Stuff You Should Know - Why was Titicut Follies banned?

Episode Date: March 22, 2022

Titicut Follies is a documentary made famous by its banning. But why was it banned? And what was it even about? Listen in to learn all you need to know about this infamous doc. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hey, I'm Lance Bass, host of the new iHeart podcast Frosted Tips with Lance Bass. Do you ever think to yourself, what advice would Lance Bass and my favorite boy bands give me in this situation? If you do, you've come to the right place because I'm here to help. And a different hot sexy teen crush boy bander each week to guide you through life. Tell everybody, yeah, everybody about my new podcast and make sure to listen so we'll never, ever have to say bye, bye, bye. Listen to Frosted Tips with Lance Bass on the iHeart radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Munga Chauticular and it turns out astrology is way more widespread than any of us want to

believe. You can find in Major League Baseball, International Banks, K-pop groups, even the White House. But just when I thought I had a handle on this subject, something completely unbelievable happened to me and my whole view on astrology changed. Whether you're a skeptic or a believer, give me a few minutes because I think your ideas are about to change too. Listen to Skyline Drive on the iHeart radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Stuff You Should Know, a production of iHeart Radio. Hey and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh and there's Chuck and this is Stuff You Should Know. Oh, just us today, Jerry's on vacation and that's cool. Yeah, I think Jerry's in the Disney

world and it went right after me. She's in the D. I said, hey Jerry, in the South bathroom of Frontierland above the toilet. I've left, I've taped a gun. Go shoot Mo Green. Go shoot Mo Green in the restaurant booth. Wow. No, Mo Green got it on the massage table. Oh, that's right. The police commissioner or the police chief, he took it in the neck, but he was tangential to the hit with the bathroom. I don't remember who was trying to hit. Tessio. I goofed that up. Hey, shout out to... Wait, no, I'm not done sorting this out. Okay, go ahead. Name all the hits in the Godfather. Go ahead. Shout out to our pal and friend of the show, Kevin Pollock, because that made me think of the great, great show that is one of my favorite shows called Better Things

from the wonderful, talented Pamela Adlon. They are entering their final season and I watched the first episode, The Heaven Knight and Pollock, who plays her brother on the show, had a great line that I knew was improv to where he was getting in his car and I can't remember what they were talking about. And he said, right in the eye, like Mo Green. And I texted him immediately and I was like, right in the eye, like Mo Green. I was like, that was yours. And he went, oh yeah. He said that was improv. Nice. It was very fun. It's always fun to be able to watch a TV show and text your pal that's on that TV show. Right, yeah. He's got the best parts. He just pops up in all the best stuff, you know? Yeah, he's in Maisel. I think... And I've talked to Pollock about this and he's

like, yeah, I agree. I think he could star in a really great indie film. I just think he's a really great actor and he's great at comedy, but I think he's on top of that just a really, really great actor. Didn't he star in that Project Greenlight film? I don't know, did he? Which one? I'm pretty sure. I think the first season. Oh boy, I don't remember those movies. I know that Shia LaBeouf, that was where he got his start. Is that right? Was he in one of those? The Battle of Shaker Heights or something? I think that might have been the one that Pollock was in. Was he in that? I didn't remember that movie. But I mean, a really good movie. And I'm not sure the Project Greenlight was that great. It was a cool show though. I dug it. Yeah, yeah. I'm surprised they hadn't brought

that back in the iPhone film making age. Yeah, it's a little surprising. Who would bring it back though now? Ben and Mac could bring it back. I mean, that's who did it the first time, right? Sure, but I mean, are they still relevant? Aren't there two younger versions of them? Who's the new Ben and Mac? Who's better? I don't know who the new Ben and Mac are. How about Wiz Khalifa and... Charlemagne the God. Sure, thank you. All right, great. Anyway, Keppa Pauk's a great actor and a good dude. Yeah, agreed. And probably somebody, I would guess, who's seen the movie that we're going to talk about today. I would be really surprised if he hasn't seen it, just because I feel like if you are into movies, if you're a

movie maker, if you consider yourself a cinemafile, if you want to get punched in the stomach, you've probably seen Titicut Follies, right? Yeah, I mean, this is one that I saw in film class in college. It is one that you... There's about a 50-50 chance that you will see this if you've seen it in film class in a college. People like Casey, our colleague Casey Pegram, no doubt is a Frederick Weissman fan. I'm surely, if I texted him, he'd be like, oh, sure, Weissman, yes. Although, I thought Titicut Follies was not one of his great at work. That sounds like Casey. God bless, Casey, all-time greatest movie crush guest. But, yeah, Fred Weissman made this film. He was a law professor in his 30s and the 60s, and made this documentary film about a mental institution,

specifically one for the criminally insane, that's what they called it. Yeah. And it was a very, you know, it was a movie that gained a lot of reputation as like the most disturbing film you've ever seen. And it's been banned in this many places and that kind of thing. But when you kind of peel it back, it's just a very straight-up sort of cinema verite documentary about an institution that needed to get their act together. Right. And that was kind of Weissman's whole jam. Like, he's made 48 films. I think he just turned 92 a couple of months ago. Amazing. And starting in 1966, he made about a film a year. Yeah. And he has his own style, like he said, cinema verite, which I feel like we should probably kind of just go ahead and explain,

