What's up, doc?
Thursday, February 27, 2014
"Harvey" is an interesting film to dissect 64 years after its original release. Our views on psychiatry, mental illness and alcoholism have certainly changed, which can make this film a bit problematic for modern audiences. Nevertheless, the picture still packs a walloping charm and disarming sensibility made all the more entertaining by James Stewart's resonant performance. Here's what our discussion group learned after examining "Harvey":
- It takes a lighthearted, whimsical look at mental illness and substance abuse without getting too serious.
- Arguably, prior to this film, mental illness was always treated soberingly in serious dramas and some “social problem” pictures, such as “The Best Years of Our Lives,” “Sunset Boulevard,” “Hangover Square,” “A Double Life,” “Spellbound,” “Gaslight” and “The Snake Pit.”
- This is, debatably, a fantasy film in that it leaves open the strong possibility that Harvey actually exists via several unexplained phenomenon and visual clues in the movie. It often walks a fine line between fantasy and reality, but deliberately steps over the line into fantasy several times. Unlike a film like “It’s a Wonderful Life,” where you see a tangible angel and heavenly bodies literally talking to one another, this movie relies on the faith and imagination of its viewers, although it’s clear that the filmmakers want you to believe that Harvey exists. Still, either interpretation (Harvey is or isn’t real) is possible. In this way, Harvey is a remote cousin to the psychological horror films of Val Lewton, where the monster or supernatural menace is suggested, but never shown.
- The movie does not criticize alcoholism/problematic drinking, which is what Dowd suffers from and which may be the culprit behind his “imaginary” friend. One reading of the film is that, by making Dowd such a sympathetic, admirably nonconformist character, but also a drunk, it actually condones drinking as a way of gliding through life with less stress and worries. Some critics marveled how a film with this kind of even unintentional message could have been given the stamp of approval by the Hays Code and censors of the era.
- You could also make the case that “Harvey” is actually quite contemporary and postmodern in its sensibilities. Critic Jeffrey Kauffman wrote: “Harvey is an unabashedly old fashioned piece of entertainment, but it’s also surprisingly modern in its prescient view of cynicism and conformity” (see http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Harvey-Blu-ray/36383/#Review).
- The film forces us to ask the question: Is it better to be “sane” and conform to the norms of a cookie cutter society, or is it better to be a free-thinking, carefree dreamer who lets worries wash over him or her?
- Put another way, perhaps the adage “ignorance is bliss” can be applied here: In a crazy, unfair, cutthroat world, is it better to live in reality or fantasy?
- Faith vs. science: Consider how critical the film is of the mental institution and its methods (stripping and bathing patients, giving “cure” serums, the attendant’s rough-and-tough tactics) and how supportive the movie is of those who believe in the rabbit.
- Kindness, patience and being “pleasant” are more important than being “smart.”
- The story is a “comedy of errors,” like Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” in that it presents ridiculous situations borne from misunderstandings and mistaken identities as the basis of its humor.
- Like so many films of its era, “Harvey” paints mental illness with a broad, stereotypical brush: in Hollywood’s classic era, the insane are usually showcased as either violent psychopaths (“Hangover Square”), victims whose cure is true love (“Spellbound”), or harmless, happy-go-lucky crackpots (“King of Hearts”). Additionally, the easy way to deal with characters so afflicted in pictures of this period was to have them committed to a sanitarium or institution.
- Many very distinct and different psychiatric disorders are often grouped together in films prior to the 1970s and generically labeled. For instance, “hysteria” is often applied to deranged women.
- One could argue that this film is negligent in its depiction of Dowd: here is a man who is not encouraged to get treatment for his alcoholism, who is looked up to by some as almost a Zen-like genius who not only has the gift of seeing a creature others cannot but who doesn’t feel pressured to face reality like the rest of us are forced to do.
- Writer Daniel DiMattei espouses this belief, by writing: “…he's incapable of relating to actual people, has no stable relationships (romantic or platonic), and is avoided by most of the townspeople and hardly acknowledge by anyone as he squanders his lonely existence developing an alcohol addiction rather than receiving treatment or help with developing his social skills. But perhaps the most absurd concept about this film is its message that the mentally ill are happier than the sane. For those who don't see why this is a terrible and utterly misguided message, visit your local mental health facility or speak with someone currently living with bi-polar disorder.” (See http://www.examiner.com/review/harvey-1950-a-review).
- Then again, this is a commercial work of feel-good entertainment, not a public awareness message, or a cautionary tale, or a history lesson, or a textbook example of accurate psychological diagnosis. The ending alone should give you a clue that this is lighthearted fantasy: consider that the head of the sanitarium walks off arm in arm with the invisible rabbit, believing fully in Harvey’s presence and power and no longer a doubting Thomas. How plausible is that for a conclusion?
- Miracle on 35th Street
- Being There
- Donnie Darko
- Lars and the Real Girl
- The Beaver
- The Bishop’s Wife
- No Highway in the Sky
- The Robe
- Flower Drum Song
Read more...