion > Mentally ill people are not a sideshow o...

Mentally ill people are not a sideshow of monsters and freaks

posted 9 years ago by Tastentier
49 replies | jump to latest

I'm so sick and tired of seeing distorted caricatures of mentally ill individuals next to vampires and werewolves in the horror movie section. Mental illness is a debilitating and often fatal health issue that is only rendered more socially crippling by media stigmatization in general and the "scary crazy people" horror movie trope in particular.

Some might consider this post to be a spoiler, but the plot summary / press release blurb of this unimaginative concoction, which falsely describes agoraphobia as a psychosis and shows how little background knowledge went into the script, already gives the basic plot away: Home invaders turn from hunters to hunted because mentally ill people are oh so dangerous and violent. Feh.

If you don't understand why the utter lack of creativity that compels writers and directors to turn a disenfranchised and much-stereotyped minority into movie villains is a social issue, just imagine a horror flick that shows Jewish people sacrificing Christian children on Passover. This movie is just as unacceptable, and for exactly the same reason. (In case you don't know what I'm talking about, I suggest you google "Aktion T4").

Bottom line: Unlike fangs, horns and claws, mental illness is not an acceptable movie monster attribute. Mentally ill individuals have enough crap to deal with and really don't need this undeserved stigma and misinformation. It shouldn't be that difficult to come up with a creative and original horror movie monster/villain who isn't based on a minority demographic.

[–] spxxx 9 years ago

TL;DR: "I'm an oversensitive wuss wah wah wah"

"I said forget about it cuh"

[–] Ronin-Trap 9 years ago

What happened to the internet? Can one not criticize anything anymore with being booed out of the room for being butt-hurt? As bad as SJWs are, I swear the other end of the spectrum is not one iota better.

[–] NotASpookyGhost 9 years ago

Thank you, so true!

[–] Markyajv 9 years ago

As someone who battles several mental health issues I would go into full battle mode if my house was invaded. wether or not I had those issues.. Your point is moot. Should she have just let them in while she hid somewhere?

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

The point is that the mentally ill protagonist is the "monster" of this horror flick. If the horror movie industry used, say, Jewish people as movie monsters with the same regularity, the public outcry would be deafening.

You may think this an unfair comparison, but not only are both Jews and mentally ill people historically persecuted minorities and Holocaust victims, there are also many historical myths and lies about Jews that would make for excellent horror tropes.

For example, Jews were said to abduct Christian children and sacrifice them in Satanic Passover rituals. That's about as factual as the myth of the violent mentally ill people, considering that neurotypical individuals commit far more violent crimes. On average too, not just in terms of raw numbers. Mentally ill people constitute 25% of the populace, but only commit a mere 4% of violent crimes. The stigma of the dangerous and violent mentally ill is thus wholly undeserved and as ugly a stereotype as the above-mentioned myth about Jews.

[–] PsychoCalipso 9 years ago

She is not portrayed as a monster. Maybe you are just projecting your own views on "mentally ill" people here.

Did you even watch the movie? Or did you not understand that agoraphobia was not the main issue with her but the traumatic experience of being sexually abused by her father for years and the watching her own brother murder him.

[–] Markyajv 9 years ago

Btw.. Her psychosis wasn't her agoraphobia it was that she was a murderer. IE body in freezer..

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

That's exactly the problem with this movie. Btw, you might want to look up the word psychosis, because it doesn't mean what you think it means.

[–] astralxromance 9 years ago

You sound like you're overreacting

[–] JimiCobain 9 years ago

She wasn't dangerous because of her agoraphobia, it was because she was traumatized and fvcked in the head from being raped by her daddy for most of her life. Now, I'm not saying that experience has to turn someone into a killer, but it's not unbelievable to see it happen in this case.

[–] cailan 9 years ago

I liked this movie, and I tend to agree with the simple and non-combative assessment of the poster who proceeds me, JimiCobain. This was not about a psychotic agoraphobic, this was about a psychotic who happens to have agoraphobia. They could have done a better job at underlining the *occult* quality of the character; in other words, her vicious nature was *hidden* by her seemingly timid and vulnerable aspect as an agoraphobe. A wolf in sheep's clothing.

But you need a BOLD underline considering the prevailing mindset of our times regarding mental illness. The movie's description I read — "agoraphobia is not her only psychosis" — made me cringe as well. This was negligent, asinine marketing.

Tastentier, you maintain a cool head and steady resolve even while you're being barraged with senseless hostility. Identifying prevalent discrimination/stigmatism/pigeon-holing as the malignancies they are, and pin-pointing the insidious and devastating societal effects of these knee-jerk dispositions is a hard sell. Even those who are generally kind and positive people can be quick to dismiss, turning into mulish eye-rollers when the topic is broached. It's a heavy staff to wield. Nothing will succeed but tireless repetition — same as what got us to this place. Stay the course, man!

[–] cailan 9 years ago

By the way, 12 Monkeys: Wasn't Brad Pitt's character a terrorist? Like, that's the polar opposite of helpful hero. Maybe he got Pitt and Willis mixed up. Sooooo easy to do (not!)

[–] songod-95003 9 years ago

Well there are lots of responses to this and I have not read one! I just have a question for you.

Did you watch the movie?

If not, here is a brief overview with regard to the characters issue:

The main characters agoraphobia was not why she was able to turn the tables on the home invaders. Her fear of leaving the house was more a plot device that allowed the character to be trapped when otherwise able to get out of the house. That she turned the tables and ended up the hunter not the hunted was the result of other things that had happened to her and her deceased brother. Again, she was not portrayed as a monster because she had severe agoraphobia.

She had other issues, indeed, but nothing that could have been related to or a symptom of agoraphobia.

I suggest watching a movie before posting a condemnation of it.

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

Hitchcock's Psycho stigmatized trans* people even though the killer's crossdressing habits had little to do with his sociopathy. It also stereotyped schizophrenics as potential killers. It's the same with this flick. A mentally ill person is portrayed as a killer, and both her agoraphobia as well as her murderous proclivities are misrepresented as psychoses (rather than an anxiety disorder and sociopathy / antisocial personality disorder, respectively). We can argue semantics all day, but the fact remains that this movie negatively stereotypes mentally ill individuals.

[–] songod-95003 9 years ago

And I see from your Hitchcock comment that you are a dyed in the wool Mental Health Activist who sees slights everywhere.

So there is no point in any type of discussion with you.

Oh and I wasn't discussing. I was TELLING YOU. I am right about the movie, you are wrong. Period.

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

It doesn't work that way. You don't get to tell people while someone is standing on their foot "you're not being hurt or inconvenienced, period". When people tell you that something has a negative impact on their lives, you can either stfu, listen and try to give a sh*t, or you can shrug and say "I don't care".

You've chosen to do the latter. "I got mine, screw you and your problems, I can live with you being discriminated against". Fine, that's your prerogative. But don't presume to tell me how I'm supposed to feel about something that affects me and people I care about.

[–] songod-95003 9 years ago

Thanks to mental health advocates people who 60+ years ago would have been locked up are walking among us. Example: A recent mass shooters family said "We knew something was not right about him" but they chose to do nothing to get them involuntarily committed. Before, a doctor could have had the murderer locked up.

The notion that paranoid\delusional or otherwise impaired people are "fine" as long as they are on their meds is simply BS. They are time bombs waiting to go off.

There. Does that make me fit into your stereotype better?

Point is, you made a wide far reaching assumption about this movie without apparently seeing it. Also, you're absurd analogy of standing on someones foot and telling them they are not in pain is, well, an indication you yourself are *beep* up and if not already on medication ought to be. Maybe you even need 24/7 observation!!

Do you have access to a firearm? I hope not!

Many many friends of mine are on mental meds. Some are suffering from extreme OCD and I am there go to person to call at 3am to talk them down from thinking, for example, one of the people on the FBI's Most Wanted poster in the supermarket is stalking them. They know they can call me because I will listen and then explain how absurd their notion is, and then move on to how the fear they feel has been generated by a notion that is, in the face of it all, absurd. I have also had friends fear their co-workers can read their minds!! Just my *beep* luck, huh? If I can't help them, I recommend they go to the emergency room. And then see their doctor for a change in meds.

Not that I have to justify my self to you.

Frankly, you are as asshat for first taking a FICTIONAL movie no one is probably gonna see (the vast majority) so damn seriously and then when I make the point that the movie DOES NOT make her a psycho because of her fear of leaving the house you go all bats**t on me for being insensitive!! You wanna make a difference? Leave your own house and petition the state you are in to do more for people with serious mental issues. IMDB is not gonna help you out.

Now, I have wasted enough typing time on you, my paranoid delusional psychopathic pen pal. I have more than enough disturbed people in my life. So f-off.

[–] Desepticon 9 years ago

In Psycho, Norman Bates wasn't a transexual at all. He had some kind of dissociative personality disorder where he believed at times he was his mother.

My brother was eaten by wolves on the CT Turnpike

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

Trans* is a rather large umbrella that includes non-transsexual crossdressers. But my point was that Psycho linked both crossdressing and mental illness to criminal and violent behavior in the public perception, especially since Hitchcock falsely made Norman out to be schizophrenic rather than a psychopath with DID (both of which are personality disorders rather than mental illnesses).

Hollywood has a long tradition of "queer-coding" villains, i.e., of assigning gender-atypical or sexual minority traits to unlikable characters. This greatly contributes to the negative perception of sexual and gender minorities in real life, just like the "dangerous mental patient" movie trope contributes to the marginalization of mentally ill individuals.

[–] Desepticon 9 years ago

You make some interesting points, but I don't think it survives a more nuanced reading of Psycho. Norman wasn't gay, it was the sexual excitement he felt that led to his mother personality taking over. He wasn't a crossdresser or trans either, he believed himself at times to be his mother. Norman Bates didn't kill because he wore a dress or was gay (which he wasn't), but because of some kind of deep seated psycho-sexual issue that was rooted in his relationship with his mother. The message to the away from this movie isn't that people with gender-atypical attributes are more dangerous, but those with overbearing and dominating mothers who are sexually repressed are. Psycho could be viewed as a reflection on the sexual liberation burgeoning at the time, warning of the dangers of repressing your desires.

My brother was eaten by wolves on the CT Turnpike

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

I don't care what kind of message (if any) this movie was supposed to have. My only concern is the effect that it had on the public perception of minority groups. To this day, people confuse schizophrenia with DID and believe schizophrenic individuals to be dangerous, all thanks to movies like Psycho. Trans* individuals are also perceived as a threat by many. Just look at the outrage over trans* people using women's restroom facilities. The intricacies of the plot or the fictional Norman Bates' fictional condition are irrelevant to this point.

[–] Desepticon 9 years ago

I'm thinking more in terms of the intention of the director, rather than any misconceptions the public could glean from this. I understand and agree with most of what you are saying. It's probably true that popular culture does have some effect on society and how we treat others. However, I would argue that that isn't the fault of the director. It's not his fault people are idiots and may misinterpret his film or use it as justification for how they treat others. When judging the value of a film, I think it's important to take into consideration the intention of the artist.

My brother was eaten by wolves on the CT Turnpike

[–] Tastentier 9 years ago

Well, you know what they say about intentions. The road to hell and all that. Intentions can easily be made up after the fact in a misguided attempt to excuse the negative consequences of one's actions instad of simply saying "I'm sorry that I hurt this minority group, it won't happen again".

That's really all I expect from Hollywood writers and directors as well as media creators in general. To realize that this is a problem and to do better from here on in. "But my intentions were good" is a cop-out. If someone stands on my foot, I don't care if it's an intentional act or not. All I want this person to do is put their foot elsewhere and watch where they're stepping in the future.

[–] williamforrest429 9 years ago

My uncle was mentally retarded,that being said your asinine comparison between Christians and Jews and vampires and werewolves plus your choice of forum to announce your displeasure leaves me to believe your a troll or perhaps mentally ill yourself