hmm. I thought that was the jist of it the first time I watched it - Poppy's argument that she has been brought in against her will seems plausible enough because, to all intents and purposes, she seems 'normal' to begin with.
but then I rewatched the whole thing, and changed my mind. its made pretty explicit that the group are day-patients, and as such are not compelled to attend meetings at all. they do so of their own volition, which is why so many of them are constantly concerned by the prospect of being discharged - they aren't 'crazy' enough to be sectioned, but they don't feel ready to be 'normal', so they cling on to their day-patient status to define and protect them.
in this context, Poppy's insistence that she's 'not mad' and that she shouldn't be there seems like classic crazy-talk. eventually some members of the group get better and are discharged (whether they are better or not, the fact that they are discharged has no real conspiracy connotations, but rather shows the sinister nature of budget-led NHS treatment), meanwhile others jump on Poppy's story and embellish it, turning it into a far-fetched conspiracy plot to 'get rid' of the lingering patients.
the conspiracy theory is most obviously disproven in the case of the 'viewing room', which is shown quite clearly to be fantasy.
also, the first time 'MAD money' is mentioned, there is a strong sense that the lawyer has realised he is dealing with a 'crazy' person (Poppy) and so invents a reason why he can't take her case (he can't really take her case because there is no case - Poppy is attending the clinic through her own choice, despite whatever she says to the contrary: we never see anyone forcing her to attend). apart from anything else, the phrase 'MAD money' is so insensitive, it couldn't possibly be a real scheme!
I think the real message of the film was that Poppy was 'mad' all along; while her influence on N is a stabilizing one, allowing N to finally support herself in the real world (in contrast with the pathetic efforts made by the practitioners at the clinic), N's influence on Poppy has the opposite effect - N teaches Poppy how to express her pain in self-destructive ways.
Poppy and N are people with the same condition, but who trade coping strategies. By the end, Poppy is no longer able to take care of herself, because she has learned how not to.
in short, I think you miss a lot if you take Poppy's version of her story for granted - remember N is the narrator, and for a good reason; she provides a neutral set of eyes for us to see Poppy through at the beginning, and if you look closely, you realise Poppy isn't as sane as she says she is!
anyway, there's no 'right' reading of the film, but I think its important you ask why Poppy keeps going back to the clinic - there's nothing making her go, besides her story.
reply
share
Willowickie
14 years ago
I think I agree with you bishely, however I do remember one scene early on where the black receptionist man (whom ends up in a proper uniform at the end)physically forcefully puts Poppy in the room, like ushers her in as if against her will...
This seems to contradict the views I've read of her NOT actually having to turn up all the time, because otherwise why would he so, almost violently, treat her this way if she was there voluntarily?
Or am I paying too much attention to something relatively insignificant?
reply
share