Movies and the Mind Read online

  Movies and the Mind

  Theories of the Great Psychoanalysts Applied to Film

  WILLIAM INDICK

  McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers

  Jefferson, North Carolina

  LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGUING DATA ARE AVAILABLE

  BRITISH LIBRARY CATALOGUING DATA ARE AVAILABLE

  e-ISBN: 978-0-7864-8092-0

  ©2004 William Indick. All rights reserved

  No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying or recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

  On the cover—(inset) Colin Clive, left, and Boris Karloff in Frankenstein (Universal, 1931); background imagery ©2004 Photospin.

  McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers

    Box 611, Jefferson, North Carolina 28640

      www.mcfarlandpub.com

  For Michelle Kennedy

  Table of Contents

  Acknowledgments

  Preface

  Introduction: Film as Myth

  1. Analyzing the Movie Dream

  2. Archetypes of Oz

  3. Heroes and Villains

  4. The Myth of the Birth of the Hero

  5. Religious Symbolism in Film

  6. The Monomyth

  7. Archetype Evolution

  8. Superheroes and Underdogs

  9. The Personal Myth

  10. The Modern Myths

  11. The Horrors of Childhood

  12. The American Family and Its Mechanisms of Defense

  13. Characters in Crisis

  Conclusion: An Eclectic Approach to Film Analysis

  Filmography

  Bibliography

  List of Names and Terms

  Acknowledgments

  I owe many thanks to Mustafa Lokmaci, a graduate assistant in the Psychology Department at Dowling College, for compiling the filmography, subject index and film index. Much of the information in the filmography was retrieved from the Internet Movie Database (IMDB.com).

  Much appreciation goes to Jim Garbarino at Cornell University, Suzanne Johnson at Dowling College and Frank Madden at SUNY Westchester Community College for their mentorship, guidance and advice.

  I owe a debt of gratitude to the faculty and administration of Dowling College in Oakdale, New York, for their support of my research and writing projects.

  Preface

  In this book, the psychoanalytic theories of Sigmund Freud, Erik Erickson, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler, Joseph Campbell, Otto Rank and Rollo May are applied to film analysis. The psychoanalytic approach to film analysis provides an in-depth process for unearthing the latent symbolism in film imagery. An appreciation of these elemental issue and symbols provides a fundamental understanding of film structure that is invaluable to filmmakers, screenwriters, psychologists or anyone with an interest in psychology or film. The distinct analytic approaches provided in this book offer an integrative and eclectic perspective that will help all readers—not just psychologists—to gain a deeper and more personal understanding of the films they view.

  The idea for this book emerged from my needs as an assistant professor of psychology at Dowling College in Oakdale, New York (a small liberal arts college). My two lifelong interests have been psychology and film, so it seemed only natural that I should integrate my dual passions into an interdisciplinary course, “Psychology in Film.” A colleague in the psychology department expressed a mutual interest, so we created the course and proposed it to the college. The course would introduce undergraduate students to the major psychoanalytic theories by using films as the subject for analysis. It was designed to increase the students’ knowledge of psychology while offering a unique way to gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of film. The course was approved and scheduled, but there was only one problem: We couldn’t find an appropriate textbook.

  I searched and searched, but could not find any book that applied the major psychoanalytic theories to film analysis in an integrated, coherent and eclectic manner. For example, Jung and Film: Post-Jungian Takes on the Moving Image by Hauke and Alister (2001) focuses on film representations of Carl Jung’s theories of archetypes and the collective unconscious. Psychiatry and the Cinema by Gabbard (1999) focuses on the role of the psychiatrist in the movies. Similarly, Psychoanalytic Approaches to Literature and Film by Charney and Reppen (1987), The Imaginary Signifier: Psychoanalytic and the Cinema by Mertz (1986), Screen Memories: Hollywood Cinema on the Psychoanalytic Couch, by Greenberg (1993) and The Analysis of Film by Bellour and Penley (2002) all provide traditionally Freudian takes on movies. However, I have not encountered a book that offers a comprehensive and eclectic approach to film analysis using a broad variety of theories and a plethora of examples from both classic and contemporary movies. My solution to the problem was an expedient one. I decided to write the book that I needed myself.

  The theories, approaches and analyses in this book are inspired and drawn from the lectures and discussions from my “Psychology in Film” class. For the most part, each chapter represents the topics and ideas that would arise from single lectures or course sections. The first two chapters demonstrate how both Freudian and Jungian methods of dream analysis can be applied to film analysis. Drawing out the parallels between film imagery and dream imagery is a perfect introduction to the subject of film psychoanalysis, as the film viewing experience and dream experience are similar on many levels. In subsequent chapters, the focus turns to the psychoanalysis and deconstruction of the primary figure in most movies: the hero character. A Freudian interpretation of the hero is provided in chapter 3. The hero character is analyzed according to Otto Rank’s theories in chapter 4, while chapter 6 provides Joseph Campbell’s model, and chapter 8 introduces an Adlerian perspective.

  Chapter 11 applies Sigmund Freud’s psychosexual stages to the horror film genre. Similarly, chapter 12 applies Anna Freud’s configuration of the ego defense mechanisms to the family melodrama genre. And chapter 13 applies Erik Erikson’s stages of identity crisis to eight different film analyses.

  The other chapters in this book provide original theories and perspectives on psychological themes in film. Chapter 5 explores religious symbolism in films, chapter 7 traces the evolution of modern heroine characters in film history, and chapter 10 focuses on a handful of preeminent filmmakers whose monumental works warrant their ranking as “modern mythmakers.”

  A leitmotif running throughout all the chapters is the concept that film constitutes an ongoing modern mythology for contemporary society. This concept is explained in depth in the introduction to this book, and readdressed on different levels in every chapter. The conclusion is an integrated, eclectic film analysis of one film, applying all of the different approaches and paradigms described in the previous chapters. The final analysis demonstrates that film psychoanalysis, just like clinical psychoanalysis and psychotherapy, is most meaningful when the process is flexible, open and inclusive of all approaches.

  Introduction: Film as Myth

  Our fundamental notions of a good story and character come from the elemental building blocks of our culture—our myths. Just as letters and words constitute the bases of our language, myths and legends constitute the bases of our modern characters, literature and art. Film is only the latest mode of storytelling in a long line of literary heritage. In a sense, there are no new stories, merely new ways of retelling the ancient themes and characters that have been told and retold for thousands of years. So, if we wish to analyze the movies that influence our minds and lives, we must break them down to the most basic elemental level—the level of myth.

  Myths and stories originate fro
m the imagination, a part of the psyche that is mainly unconscious. Hence, myths and stories can be understood and analyzed as unconscious expressions. Sigmund Freud’s greatest contribution to psychology was his ability to relate his ideas about the unconscious to the themes found in ancient myth. By relating neurotic conflict to the myth of Oedipus and the basic drives to mythological figures such as Eros and Thanatos, Freud revealed the link between the universal issues disclosed in myth and the personal issues repressed in the unconscious. In doing so, Freud uncovered the “Lapis Philosophorum” of psychoanalysis—the philosopher’s stone that converts latent unconscious material into manifest psychological issues.

  Carl Jung’s departure from Freud was a bold venture into the area that Freud himself broached, the area in which myth and psychoanalysis intersect. Jung explained how the mythological archetypes that are personally meaningful in dreams become collectively meaningful through myth. Jungian and Freudian methods of dream analysis, though quite different, offer complementary techniques for the analysis of dreams. In turn, the same techniques can be used to analyze film, which—like myth—is a form of “communal dream.” Film’s visceral appeal as a larger-than-life medium makes it an extremely powerful psychological force. Viewers identify so readily with movie characters and become so emotionally connected with the films they see that the illusion on the screen becomes intertwined with their own fantasies. Film, fantasy, and dreams are the realm of the unconscious. We project are unconscious desires inwardly though fantasy and dreams, and we project them outwardly through the experience of film. In this sense, films can be psychoanalyzed in the same way as people’s dreams.

  Otto Rank applied the structure of mythological symbolism to psychoanalysis through his study of the “myth of the birth of the hero.” Rank revealed that the primary symbolic figure in mythology—the hero—has a story that is ubiquitous in structure and universally resonant on a psychological level. Joseph Campbell wove Freudian, Jungian and Rankian theory together with his encyclopedic knowledge of world myth to create his structure of the “stages of the hero’s journey.” By applying Rank and Campbell’s complementary models to film analysis, the film hero’s character and screen story can be deconstructed in a way that is exceptionally appropriate for the study of the prototypical Hollywood action movie, which usually casts a classical hero figure in the leading role.

  Alfred Adler, Erik Erikson and Rollo May each conceived of their own unique models of personality development and the unconscious mind. Their views on inferiority, identity and existential integrity broadened the field of psychoanalysis, which in turn broadens the palette for the film analyst, providing alternative models for the deconstruction of film characters, symbolism and plot. Like myth, film is a delivery system for the timeless archetypes, collective symbols and elemental images that communicate to audiences because they represent the universal psychological issues of personal growth and existential meaning. As the medium for modern mythology in contemporary society, film plays a crucial role in the recreation and expression of these issues. And in the hands of the modern mythmakers, the technical wizards and artistic geniuses at Disney, DreamWorks, Lucas films and other studios, these ancient archetypes are reborn into even greater visions through the most powerful and psychologically pervasive storytelling medium ever created—the motion picture.

  Fairy tales and myths have persisted as central figures in the collective unconscious for thousands of years, with only human voices and picture books to illustrate them. Imagine how much more vibrant and alive these ancient archetypes become through the modern sorcery of graphic computer animation, philharmonic orchestrated scores and digitally enhanced sound. If a picture tells a thousand words, than a thousand, thousand pictures tell a whole universe of ideas.

  1

  Analyzing the Movie Dream

  Sigmund Freud was born in Freiberg, Moravia, in 1856. He was educated at Vienna University and remained in Vienna for most of his life. After receiving his medical degree in 1881, he spent three years at the General Hospital of Vienna, then received an appointment as lecturer in neuropathology at Vienna University. Freud was influenced by French neurologist Jean Charcot’s use of hypnotic suggestion in his treatment of psychological hysteria, inspiring him to focus his studies on psychiatry and psychopathology. Specializing in nervous diseases, he went into private practice in 1886.

  Early on in his work, Freud abandoned the use of hypnosis as a method of uncovering the root of neurotic conflicts, and developed new techniques such as free association and dream analysis. In 1900 Freud published his seminal work The Interpretation of Dreams, which would become the first manifesto of psychoanalysis. In this book, Freud revealed his incredibly controversial and provocative theory of the Oedipal complex, in which infantile sexuality, aggressive impulses, sexual drives and unconscious repression play key roles in the mind of the neurotic. Freud was appointed full professor at Vienna University in 1902, which gave him the time and financial freedom to focus most of his time and energy on developing his revolutionary theory of the unconscious.

  Freud’s theories were publicly derided by most of the medical establishment during his lifetime. Nevertheless, his intriguing ideas spurred a psychoanalytic movement that grew steadily throughout Europe and America. At his peak, Freud was the central figure in a circle of psychoanalytic theorists that included Alfred Adler, Abraham Brill, Eugen Bleuler, Sándor Ferenczi, Ernest Jones, Carl Jung, Otto Rank and William Stekel. However, Freud’s domineering personality and his insistence on a strict interpretation of his theory caused dissension among his disciples. Much to his chagrin, Adler, Rank and Jung defected and went on to develop their own psychoanalytic models. Nevertheless, all psychoanalytic theories owe a tremendous debt to Freud’s conception of the unconscious mind. In his later years, Freud abandoned clinical work in favor of analyzing literature, religion, culture and mythology. The Nazi occupation of 1938 forced Freud and his family to flee Austria and move to London, where he died a year later.

  In his first major book, The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), Sigmund Freud developed a sophisticated theory of dreams, which included a distinct method of dream analysis. In Freud’s view, the primary function of dreams is wish fulfillment—the unreal, but nevertheless satisfying release of a repressed id impulse. The sexual fantasy dream resulting in a nocturnal emission (the “wet dream”) represents the closest functional example of libidinal wish fulfillment in dreams. Laboratory research performed decades after Freud’s death validated many of his ideas. Sleep researchers found that males almost always experience penile erection during REM sleep cycles. When males dream, whether or not they’re dreaming of sex, their bodies are experiencing a state of sexual arousal. Libidinal release while dreaming is definitely physiological, if not always psychological.

  But even Freud admitted that not every desire or wish is exclusively sexual in nature. Sometimes we need to release the impulses that are merely inspired by the sexual drive—the broader Eros needs for love and affection. Other times we need to release the impulses that originate from the aggressive drive—the Thanatos urges towards conquest, revenge and destruction. But however the wish is fulfilled, the unconscious fantasy of the dream is still the fanciful product of the imagination. Impulses and desires within the “dream-play” are transformed and switched around in a panoply of psychological distortions, so that many dreams make absolutely no sense to the dreamers in their conscious state. In order to understand the dream, it must be interpreted by referring back to its place of origin, the unconscious. Freud’s “dreamwork” consists of various analytic techniques that guide the interpreter through the maze of unconscious images of the manifest content, in order to reveal the latent unconscious desire that gave birth to the dream.

  Condensation

  The first step to revealing the hidden meaning of the dream is understanding that the dream is created in an unconscious code that only the dreamer can understand. The code condenses the psychological material in the
dream into images and events that all have specific and significant meanings for the dreamer. For instance, a patient in analysis may have a dream in which she is following a black cat through an empty movie theater while a Bugs Bunny cartoon is playing on the screen. Given this information alone, the dream does not seem to have any particular meaning. However, an analyst would assume that the dream does have a meaning, and that this meaning can be revealed by exploring the patient’s personal associations with the images in the manifest content. The analyst would begin by asking the patient to explore her associations with black cats, movie theaters and Bugs Bunny. The analyst may even use certain analytic techniques such as free association, which help the patient disengage her conscious resistance and allow unconscious associations to flow freely.

  Through the process of uncovering her associations, the patient reveals that she had a black cat as a child, but the cat ran away. This association may suggest that the dream is referring to an issue originating from the patient’s childhood. The patient, in exploring this association, goes on to reveal that she was very upset when her cat ran away, but she was even more upset by the unsympathetic reaction of her father, who did not comfort her and did not help her search for the cat. So the dream may be dealing specifically with a childhood issue involving the patient’s father. In exploring her association with the movie theater, the patient reveals that she loves the movies, and goes to the movie theater often. In further exploration, she reveals that she once had an ambition to become a movie actor, but she gave up this goal shortly after her marriage. This association may suggest a link between the patient’s regret for giving up her goal of becoming an actor and her childhood relationship with her father. And, finally, in exploring her association with Bugs Bunny, the patient reveals that she herself never cared for cartoons, but her five-year-old son loves them, especially Bugs Bunny.