don't you? Sure. Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead, film guy. Well, cinema verite, I mean, what's the direct translation? Direct cinema. Yeah, direct cinema. And it's the idea that you kind of set a camera up and let it let life happen in front of it for whatever your subject is. You don't, you don't do interviews, you don't do talking head shots. You don't, you, it's really just one good example is that documentary in the, of course, now I can't think of it, in the 70s about the American family that ran on PBS that was so groundbreaking, where they just set up a camera and followed this family. And if you're thinking, it sounds a lot like reality TV, I think in its purest form, reality TV

can be this, but it really turned into something else entirely. Oh yeah, it's just so deeply manipulated by producers behind the scenes who tell them to do this or that or whatever. Yeah. Cinema verites would not, would not want to do that. They, they just shoot and hope, hope also that people act like themselves. That's another thing. And one thing Frederick Wiseman, the guy who made Titty Cut Follies said like, he believed that people basically acted like themselves when the camera was around because people are in general lousy actors. Yeah, we can test that. They're behaving like you would expect them to behave. So they're probably acting like they would without the cameras, but especially in a cinema verite kind of setup,

because it's, it's intrusive. There's a camera there, but it's not nearly as intrusive as like a camera on like some rig that's flying around. Like there's lighting people and dappers and a craft services table that's calling your name. It's just much less intrusive than that. It's minimally intrusive as far as filmmaking goes. And that's the point of it because they want to document reality without leading the, the viewer as much as possible from what I understand. Yeah, that's exactly it. And I love cinema verite documentaries especially. And I also like sort of quasi cinema verite where there's a lot of like, I don't mind interviews being put in there as long as there's a lot of just sort of watching life happen. It's really

amazingly engrossing. There were these two filmmakers that I think inspired Weissman, Richard Leacock and Robert Drew, who in the early, I think in the 50s and early 1960s were kind of dabbling in cinema verite documentaries. And they made one in particular called Mooney versus Fowl, which is about a high school football championship and Mooney and Fowler, the two coaches. And I watched the trailer for that today. I guess his, I'm guessing it's his daughter that put this up on Vimeo along with some other like interviews with her dad, Drew's daughter, that it's really engrossing just to watch. And especially because all you see, if you're a modern person in 2022 and you're like, what was life like in the 1950s?

You don't get that from I Love Lucy and Dick Van Dyke. Like those are great shows. But to be able to just sit in and take a peek at these high school football coaches and these people, the community in the stands and these players, like it's just so engrossing to me. Not everyone's cup of tea, but I really like it. Yeah, no, totally. But yeah, I feel like even, even if it isn't your cup of tea, you would, like you said, be engrossed by it. I don't think there's any way to just be like, no, I don't know. Some people probably find it dull. I'm sure there are, but it's just, it is engrossing. I don't think there's any other way to universally describe it.

Yeah. And Drew, I sent you that one little interview snippet. I don't know if you saw it, but he sort of was talking about being a new form of journalism. Where he talked about, you know, it's like, they're like, well, what is this though? And he was like, well, it's like a play without a playwright or a movie without actors or journalism without opinions. And I was like, oh, well, that's interesting to say in the 1950s. Yeah, all the way back then. Yeah, but it's, they saw it as, Lee Luckin, I think Drew saw it more as a form of journalism. And I feel like that's what documentaries used to be, and that's changed a lot.

Sometimes for the better, it can be all things, I guess, but it seems like documentaries used to be way more journalism and less big time entertainment. Yeah. What do you think about, how do you feel about recreations in documentaries? I think it can be cool if you have a good, like a new spin on it. Kind of like when the kid stays in the picture came out, the documentary about the producer, what's his face? Robert Evans? Yeah, Robert Evans. Was it Godfather? Back again? Yeah, exactly. Full circle. They did those recreations through animation and this really

cool style of animation that like, was really engaging and awesome. And like, re-crease can be really cool if you do it right, I think. Yeah. Or really bad if it's like some dumb cop show on TV. Oh yeah, like... But those are kind of fun too. Yeah, you mean like the one headline news shows at 100 episodes a day, forensic files? I haven't seen it, but if it's the re-crease I'm thinking of where it's like, you know, they recreated murder on like, you got $500 to shoot this. Yes, that's exactly right. You're thinking of forensic files, but still, if you watch enough of it, it'll really like, your whole life will turn dark. You gotta be careful with forensic

files, everybody. So should we go back and talk about Bridgewater State Hospital? Yeah, because this is the place where Frederick Wiseman showed up with his camera with permission, as we'll see. And by the time he got there in 19, I think he shot in 1965, maybe 1966. Yeah, 1966. Okay. When he got there, it had been around for over 100 years. It didn't start out as a state hospital. It started out as a poor house, an alms house, I think all the way back in 1854. Yeah, and it's interesting when you read these, it's disturbing, but when you read these old-timey classifications in medicine or especially in mental health, where someone be, you know, the description of someone that might be put there might just be bad.

Like that's one of the descriptions. Right. Like they'd be on par with labeling them alcoholic or schizophrenia or something like that. Yeah, but if you had an alcohol problem or you had legitimate mental health issues, or if you were pregnant, maybe, or blind, or you had syphilis, you might have been put in this poor house in 1854. Right. In Massachusetts, by the way. Yeah, I don't know if we said that or not. Yeah. So that's how it started out. And then over time, they started adding criminals and focused more on criminals and the mentally ill. And then by the time 1895 rolled around, it became the state asylum for insane criminals

at the state workhouse at Bridgewater. And then eventually, it became known as Bridgewater State Hospital, I think by 1909. And then very crucially here, it was handed over from the state board of charity, because remember, it started out as a poor house, over to the Massachusetts Bureau of Prison. So for all intents and purposes, at least bureaucratically speaking, it is a place where the criminally insane how they were termed in the 20th century are held. Yeah. And there were some bad criminals in there. I mean, there were murderers. There were people who were convicted of cannibalism, of rape, of children, or just generally of rape. So there were some bad dudes in there for sure. But then there were also, and this was sort of

one of the saddest things about sort of that time in this country. Those people were right alongside other people who either committed a very minor crime or maybe didn't commit a crime at all. And they were just quote unquote being held there temporarily, but that could stretch on into years. Yeah, there's still something today called civil commitment. And it's basically that you were being held not because of a crime or because of a minor crime. And you maybe have even served your sentence, but you're being held because you had been deemed mentally unfit to return to society. Even though maybe you didn't even start out like in a mental hospital, maybe you started out in jail and then you're just a troublemaker. They considered you a

troublemaker in jail and you got sent to the hospital. At that point, your sentence was just, it just went away. It was you were there until a doctor decided you should be let out. And the problem was getting the attention of a doctor long enough to say, oh, actually you're fine. It can let you out was really difficult to do. And so it was a really desperate place, especially for people who didn't feel like they should be there, belong there, because after a while, it seemed to exert its influence on your mind and your outlook. And it would bend you to reflect it so that you kind of needed to be there after a while, even if you didn't start out that way. Yeah. I mean, anyone who's ever seen One Flew of the Cuckoo's Nest,

it's kind of exactly that happens in the plot. Like people got worse at these places. Right. And you mentioned the actual medical attention. President of the Massachusetts Bar Association at the time, Paul Tamborello. And a big thanks to Livia for digging this up and putting this together for us. But he told the Harvard Crimson back then that of the 650 men held at the hospital at the time, actual medical staff were able to see less than half of them one time a year for about 20 minutes. Right. So other than that, you're like, well, then who was it? If it wasn't medical staff, it was like prison guards, basically. Right. Yes. And even then, when you did get that 20 minutes, you were confronted by a person or group of people who were

going on the premise that everything you said came out of your mouth was loony and not based in reality or fact. No matter how well you put your case or stated your case or complained, like any show of emotion would just prove to them that you were meant to be in there for another year until they could hopefully see you again and reevaluate you. Yeah. There was this one example Livia found of, geez, it's hard to believe, Matteo Calicochi was arrested in 1927 at my daughter's age, almost seven years old for stealing seven bucks from a grocery store, which is a pretty good take in 1927, by the way. Sure. And he was found incompetent to stand trial and then sent to kind of sent all around over the years to different institutions

after he tried to escape in 1935 was eventually landed at Bridgewater. And this is another one of those archaic terms was charged with bad habits and resisting authority. And this seven-year-old eventually ended up here later in life, but stayed there for 28 years and released in 1963. So that's just one example of how sort of a small petty crime, but if you maybe have an attitude or you're a troublemaker as a kid and you bounce around from place to place, you just might wind up here with no one advocating for you. This all made me think of what families were doing, but I guess at the time some families were kind of like maybe convinced themselves they were better off there or they didn't want to deal with the trouble or there were no family,

I don't know. Yeah, or their family was poor and had no influence over anybody, so they couldn't do anything about it. Very sad. Should we take a break? Yeah, see, we take a break and we'll come back with Wiseman in his 10-year while he was at Bridgewater. Do you ever think to yourself what advice would Lance Bass and my favorite boy bands give me in this situation? If you do, you've come to the right place because I'm here to help. This I promise you. Oh god. Seriously, I swear. And you won't have to send an SOS because I'll be there for you. Oh man. And so will my husband Michael. Um, hey, that's me. Yep, we know that Michael. And a different hot sexy teen crush boy bander each week to guide you through life step by step. Oh, not another

one. Kids, relationships, life in general can get messy. You may be thinking this is the story of my life. Oh, just stop now. If so, tell everybody, yeah, everybody about my new podcast and make sure to listen so we'll never ever have to say bye, bye, bye. Listen to Frosted Tips with Lance Bass on the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Mangesh Tekeler and to be honest, I don't believe in astrology. But from the moment I was born, it's been a part of my life in India. It's like smoking. You might not smoke, but you're gonna get second hand astrology. And lately, I've been wondering if the universe has been trying to tell me to stop running and pay attention because maybe there is magic in the stars if you're willing to look for

it. So I rounded up some friends and we dove in and let me tell you, it got weird fast. Tantric curses, major league baseball teams, canceled marriages, K-pop. But just when I thought I had to handle on this sweet and curious show about astrology, my whole world can crash down. Situation doesn't look good. There is risk to father. And my whole view on astrology, it changed. Whether you're a skeptic or a believer, I think your ideas are going to change too. Listen to Skyline Drive and the I Heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. So Frederick Wiseman had an interesting origin story as a filmmaker. He went to law school at Yale supposedly to get out of the Korean war draft. But then when he graduated, he still ended

up getting drafted anyway. And he was in there for almost two years. Kind of after the war, but yeah. Yeah. But I still, I'll bet he was not happy about being drafted either way. Sure. So he, I guess, went to Korea for a couple of years. And then after the army, he and his wife, what is her name? Zipporah Batshaw. Great name. Yeah. She was a law professor as well. They went to Paris, lived for a couple of years, and then decided they needed to move back. So they moved back to like the Boston area. But while there, Frederick Wiseman got into filmmaking. He started just shooting stuff with a little eight millimeter camera at about the time that Cinema Verité was being developed in France. That's right. So like you said, he came back from

France, started teaching law at BU and sort of had that filmmaking bug still. So he bought the rights to a book, a novel called The Cool World about poverty in Harlem. And he hired a woman named Shirley Clark, sorry, to direct it. And it was a very small, I don't think it was much of a big film at all, but it was a very small sort of indie film at the time, which is to say it was probably not seen much. But Wiseman was like, Hey, like if surely Clark can do this thing, I can do this thing. And I don't like law school. I don't like teaching law. And one of the things he did because he didn't love teaching law was take his class on a lot of field trips, I guess, just to mix things up. And they used to go to Bridgewater. And after a few visits, he was like,

wait a minute, I think everything kind of came together. His love of filmmaking, his cinema verite kind of becoming popular and his interest in that, and then his interest, disinterest in law and interest in Bridgewater. So he had this idea to make this film there. Yeah. So as we'll see later, this is kind of crucial. He got permission to show up. He said many times in later interviews, Bridgewater is not the kind of place you just kind of parachute in at night, do all your filming and then creep away at dawn with all of your footage. Like he had to get extensive permission from... It sounds like he's done that before though, which is kind of cool.

Right. Yeah. We've done that before too in grocery stores, remember? Oh, that's right. So he got permission from the lieutenant governor. He got permission from the department of corrections head. He got permission of the superintendent of Bridgewater. They all knew he was there. And they would have figured out eventually anyway, because he spent 29 days filming in Bridgewater and he would just do his cinema verite style where he would just walk around and just film stuff, film whatever he could, just film, film, film. And I saw something where he said that for his documentaries, he films anything from like 75 hours at a minimum, Chuck.

Oh, wow. Up to 250 hours. And then he goes through it all and edits all the stuff he likes. And then after like month eight of editing, he'll start piecing it together into like an arc, a story arc. Wow, which boiled down in this case to 83 minutes of a movie. And the name Tidicut Follies comes from, I think Tidicut was a Native American name, I would guess somewhere in the region. I didn't really pinpoint that. I think for the Bridgewater area, that's what they called it.

Okay. And the follies where the film opens up with a musical performance by the... I guess they were inmates with the song Strike Up the Band where they're all dressed the same. And you can see quite a few clips on YouTube, but as Olivia points out, like Weissman has always been really guarded with how his films are exhibited. And so I don't think you can just like go YouTube this thing up and watch the whole thing still, even. I did last night.

Oh, on YouTube? Yeah. Okay. And not on YouTube, no, it was on Vimeo. Oh, interesting. All right. I wonder if that's like some sort of pirated upload. It was a VHS copy put online.

So I'm thinking, yeah, it was pirated. Did you watch it all? Yeah, I did. I'd never seen it before. I was familiar with it. The title, I had not a lot of idea of what it was about. But yeah, it was certainly striking. It was really something like it had ups and downs and highs and lows.

And I think it was everything Weissman wanted me to feel about it. It was pretty great. Yeah. I mean, it is great. It's even at 83 minutes. It's tough to sit through the whole thing because I think by its nature, cinema verite can be taxing. Yeah.

Even while engrossing, it can be pretty taxing. That's the best way to put it. But it's also obviously in this case, it's not about a high school football championship. It's literally watching these people. I mean, I guess we should just talk about some of the scenes, maybe. Yeah, and a lot of the people are going to go back and be like, just so this was great, to spare with us, everybody.

Yeah. I mean, hey, you're a cinephile. That's right. Punch me in the face. No, the stomach. Face is way too hostile. Stomach's got a little bit of friendliness left in it, you know? Yeah, like Houdini style.

That'll do. Well, one of the scenes that Livia picked out that certainly stands out in my mind, too, and I think you can actually find parts of this one on YouTube is a guard, I guess was he dry shaving him? It looked like dry shaving, or was it a wet shave? No, they put like shaving cream on him and everything. Oh, okay. And everybody seems to characterize it as like really rough,

like forceful, kind of almost like he's being tortured with the shave. It was fast. It was fast. Yeah. I didn't, it didn't look like it hurt the patient. So it didn't, and it didn't seem like the guy was trying to torture him. It just seemed like he was being very quick and efficient. And he does like cut him at the edge of one of his mouth,

one of the edges of the corner of his mouth, sorry. Right. So he's bleeding a little bit, but he doesn't seem like, he doesn't seem in distress at all while he's shaving him. At the very least, he's not in distress because of the shaving. Right, but then what happened? Well, there are these, at least two guards, right? And this inmate, by the way, is named Jim.

He's probably the most famous character in the movie. Yeah. Or patient, I should say. He's not a character. He has, it's easy to get a rise out of Jim. As hard as Jim tries to not let you get a rise out of him. If you press his buttons, he's going to like yell, he's going to get mad, he's going to try to contain himself.

And there were a couple of guards that were guarding Jim while he was being like washed and shaved and all that stuff. Who just spent the entire scene trying to get a rise out of him by saying like, why is your room so dirty, Jim? Is your room going to be clean tomorrow, Jim? You've got to keep your room clean, Jim. Just ceaselessly and incessantly. And we see eventually when they take him back to his room,

it's totally empty. There's a window, there's nothing in the room. And in fact, Jim is kept naked in his room. So there's no way for Jim, for Jim's room to be dirty, and also for no way for Jim to keep his room clean. These guards, you've realized, we're just trying to get a rise out of Jim and they do over and over again. And it's really hard and sad to watch Jim like just get upset.

He's trying so hard to just not let these guys get to him because he knows what they're doing. He's fully aware of what they're doing and he just can't help himself. Probably like five different times he reacts and then tries to regain his composure again. Yeah, it's almost as if they're trying to drive him mad. Yeah, and they're also doing... I saw somebody describe it as they're goading him

with the kind of like bored desensitization or desensitivity of somebody who does this like every day and know exactly what he's going to do. And there's no fun in it anymore, but they just kind of do it to amuse themselves as much as they can from it, which is even worse, you know? Because they're just torturing this poor guy mentally. Yeah, and we should point out too that, you know, Weisman showed scenes like this,

but it wasn't like a 100% indictment on the people who worked there because he did also show some parts where there was some care taken. I mean, I haven't seen the whole thing since college, so what was your net net on that? So, I think the thing that I got from it was that Weisman treats everybody as human and equal in that he's not expressing like empathy necessarily. He's not trying to even get you to empathize or sympathize. He's not trying to get you to form an opinion.

He's just showing you what he found. And if he is trying to get you to form an opinion, it's so obtuse that it's tough to put your finger on in retrospect. Maybe you respond exactly the way he wanted you to, but he's not, very rarely does he like hammer you with it. So, I feel like he just treats everybody the same. Like there's a guy, there's a patient who talks about all of the children he's raped. And he knows that it's bad.

He knows that it's like what he's doing is wrong and he can't help himself. But there's like Weisman makes no effort to make this man seem despicable or evil or anything like that. He might as well be talking about like a car he's thinking about buying for how Weisman portrays it. And so like if he's treating that guy equal, he's definitely treating like the guards and the clinical staff and everybody equally. But I think more than that, he just turns the camera on

and lets them behave as they're going to behave. He lets them present themselves to you rather than him trying to manipulate it so that you see what Weisman wants you to see. Yeah, I mean, that's the purest form of cinema verite, which you know, it's interesting how conditioned we are to even hearing an ominous musical score during a scene where a guy might talk about crimes like that. And when all that's stripped away, like it can be like more unsettling, I think, than hearing that creepy score.

Totally. It reminds me, and this is certainly not the same thing, but we went to a Cleveland Indians baseball game one time when Emily's family still lived in Ohio and it was this throwback game where they didn't do any modern things at all. And you don't really think about that. You're like, what was the baseball game? What do they do?

Like all they had was the organ player and the the announcer going, you know, now up to bat number five, so and so, so and so. Awesome, man. Done. They didn't play a song when they came up that the batter picked out. They didn't have the the Home Depot hammer and nail and shovel chase each other around the field between innings and a race. They didn't, you know, there's, you don't realize when you go to a sports game of all the extra,

boy, especially an NBA game, all the extra stuff that's there until it's gone. And it was really, really weird. I liked it. Our family was like, I'm bored and I was like, I think this is kind of cool. Do they have cracker jacks at least? Oh, yeah. I mean, they sold the stuff and it wasn't throwback prices, of course. But it was it's weird when you're so conditioned, though,

kind of like with film, just to background noise and just sort of the things that we hear in movies, lighting or a camera move or, you know, cinema verite is all about sort of just locking that camera down or hand holding it sometimes. When all that artifice is gone, it can have a reverse effect that all the artifice has, like you're using it for. Yeah. And I think in addition to what is added to kind of manipulate you emotionally or unconsciously, there's also a lot that's removed, a lot of reality that's removed, like the background

noise. If they put background noise in, it's fully artist. It's not the actual background noise that was there when they were filming. That's not what Wiseman does. This film is replete with disturbing background noise, like televisions that are on that you can't see, other people's conversations that you can't make out what they're saying. The lighting he uses is only the lighting at Bridgewater. He doesn't use any of his own light.

It's all whatever it's called available light. And yeah, when you just kind of watch it, you're like, this is just like looking in on real life, which makes what you're seeing all the more disturbing because in addition to almost being there, you almost feel guilty, especially if you have half a conscience of witnessing the stuff that you're seeing because you're seeing some of these people like Jim when he's taken back to his cell after those guards got a rise out of him while he was being shaved. He's naked, fully naked, stomping around, basically throwing a tantrum. You can tell he's trying to calm himself down.

This is how he's like getting out his anger. And Wiseman just sits there and films the whole thing. And you're forced to watch as the viewer, I saw somebody put it, it's basically like, you're the one standing in the doorway, even after the guards have left. You're still standing there watching this man in one of the, probably one of the several worst points of his recent life, just gawking at him basically. And that's the hard part of it for sure. Yeah, or at the other end of the spectrum, there's a scene with a guy named Vladimir.

And this guy is very lucid and he's speaking very clearly about, you know, I think I've deteriorated since I've been here. I think all this noise that you're hearing, all these TVs that are always turned on full blast, it's sort of driving me crazy. And I would like to go back to prison, where I actually could work out in a gym and I could take classes. And this medication that they're giving me is making me worse. Like I feel that it's harming me. And when he's, you know, when the guards take him out of the room, then there's a scene of the clinicians like discussing things. And it's sort of like, it sounds like we need to up his medication and his tranquilizers

because he's paranoid. So when you see something like that, it's sort of the other end of the spectrum from Jim, equally disturbing. But part of the beauty of this and the rawness of this film is like, these people are all in here together. Yeah, it's never lost on you. His is a particularly sad case. Yeah. Because you can tell like, no, he's, he's with it. This guy is, he knows what he's saying. He's not trying to manipulate. He's pleading his case in a logical way. He's trying so hard not to get worked up. How would you not get worked up when you're pleading your case to be released from a mental institution from somebody who's just taking you as, you know, nuts. So why should you be listened to? There's even one of the,

one of the medical staff at that meeting after he leaves the room and they're discussing him. She says, what did she say? She's like, if you take his basic premise as, as true, then everything he says from that is totally logical. But of course his basic premise is total hogwash or whatever she says, something like that. I'm paraphrasing. Just dismiss. So it's like that guy had never had a chance. He just wasted his breath. He just, like they were, they were never going to listen to him. And it's just... It's like red and Shawshank. Yeah. Yeah. Was he not supposed to be there? He was supposed to be there one day. Well, yeah. But every time he came up for parole,

he would plead his case. They would deny it. And then finally in the end, he was like, you know, it doesn't matter what I say in here. You're not going to let me out anyway. That's my Morgan Freeman, by the way. It sounded a little more like Boss Hog on tranquilizers. What? Yeah, that was Boss Hog sedated. Oh man. Let's hear it again. No, I can't. Maybe Jerry can edit that part. I can't ever do my Morgan Freeman again. One of the great voices. But yeah, he basically says, you know, institutionalize, you're not going to let me out, no matter what I say. And of course, that's when they let him out because it's a dramatic film and with a great, wonderful,

happy ending, not like to the cut follies. No. One other thing that I think we should point out too for people who haven't seen the movie, like we know Vladimir's name and Jim's name, just because it comes up like in discussion, like they're calling him Jim or somebody addresses Vladimir as Vladimir. There's no Chiron at the bottom of the screen says Vladimir or Jim. There's no, no one explaining how Jim got here or what Vladimir did. There's no nothing. Nothing is explained. It's just, here's a scene. Here's another scene. Here's another scene. Here's another scene. Nothing necessarily leads into anything else. There's one part that see that Wiseman says he regrets because it was so he calls it hamfisted where there's, it's really hard to

watch. The main doctor, the main clinician who's a recurring character, whose name we have no idea who it is. At least if you just watch the movie. He force feeds a patient who's stopped eating and through, with a nasogastric tube stuffed on his nose all the way into his stomach. And this guy is just stoically taking this. Like he's decided he is not going to eat. They even give him a choice. They're like, you can drink the soup or you're going to, we're going to force feed you and he's like, you're going to have to force feed, but I don't even think he says anything. Yeah. So there's a, there's a force feeding scene. You watch an emaciated man who's starving himself force fed and he intercut that part with scenes from the man's preparation for burial.

Right. To kind of show like, you know, he didn't make it. He was successful in ending his own life through starvation. And then also I think what Wiseman was trying to get across was that he was you know, he's really being cared for. He's given like a decent burial and like, I think eight, he has eight pallbearers from the institution and he's like treated very well compared especially to this force feeding through a tube down his nose. And Wiseman thought that was a little hamfisted. That is, that is the most cinematic part of the entire movie. Nothing else is anywhere remotely like that. It's all just scene, scene, scene, scene. And like no explanation of who these people are or what they are trying to say. All right. Should we take a break? Yeah.

