To the editor,
Chup, directed by R Balakrishnan (Balki), is an engaging crime thriller.
1
The protagonist, Danny, experiences repeated childhood abuse from his father. As a
coping mechanism, he develops an alternate personality. He makes two cups of tea,
orders
Vada Pao for two people, and communicates with an alter ego who is more
arrogant, apathetic, and vengeful. The movie revolves around his serial killings of
biased or
paid movie critics who perform reviews unethically.
We aim to review the movie through a psychological lens.
Depiction of the Protagonist: The diagnosis
The movie makes it clear that the protagonist has a psychiatric illness. However,
the exact
diagnosis remains elusive. The closest we could assume was dissociative identity disorder
(DID).
The alters in DID do not directly communicate among themselves.
2
However, the two alters of the protagonist show this, with complete awareness of the
alter ego, which makes it unusual for DID. We reviewed other cinematic portrayals
of DID and
found that its symptoms are commonly employed to depict schizophrenia, leading to
audience misconceptions.
3
These films often blur the boundaries between DID, schizophrenia, and psychopathy.
3
This is exemplified in the movie Voices Within, which equates auditory hallucinations
with DID. Though DID and schizophrenia can be comorbid,
4
enough information is not provided in Chup to consider phenomenology suggestive of
schizophrenia. The protagonist may be harbouring distress related to a personally-sanctioned
“overvalued idea” that biased film critics should be punished to death based on how
they have
critiqued a movie.
Childhood trauma is strongly associated with DID.
2
This is depicted in the movie. However, in many movies, the narrative usually weaves
around the character’s journey from a repressed trauma to an eventual cure.
3
This was seen in Identity, Raat Aur Din, and Anniyan, where the generally “repressed”
protagonists take on new identities to fight injustice.
Also, the ability of the protagonist to maintain a romantic relationship, emotional
bonding
with his mother and dog, and the lack of legal troubles do not fit into the psychological
construct of psychopathy.
Irrespective of the diagnosis, the brutality depicted in the protagonist can increase
the
stigma towards people with mental illness (PMI). In cinema, the portrayal of negative
aspects
of psychiatric disorders and patients consistently exceeds the positive ones.
5
Violence, boundary violations, sensational melodrama, and suicide are common themes
of
negative interpretation of PMI. They are portrayed as caricatured stereotypes such
as
homicidal, anti-social, deceptive, narcissistic, and even as zoo specimens.
6
Such negative depictions increase the stigma towards PMI as they influence the public
image and shape community attitudes.
6
In reality, PMI are likelier to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators.
7
Depiction of the Mental Health Professional (MHP)
Schneider argued that the portrayals of MHPs in movies are not representative of the
actual
profession but rather exaggerations, of the story plot, of certain aspects or characters.
8
Bollywood movies also have described MHPs in myriad ways. For instance, while in Bhool
Bhulaiyaa Akshay Kumar is shown as eccentric, in Dear Zindagi, Shahrukh Khan is depicted
as an
empathetic and skilled professional.
In this movie, the police think of approaching a psychologist when looking for a person
who
thinks “differently.” The psychologist visits Ashram as her getaway and
passes distasteful comments like “You critics are killers,” making her character appear
impudent.
The movie, however, talks about the importance of forensic psychology, which will
likely
promote this subspecialty in India.
Psychiatric Illness and Criminality
The false consideration of the equivalence of psychiatric illness and criminality
stems from
incorrectly labeling all criminals as PMI. The Indian Penal Code protects those who
have a
severe mental illness if they cannot appreciate the nature of the crime and differentiate
right from wrong.
9
However, DID poses unique medicolegal challenges. Courts generally reject DID as a
diagnosis
due to a lack of validity, and reliability in the diagnostic process and limited knowledge
of
etiology. Additionally, there is the possibility of people faking the disorder, which
poses
challenges in determining legal responsibility for the crimes committed, given the
possible
claims of insanity defence on the grounds that the perpetrating alter is different
from the
person who is being punished. The case of Chris Sizemore, who had two very distinctive
identities, named Eve White and Eve Black, and how Eve Black committed a prohibited
act but
Eve White had no memory of it, is used as an argument to support protecting DID patients
from
facing legal liability for the illegal actions committed.
10
Some courts have adopted the method of judging several identities within a patient
with
DID as separate identities, but also hold the innocent identities too responsible
for the
crime.
A framework is needed to define whether DID should be considered a valid reason for
a
person’s incompetence to stand trial or non-liability for a crime.
11
Conclusion
Chup has done commendable work in cinematography and storyline and highlights the
role of
MHPs in understanding criminal psychology. While the movie’s protagonist was portrayed
as
having a mental illness, the movie lost an opportunity to advocate help-seeking and
healing
from trauma. The brief reference to the psychiatric care facility was in a negative
light
(Portrayed in black and white, with the patient being unresponsive as a distressed
mother
visits him). It also lost an opportunity for the previously introduced psychologist
to
interact with the protagonist. Most importantly, the movie falls short of the groundwork
about psychiatric illnesses and their treatment.
Considering the influence of movies on the public, filmmakers need to represent
mental-health-related issues sensitively and accurately within the realms of creative
freedom. They can consider consulting MHPs and persons with lived experiences of mental
illness before producing the movies. They can also promote help-seeking and advocacy
by
displaying relevant information before or during the movies. Perhaps, an argument
can be
made by professional bodies to the appropriate authorities for including MHPs in the
censor
board, especially for movies that depict mental disorders.
Till such a change occurs, MHPs should act as advocacy agents and support, critique,
and
empower art and movies where appropriate.