Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

DIRECTOR'S CUT: Villain Therapy: SPLIT and Dissociative Identity Disorder (Patreon)

Published:
2022-10-03 16:24:43
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

Is SPLIT an accurate portrayal of Dissociative Identity Disorder? Mostly no. But it does get some things right.

Licensed therapist Jonathan Decker and filmmaker Alan Seawright take a look at the many identities of James McAvoy in one of M. Night Shyamalan's best (if not clinically accurate) films. (And some of McAvoy's best performances! Seriously, incredible work.) They talk about some of the causes of Dissociative Identity Disorder, what DID systems look like in real life, the therapist in the film and what she gets right and wrong in working with this DID system, and the spectacular storytelling and performances in Split. It's a balance between loving this movie as an interesting and entertaining film, and recognizing the problems with the mental health portrayals.

Files

Comments

Link

As someone that has DID due to several traumatic incidents I was absolutely stunned to finally come across Split through your videos. I had no idea it existed and maaaaaybe that's a good thing, but at the same time I can see it as its own fantasy and enjoy it. I am sad that DID continues to drive away friends and potential relationships, and it's because of media portraying it improperly and irresponsibly. That aside, I do have an interesting read from Brandon Sanderson called Legion. Has anyone else here read it and/or have thoughts on it? I very much enjoyed it and it also made me feel a bit represented somewhere in media/literature. DID is different for everyone, of course, but this story was almost me in a nutshell when it came to DID?

Melissa

Cooperative responsibility ... Everyone just needs to calm down and eat some fruit or something 😁

SaucyJTB

Duty of the audience, 100%. Willing suspension of disbelief is an amazing tool for filmmakers and other forms of storytelling, absolutely. But there is one key term in that phrase: suspension. Not termination. There's nothing wrong with suspending belief in something temporarily, but you cannot stay in that state. As you guys have said multiple times now, "Watch with your brain turned on." You can watch something knowing that it's not real and still enjoy it. That's the beauty of fantastic storytelling. Just don't stay in that state at all times. Also, I took Hedwig as the personality that protects his childlike innocence that he never got to have as a child. Like it was so repressed that he had to create that persona to try to reclaim that state of being. Granted, I am not familiar enough with DID to know if that is accurate, so I could be entirely off base. That's just my interpretation of how the story was portrayed. James McAvoy is an amazing actor, and I am so glad that he took this role on. His swapping of personalities was done so well that you can tell who is in the light each time the camera is on him, and that's stellar acting.

flamingbluepanda

Something I love about this is that I'm watching this as a creator, because I have been writing a story about DID and I have been trying to do research for this story. I have spoken to multiple systems, and I have been watching content by systems for the purposes of education. I wanted to see your take on this movie (and moon knight, which im watching next) and I love how much you guys asked for feedback and to open conversations. I think that research on these things should be split (ha) between duty of the audience and duty of the creator. The creator needs to take the time to do their research and acknowlege that they are making something to entertain peoole, and the audience needs to make sure that they are taking things made for entertainment with a grain of salt.

Jay Skylar's Stories

Honestly, I think what would have been most responsible for this film would be to acknowledge the in-world presence of DID and then differentiate this case from it—or even say that this is a DID system, *but* it coincides with some supernatural aspect, and have the movie itself, maybe through the therapist character, clarify that DID is not dangerous.

Emily Warren

DID in movies seems to just be an excuse to 'modernise' Jekyll and Hyde.

Lea Hughes

Hey you two! I absolutely loved this video. Thank you so much for sharing :) I'm a long-time fan, as well as diagnosed with DID. I also love this movie, while still criticizing it for its problematic depictions of an already-heavily-stigmatized mental disorder. If it's alright, I'd like to share my thoughts on some of your points! In my experience, there's a bit of nuance to having two alters "present" at the same time. It's kind of like...asking you if you can have two different thoughts at the same time. If you define "thoughts" as the literal words passing through your head, probably not. Each one must happen sequentially. But if your definition of "thoughts" is a bit more flexible -- words, images, feelings, etc -- then you can absolutely have more than one active at the same time! For example, I can be in acute distress, and feel one of my alters (our caretaker) holding my hand and stroking my head. I can feel desperate and alone, sobbing, while simultaneously thinking, "My poor love, it's okay. I'm here." I feel it as a primary and secondary experience, with one more salient than the other (and it can shift back and forth quite quickly), but it's still simultaneous. On that note...I can't speak to others' systems, but the only time I've ever experienced rapid-switching is in severe acute distress, alone, and only between two alters. It's extraordinarily uncommon for me. I've used several different metaphors for that idea of "stepping into the light," including that one. I often refer to it as "who is driving the car" xD. I rather like the car metaphor, since it captures the idea that we're all still in the car together (some napping, some chatting, but only one person really driving.) I LOVED Alan's point that everyone has compartmentalized presentations of their personality (Thank you for that. It's my go-to when trying to normalize the diagnosis.) I also really appreciated your mutual point that it's not always so dramatic. Like most things in mental health, it's all on a spectrum. I was in my late 20s when I was diagnosed, likely due to how well-masked my presentation was. And oooh boy. You definitely stepped in quite the controversy when talking about non-traumagenic DID!. For those who don't know, there's a lot of sensitivity around this issue, mostly due to feelings of appropriation. There are some folks who, for their own reasons, have adopted DID-like symptoms willfully. Or they claim that it feels "truer" to their actual selves to present themselves in such a way, but do not attribute it to trauma. I encourage you not to be quick to judge, since many people don't remember their trauma for decades. But as someone whose life has been deeply impacted by this disorder, it can feel extremely hurtful to see someone try to claim all the "cool" or "interesting" things about it (big air quotes there), without actually having the lived experience of it. This, intersecting with the tendency of these individuals to build a social media identity around it, causes a lot of pain in the community. Okay. I've written enough. Again, thank you SO MUCH for a wonderful breakdown of an excellent movie and a deeply misunderstood diagnosis. Sending you both virtual hugs :)

Ariadwyn

I fall 100% percent on Audience responsibility. No matter what you are consuming, be it book, movie, tv, Doco, or journalism you should have a measure of disbelief. I get a little sad when shows and movies I loved as a kids get picked up and shredded by modern social standards. I would like to think we as people can (while not excusing pass behaviour), give grace to the yesteryear.

Spiderlingual

I'm kind of mixed on Audience vs Creator's responsibility. In many ways, I lean a lot more strongly towards audience responsibility because as you guys always say, you have to watch things with your brain turned on. People who make art can't just refuse to ever depict anything with problematic or inaccurate themes or ideas, because sometimes it is not that easy especially with film to avoid, and that is part of how both the artists and the consumers learn and grow and expose themselves to new ideas. That said, I don't think that absolves artists of all responsibility to consider and research and choose their depictions with some care. Even the recent backlash to the Woman King shows that it matters to people when something like history is so casually misrepresented in media, because whether the RIGHT thing to do or not, some people WILL take things from the media they consume without interrogating it, and that CAN have larger and (such as in the case of Jaws) devastating social effects.

Deb

New to your Patreon. I'm not a professional, but very interested in mental health. It was my (ancient?) understanding that DID is a possible result of severe abuse, usually with a sexual component, in a specific stage of childhood development. As in, the exact same abuse in the previous or subsequent stage of childhood development is unlikely to result in DID. Can you or a fan system speak to this? I'm happy to get a link to information instead of the information itself - better because I took up less of your time.

Smeeson

I have a child that adopted me and they have DID. I have never seen two personalities fronting at the same time, BUT! Ithink you will find this interesting. https://youtu.be/wfYbgdo8e-8