I've always enjoyed and believed Benicio Del Toro in the roles he plays. Here, he plays a very careful, methodical Native American, Jimmy Picard,who has clearly been affected by his military service. When the "regular" doctors don't know what to make of him, he is examined by a Mojave Indian Georges Devereux (Mathieu Amalric), who may or may not be who he claims to be. They spend a lot of time showing and examining dreams. This makes sense, since dreams play such a large part of both the Native American and the psychology culture. At 117 minutes, it IS pretty long. But it's certainly entertaining; a mix of Native American culture and the psychology. You can make what you want out of the dreams, but each one is its own little story. Directed by Frenchman Arnaud Desplechin. This is currently showing on netflix. I'd like to see some of his other projects.

This one slightly reminiscent of A Dangerous Method, but this has a lot more to say, and frankly make the aforementioned movie now seem extremely below par. The psychoanalysis explored here is incredibly intriguing, and different, and makes Cronenberg's piece seem very distracted and far less interesting, despite both being true stories.I've liked Mathieu Amalric as soon as I saw him in Venus In Fur (still criminally underrated as Polanski back in form) and TGBH also, and here he lands one of the lead roles and does a fantastic job as a bit of an eccentric but confident anthropologist. He and Benicio Del Toro were the only reasons I watched this initially.Del Toro is playing a war vet who suffers head trauma and is having spells of major migraines and blindness since. Plus he is playing a native Indian, so there are many subtle themes woven into the narrative without shouting them at you. The main thing I took from it was how as people from different cultures, we are at the same time very different but also all human and more similar than we think. It also touches on the treatment of native Indians, though it is barely there, just again written subtly into the narrative: Because he is Indian and drinks occasionally, all the white American doctors think he is a drunk, hence his symptoms. One of the rare times he actually speaks to them is to tell them "my name is Jimmy, not'chief'". He for the most part will only talk with the anthropologist.Del Toro nails the brain trauma victim, as I think I took more from his character personally as he reminded me a lot of myself. People say you are crazy, are schizophrenic, a drug-addict, when in reality you have brain trauma. Your mind is not well. You are judged. This aspect of the movie was done perfectly as I was able to relate with Del Toro's character immediately, and everything about his character and his actions were realistic and executed with finesse. It is not a fun experience, and even less fun when you are put in a nuthouse because of it and are surrounded by truly lost souls as you wonder "why am I here?" Definitely one of the better films that takes place in one of these facilities, though it has nothing on Cuckoo's Nest or Persona.The scenes where he talks about his past were really well done too, I was never confused as to what was a scene from the past or otherwise. Most of that is due to Del Toro, as he plays two different characters essentially, pre-accident and the present. He will only talk to the anthropologist played by Amalric, as he has been asked for, despite being a doctor with a shady reputation. But he happens to specialise in native Indians, and his approach to psychoanalysis is interesting to say the least. It was further intriguing to see him use more unconventional methods – to western culture at least – and rather focused on spiritual aspects that the native Indians believe and practice. His respect for the religious ways of his client is admirable and the world would be a better place if more doctors were that open-minded.The basic story is predictable as all hell, and I really wish the movie inserted more conflict between the two. But there are some truly great, emotional scenes between Del Toro and Amalric that dig deep into the human condition, and despite their cultural differences they realise that they are not so different. It certainly helped that the script was well-written and filled with interesting, unconventional ideas.This was also a fascinating look into how war vets were treated after WWII when it came to brain injuries. It is quite haunting, especially considering the fact treatment for people like Jimmy P. is somehow even worse in today's world, especially with US Army propaganda proclaiming they are 'Protecting freedom' and 'keeping us safe' - two of the most-cringe worthy quotes constantly repeated on US television, especially in sport, by athletes themselves, which on its own is disturbing given how big sport is in the US. I could go on and on but I won't, I simply thought this was a great metaphor for how army veterans are treated if returning home maimed and disabled. The government they thought they were serving simply does not give a toss about them, which is the unfortunate reality.I was waiting for this to go down an unexpected path as it winded down.. It kinda does and kinda doesn't. But it is a true story so I guess they stuck to the actual events. Overall a very interesting film that, despite its flaws, tells an interesting story while also touches on various social subjects that happened to be a part of his life and treatment at the hospital.3.5/5 – Sorry DC, I love your work, but this one is infinitely superior to your own take on psychoanalysis. This film has a big heart and makes for an emotional watch.

An intellectual labor of love in which the director tries to recreate the psychotherapeutic relationship between a French psychoanalyst (in reality a Hungarian-German Jew who converted to Christianity) and a Blackfoot Indian vet suffering from inexplicable symptoms in the late 1940s in a VA hospital in Topeka, Kansas.Played by Benicio del Toro (who is Puerto Rican) and Mathieu Almaric (who is half-French half-Polish Jewish), the film drags at times but does delve into some interesting psychological (although of course it goes *much* more seamlessly/painlessly than most analyses in reality).Almaric's character wins over Del Toro's with his initial knowledge of Native American cultures (actually Mojave but there are parallels to the Blackfoot). From there he tries to synthesize his anthropological knowledge with what seem to be a pretty standard fare of sexualized Freudian clichés (witnessing the primal scene, explicit discussions of vaginas (which I thought Del Toro's character spoke about far too easily for the mores of that day and age)).The relationship between the two men are supposed to be a life-changing event but I felt the film fell a little short in depicting that reality (also a film review (for which I know the director is not responsible) described their friendship as resulting from their both being outsiders, but Almaric's character never reveals his true background (his lover mentions at one point the fact that he changed his name but that is it, perhaps there were other scenes that didn't make it past the editor (I went to the premiere in NYC with the director and main actors and they said there are a lot of scenes that got cut)).In the latter part of the movie there are strong hints that Jimmy's (Del Toro's character) headaches, fits of rage and alcoholic binges are the result of systematic sociopolitical mistreatment of native Americans but the subject is only strongly hinted at, not really discussed explicitly by Jimmy in any deep or meaningful way. This was to me perhaps more interesting than the anthropological Freudianism of the first 90 minutes of the film, but the director was trying to adhere to a book on the subject and real-life events (psychology back then was even more grossly unaware of psychopolitical factors compared to now).Perhaps subtly discourages the notion that Jimmy is suffering from PTSD (a diagnosis which did not exist at the time, but the phrase "shell shock" is not used either) because he never saw combat or killed anyone (he was involved in mine-clearing operations after the German retreat). Also interesting insofar as his injury was to his head, thus perhaps implicitly challenging the often presumed relationship nowadays in vets between TBI (traumatic brain injury) and PTSD? (Then again the director was following real-life events so I don't know his intentionality.)A worthwhile film but a little odd insofar as it (to me) underemphasizes the ethnocultural forces in the characters in favor of a "special friendship" (in a universalized way) despite the fact that it is the decultured nature of American psychiatry which was at the root of doctors' inability to help Jimmy in the first place. Also couldn't stand the way a couple of actors (thinking of Almaric and Joseph Cross specifically) who think that acting means being as anxious and/or intense as possible in every scene.P.S. The film does drag a bit (114 minutes) (I'm not someone who normally complains about "art-house" films with slower (French) pacing either.)

Based on a true story, this film is a documentary fiction. A Blackfoot Indian who has fought in France in the Second World War and had had an accident there that let him comatose for a couple of days experiences great behavior disorder when back I n the USA. He is treated in Topeka, Kansas, as a veteran and they come to the conclusion that there is nothing physiologically wrong with him and at the same time the diagnosis that comes next, that of schizophrenia, does not accommodate all the symptoms. The boss of this military hospital knows a French anthropologist, trained as a psychoanalyst, in New York and he invites him for a couple of consultations with the patient. From a couple it will lead to a few dozens if not more, one a day for a rather long period.At the time psychoanalysis could only look for personal disorders at the sexual level having to do with parents, infancy, childhood, and then women (for men). The case concentrates on women and the patient finds some relief in that approach. This is very interesting how the anthropologist who is a specialist of come North American Indians, the Mojave actually, uses his knowledge of Indian culture and one language to build some trust between him and the Indian and on the basis of that trust he is able to penetrate the private life and mind of the Indian. But he does not really use the understanding of Indian culture to see what is shown in the film but not exploited at all, the fact that the Indians are systematically negated in their culture by all kinds of institutions. We can see in the film the fact that this military hospital for veterans does not have one Indian nurse or doctor able to understand the alienation of Indians in white society. Then you have the daughter of the Indian who is in the hands of catholic nuns for her education. Then you could speak of the way these Indians dress in the most white American way possible, with ties, shirts, suits, and the girls the very same way with scarves, dresses, etc. Hair cuts are standard north American. At the same time this Indian cannot get money at the post office or the bank without a good Caucasian (not North American since the French doctor is able to do it) signing for him. A white nurse tells the Indian a tall tale one day in another hospital where he is supposed to go through special tests, and she cannot in any way ignore that what she is telling him is B.S. And even the French doctor who was called in because he was an anthropologist who had spent two years with the Mojave Indians, at the end, asserts that he did not help the Indian because he was an Indian but because he was suffering. In other words he negates his own expertise. And that is justified in his mind because he did think his expertise was not with Indian culture (that was only a means to build trust) but psychoanalysis. He even, early in the film, creates some blurred situation when he advocates the typically French godless secular philosophy to an Indian who declares himself a Catholic though he knows about old Indian religions that he has "rejected" under the influence of course, but not of alcohol this time. It is also called duress.The problem we are dealing with here is Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome of American Indians who have been vastly exterminated, then locked up in reservations under rules that forced them to drop their cultures, their dances and their languages, to get educated and integrated in the American society, language, culture and all. What is the intention of Arnaud Desplechin? To remain as close as possible to the way the case was treated at the time? Maybe but naïve since the audience cannot sort out the real stake here. Yet it is surprising he does not use what has become standard today over the last ten years. It is called the decolonization of the mind. He only shows how the Indian mind is colonized and never questions his psychoanalytical approach that makes the syndrome the result of personal sexual problems.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU