I'm not sure a single film in the whole of 2012 will live with me as much as this one.
But,while 66 Months is riveting it also opened out a question about whether this type of documentary steps over the mark in terms of voyeurism.
In the end, I came to the conclusion that highlighting mental health issues could only be done to maximum effect in this hard-hitting way.
James Bluemel's film follows Nigel who lived under the radar of social services in Oxford for 66 months.
Nigel's vulnerability and need for a protector sees him being taken under the wing of alcoholic pensioner, Robbie.
Despite their apparent love for each other, Robbie is seen to physically and verbally abuse Nigel almost constantly.
These scenes are graphic and shocking and made me wonder why the film crew did not intervene.
I ought to point out that I don't know if it was even possible for them to have done so.
And Nigel in more sane and sober moments is interviewed about his life and has nothing but praise for the man who, through anyone else's eyes, appears to be his tormentor rather than his carer.
Why social services seemed to wash their hands of him is only superficially explored. One can only assume those who made the original decision to cast him adrift refused to comment in greater detail.
66 Months is a film which should shame those of us who moan about the mundane. Most lives, recession or no recession are puffed up with pillows by comparison.
It is unlikely to be widely screened in cinemas but I'm hoping one of the major TV stations take it up. Only then will it truly fulfill its role in breaking down prejudice against those with mental health issues.
I think it was a laudable piece of work. I will knock a point off, however, for those scenes which probably went a little bit too far.
Laughs: none
Jumps: none
Vomit: none
Nudity: One rather cringe-inducing scene.
Overall rating: 7.5/10
0 Comments