All right. We'll take our second break and be back right after this. Okay. See what you're doing? Do you ever think to yourself, what advice would Lance Bass and my favorite boy bands give me in this situation? If you do, you've come to the right place because I'm here to help. This, I promise you. Oh God. Seriously, I swear. And you won't have to send an SOS because I'll be there for you. Oh man. And so my husband, Michael. Um, hey, that's me. Yep. We know that Michael and a different hot sexy teen crush boy band are each week to guide you through life step by step. Oh, not another one. Kids, relationships, life in general can get messy. You may be thinking this is the story of my life. Just stop now. If so, tell everybody,

yeah, everybody about my new podcast and make sure to listen so we'll never ever have to say bye, bye, bye. Listen to Frosted Tips with Lance Bass on the iHeart radio app, Apple podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Mangesh Atikular and to be honest, I don't believe in astrology, but from the moment I was born, it's been a part of my life. In India, it's like smoking. You might not smoke, but you're going to get secondhand astrology. And lately, I've been wondering if the universe has been trying to tell me to stop running and pay attention because maybe there is magic in the stars if you're willing to look for it. So I rounded up some friends and we dove in and let me tell you, it got weird fast. Tantric curses, major league baseball teams, canceled

marriages, K-pop. But just when I thought I had a handle on this sweet and curious show about astrology, my whole world came crashing down. Situation doesn't look good. There is risk to father. And my whole view on astrology, it changed. Whether you're a skeptic or a believer, I think your ideas are going to change too. Listen to Skyline Drive and the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. So before we talk about the sort of court cases and whether or not this film could be banned or exhibited, it's interesting. You talk about like, it's just scene, scene, scene, scene. But on the flip side of that, it is like a such a carefully curated edit from all those hundreds

of hours of footage down to 83 minutes. And that's one of the things that Weissmann sort of talked about was he didn't, apparently he didn't, I don't know if he came around, but he didn't even like the term cinema verite because he felt it sounded too much like you were just shooting stuff and putting it in front of people. And he said, I am manipulating people, but it's through the edit. So while you may not think that, I mean, I guess he was a master at it because you probably shouldn't feel manipulated, but he's still putting together that careful edit. It's interesting. He is a master at it. And it's pretty remarkable. This was his first film and he was that masterful at it. Yeah. So I said earlier that it was crucial that he had gotten permission to film,

and not only from, you know, the lieutenant governor and the superintendent of Bridgewater, but also from everyone he shot. He got either written permission from them or verbal permission, audio visual, I guess, on camera, them giving him permission to use them in his film. So he was covered up in permission. And don't forget, he was a law professor too. And when the movie first came out, when he finished, he showed it to the superintendent of Bridgewater and to the lieutenant governor. They both apparently liked it according to Wiseman, but it wasn't until the movie came out in the wider release at the very beginning, I think, New York Film Festival or something like that. Yeah. And people started responding

by saying, like, this is barbaric, this treatment at Bridgewater. What's wrong with the state of Massachusetts that they suddenly turned on the film? And Wiseman had on his hands, what would come to become a banned film? Yeah. So one of the central players here is Elliot Richardson, who was that lieutenant governor you referenced at the time, had loftier political aspirations. So when it came time to run for an office higher than that, tried to suppress this film thinking it would, you know, count against him. And it became sort of like, Olivia calls it a political tool. That's exactly what it became. And Richardson would end up accusing Wiseman of double crossing the state. And it all sort of hinged on the idea,

not like, oh, you showed these awful things, but it hinged on the idea of permissions and privacy was sort of the legal framework of it. Because the argument was, sure, you might have gotten the permission from these men, but they are in no state to give real permission. And so there were a series of court cases over the years that sort of debated this, like for many, many years. In 68, there was a judge, Superior Court Judge named Harry Callis, who found that it breached privacy. And this was interesting, though, because, like, I get that as a legal basis for argument, but this judge said he kind of attacked the filmmaking process and said it's just a hodgepodge of sequences with no narrative and said each viewer is left to his own devices

as to what's being portrayed and in what context. And in the meantime, Wiseman's over there going to, oh, that's what cinema verite is. But I thought that was like, like, this judge just said you should destroy, not should, like ordered it to be destroyed. Yeah, he also called it a nightmare of ghoulish obscenities. And so the negative has to be burnt. Very judgy judge. Yeah. And of course, Wiseman was like, well, I'm not burning my negative. I'm going to fight this in appeal. That case, by the way, was the first one in Massachusetts history where a court affirmed that a right to privacy exists. It had never been affirmed in a court case and it was established

in that case. So it was not cut and dried, though, because Wiseman has a First Amendment right to freedom of expression. So it became freedom of expression versus freedom of privacy, or right to privacy, I should say. And I think the ACLU got involved and they submitted an amicus brief that basically said we think that this film has value, but to a very limited number of people, specifically lawyers, judges, law students, medical students, psychiatrists, people in those fields should be able to see this. And that is about it. And so that kind of became the ruling shortly after that initial, you need to burn the negatives on appeal. That's what they came up with.

Yeah. And so for a number of years after that, for those reasons, it was shown in like film class, it was shown in medical schools. It was shown at the library. Yeah, it was shown in libraries. That was a great place to see something like this. Or in different institutions would show this and say, this is what not to do. You can't do stuff like this. And this was sort of through the 70s. And then in the 80s, some attorneys got involved that said there were some suicides at Bridgewater in the mid to late 80s. There were some class action lawsuits that followed by patients where the attorneys said they could draw a direct line basically between a patient dying by suicide and the fact that this film wasn't shown.

Like it should be allowed to be shown for these reasons. Yeah. Like had it been shown, there would have been a public outcry for more reforms and that wouldn't have led, you know, those reforms might have prevented those suicides at Bridgewater. And so Wiseman said like he never gave up on the film being released to a wider audience. And he saw that that was a good time to bring this up again. And it actually worked out. He got a judge to basically say like, okay, this is a yes, you should be able to show this, but we need to blur the faces of the men out. And Wiseman said, that's impossible. This is film. It's not video. And then also work with me here, man. Right. He said also it'll artistically ruin my film.

Which you remember when we did that one Gorillaz filming in the supermarket, we ended up having to go back and blur every single thing in the supermarket out except for us. It kind of screwed it up a little bit. I could see where he's coming from, right? And so he appealed again. And finally they said, you know what, not a single inmate at Bridgewater and none of their families has ever filed a formal objection to this film being shown. So how about this? Just show it. It's unbanned officially by the early nineties. Right. That was a 91 with Judge Andrew Gilmire of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. And then after that, it was still because Wiseman is like I said earlier, very picky about how his films are exhibited. And so it wasn't like it was just everywhere.

I think PBS aired it in 93 in full. You could always buy the DVD from him, from his website. Or if there was a film festival or a film class, like I said, when I saw it was in college film class from a VHS tape that the professor owned, probably bought it from Wiseman. And that's sort of how it lived its life. I mean, it's interesting that this still is a relevant topic in a relevant film and is being talked about today, like in 2022. I think in 2017 he even tried to, or I think he successfully finally got it on a streaming service called Canopy with a K, which is also kind of through the library system, which is awesome. Yeah, you can watch it for free if you sign up for a Canopy account with your library card number. You can go watch,

I think all of Wiseman's films, all 48, which is pretty great. But there seems to have been some direct effects of the film on Bridgewater, but still, from what it sounds like, there's still a long way to go with Bridgewater too. Yeah, I think they made a lot of strides. And then they found, even as recently as this year, that they were using what they call chemical restraints, basically just doping people up more than they said they were doing. So this is ongoing there. And then Wiseman, like you said, made 48 films and they had names like hospital or high school. And it's just sort of that very bare bone cinema verite look at a single topic that's sort of in his bread and butter. I think it's a really cool thing.

Yeah, it is really cool. He's just fascinated with institutions, although he even says he has no idea how they work. And I think he's even said he's not quite sure he understands his film himself, which is pretty awesome to say. Yeah, and Zippora Films is named after his wife, who passed away a couple of years ago at the age of 90. And he's, like you said, still going strong. Yeah, what's his latest one? City Hall? Yeah, about Boston City Hall. Yeah, and it came out in 2020. Pretty cool. Well, if you want to know more about Titty Cut Follies, you should probably go watch it, but be warned, it is really rough, even though it is great in the term of a cinemafile would use it. How about that? A cinemafile. I always add an extra syllable.

So that, of course, means it's time for Listener Mail. I'm going to call this follow up on the effect of altruism. One of our favorite things is when we talk about a topic and someone from that topic gets in touch and is a listener. Yeah, for real. And that's what happened in this case with Grace Adams. Hey guys, we are so excited that you covered effective altruism and you did so wonderfully in Grace's With Giving What We Can. Giving What We Can would love to give your listeners a free book on effective altruism. Very cool. If you include this link in the show notes, which we don't have, but we'll just say it here, people can opt to have a free book sent to them, including The Precipice by Toby Ord,

anywhere in the world. We love sending out books and things a great way for people to engage more with the ideas, wishing you all the best from a big personal fan, Grace Adams. And oh, I should have made this into a bitly. Should I do that real quick? Yeah. All right. So you just talk to people while I do that. Oh, okay. Well, hey everybody. I mean, we could edit this together, but... Toby Ord wrote in and said the same thing too, but he also sent us well wishes and said we did a good job on the effective altruism episode, which I thought was pretty good because I like to think we're fairly fair-handed with it. We weren't too over-the-top subjective, don't you think? I think so. Although we did get one

email from someone that's kind of acted like we didn't point out any of the downsides, which I disagree with. I disagree with that too. But anyway, how's that bitly come in, Chuck? Okay, my friend, I am done. I have the bitly. If you go to bit.ly, you can get your free book. Yes, pretty great. Free books on effective altruism and free books by Toby Ord on existential risks, which I mean, come on. If you want to get in touch with us like Grace from Give Well did, we would love to hear from you. You can send us an email. Whether you want to give away free books or not, it's okay. You don't have to. Send it off to StuffPodcasts at iHeartRadio.com. Stuff You Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts on my heart radio,

visit the iHeartRadio app. Apple podcasts are wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Hey, I'm Lance Bass, host of the new iHeart podcast Frosted Tips with Lance Bass. Do you ever think to yourself, what advice would Lance Bass and my favorite boy bands give me in this situation? If you do, you've come to the right place because I'm here to help. And a different hot sexy teen crush boy bander each week to guide you through life. Tell everybody, yeah, everybody about my new podcast and make sure to listen so we'll never ever have to say bye, bye, bye. Listen to Frosted Tips with Lance Bass on the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Munga Chauticular and it turns out astrology is way

more widespread than any of us want to believe. You can find in Major League Baseball, international banks, K-pop groups, even the White House. But just when I thought I had a handle on this subject, something completely unbelievable happened to me and my whole view on astrology changed. Whether you're a skeptic or a believer, give me a few minutes because I think your ideas are about to change too. Listen to Skyline Drive on the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts.