Titicut Follies

1967

Documentary

36
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 100%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 89%
IMDb Rating 7.7 10 4,090

Synopsis


Downloaded times
January 28, 2021

Cast

720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
769.91 MB
1280*720
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
84 min
P/S N/A / N/A
1.4 GB
1920×1080
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
84 min
P/S N/A / N/A

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by vjax1451 9 / 10 / 10

Scary but true

I saw this film while in college back in the 1970'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. This was how inmates/patients were treated, but again, it was the 1960's. They were likely using the same treatment methods since the 1920'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.

Reviewed by hrising 9 / 10 / 10

After all these years this should be freely available

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 1972, 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.

Reviewed by Polaris_DiB 9 / 10 / 10

Exploration of institution

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. "Titicut Follies" is almost uncannily shot and edited. 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?" considering how strongly Wiseman marks his subjects. However, as a message, it's particularly effective and poignant, especially as the credits role and Wiseman makes his final joke on the institution. --PolarisDiB

Read more IMDb reviews

0 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment