One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Post Reply New Topic

I just finished watching this film about 15 minutes ago, and I can't stop bawling my eyes out. I've stayed in psychiatric units before, on several occasions, and so the entire film struck a chord with me. Especially Jack Nicholson's character, because I've wanted to do the same things he did while in hospital. Usually because you can see how the nurses treat people differently, depending on how severe their symptoms are. It's really weird. The closer you are to 'normal,' the more you're actually treated like a human being. It's like the nurses actually forget that we're all the same, there's this really unusual disconnect. It's pretty fascinating actually..

It's pretty insane. Pun. But yeah, I don't know, I know the film is exaggerated in some respects, but the general moral still gets through -- what does it take to be deemed as 'clinically insane,' crazy, and what are the general criteria for mental sanity? Where do you draw the line, can you even draw a line? I'm so freaked out right now. At the end they give Jack a lobotomy, or something to that effect. He was a vegetable before the Native American man 'helped him out.' Was that really the only solution they had back during that time? It's really scary to look back on old medical practices that were deemed as proper and good by health care professionals, and realize they were simply horrifying and atrocious acts of insanity in themselves. Ahh I'm rambling.

Has anyone else seen this film? I know I'm really 'late' on seeing it, but yeah, just picked it up at the library the other day...

You went to the library and didn't get the book of it instead?

^^ Really?
That question is all you have to contribute to the thread?

Interesting.

Read it, seen it, own it.

It is a classic, after all. That's why it was nominated for 9 Oscars and won 5 of them.

One of Nicholson's greatest performances. And early appearances by Christopher Lloyd and Danny DeVito, who were unknowns at the time.

I've only read the book. It just seems odd why someone would chose the movie version of a classic book when going to a library.

Yes, several times, but I do not try to analyze all of it.

People only ever get locked up for *acting* crazy (rather than for merely being thought of as "crazy"), so the challenge for some of us is to learn how much today's society will actually tolerate before trying to modify us.

As an aside: Many years ago, barbers used to drain blood from people to supposedly "let out the tired blood" so new blood would then be produced to revitalize them.

I have read the book and i wrote an essay on it for my english class, it is very insightful into the true nature of 'society' and how in reality it benefits nobody.

McMurphy for example was not even really insane, yet he was commited to hospital and was subjet to the worse 'punishment'. other patients werent committed but were volentary, they had been made to feel so bad about themselves that they did not feel stong enough to actualy leave, it was tragic.

You can borrow a variety of different media from the library.
I borrowed DVDs and CDs at the library that day, not books.
I did not have a list of items I wanted to borrow from the library before I went, I thought I would just browse and pick up interesting titles.
I happened across the DVD in passing, and to be honest, I didn't realize there was a book until this moment.
Even if I did see the book in passing that day, I most likely would not have picked it up because I was not looking for books that day.

I think I weirded out by the question you asked because it seemed extraneous to the discussion I was trying to conjure up in the thread.

And, do you have a bias towards literature over film, or something?

Yeah I like that idea. There is no real checklist for insanity, it just seems to be the result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It's just starting on AMC where I am. I've seen the movie and read the book but I can't remember in which order. If you didn't know, the book is told from Big Chief's perspective. I've been wondering about this movie lately so I'm glad it's on. I wonder how many of the self committed have Aspie characteristics.

Yes. I hate that the library has DVD's. My library is small, and will have movie versions of books without even having the book. It is very aggravating to me, when money and space are going towards DVD's instead of books. The library is for access to information and to promote literacy, not be a replacement for Netflix.

Oh, I thought the exact same thing! The red-headed man who is very verbose and easily frustrated struck me right away.



I'm sorry that you don't have larger library facilities available to you. I live in a town that houses two universities and a college, and so we have some of the most prestigious library collections in the world sitting right here -- books, periodicals, journals, magazines, DVDs, CDs, and books. Craploads of books. I think I'd be a different person if I wasn't exposed to the material I've stumbled across in those facilities, to be honest. We also have 5 or 6 libraries scattered through the city for public use.

In any case, it seems like you are working with very narrow definitions of 'literacy,' and 'library.' In our current times, I think we've come to a point where films, CDs, magazines, audiobooks etcetera are incredibly valuable literary resources for anyone who is willing to sit down and let themselves be exposed to anything that isn't a noisy television station, or their Facebook log-in page. People hardly read as much as they used to anymore due to technological advancement (ie facebook, BBM twitter), and I think that even reading a sex magazine or watching a sh***y movie is at least something. At least we are actually reading, and/or absorbing a storyline, and expanding our minds in a literary way, arguably, I guess. I don't think it's arguable though, to be honest. I think it truly benefits those who indulge.

Moreover, many people don't have access to computers, and picking up a movie from the library is a real treat for them. There is no netflix for those who aren't as computer literate as we are. Also, some people don't enjoy reading traditional book forms as much as others, and to deprive these people of the joys of literacy simply because one has a bias towards prose, and doesn't approve of other literary aids seems ... illogical, and kind of pretentious? I don't know.

I don't know. I've just always thought the library was a place you can borrow stuff from for long periods of time, guilt-free. I've always been stupidly grateful for anything I can get my hands on. It's all educational anyway! More is better than less in my opinion, when it comes to a library.

I get your point, but I don't think reading a sex magazine is expanding one's mind in a literary way, or that anything besides actual books can be considered literature. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literary

I don't mind the library having DVD's, I guess I sounded harsh in my previous posts. The library is a collection of information open for and to help the public. Actually, in my town the movie-rental shop recently shut down due to lack of business (one that used to thrive). There's obviously some other way people are obtaining movies around here, I just assumed it was probably Netflix.

It's just the point that for such a small library, for it to be considerably lacking in MANY classic or otherwise "necessary" books while having multiple copies of Twilight on DVD is bothersome. When I think library, I think books. I hope to live near a nice big library one day.

literacy
–noun
1. the quality or state of being literate, esp. the ability to read and write.

Are publications like cosmopolitan printed text? Are they readable? Yes. Thus, they promote literacy, by default. They belong in a library, if applicable. I'm not sure why you have a bias toward physical books! I feel like we're beyond such narrow definitions and mediums. It's as if words that are not between a hardcover are meaningless to you, or not as worthy. Weird. Would you consider fan-fiction beneficial to the realm of literacy or not? Because it certainly is.

Oh, 'Literature' is an entirely different subject. I was only talking about literacy, and how it can be promoted in a zillion other ways than just through books, which you were/are refuting.

Also, I didn't mean 'sex magazine' as in playboy, although, I would argue those belong in libraries too, for research and pleasurable reading. Words do accompany the photos in most cases, but even if they did not, I still say the library should stock them. Why not. Seriously. Why the hell not.

Well, your library probably has a ton of twilight DVDs because the saga is really popular! Libraries, especially small ones, are naturally going to cater to the demand. You seem really upset by it though ... well, I guess you could always ask your librarians to order some different books, or see if they have anything similar to what you're interested in on the shelves.

What, so printed word makes something literary? If I printed out someone's Twitter tweets, does it become literary? Is it any intellectual value to someone? Does it belong in a library?

Absolutely. To read a twitter feed, and/or write a tweet, you need to be literate. Even literate people struggle with using twitter, to be honest! It's difficult to say something in 140 spaces.

Anything that involves words fits under the umbrella of literacy, in my opinion.

Also, nice NMH reference.