The Male Therapist, Hollywood-Style

Two iconic images, from two classic films: in Now, Voyager, kindly therapist Claude Rains walks in the garden with troubled patient Bette Davis. He's paternal, insightful and obviously knows what's good for her.

In The Three Faces of Eve, Lee J. Cobb helps Joanne Woodward parse out the three distinct personalities tormenting her. Like Claude Rains before him, he's a model of the patriarchal culture, a therapist of unquestionable motives and unimpeachable authority. One of the good guys.

Which begs the question: How did we get from there to Hannibal Lecter?

Because, with rare exceptions, that's where we are. Look at how male therapists are currently depicted in mainstream Hollywood films. Instead of being shown as caretakers, they're portrayed as troubled, sexually predatory, even psychotic: Richard Gere in Final Analysis. Bruce Willis in The Color of Night. Robert DeNiro in Hide and Seek. Brian Cox in the recent Running with Scissors. And of course, as mentioned above, the wearily omnipresent Dr. Lecter, in The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal, Red Dragon and last year's Hannibal Rising.

Things aren't much better on the small screen. On TV shows like Without A Trace, The Closer and CSI, a male psychologist or psychiatrist is as likely to be the bad guy as any garden-variety contract killer or spurned lover.

Of course, as a former screenwriter myself (now a licensed psychotherapist), I know enough to be skeptical of Hollywood's notion of any profession...but still, I can't help wondering what's going on.

What makes this trend even more irksome is the contrast with the predominant depiction of female therapists on-screen: Barbra Streisand's Dr. Lowenstein in The Prince of Tides. Lorraine Bracco's Dr. Melfi on The Sopranos. Carolyn McCormack's earnest Dr. Olivet on the long-running Law and Order.

(In some attempt at balance, I guess I should mention Birds of Prey, the short-lived WB series of a few years back, in which Mia Sara played an evil female psychiatrist named Dr. Harley Quinn. Grandiose, homicidal, the works. Then again, what else would you expect of the Joker's girlfriend?)

Don't get me wrong. There have been the occasional positive portrayals of male therapists on film and TV: Judd Hirsch in Ordinary People. Robin Williams in
Good Will Hunting. And, to cite Law and Order again, J.F. Simmons' wonderful, testy police consultant, Dr. Emil Skoda. Not to mention the recent Golden Globe-nominated Gabriel Byrne in HBO's In Treatment, playing a therapist who, though certainly flawed, ultimately has his heart in the right place.

But these are clearly exceptions. The question is, why? What happened? How did the on-screen image of male therapist go from father figure to the most likely suspect?

Maybe this change simply reflects one that's occurred in the culture at large. After all, the past fifty years has seen a challenge to the whole idea of male authority. In terms of image, professors, doctors and scientists of the male persuasion have suddenly gone from being saints to sinners.

Same with male therapists. No wonder today's TV and film writers find them irresistible as villains. All that education, respectability and power, turned to the Dark Side.

But it wasn't just society's growing distrust of male authority that turned Lee J. Cobb's gray suit and pipe into Anthony Hopkins' face muzzle and leather restraints. There was also a trend, starting in the 50's, of popular films that threw extremely cold water on the notion of psychological treatment as a positive tool to alleviate suffering. Films like The Manchurian Candidate (and its recent remake), The Snake Pit, and One Flew Over the Cukoo's Nest all suggested the nefarious ways that psychology could be exploited or used for evil, often conflating its concepts with those of brain-washing and drug-induced manipulation.

Even such recent films as A Beautiful Mind depicted the horrendous misuse of electro-convulsive therapy -- at the hands, of course, of a cooly assured male psychiatrist. A real Poster Boy for the clueless patriarchy.

Let's face it: the world's a pretty treacherous, confusing place nowadays. Our most sturdy institutions -- government, the church, education -- traditionally headed by men, seem to be letting us down. It's no different with therapy. Fairly or not, I believe the way in which male therapists are portrayed on screen reflects a similar disenchantment with both the profession in general, and its male practitioners in particular.

Nowadays, much like Catholic priests, the male therapist suffers from the failed expectations of a disillusioned public. He's been transformed, regrettably, into just another stock character -- our distrust and suspicion buffed to a stereotypical finish by the narrative demands of TV and film.

So now, to the hallowed celluloid images of "tough" private eye, "brilliant" physician and "ruthless" attorney, we can add the unethical, manipulative and frequently homicidal male therapist. Coming to a theater -- or TV screen -- near you!

Hmm. Sounds like we could all use a walk with Claude Rains right about now...

Comments

[McJung]

Although Gabriel Byrne's character "ultimately has his heart in the right place", his behavior is more unethical and probably more illegal (depending on his location and his license) than even Meryl Streep's magnificent dual relationship in Prime. I agree that he is portrayed positively - I'm just not sure he deserves it.

I guess this "likeable fool" portrayal of male therapists begins with Bob Hartley, who was not so much a psychiatrist as just one more lovably incompetent sitcom husband (a few months ago I heard Bob Newhart say his character was the worst therapist ever - how I wish that was true).

[Jayne Lyn Stahl - Huffpost Blogger]

Great analysis, thanks! I especially like mention of Robin Williams, in "Good Will Hunting," as it was a stunning performance, and a great way to debunk the myth that women therapists are somehow more adept at dealing with emotional triggers.

[mercedes1947]

I can understand how 'irksome' gender bias can be - "What makes this trend even more irksome is the contrast with the predominant depiction of female therapists on-screen..."

Sounds like you are experiencing stereotyping. Entertainment is negatively stereotyping traditional male authority figures. He is a male therefore he must be abusing his authority, he must be up to something, underneath the sleek image he is a monster.

Doesn't feel very good does it.? You are a kind, effective therapist and the population judges you on the basis of broad misconceptions. Welcome to the world guys.

This kind of thing has been going on for centuries. She is a woman therefore she is irrational - emotional - manipulative - can't handle male jobs. He is black therefore his lazy, shiftless, not as smart as us whites, sub-human.

What goes around, comes around. Looks like you're it, it is your turn to take the heat. Unfair of course, unrealistic, yes. Why is it happening now? The shifting paradigm. If you don't know what that is, you haven't been paying attention for the last 30 years.

[BMacB]

Hi Dennis

Don't forget the late, fabulous Stanley Kamel as the wonderfully funny, but kind psychiatrist to Adrian Monk. I particularly remember the hilarious episode where Monk became convinced that his doctor was a shoplifter - only to discover that his powers of deduction had failed him; a rare event!

Enjoyed this article immensely. More, more!

Bonnie

[goodhelp]

Dennis, of course your analysis is right on...yet, movie writers/producers must have "bad guy" targets--the crooked business man, the political fringe lunatic, drug dealers, etc.
The zeitgeist of the times plays a big role in whom we "target" as a type of evildoer. Maybe even a recent Texan Republican president? --G

[gilesslade]

Great observatio­ns...Holly­wood has long been suspicious of psychiatrists and psychologists. In Bringing Up Baby there's a wonderful scene in which a wacky Katherine Hepburn interacts with a psychiatrist of dubious mental health

Hannibal Lecter is in the same anti-shrink vein, but there is even more to him since he is firmly entrenched in anti-profe­ssionalism of the Frankenstein story. In Lecter, it is spun anew to adapt it to the needs of our era .

-- As a medical specialist he is at the pinnacle of professional life and his sophisticated tastes and talents reflect a very high level of culture. Fundamentally, however, he is flawed by the warped professional life he chose. He represents everything that is wrong with professionalism at a time when --legal, medical, scientific, engineering-- professional expertise is being challenged on many fronts by the democratic access to information of the Internet. (There is a great book about the negative aspects of professionalism called DISCIPLINED MINDS). Lecter's depersonalization and detachment achieve the level of psychopathology. He is a profoundly warped western man who excessive anhedonia (or disphoria) --even during the most brutal acts of murder and cannibalism-- fascinates while inviting revulsion and rejection.

The book RED DRAGON is on my all time great thriller list...I love the way it adapts the story of Frankenstein.

[Radioboy]

Is it not possible that since therapy is so prevalent, especially in the Hollywood community, that it's just another case of filmmakers writing from what they know? So many people seem to be in therapy. If you don't have a therapist, you know one. If you are creative, you let your mind wonder into the "what if" scenario, and if you do that, it's not a giant leap to think that writers would tap into as a subject matter one of the few people who might have the answers or might have control. If everyone in Hollywood went to church more often, you might just see more evil priests on the screen.

[BlackJAC]

How 'bout the notion that seeing a shrink is a scarlet letter of shame and embarassment these days? Nobody's allowed to have a bad day or to simply be with their own thoughts anymore. You say you don't feel like going out, you're branded a potential headcase and shipped off to the nearest shrink for five years.

[Hoyt Hilsman - Huffpost Blogger]

Excellent piece!! I wonder if our faith in science has also been diminished -- witness the Bush war on science, the ascent of fundamentalism and the pseudo-science of the New Age and conspiracy theorists.

[Cassandra2]

"So now, to the hallowed celluloid images of "tough" private eye, "brilliant" physician and "ruthless" attorney, we can add the unethical, manipulative and frequently homicidal male therapist."

I believe you've answered your own question. In a nutshell, when a film needs a strong protagonist or antagonist, the first thought that comes to mind is MALE, especially in American film culture. it isn't a question of why there are so many male therapists being portrayed as villians as why there aren't more female villians in general. Women play sympathetic and supportive (read "weak") roles more often than not, and therefore are relegated to roles like "good" therapist, which doesn't play very well to action-oriented filmgoers looking for "tough guys" (good or bad). Let's face it, "evil" therapists make better entertainment than "good" therapists; "good" therapists are generally supportive roles (e.g., Bracco's Melfi plays off of Gandolfini's Soprano, as you've cited above).

[sunshine2]

I hate to break this to you, but many therapists ARE screwed up.