Jimmy P: Psychotherapy of a Plains Indian

"Jimmy P." is an unusual film for many reasons. Although the film's star Benicio Del Toro is a pretty hot commodity in films these days, this Oscar-winning actor decided to take a very different sort of part in this film. In the last year, for example, he's been in a couple HUGE Hollywood films--"Thor: The Dark World" and the recent mega-hit "Guardians of the Galaxy". But "Jimmy P." is a much smaller sort of film--one with very modest pretenses and which is not exactly the sort of film the average viewer would enjoy. My assumption is that he just liked the role and it offered him a good chance to act without all the special effects and eye candy of a typical film. Regardless, it is interesting and worth a look--particularly if you are interested in the history of psychotherapy.

When the film begins, a WWII vet, Jimmy Picard (Del Toro) has come to the VA hospital because of the intense pain he's been feeling. However, despite many, many tests, the doctors can find nothing physically wrong and eventually one of them suggests his problems might have a psychological basis. In a wise move, the psychologist at the hospital suggests they find a psychotherapist who has a background in anthropology so that they can address not only Jimmy's emotional problems but see this in the context of his American Indian heritage. In other words, perhaps there are problems specifically related to this ethnic background. So, the hospital goes searching for such a man and they enlist the help of a French therapist, Georges Devereaux (Mathieu Amalric). Much of the film consists of the therapy sessions between Devereaux and Jimmy and focuses on the insights that they learn and the progress he makes.

As far as the history of psychotherapy goes, this is a fascinating film. And, since I used to be a psychotherapist and teacher (teaching psychology among other subjects), I was familiar with the analytic bent of therapy in the 1940s and wasn't surprised at the way therapy was portrayed in the film. Its focus on sex, repression, free association and the like were BIG back then, though today this is not at all typical of counseling sessions which are now much more problem-centered and short-term in nature. Plus, today, most therapists believe that more than just sex is behind all our emotional problems. This is NOT a criticism at all--just an observation and to let you know that the style of the meetings between the Jimmy and Devereaux are not at all typical of what you'd find today. To me, this was pretty interesting--and, yes, I know for the average person this isn't exactly exciting stuff. What is pretty exciting, however, is the nice, gentle sort of acting you see here. Del Toro and the rest of the cast did a very nice job and the movie is an interesting slice of life movie. But, unfortunately, a lot of folks probably wouldn't rush to see this sort of realistic story as there aren't many 'exciting' portions to the film--just a decent little story.

Finally, Benicio Del Toro is a fine actor and he did a fine job in "Jimmy P."--but, I do wonder why the filmmakers didn't hire an actual American Indian to play this role instead of a Puerto Rican American? After all, there probably aren't many opportunities for members of various American tribes to act in films and this might have been a nice chance to give someone a chance to play the role intended for an American Indian. While no one would ever think of having a white person play a black in films these days, it's still surprising to see which actors often play Asians and American Indians in films. I also noticed that lots of supporting parts were played in Jimmy P. by American Indians--perhaps one of them might have been cast in the lead.

It's one of those movies that you have to sit down and watch; you cannot go and cook some spaghetti while you're watching it, you have to pay attention. You can feel a rise in the film's soul as you watch it display fine cinematography, good performances and almost perfect pacing. The film runs at an exact length, never feeling too long or too short altogether, and the scenes run through as one scene, as how most movies should be. The dream sequences in this film are my favourite, them being surreal beings with meaning the main character attempts to understand. The main character, Jimmy Picard, tells his tragic past in a fashion only talented actors could pull off, and it makes you realize why Benicio Del Toro was cast out of all the actors that are around. I think you'll enjoy this a lot, especially if you're a fan of a good drama.

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.)

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.

Firstly, I'm not a movie buff nor am I an expert on the director or anyone else involved in making this movie, I just watch movies based on whether or not I fancy watching them.

The acting left me with a feeling of warmth towards the characters, sure it's not a short film, and some of the scenes could probably have been shorter, but I feel that would've taken away from the tonality. The movie seems well written and likable, but the pacing and content won't be everyone's 'cup of tea'.

In short, the movie is good, it's not an action movie, there's almost no excitement, but who would read the synopsis and think there would be any? There's really nothing left to say about this film as far as I can see, I'd recommend it, but not to everyone, and can't see a group of lads sitting round with cans of lager enjoying it, it's more of a 'sit and watch alone' type of thing.