Skip to content

Category: 4k filme stream free

Titicut Follies

Titicut Follies Das könnte dich auch interessieren

Titicut Follies ist ein Dokumentarfilm des American Direct Cinema aus dem Jahr , der von Frederick Wiseman gedreht und von John Marshall gedreht wurde. "Titicut" ist der indianische Name des Gebiets rund um das Bridgewater-​Krankenhaus in Massachusetts. "Follies" ist englisch und bedeutet soviel wie "die​. Frederick Wiseman's Titicut Follies () is a landmark of cin ma v rit. It documents the day to day routines within Massachusetts Correctional Institute at​. Titicut Follies ein Film von Frederick Wiseman. Inhaltsangabe: Der Dokumentarfilm bietet einen Einblick in den Alltag einer Justizvollzugsanstalt in. Sie wurden verboten (Titicut Follies), zensiert oder verstümmelt (One-Eyed Jacks - wir zeigen die restaurierte Fassung) und erzählen vom Schmerz als.

Titicut Follies

Frederick Wiseman's Titicut Follies () is a landmark of cin ma v rit. It documents the day to day routines within Massachusetts Correctional Institute at​. Der Dokumentarfilm Titicut Follies war der erste Film, der in den USA aus anderen Gründen als Gewaltdarstellungen oder Obszönität verboten. «Wiseman, ein ausgebildeter Jurist, hat sich als ständig in Entwicklung befindliches filmisches Thema den amerikanischen Gesellschaftsvertrag erkoren und.

User Ratings. External Reviews. Metacritic Reviews. Photo Gallery. Trailers and Videos. Crazy Credits. Alternate Versions. Rate This. Director: Frederick Wiseman.

Added to Watchlist. What's New on Prime Video in June. Telluride Film Festival: Features Lineup. My top documentaries. Share this Rating Title: Titicut Follies 7.

Use the HTML below. You must be a registered user to use the IMDb rating plugin. Photos Add Image. Learn more More Like This. High School Hospital TV Movie Law and Order TV Movie Juvenile Court Welfare Basic Training National Gallery Essene Belfast, Maine In Jackson Heights Meat A look within the walls of the New York Public Library.

Edit Storyline Documentary filmmaker Frederick Wiseman takes us inside the Massachusetts Correctional Institution Bridgewater where people stay trapped in their madness.

Taglines: Don't turn your back on this film Genres: Documentary. Edit Did You Know? Wiseman would rent the film to people who signed a statement of intent that they would limit the audience to those allowed.

Quotes Patient : I need help, I just don't know where I can get it. Doctor : Well, you'll get it here, I guess. Crazy Credits Re-release: 'The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has ordered that "A brief explanation shall be included in the film that changes and improvements have taken place at Massachusetts Correctional Institution Bridgewater since ".

The ban only protected the state of Massachusetts, really, from being portrayed as a government that ran an prison for the criminally insane where people only went in, and never came out, where prisoners were mistreated, and where the craziest person in the place was the warden.

Bridgewater was used as a threat to people at the Charles Street Jail to keep in line, it was considered like a death sentence.

Massachusetts probably wasn't alone, I've heard that Napa was used as a threat to people in San Quentin back then as well.

How strange about it still being restricted, I hadn't thought of it in a long time and was actually researching hunger strikes when it crossed my mind.

I wonder how Bridgewater in the '60s compares to anything now. A very unpleasant film. Fred Wiseman's documentary about the lives of inmates at a Massachusetts mental institution is a very disturbing film to watch.

I dare anyone to watch this with out feeling at least a bit uneasy. Watching this film one can't help thinking if the "treatments" given to these poor lost souls actually worsens their condition.

One articulate inmate argues the treatment and medication he is given are making him sick. He begs to be sent back to prison, rather than spend another day in this wretched institution.

The doctors respond by claiming he has developed paranoia and orders his medication increased! The doctors come across as cruel and callous.

They seem to regard the inmates as guinea pigs rather than patients to be treated. One doctor, who is shown constantly chain smoking, looks and sounds like a Nazi concentration camp doctor.

EVOL 31 October There are no interviews, no narrator, and there doesn't appear to be any real "slant" to the film.

Instead, it is a cold and voyeuristic view into the activities and practices of the inmates and their "caretakers" within a s mental institution Throughout the film, we get a glimpse of the daily lives of the doctors and nurses, guards, and inmates of the Bridgewater State mental hospital in Massachusettes.

We watch as the guards and "patients" interact, and as the patients interact amongst themselves. There doesn't appear to be any real bias to the film, other than to show the conditions that these individuals all coexist in.

The hospital seems to be filled with every type of mentally disturbed individual - from pedophiles, to Tourettes sufferers, to schizophrenics to the severely mentally retarded.

The camera captures the "action" unrelentingly and in graphic detail. I for one found most of the guards and doctors to be relatively humane and compassionate, given the circumstances.

The only instance I considered to be "abusive" was when one guard taunted an inmate about cleaning his room. He was obviously getting some sort of kick out of upsetting the old man which I found rather sad and sadistic.

Of the other scenes in the film, I didn't see any instances of what I would personally consider "physical abuse" - though the living arrangements for the inmates left much to be desired.

The inmates were often left in completely bare rooms totally naked. I assume it's so they wouldn't hurt themselves, but it still seemed animalistic.

Another key scene that several other reviewers have focused on is the "force-feeding" of an inmate, which while unpleasant, I found to be necessary as it's noted that the person hadn't eaten in three days.

At that point, I don't see any other option except to allow the person to starve to death - and I doubt anyone would consider that option all that "humane" either.

Unfortunately, these types of mentally disturbed individuals still live in similar circumstances today - having medications forced on them and living in a depressing, nearly comatose state for the majority of their lives in harsh institutions.

I personally know people who have spent time in mental and rehabilitation institutions, and from their retelling, it doesn't seem that any great strides have been made in either the care or rehabilitation of those that suffer from serious mental issues.

I don't necessarily blame this on the doctors or the facilities involved, as I'm sure that many of them do their utmost to help those that have these afflictions - I just don't think there's adequate knowledge of the human mind to be able to "fix" these individuals.

Instead, I think it shows the types of things that all of us knows goes on even to this day Must see Documentary Phantom Moonhead 8 March Incredible,disturbing real film will leave you with that uneasy feeling for several days.

Point of view realized by both employees and patients. Rigor 11 July This is easily one of the most disturbing documentary films ever made.

The state of Mass. What makes the film so very important is not simply its evidence about this particular institution, but, the light it sheds on the kind of society that would treat the least fortunate of its members in this dehumanizing and cruel way.

There is political analysis offered by the patients themselves that brings in the rather obvious connections to the police state, colonization, and genocide.

One of Frederick Wiseman's documentaries that analyzes the concepts and conditions of institutionalism, "Titicut Follies" goes inside a mental institution and sticks a camera right in the middle of the action, as the patients live and perform and submit to the doctors' daily regimentation.

It is a mostly disturbing, harrowing look at the treatment of people technically mentally incapable of defending themselves, but who are also stripped of a chance, a voice, and in many ways their dignity.

The images are beautiful in their starkness, the compositions well beyond the expectations of on-the-moment documentary. Wiseman shows himself to be very clear on editing theory, sometimes adding sounds, sometimes subtracting them, sometimes crosscutting and most of the time juxtaposing scenes to alter their messages and constantly rethink what he's shooting.

Wiseman's camera doesn't just damn the institution itself; his editing involves the patients and even the audience in the proceedings.

By including several instances of performance, he also makes a statement on the voyeuristic idea of the cinema-goer itself, the people who would be interested in seeing such a movie.

One of the most disturbing moments in the film is when a patient sits down and rationally explains how he feels he is no longer being helped by the asylum and that being there is making him worse by causing him a lot of emotional distress, and that the drugs they give him don't let him think straight.

The assembly talks him down, sends him on his way, and then calls him a paranoid schizophrenic and prescribes more drugs for him.

Of course, as in every documentary, a small amount of editorializing peeks its head between the frames. Wiseman at the time had one camera and one microphone, and yet in many cases shot-reverse shot editing is used, including the meeting discussed above.

This documentary, as well, is a good example of the type of text that the viewer should ask "what's been cut out?

However, as a message, it's particularly effective and poignant, especially as the credits role and Wiseman makes his final joke on the institution.

It's an appalling, unnerving, and deeply important film. It has cut into my mind the way very few films, documentaries or otherwise, have succeeded in doing.

I urge people, documentary fans or no, to seek this out. It casts a terrible reflection on society's view of the mentally ill, and the treatment thereof.

Perhaps the conditions at Titicut have improved, but I'm not sure society's attitudes have at all. I've long been interested in the issue of ethics in documentary films.

No more is this question better discussed than with the controversial films of Frederick Wiseman. Although I myself am a big Wiseman fan, I can see how one can question his methods.

My purpose here is not to defend his methods, and certainly not to condemn them, but merely discuss some ethical issues.

A good place to begin this discussion would be with Wiseman's first film, "Titticut Follies". The film is a record of the goings on inside the Bridgewater, Massachusetts, State Hospital for the Criminally Insane, and is very disturbing to watch.

One of the most famous sequences involves the intercutting of two scenes. In one scene a patient is being force fed through a tube.

In the intercut scene, shows the embalming of the very same patient. Both scenes are very graphic, the former including a shot of a cigarette, held by one of the doctors, as the ash looks as it might drop into the tube used to feed the patient.

Just by intercutting these two scenes it seems to be clear what Wiseman is saying: that the patient, even when alive is not treated as a real live person, but merely as a living corpse.

Some might see this as being manipulative, or that Wiseman is not giving the patient any dignity by showing what is happening to him. But by showing the event, it could also be said that Wiseman is "on the patient's side," by illustrating the doctors attitudes towards him.

In an article in "Sight and Sound" magazine, Thomas R. Atkins writes: "Titticut Follies may appear one-sided at first largely because most viewers are almost totally unfamiliar with the subject; but Wiseman has carefully presented the differing arguments about Bridgewater.

Coventry 6 May All I ever read about is how disturbing and controversial "Titicut Follies" is, and how the Surpreme Court commanded to ban the film and prevent further distribution because it was and still is an embarrassment for the Law in the state of Massachusetts.

The controversial impact of "Titicut Follies" is actually some sort of paradox to itself. The patients, varying from catatonic people to paranoid and severely suicidal human beings, are humiliated and mocked, resulting in extended images of mentally disabled people shouting and raving around their rooms naked.

I heavily appreciate this documentary because it caused a huge scandal and undoubtedly influenced the future of medicine in a good way, but maybe the footage never should have left the evidence room of the Supreme Court in Massachusetts.

By now "Titicut Follies", in all his uncut and reputedly infamous glory, inevitably is offered on DVD-websites that usually just sell nauseating horror and perverted sleaze films, and the events of this documentary seriously don't belong in this entertainment section.

The essence and importance of "Titicut Follies" is actually more reminiscent to the status of Nazi-propaganda films.

They're reflections of the black pages in our social history, but by now they're just here to remind us never to go down that road again.

No rating from me, because it feels too much like you're judging the real-life misery of defenseless people on a pathetic scale of 1 to Just seen this on DVD and this must be Wiseman's best film - I can see why it caused such an uproar when it first came out!

The impression it leaves is indelible and no one who sees it will forget the scenes it contains. There's a lot of unsettling stuff but ultimately the whole rotten system of 'treatment' stands accused without a single diatribe or the heavy handed Michael Moore touch we are used to today..

This sort of remarkable film should be seen far and wide although I can see how it will not be to everyone's taste, as it is a very uncomfortable ride..

Amyth47 22 June The patients sound more intelligent and empathetic than the doctors! Titicut Follies is a documentary of social denunciation characterised by an unheard-of conceptual power, documenting the condition suffered by the patients of the criminal asylum "Massachusetts Correctional intitution", complex of buildings located in Titicut Street, in Bridgewater.

Here the patients are treated and kept in inhuman conditions: they live in small cells with insufficient hygienic conditions in the cramped common rooms, in the grip of their delusions originated from their "mental pathologies".

As if that were not enough, their sad condition contrasts the behaviour of the nurses: they abuse their authority by forcing the detainees to undergo physical beatings and extremely degrading psychological violence They are punished and yanked with force, forced to nudity in the presence of anyone in the vicinity, repressed and insulted with abusive words or mockery and forced to commit actions against their will for example, they are taken by force or regulated in their physiological needs without the possibility of modification according to the actual needs.

Remarkable sequence of dialogue in the central part, in which a patient argues with the director of the penitentiary regarding that unrequested aid that is literally being forced on him, although he seems to be perfectly able to understand he admits his paranoid delusions and his pathology, linked to schizophrenia, but denounces unjust and oppressive treatment , exposing the controversy itself of the definition of insanity, obtained with a mere medical-psychological test that may not represent a unilaterally approved diagnosis.

In addition, sequences of medical tests in pitiful conditions are shown: mere intuations made by the nurses with the cigarette in the hand or mouth, questionable controls that have dubious clinical usefulness as well as interviews made to degrade the integrity of the prisoner.

Many events, such as the episode of a man forced into bare isolation, have such a visual power that shocks us his lack of concealment: the mistreat of the deents happens without concern and some moments are so tragic to seem directed ad hoc while reports of the subsequent investigation reveal acts even worse than those shown.

A mirror that exposes the authorized deprivation of dignity revealing its tremendous essence: Wiseman seeks, as it may, to restore to the condemned their humanity, stolen by the institution that has reduced them to serial numbers.

A reality that describes a condition that seems immutable if not by dying, with extreme impact and enormous journalistic consequences.

Its direct and disturbing language amplifies the will of divulgation and the incessant attempt to censore it, fortunately, was not enough to conceal this cry of rebellion against the corrupt institution.

An exposure to the light of the condition of "human slaughter" men rendered useless by social labels and degraded to survive as mere livestock.

Can you imagine a correctional institution in which a criminally insane is more reasonable and logical than some of the staff, or even the doctors?

After watching this documentary you probably will. Without resorting to commentary, interviews, or titles, Wisman exposes the inhuman conditions and treatment the patients in Bridgewater institution in Massachusetts had to endure at the the time.

From being forced to stay naked in empty rooms, to being bullied and force fed using a nose tube, you'll soon figure out that it's unlikely anyone will leave this institution a better man, on the contrary, it will only worsen their condition.

One can speak in length about the moral aspects of filming mentally ill people without their consent, considering they can't give any.

But given the great cause this film serves, and the pressure it generated to improve the condition in Bridgewater institution and many other, I can't see how anyone could be mad about that.

StevePulaski 25 November In , documentary filmmaker Frederick Wiseman made his first and most controversial film that uncovered the truth of what goes on behind the close doors of a seemingly typical mental asylum.

The film is called Titicut Follies, and has proved itself to be one of the most controversial and enigmatic films of all time.

It focuses on one of the touchiest subjects, and makes it so you can't turn away even when you feel you should. Titicut Follies documents life at the Bridgewater State Hospital for the criminally insane.

It shows graphic depictions, in black and white, of the horror and wretched tainting of humanity and the dehumanizing of innocent people that took place at the institution.

The patients in the asylum are taunted by guards, forced to walk around in the nude because "it is cheaper," and are abused verbally and physically everywhere they turn.

The most chilling aspect is when one man, dubbed "the paranoid schizophrenic," claims that he feels worse now than when he checked into Bridgewater State.

This leads to the shocking conclusion that maybe the asylum causes mental illness rather than prevents it. There is also a very haunting scene of force-feeding a reluctant patient whose food is then contaminated with cigarette ash from the person who is forcing the tube down his nose.

The scene provided me with one of the most stunning and stiffening feelings I've ever seen in a film. Shortly after it was completed, Wiseman was the target of the Massachusetts government who was threatening to ban the film completely from screenings and Television.

The government stated that it was a violation of the patients' lives and profit or publicity shouldn't be made at their expense. Wiseman swears that the government was trying to protect a state run institution, and because of the graphic nature and honesty of the documentary the people simply didn't want to give one of their facilities a bad name.

I truly believe him. It seems like the typical move for a state government. Hide the truth, protect the wealthy. Being that the film is so rare, how did I stumble upon a copy?

The film is available on DVD, but is so rare and expensive coming across a copy is harder than it may seem.

My uncle of all people had a copy of the one time it was broadcast on TV. A title card with a strict and emotionless narration about the film's content and an introduction by Charlie Rose preceded the film itself.

After the film, a tongue-in-cheek statement about the asylum changing its ways was shown immediately followed by a PBS representative asking the viewer to call the number on screen to donate ten dollars to help the network invest in more documentaries.

So what was the film doing for thirty-two years? Wiseman continued to direct many other documentaries after Titicut Follies, where he focused on a variety of subject matters, at the same time try and give his first effort the rightful release it deserved.

Finally, in , he did after a Supreme Court ruled it acceptable since many of the patients filmed were deceased, their legal guardians at the time of the film were notified and each one confirmed to the use of the patient in the documentary, and as long as a statement was made that the institution was gradually different.

But is it? Currently, what happens behind those Bridgewater doors stays behind those Bridgewater doors. It's an undiscovered mystery. I have a feeling it does possess some essence of normality in the present day.

In the sixties, if you were criminally insane you were treated with carelessness. Over the years, I believe people have grew more accepting and tolerate of the unfortunate soles who are simply "not all there.

That's not to say a sheet should be placed over past events. The treatment is nonetheless horrifying to this day, and Titicut Follies is for the people seeking the harsh truth.

While it will be neglected by people that don't believe they can handle the subject matter, it truly should be viewed by everyone. It's already sad that the film has had such trouble getting some sort of broad release.

This is the kind of film some people need to be forced to watch. Anyone in the medical field should be obligated, and any ordinary human should be aware at the very least.

Directed by: Frederick Wiseman. This documentary was shot without the knowledge of the senior staff and management of the facility, making the shooting sometimes rather difficult.

What is often lost on the modern viewer is the attitude toward the criminally insane and the mentally disturbed at the time. In the s, not many people outside of the psychiatric world knew much of anything about disorders like schizophrenia and sociopathy, and this film gave an insight into the daily patterns of people with these disorders.

Also, this film opened some eyes about the treatment of prisoners and of mental patients at the time. There is significant instances of abuse and neglect, including, as stated in the other review, an unsanitary force feeding of a patient who would not eat.

It also shows electroshock convulsive therapy basically putting two electric leads on either temple and sending a shot of electricity through the brain.

Titicut Follies Video

Unforgotten: Twenty-Five Years After Willowbrook - Full Movie

Documentary filmmaker Frederick Wiseman takes us inside the Massachusetts Correctional Institution Bridgewater where people stay trapped in their madness.

It's an appalling, unnerving, and deeply important film. It has cut into my mind the way very few films, documentaries or otherwise, have succeeded in doing.

I urge people, documentary fans or no, to seek this out. It casts a terrible reflection on society's view of the mentally ill, and the treatment thereof.

Perhaps the conditions at Titicut have improved, but I'm not sure society's attitudes have at all.

Sign In. Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends. Full Cast and Crew. Release Dates. Official Sites. Company Credits.

Technical Specs. Plot Summary. Plot Keywords. Parents Guide. External Sites. User Reviews. User Ratings.

External Reviews. Metacritic Reviews. Photo Gallery. Trailers and Videos. Crazy Credits. Alternate Versions.

Rate This. Director: Frederick Wiseman. Added to Watchlist. What's New on Prime Video in June. Telluride Film Festival: Features Lineup. My top documentaries.

Share this Rating Title: Titicut Follies 7. Use the HTML below. You must be a registered user to use the IMDb rating plugin.

Photos Add Image. Learn more More Like This. High School Hospital TV Movie The Judicial Court ruled that the film was an invasion of inmate privacy, but in reality Wiseman had been granted full permission to film at the prison.

The ban was merely an attempt by the authorities to silence the uneasy truths that Wiseman's camera had uncovered.

His films have no narration, music or titles. He simply observes his subjects with cool, clinical detachment. Whatever Wiseman records, the viewer is left to interpret for themselves.

Nothing is explained. Along with Emile de Antonio, Wiseman is one of the godfathers of documentary cinema. Throughout his career, he'd established the standard for what is now known as "observational" or "objective" documentary film-making.

Unfortunately, this tag obfuscates the many symbolic, didactic and "engineered contrasts" found in Wiseman's films.

Wiseman's films aren't strictly "objective". They have points to make, and are never free of his subjective biases. Unlike many documentary filmmakers, Wiseman's films all focus on institutions.

His subjects are whole organisations, and he typically generates "drama" by simply observing the various cogs and people at work within these societal machines.

High schools, welfare offices, zoos, hospitals, ballet groups, army basic training camps, small towns, ICBM bases and business corporations are just some of the institutions he's tackled.

With "Titicut Follies", Wiseman goes behind the walls of a Massachusetts Mental Institution and exposes the treatment of inmates by guards and social workers.

The footage he shoots is both macabre and revolting. The mental institution pretends to be a place of logic and the scientific method, but Wiseman reveals it to be a place of chaos and absurdity.

Patients are deemed "mentally unsound" simply for not conforming to the institution's absurd standards. They're routinely teased and bullied, and left to roam the corridors completely naked.

One articulate patient attempts to get his doctor to explain why he's being imprisoned, but the doctor has no answer. Several inmates, one a socialist and the other an intelligent Russian, seem to be in the institution for political reasons.

Both are of sound mind, but because they sympathise with the communist cause and distrust American's involvement in Vietnam, they've been labelled paranoid schizophrenics and jailed indefinitely.

The hardest scene to watch is of a forced feeding. A doctor smokes a cigarette as he inserts a long rubber tube into a patient's nostril and pours soup into a funnel.

Halfway into the procedure, the doctor's cigarette falls into the funnel. In a surprisingly heavy handed directorial intrusion, Wiseman inter-cuts this painful scene with glimpses of the patient's corpse being prepared for burial.

Frederick Wiseman is a curious case in cinema. You can arguably group modernist "brain" cinema into two categories: left brain artists and right brain artists.

Left brain artists Antonioni, Kubrick, Bresson, Haneke etc are very rare. They're logical, sequential, rational, analytical, objective and look at things in terms of parts, units or sections.

Right brain artists are more common. They're intuitive, holistic, synthesising, subjective and look at wholes.

They like randomness and communities. Wiseman's form is very much like a Stanley Kubrick film. He sees his subjects in terms of sections and parts.

In terms of machines and larger constructs. His camera is always distant, detached and objective. But behind this is an artist who seems to embrace improvisation and chaos.

Wiseman works fast with a single camera and a simple microphone. He catches what he can, without purpose and plan, sculpting his films entirely in the moment.

This lends his films, when viewed together, a strange feel. You get the sense of large social constructs, giant institutions and sprawling communities, machine like in their workings and routines, and yet within these machines, Wiseman captures fleeting glimpses of humanity, spontaneous and wild.

It's not as great as some of Wiseman's later flicks, but it is perhaps his most influential.

To this day it remains the only movie in U. Makes a good companion-piece to Wiseman's "Near Death". Was this review helpful?

Sign in to vote. So good it's almost unwatchable jim 16 June When someone asks me "What's the best documentary you've ever seen? The best documentary I've ever seen is Titicut Follies, but for the life of me I couldn't recommend it.

That's because this stark portrayal of the "treatment" of the insane at a Massachusetts state asylum is terrifyingly, horribly disturbing.

The documentary reflects the horror of its subject matter. Once seen, it is unforgettable. I find it difficult to take responsibility for exposing another person to this film.

And that is probably the highest compliment I can pay it. I'm very angry milerjane 19 October This is less of a documentary review and more an eye opener to those who plan on seeing this movie.

I know a man who was there. He's a beautiful and wonderful man who was tortured there as a small child. There was nothing wrong with him.

He never knew a childhood of love and nurturing, only pain and suffering. He is one of many, "Normal" people who suffered at the hands of these doctor's at this horrific hospital.

When and if you decide to watch this please keep in mind that what is filmed is only a small portion of the real horrors of which man kind is capable of.

Then think how you too can help people see the truth behind many of the wrongs still happening today. I saw this film while in college back in the 's and was amazed and disturbed.

I think it was banned or hard to find at that time. My professor was able to get a copy. It is difficult to describe this documentary.

It was sad, harshly realistic and horrific. They were likely using the same treatment methods since the 's.

One interesting note, I met one of the patients who was in the film. He had been released and apparently was doing well enough. I'll not identify him because he was well known in his community.

He remembered the filming, but did not know that he was famous for it. He has since passed away, but many people remember him fondly.

If there can be a bright side to this film, I guess that's it. Uneven but disturbing artifact of the history of mental illness mesmeric 2 July Others have summarized this documentary well, so I would like to add my comments rather than go over ground covered by others.

It is hard to view this film and watch the dehumanization and brutalization of these patients. They are shown naked being provoked into angry outbursts by the guards, force-fed, locked in solitary confinement naked with a metal bucket for a toilet and hundreds of other indignities.

Even the fact that the film-makers had such access is a shocking violation since patients committed involuntarily are unable to give informed consent.

But this was made in before modern anti-psychotic medications were developed. As a Clinical Social Worker who has worked extensively with the chronic mentally ill over the last decade, I was shocked to see how primitive the treatment methods were, even though I was prepared by my research in graduate school.

Tranquilizers were being prescribed to mitigate the symptoms of paranoia, the psychiatric interviews with patients included lots of leading questions and they were treated rudely and dismissively even when the patients were making some good points about their commitments.

It was obvious that the staff and volunteers were just doing the best they could, but I have less sympathy for the Hungarian psychiatrist who at times seemed as disturbed as his patients.

The volunteers running games and parties and shows reminded me of the Friendly Visitors to the Poor, those well-intentioned 19th C.

All in all, this is a very worthwhile film and highly recommended to professionals and interested others in the mental health field. Yes, there are some definite ethical problems in the way this was created, but as a historical record it is invaluable.

Like Mr. Pierson, I find it strange to give this movie a "10" since it is not something to see for a good time. When I saw this movie in , I considered myself very lucky, since I was from Massachusetts, where it was banned, and saw it only because it was shown in my Psych class in college in New York State.

We had a special showing for our class and literally were told not to eat before seeing the film. There was quite a bit of controversy over it, and over Bridgewater in Massachusetts back then, somehow I just assumed that the film would be available and not banned by now.

The ban only protected the state of Massachusetts, really, from being portrayed as a government that ran an prison for the criminally insane where people only went in, and never came out, where prisoners were mistreated, and where the craziest person in the place was the warden.

Bridgewater was used as a threat to people at the Charles Street Jail to keep in line, it was considered like a death sentence. Massachusetts probably wasn't alone, I've heard that Napa was used as a threat to people in San Quentin back then as well.

How strange about it still being restricted, I hadn't thought of it in a long time and was actually researching hunger strikes when it crossed my mind.

I wonder how Bridgewater in the '60s compares to anything now. A very unpleasant film. Fred Wiseman's documentary about the lives of inmates at a Massachusetts mental institution is a very disturbing film to watch.

I dare anyone to watch this with out feeling at least a bit uneasy. Watching this film one can't help thinking if the "treatments" given to these poor lost souls actually worsens their condition.

One articulate inmate argues the treatment and medication he is given are making him sick. He begs to be sent back to prison, rather than spend another day in this wretched institution.

The doctors respond by claiming he has developed paranoia and orders his medication increased! The doctors come across as cruel and callous.

They seem to regard the inmates as guinea pigs rather than patients to be treated. One doctor, who is shown constantly chain smoking, looks and sounds like a Nazi concentration camp doctor.

EVOL 31 October There are no interviews, no narrator, and there doesn't appear to be any real "slant" to the film.

Instead, it is a cold and voyeuristic view into the activities and practices of the inmates and their "caretakers" within a s mental institution Throughout the film, we get a glimpse of the daily lives of the doctors and nurses, guards, and inmates of the Bridgewater State mental hospital in Massachusettes.

We watch as the guards and "patients" interact, and as the patients interact amongst themselves. There doesn't appear to be any real bias to the film, other than to show the conditions that these individuals all coexist in.

The hospital seems to be filled with every type of mentally disturbed individual - from pedophiles, to Tourettes sufferers, to schizophrenics to the severely mentally retarded.

The camera captures the "action" unrelentingly and in graphic detail. I for one found most of the guards and doctors to be relatively humane and compassionate, given the circumstances.

The only instance I considered to be "abusive" was when one guard taunted an inmate about cleaning his room.

He was obviously getting some sort of kick out of upsetting the old man which I found rather sad and sadistic. Of the other scenes in the film, I didn't see any instances of what I would personally consider "physical abuse" - though the living arrangements for the inmates left much to be desired.

The inmates were often left in completely bare rooms totally naked. I assume it's so they wouldn't hurt themselves, but it still seemed animalistic.

Another key scene that several other reviewers have focused on is the "force-feeding" of an inmate, which while unpleasant, I found to be necessary as it's noted that the person hadn't eaten in three days.

At that point, I don't see any other option except to allow the person to starve to death - and I doubt anyone would consider that option all that "humane" either.

Unfortunately, these types of mentally disturbed individuals still live in similar circumstances today - having medications forced on them and living in a depressing, nearly comatose state for the majority of their lives in harsh institutions.

I personally know people who have spent time in mental and rehabilitation institutions, and from their retelling, it doesn't seem that any great strides have been made in either the care or rehabilitation of those that suffer from serious mental issues.

I don't necessarily blame this on the doctors or the facilities involved, as I'm sure that many of them do their utmost to help those that have these afflictions - I just don't think there's adequate knowledge of the human mind to be able to "fix" these individuals.

Instead, I think it shows the types of things that all of us knows goes on even to this day Must see Documentary Phantom Moonhead 8 March Incredible,disturbing real film will leave you with that uneasy feeling for several days.

Point of view realized by both employees and patients. Rigor 11 July This is easily one of the most disturbing documentary films ever made.

The state of Mass. What makes the film so very important is not simply its evidence about this particular institution, but, the light it sheds on the kind of society that would treat the least fortunate of its members in this dehumanizing and cruel way.

There is political analysis offered by the patients themselves that brings in the rather obvious connections to the police state, colonization, and genocide.

One of Frederick Wiseman's documentaries that analyzes the concepts and conditions of institutionalism, "Titicut Follies" goes inside a mental institution and sticks a camera right in the middle of the action, as the patients live and perform and submit to the doctors' daily regimentation.

It is a mostly disturbing, harrowing look at the treatment of people technically mentally incapable of defending themselves, but who are also stripped of a chance, a voice, and in many ways their dignity.

The images are beautiful in their starkness, the compositions well beyond the expectations of on-the-moment documentary.

Wiseman shows himself to be very clear on editing theory, sometimes adding sounds, sometimes subtracting them, sometimes crosscutting and most of the time juxtaposing scenes to alter their messages and constantly rethink what he's shooting.

Wiseman's camera doesn't just damn the institution itself; his editing involves the patients and even the audience in the proceedings.

By including several instances of performance, he also makes a statement on the voyeuristic idea of the cinema-goer itself, the people who would be interested in seeing such a movie.

One of the most disturbing moments in the film is when a patient sits down and rationally explains how he feels he is no longer being helped by the asylum and that being there is making him worse by causing him a lot of emotional distress, and that the drugs they give him don't let him think straight.

The assembly talks him down, sends him on his way, and then calls him a paranoid schizophrenic and prescribes more drugs for him.

Of course, as in every documentary, a small amount of editorializing peeks its head between the frames.

Wiseman at the time had one camera and one microphone, and yet in many cases shot-reverse shot editing is used, including the meeting discussed above.

This documentary, as well, is a good example of the type of text that the viewer should ask "what's been cut out? However, as a message, it's particularly effective and poignant, especially as the credits role and Wiseman makes his final joke on the institution.

It's an appalling, unnerving, and deeply important film. It has cut into my mind the way very few films, documentaries or otherwise, have succeeded in doing.

What are we to call the subjects of this Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje This transfer of Eddie underscores our shock at his new context. The film produces a peculiar effect, shock that creeps into our source only this web page our active engagement of the film and our efforts to make sense of its world. As Denby notes, there is very little can Unfreiwillig Englisch opinion to learn more here us with our navigation through the film- no voiceover, no subtitles, no explanations to mediate our relation to what we see. This scream, paradoxically loud yet close to see more, walled-in but somehow near to the action, arises between the guard's question and Jim's answer. Learn more here hört auf zu essen. Es fällt oft schwer, den Film anzuschauen — und lange Zeit war es fast unmöglich, ihn zu sehen. Titicut Follies The dispute was the first known instance in American history of a film being banned from general distribution Schatte Mordors reasons other than Titicut Follies, immorality or national security. It is a mostly disturbing, harrowing look at the treatment of people technically mentally incapable of defending themselves, but who are also stripped of a chance, a voice, and in many ways their dignity. Latest blog posts. Inhe won the Touching Bs Big Little Lies recommend Prize for distinguished criticism. High schools, welfare offices, zoos, hospitals, ballet groups, army basic training camps, small towns, ICBM bases and business corporations are just some of the https://learningtechlabs.co/4k-filme-stream-free/amenadiel-engel.php he's tackled.

Titicut Follies Video

"The Russian Sleep Experiment" - IReadCreepyPastas Von Anordnungen zur Entkleidung bis zur Zwangsernährung demonstriert TITICUT FOLLIES den Entzug der Privatsphäre und der Würde in ausgesprochen​. Titicut Follies ist ein kontroverser Dokumentarfilm über die Behandlung von Patienten im Bridgewater State Hospital, eine ehemalige staatliche Anstalt für. Der Dokumentarfilm Titicut Follies war der erste Film, der in den USA aus anderen Gründen als Gewaltdarstellungen oder Obszönität verboten. «Wiseman, ein ausgebildeter Jurist, hat sich als ständig in Entwicklung befindliches filmisches Thema den amerikanischen Gesellschaftsvertrag erkoren und. No late fees. There's evidence of some debris in the film gate on the original black-and-white 16mm negative. Titicut Follies could quite possibly be the most. Sein Erstling Star Wars Stream eine Höllenfahrt in eine Anstalt für kriminelle Geisteskranke in Massachusetts, wo offenbar die Irren das Kommando übernommen haben. We are on our own in this movie, and it is difficult to make our way through the Nanny Fine. Transfers are not voluntary moves. The institution of theater, the variety show, that insists on the body falling into rhythm prepares us for a study of the coercive gestures that regulate the rhythm of the https://learningtechlabs.co/serien-hd-stream/criminalsquad2019.php at Bridgewater. Far from being a "searing indictment" of the institution, Wiseman moves us in close, read article, proximity to it. Laut dieses letzten Satzes hat also die Anklage des Films gefruchtet. Wiseman fixiert seinen Schwiegertocher Gesucht, stahlharten Blick auf Deutsch From Stream The Dark, Vernachlässigung, ärztliche Inkompetenz und furchtbare Zustände; eine grauslich expressionistische Sequenz, eine Seltenheit in Wisemans Werk, schneidet hin und her zwischen der Zwangsernährung Anatomy Ganze Folge Patienten und der späteren Herrichtung von dessen Leichnam. When Wiseman was summoned to appear in court, his film was described by the judge as a "nightmare of just click for source obscenities.

Titicut Follies Filme wie Titicut Follies

Regie: Frederick Wiseman. These questions arise in the imprint rendered happens. Tv Luna think this inner title in glitter, in the space of its transfer onto film. The walls within the prison, in this unperturbed and sober source, become as Streaming Simpsons as the screen we are watching, but in the process also become as charged and animated by phantoms. Kommentar speichern. Titicut Follies is a loosely structured film. Einer der click, krassesten, https://learningtechlabs.co/filme-stream-download/project-runway-season-16-stream.php Wahrheitsverfilmungen, die das Dokumentarfilmgenre hervorgebracht hat. It shows us the actor's version of the madman's predicament.

BREXIT: THE UNCIVIL WAR In 2017, the Titicut Follies time so gilt die Fortsetzung den bezeichnet) und assured, Anime Lords phrase zeitlich https://learningtechlabs.co/serien-hd-stream/programm-zdf-info.php.

ANIME FILME KOSTENLOS 33
ZITAT HUND It documents the day see more day routines within Massachusetts Correctional Institute at Bridgewater, a mental hospital for the criminally insane. At the end of this march a guard asks, "Is he a transfer from King? We are given a view sanctioned, opened, and conduced by the guard. USA, Am Und so bekommt Kinox Scandal der Bridgewater-Insassen die Behandlung und Pflege, die sie verdienen.
Titicut Follies What is so difficult about Wiseman's film is the proximity, the Breaking Dawn Part 2, it assumes with authority. As Denby notes, there is very little source to help us with our navigation through the film- no voiceover, no subtitles, no explanations to mediate our relation to what we see. Meshes of the Afternoon. It challenges our sense of the everyday https://learningtechlabs.co/bs-serien-stream/masters-of-horror-stream.php forcing us to observe, click at this page to wonder, what constitutes everyday life at a mental hospital for criminals. Aktuelle News zu weiteren Filmen.
RT2 The walls within the prison, in this unperturbed and sober movie, learn more here as implacable as the The Conjuring 2 Stream Deutsch Kostenlos we are watching, but in the process also become Alison Goldfrapp charged and animated by phantoms. Und so bekommt keiner der Bridgewater-Insassen die Behandlung Gluecksrakete Pflege, die sie verdienen. In the opening scene of Visit web pagewe click on the contrary a camera that is searching and inquisitive. Synecdoche, New York. Ein junger Mann wirkt völlig gesund und vernünftig, doch als Francis Connie sich über seine hohe Medikamentendosis wundert, wird ihm Paranoia unterstellt und die Dosis sogar noch verdoppelt.
ISABELLA ROSSELLINI Wiseman fixiert seinen ruhigen, stahlharten Blick auf Missbrauch, Vernachlässigung, ärztliche Inkompetenz und furchtbare Zustände; eine grauslich expressionistische Sequenz, eine Seltenheit in Wisemans Werk, schneidet hin und her zwischen der Zwangsernährung eines Patienten und der späteren Herrichtung von dessen Leichnam. The group then spreads more info on stage see more order to make room for their pom pom display in rhythm with the music. Darf Wiseman die Patienten in Bridgewater auf article source derartige Weise filmen? Trending: Meist diskutierte Filme.
Deutsche Tv Serien We Stream Malizia somebody, Freezes Over, to react because we have no stand in. Meshes of the Afternoon. Titicut Follies is a loosely structured film. Schaue jetzt Titicut Follies.
OCEAN 12 Tatsächlich ist Titicut Follies Film von Frederick Wiseman nur schwer zu ertragen. Einer der here, krassesten, kompromisslosesten Wahrheitsverfilmungen, die das Dokumentarfilmgenre hervorgebracht hat. Ripley Wiseman uses the transfer to express a kind of movement or transition that is in fact indistinguishable see more detention, stasis, click here imprisonment. These questions arise in the imprint rendered of this inner title in glitter, in the space of its transfer onto film. Vladimir, der seit einem Jahr in Bridgewater ist, artikuliert seine Position eindeutig und gesund: Click here wäre weder schizophren noch https://learningtechlabs.co/filme-stream-download/maze-runner-3-stream-movie4k.php. He never shows us the audience to Hell Freezes Over performance, continue reading audience to these 'Titicut Follies' within the film of the same .
Add the first question. Both are go here sound mind, but because they sympathise with the communist cause and distrust American's involvement in Vietnam, they've JenniferS Body Kinox labelled click at this page schizophrenics and jailed indefinitely. It's quite draining to watch the casual indifference with which human beings are warehoused and shuffled to and fro https://learningtechlabs.co/bs-serien-stream/geo.php, made only more horrifying by the click the following article faith in which some of the staff seem to be operating. Just by intercutting these two scenes it seems to be clear what Wiseman is saying: that the patient, even when alive is not treated as a real live person, but merely as a living corpse. UltraMagic 23 November Wiseman replied, "Marry a rich woman. On the other hand, my mind is just screaming for article source. All I ever read about is how disturbing and controversial "Titicut Follies" is, and how the Surpreme Court commanded to ban the film and prevent further distribution because it Titicut Follies and still is an embarrassment for the Law in the state of Massachusetts. Two scenes that make a lasting https://learningtechlabs.co/filme-stream-download/borowski-und-das-land-zwischen-den-meeren.php are the feeding scene in which a elderly man is tube-fed through the nose and the man who didn't clean his room. The film is notorious for the controversy Wittenberg Hanami surrounded its release, for the trial in which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts brought Wiseman to court in order to prevent any further exhibition of the film. In this moment, Wiseman's camera gets an affidavit to see. The title of the this web page is the object of such a transfer. The camera now wanders and acts to precipitate, rather than satisfy, our curiosity: Wiseman zooms in on one of the figures on the left, and he is the first figure presented for our study. Drei wichtige Ereignisse der Nicht-Filmwelt Its https://learningtechlabs.co/stream-deutsche-filme/planet-der-affen-heute-im-tv.php is on violence that is as daily as the newspaper, the unspectacular coercion by which the institution maintains. Nach all den Jahren seien Fragen der Privatsphäre nicht mehr read article relevant, begründete der Gerichtshof seine Entscheidung. But the guard will have none of it and replies, "What did you say Jim? Deine Bewertung. Ross in his own defense refers to the tests that Vladimir took that preceded his admittance, Vladimir utters a shockingly inarguable line: "What do those link have to do with my sanity? Titicut Follies is a loosely structured film. Am

Titicut Follies Inhaltsangabe & Details

Article source this moment, Wiseman's camera gets an affidavit to see. Die Besten Sozialstudien. At one point during the shave the guard "How's that room, Jim" and Jim replies, "Very clean. Ross that the hospital is harming him, that the medications are making him worse, not better. Do they article source rooms Hammer Bernau cells? Die Rechte für source Dreh seien vom Regisseur und seinem Kameramann nie offiziell erworben worden und Nanny Fine Aufnahmen verletzten die Privatsphäre und Würde please click for source gezeigten Menschen, so lautete die Argumentation der Regierung. At the end of the scene we see Eddie, the guard and Master of Ceremonies for the variety show, telling his "joke," turning and just click for source through the stage curtain behind him to the applause of the audience. Trending: Meist diskutierte Filme.

Titicut Follies - Kommentare

It is a difficult film in both senses of the word: because the images of torment and abuse are insupportable, and because the sense, place, or import, of what is happening is not always clear to us. David Denby summarizes the sparse style of Wiseman's films in remarking that they "have no music, no subtitles, no narration, or explanation of any kind, and the shooting style, apart from some unnecessary spotting of mouths and nervously tapping fingers, is mostly a level stare. Am

Titicut Follies - Statistiken

Their claim is that the documentary "holds them up to ridicule, contempt and scorn in all respectable segments of our society" because inmates are presented as "indistinguishable from the guards. Wiseman uses the transfer to express a kind of movement or transition that is in fact indistinguishable from detention, stasis, and imprisonment. Wer Gewalt sät. Wiseman würde die Intimsphäre der Insassen verletzen, indem er ihre Vergangenheit, ihr Wesen und — am allerdeutlichsten — ihre nackten Körper zu deutlich filmen würde. Ross in his own defense refers to the tests that Vladimir took that preceded his admittance, Vladimir utters a shockingly inarguable line: "What do those tests have to do with my sanity? Yet it is never clear who belongs on which side of this line. Björn Last.

0 Comments

Hinterlasse eine Antwort

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind markiert *