We’ve written a handful of articles about M. Night Shyamalan’s Split here on Bloody Disgusting in the past week, and that’s because, well, it’s our duty to talk about this stuff. We posted two reviews, one written by Trace Thurman and the other by Jimmy Champane, and we also dug into a few problems with the film: I wrote about its final act issues, while Chris Webster had a problem with the protagonist. For the most part, issues aside, we all agreed that Split is a damn fine horror film, and we’re incredibly happy to see it reigning supreme at the box office.
A win for original horror is a win for us all.
But one aspect of Split we haven’t yet dug into is the single most talked-about and controversial aspect of the whole damn thing. From the very moment the first trailer hit the net, many were concerned that Shyamalan was furthering harmful stigmas about mental illness – the film centers on a madman with the very real Dissociative Identity Disorder – and countless think-pieces have hit the net in the wake of release. Personally speaking, I’ve had several debates about this very topic on social media, and now that I’ve had a week to really think hard about the film, I wanted to write my own piece.
Contrary to many, I found Split to be anything but insensitive on this particular front.
Now mind you, I don’t personally suffer from any form of diagnosed mental illness, so if that somewhat negates my opinion on this whole issue, I totally understand. It’s hard to be taken seriously when talking about something that doesn’t directly impact you yourself in any real way, so believe me, I get it. If people who do suffer from Dissociative Identity Disorder have taken issue with Split and its depiction of it, I take that very seriously and consider that there must be something to that whole argument. So please know that I’m not disregarding anyone’s opinion, but merely stating my own.
One major issue with the argument against Split, however? I’ve spoken with a handful of active members of the mental health community who feel the film is harmful, stigmatizing and totally insensitive… but they haven’t actually seen it for themselves. They’re basing that opinion on trailers, plot descriptions, and articles they’ve read online; in other words, they never gave the film a chance to prove their hunches wrong. Many decided to boycott based on the trailer alone, which I take issue with for one big reason: Split, contrary to whatever you may have ascertained from the trailer, is a film that actually treats mental illness with a welcome degree of care; furthermore, it depicts those who suffer not as less than, but as more than.
There’s an entire sub-plot in Split, away from the main storyline centered on three young women locked up in a basement by James McAvoy’s mentally unwell Kevin, that’s all about Kevin’s doctor, Karen Fletcher. Played by Betty Buckley, Fletcher is Kevin’s psychiatrist, looking out for and protecting him after everyone else has discarded him. Many have criticized the sub-plot for making the film drag in parts and ultimately taking away from what’s really compelling about the story, but Dr. Fletcher’s storyline is incredibly important when debating the film’s ethics.
Fletcher’s theory on Kevin and others who suffer from his disorder is that they’re more advanced than the rest of us, having unlocked the true power of their brains and, essentially, becoming superhuman as a result of their incredible life traumas. There’s even one scene where Fletcher explains this theory to a classroom via Skype, and the scene seems to exist for the sole purpose of Shyamalan letting us know that he’s actively NOT trying to paint mental illness in a negative light. You could argue that the scene is unnecessary to the actual plot of the film, but it’s there nonetheless, and it’s there for a reason. Those with D.I.D. are not “broken,” Shyamalan is telling us, but rather “more than” the rest of us.
And this idea plays heavily into Split‘s final moments, which I won’t spoil for anyone who hasn’t yet seen the film. Shyamalan hits home the idea that our various traumas and mental illnesses make us stronger and perhaps even “purer”; and if you’re asking me, he ultimately sends a very empowering message to those who, like Kevin and Casey, may feel broken and cast aside by society. Granted, he doesn’t quite hit that ball out of the park (the film feels like its lacking a final scene necessary to really tie everything together and make it all resonate), but he tries. And his positive message, to me at least, was very clear.
Jimmy Champane felt the same way in his aforementioned review. He wrote:
On the topic of the criticism Split has drawn on its villain using mental illness as a catch-all excuse, I personally think Shyamalan treats the disorder with care. A not-so-subtle undertone of the film focuses on Kevin’s therapist’s struggle to bring Dissociative Identity Disorder as the key to unlocking the potential of the human brain – and it works. Additionally, the way Shyamalan carefully uses Casey’s past as a tool to show why she’s able to keep a cool head and outsmart Kevin’s different personalities shows that he went the extra mile to delicately show his respect for those struggling with mental illness.
Yes, many horror films do depict the mentally ill as crazy, broken madmen, and though Split‘s antagonist is indeed a villain who does some awful things, there’s something way more going on just beneath the surface. Shyamalan clearly had something to say with Split, and though you may take issue with the way he went about saying it, I ask you to at least consider that he was trying, like few filmmakers actually have, to not depict mental illness as something we ought to be afraid of. And I also ask, to those who have judged it without seeing it, that you at least give it a chance.
An important issue to raise, but Split is the wrong target.
