CONSCIOUS CINEMA
pair of twin tragedies, the death of one son (Scott
Doebler) and the attempted suicide of another
(Timothy Hutton). But is that all that’s amiss in the
Jarrett family? And is everything that’s supposedly
problematic really as troubling as some contend?
Perceptions alone don’t always tell the entire story, and going beneath the surface to see what underlying perspectives are truly at work is essential
to understanding how the family’s reality has unfolded as it has—and what it will take to resolve
their challenges.
ness an array of perspective possibilities play out
on screen, ranging from healthy and well-adjusted
to overwrought and self-destructive. The implications in that are truly wide-ranging, with ramifications that extend well beyond the primary areas
under exploration in the picture’s central premise.
As noted above, our perspectives and the beliefs
that arise from them are often significantly shaped
by our perceptions of our reality
(which, themselves, are products of those beliefs and perspectives). Those perceptions,
in turn, may present each of us
with views of reality that differ
markedly from those held by
others (even those we think of
as our kindred spirits). Consider the scenario presented in the
Oscar-winning drama “Ordinary
People” (1980). In a household
where everything seemingly
should be free of pain and hardship, an affluent family living on
Chicago’s upscale North Shore
seeks to pick up the pieces and
reassemble itself in the wake of a
34 | NEW CONSCIOUSNESS REVIEW
Comparable circumstances surface in the riveting
biopic “A Beautiful Mind” (2001), which tells the
life story of Nobel Prize-winning mathematician
John Nash (Russell Crowe), who battled mental illness during a significant portion of his adult life. As
portrayed in the film, is the reality Nash perceives
genuine, or is he suffering from an elaborate delusion? Answers may not be as easy to come by or as
clear-cut as one might think, a challenge for both
characters and viewers alike. What’s more, as this
picture reveals, what we think of as a handicap in
one context may actually prove to be a blessing in
another, something that should give us all pause
to contemplate the breadth of our prevailing perspective.
Courtroom dramas are especially good vehicles
for addressing situations in which opposing parties hold divergent perspectives about how events
unfolded and what should be done about them.
“Gett: The Trial of Viviane Ansalem” (2014) provides a particularly good example, in which
the title character (Ronit Elkabetz), an Israeli woman, seeks
to dissolve her marriage to the
husband she no longer loves
(Simon Abkarian). However, because Israel has no civil divorce
proceedings, Viviane must make
her case before an all-male religious court. Such tribunals have
historically ruled in favor of the
husband’s wishes, no matter
what they may be, so Viviane
faces an uphill battle in pressing
her claim, especially since her
contention is seen as weak and