Documentary Films .net

First of all, I admit that I, too, was disturbed by the fact that the filmmaker chose to document people jumping to their deaths. I was horrified to see this in action. I believe that life is always preferable to death. However, and not lightly, I might argue (with myself as well as with you) that these people would have jumped whether or not the filmmaker’s cameras were recording these events. (And, apparently, the filmmaker and crew did notify bridge security whenever they identified a potential jumper.) Please consider perhaps that the filmmaker’s intention was to cause the rest of us–you, me, etc.–to address the issue of suicide by shoving it into our faces (an intrusive action which, unfortunately, seems to be required when addressing a subject such as mental illness or suicide) and NOT to provide answers. Perhaps the answers are required to come from us after the filmmaker has asked the questions. This seems to me to be the usual purpose of documentary filmmaking: To incite the viewer into some positive action after being stimulated into such action by the documentary film itself.

Your statement regarding one of many reasons to suicide: “…some simple desperation onset by the parade of small failures most of us perceive or encounter,” illustrates the general misunderstanding of and active derisiveness toward those who kill themselves. It seems to be nearly universal that people find it more comfortable to ridicule the things they fear rather than to confront, acknowledge or understand them. Your phrase diminishes the “desperation” of the suicidal person in the face of “small failures” and relegates the most important decision of his or her life to the realm of the weak and the whining. The tragedy, at which you seem to be laughing, is that even though these things may be in the eyes of others “simple desperation” and “small failures,” to the suicidal person they are the proverbial last straw, or the final sign that it would be better for them to die than to continue living. They have already expended enormous effort and energy just to be partially functioning, according to the rest of us, at this point, now. While our daily reality may be about sunny days and needing to mow the lawn, their daily reality is more likely to be all about the fact that they hurt. Period. This is why it is referred to as mental “illness.” It isn’t what most people consider to be correct or even conceivable; but to the suicidal it is stark and inescapable reality. They do not necessarily want it. Most of them, it seems, do not. Do you want the flu when you have it, or worse, Cancer? Of course not. Unfortunately, they have it, whatever it is, anyway; and they have to deal with it the best that they can, moment by moment, without the societal stamp of approval given to other, more acceptable maladies. Sometimes, as you can see and hear in this film if you look and listen closely enough, the only solution they can find to their distress is their own death. It stops the pain. That may not be the “real” truth as you and I may see it; but it is the only truth that they can see. Have you ever reacted to a situation or responded to a statement fully convinced that your interpretation of events was absolutely correct, only to find that nothing you assumed to be true was, in fact, true? (I once swerved a car to avoid hitting a drunken man running into the road in front of me, only to discover that what I saw was actually a similar shape made by vines growing on a streetlight support cable. You can admit to something similar, I’m sure.)

This is the force that you can see in this film driving “Gene” to stand upon the bridge railing, hold his arms out as wings or cross-members, and then, seemingly gleefully, fall backwards to his death, in spite of the fact that there are people who obviously and demonstrably love him (and in spite of us, as we watch, willing him to fly). Again, the tragedy is that his perception of his own pain was stronger than his belief in the love of those who would otherwise protect him. This was not his choice, but his burden. And he apparently saw the only solution to his, learned through long experience, inescapable pain as being the ending of his existence. As much as he may have loved his friends who loved him and may not have wanted to hurt them, he also apparently had a pain that could not be eased, even by the very love for which he was searching. Consider the amount of strength and resolve it takes to walk the bridge, vault over the rail, and voluntarily jump to one’s death when most of us can’t hold our breath for more than a minute or so, if that, before the survival instinct takes over and forces us to breathe again. This is a small measure of the power of the pain that these suicidal people are trying to manage on a daily basis. It’s not so much that they want to die as it is that they can’t find any alternative that works for them. I propose that no one chooses to die. Some do, however, submit to death. They die only as their last remaining perceived alternative.

In answer to your review, if we should, as you suggest, come away from this particular film with the feeling that someone other than ourselves should be responsible for addressing the issue of suicide, then we abdicate the responsibility to our fellow humans that is implicit in our own human existence. If we do that then we become like those people depicted in the film, either verbally or visually, who were oblivious to the life-ending emotional pain of the suicidal subjects. We would do better to emulate the actions of the man who, apparently acting on instinct, pulled a suicidal woman back over the railing and saved her life, at least for that moment.

To require the filmmaker, again as you suggest, to provide an answer to the question of suicide is akin to requiring the maker of any other documentary to provide answers to the questions that are raised by his or her film. Isn’t it the implied aim of socially conscious documentaries that they should portray to those of us who would otherwise remain unexposed to their subject(s) the reality lived by their subject(s) in order to expand our own understanding of the human condition beyond our limited view? Isn’t the purpose of such films to cause their viewers to think and to react, rather than to spoon-feed them not only a particular issue but also a prepackaged solution to that issue? Are we so lazy that we now require of our “thoughtful” films that they also do the thinking for us? I hope that this is not the case.

To be honest, I don’t know exactly what I feel about “The Bridge”. I find it incredibly sad. I find it also angering, puzzling and disturbing. I believe, however, that this was the exact intention of the filmmaker. I believe that this is what I am supposed to be feeling. I am not dissatisfied because the filmmaker didn’t give me answers; I am instead motivated to reach out to my fellow humans and thereby to work toward an answer. Perhaps this was the filmmaker’s hope.

Thank you for reading.

Watching people take their own lives is disturbing - most people will agree - although I think it is unfair to criticize the filmmaker for documenting it. That is, after all, the essence of genre. I don’t believe that it is our place as documentarians to morally edit real life. I would throw down my camera in a nanosecond if the person in front of it were crying out for help or unconscious and in imminent danger. This situation was complete different, and I strongly believe that it was not the filmmaker’s responsibility to police the physical safety of these people, nor was it his moral responsibility not to show it. Officials near the site even said that the practice was very common.

The reference to using Gene Sprague’s personal tragedy as a mere blocking tool is almost offensive to me. Using his experience to frame the story was very powerful in helping me to find some semblance of insider understanding into these individual’s personal struggles in trying to cope with life. I looked at Mr. Sprague more as the main character in a story that needs to be told in order to make us all more aware of the tacit symptoms of psychological diseases like this. This could be happening to any one of our own loved one’s, at this very moment, and this film has given us a way to better understand the scope of the problem and its symptoms.

I just saw The Bridge last night for the first time. Having been diagnosed with two severe, chronic mental illnesses about a year and a half ago, I absorb as much information as possible. This documentary is useful because it brings to light shortcomings in assistance for the mentally ill. To anyone with a severe mental illness, suicidal thinking is neither “sensational” nor “disturbing”. It’s just another symptom of mental illness. Personally, I’ve been less unnerved by suicidal/homicidal thoughts than I have been by seeing stuff (that isn’t there) moving out of the corner of my eye. Mental illness can be a lot like having a broken record in your brain that is stuck on the same thought unceasingly. It doesn’t have to be pain that leads to suicide, it can be these constant, intrusive thoughts or even a voice suggesting the act. Regardless of what immediately precedes a suicide, mental illness that hasn’t been treated adequately is the culprit (not external events or relationships with people). Unfortunately there is no cure for mental illness, only ways to manage or lessen symptoms (including suicidal thinking). If people want to take action as a result of this documentary, find a way through mass media to make sure people know the signs of mental illness in its early stages; begin to provide access to psychiatrists and medication despite the limitations of insurance coverage; and encourage coping and living skills for the mentally ill (rather than hospital stays or social security disability incomes). There never has been adequate care available for mental illness. Recent, better medications have helped combat mental illness somewhat. However, sitting around doing nothing everyday or believing that you aren’t capable of living a full life makes mental illness worse. There needs to be a revolution in care that shows the mentally ill how to face the stresses and fears of everyday life rather than hide in a hospital, group home, or parent’s house. It’s obvious by seeing the people in The Bridge who completed a suicide that none of them had any skills to deal with living with their mental illnesses (and their families/friends knew nothing about mental illness). They could have learned how to cope better with mental illness by recognizing what thoughts and behaviors are the illness and by seeing them as symptoms that will pass. It’s possible to never commit suicide even though your illness puts these thoughts in your head, but not without a correct diagnosis from a psychiatrist (not a family practice doctor or counselor/therapist), medication that works well for you, and having friends/family who force you to become self-sufficient, self-coping, and self-supporting (even financially). Treating mental illness properly, not adding safety features to bridges, will prevent suicides.