Cinematherapy: using nature documentaries (Part two), by M. P. Egidi, E. Gioacchini.

As we have recently said during various online discussions, we think that using nature documentaries in the specific context of cinematherapy is absolutely justified, also, as in the case of the March of the Penguins, in cartoon versions.

There is a wide range of contexts in which these documentaries can be used, from those in which the objective is to re-evaluate and recreate the goals of a person’s life (temporarily contracted in the experience of the single person or of the group), to those in which the aim is to underline the importance of resources that are not finding expression.In these situations, the passage that can metaphorically express creatively typically human behaviour (the animal made human) comes back to the person involved with corrections that would be hard to accept with common sense. To be clearer... Modern society has long lost the use of myth and is oriented more to a digital sense than to an analogical one, it doesn’t easily allow process-judgement, nor the underlying caption to the cinema-text, nor the moral teaching. The message of the plot can thus more easily avoid the blocks of censorship and the superficial judgement of rhetorical emptiness, which would otherwise be perceived, and work deeply on the individual. The candour of the animal character, somehow made human, is accepted; therefore critical sense and sense of absurdity, which could be raised by symbolic elements of the text, are bypassed.

In the film March of the Penguins the little animal’s ability to move from the depth of the ocean to the hard, but possible, land is, for example, an important metaphor of the possibility of finding out abilities and resources of which we are not aware; just like the penguin’s march is a good example of a path towards change, toward the possible re-definition of roles.

The generation gap, so strongly highlighted and parodied in the script of the film, suggests reflections overcoming the formal criticism of what is well-known and taken for granted, because it is animals talking about us. The issues tackled are of natural laws as well as of human psychology.

The theme of suffering, of defeat, and that of courage and of the gratuitous way in which favourable events take place, thus seeming to reward perseverance, risk-taking, the wait for something positive can unfold themselves in unexpected environments. This gives them originality and provides the audience with a new point of view. Scientific facts made into a story in the text end up giving strength and credibility to more important messages about relationship, personal attribution of sense, life objectives.

In the final part of the film, man is forced to face himself, his ability to hide truth, to use it selfishly for his own exclusive advantage, or else to change it into an element of progress both for the individual and for the group.

Implied in the story is the fact that all the characters in this kind of documentary or film, both the animals and the human audience, are part of the same territory and need to find a way to cohabitate harmoniously on the same planet.Loneliness, loss of the feeling of belonging to a group, antisocial or unsociable aspects of some personalities can all receive some new suggestions, which could work as motivations for redefining roles in a silent dream of personal stories apparently lost in the conscious memory and then recovered through a positive regression stimulated by the show and for the use of the individual’s Ego.

Photos: from  March of the Penguins
Filmography:
Directed by Luc Jacquet
Produced by Yves Darondeau, Christophe Lioud, Emmanuel Priou
Co-Producer: Jean-Christophe Bar
Executive Producer:Ilann Girard
Written by Luc Jacquet, Michel Fessler
Narrated by Charles Berling, Romane Bohringer, Jules Sitruk, Amitabh Bachchan, Morgan Freeman
Music by Émilie Simon, Alex Wurman (US version)
Cinematography Laurent Chalet, Jérôme Maison
Editing by Sabine Emiliani, Studio Bonne, Pioche, APC, Buena Vista, International Film, Production France, Wild Bunch,
Canal+, 'Institut Polare Français, Paul-Émile Victor, National Geographic Films
Distributed by Warner Independent Pictures (US), Lionsgate (Canada), Maple Pictures (theatrical Quebec (east of Canada),
Alliance Films (theatrical Toronto (west of Canada)
Release date(s)
France: 26 January 2005
Canada: 20 May 2005
United States:
24 June 2005 (limited), 22 July 2005 (wide)
United Kingdom: 9 December 2005
Australia: 19 October 2006
Running time 85 minutes, 84 minutes (US version)
Country France
Language French (original)
Gross revenue $77,413,017 

Cinematherapy: using nature documentaries (Part One), by M. P. Egidi e E. Gioacchini .

We are going to talk about quality nature documentaries and our specific topic is filming nature live, without manipulations, fixings, embellishments on the subject or on the environment. We wish to analise the possibilities and potentialities of using documentaries on wild nature in cinematherapy. The success of this genre is unquestionable. Think, for example, of the recent March of the Penguins, a French film-documentary showing these animals facing a long and difficult march though the ice of Antarctica to grant the survival of the species.

Few colours: the white of the location, the two-coloured coat of the penguins, the blue of the sky and the range of greys of the ice storms. Few characters: the penguins rarely interact with other animals, dramatic fights against predators are almost non existent, man and his works are (obviously) absent. Yet the film, which came out in Italy in 2005, had an extraordinary success and the Italian commentary of a much-loved actor such as Fiorello was just a bonus to a work based on the fascination of a real and hard story to be told without concessions. It won the bet!

This and other similar works have much-deserved success. They are based on a similar inspiration, similar stylistic coherence, similar purposes. In all cases, there’s a film in the film. Few minutes of straight filming, directed with the eye and the spirit of the observant naturalist, are often the reward for days laying in wait, monitoring, complex expedients aimed at the same time at avoiding interference with the natural environment and at obtaining good results from a technical point of view. The general interest for this genre could be due to something that often happens in the field of environmental education and biology of conservation, in which I work. Amongst people working in this field there’s a story about a primary school in Rome: when the children were asked to name some wild animals, most of them mentioned the gnu, not considering species that are more familiar to our environment, such as hedgehogs and foxes. It’s a surprising answer at first, but it is probably not so surprising considering that there is a new urban generation of children who have never seen a firefly (they have just come back to our parks and gardens after their population had gone down because of pollution) and have long been familiar with the life cycles of exotic animals through TV documentaries.

The aims of nature documentaries are praiseworthy, they educate, inform, transmit values, and sometimes amuse or initiate reflection. They do not allow concessions, no happy ending or, better, the happy ending is implied, sometimes, in the plot, because, if you can record the full life cycle of an animal or of a herd or pack, you can show the success of evolution, the triumph on the elements, the fulfilment of a life adventure. Nonetheless, it is impossible to hide from the audience images and concepts at the basis of science, the certain death of a wounded or abandoned cub, the cruel (but never unbalanced) predatory fight, the destruction of environments because of natural or human causes.

So we may wonder how effective and how appropriate it is to use such documentaries in cinematherapy. Quite aside from the educational value of the nature film/documentary, because it shows correctly the laws of nature, when and how is it possible to use it in cinematherapy, considering that (as you can see in the column on the side) the choice of the show is left to the subject/patient?

Our personal answer as an enthusiast of the subject is that this genre should be used to enhance the personal resources of the individual. For example, in the film March of the Penguins the Darwinian concept of the survival of the fittest (and not the strongest!) is correctly shown and this can help understand how important and necessary it is to push one’s boundaries, to get to know one’s environment and its threats, to learn a new discipline of oneself, to be flexible in one’s goals and to free oneself of fears.

(Translation by E. Bianchi, UK)