Post-Apocalyptic Snowman
2005
Directed by Floria Sigismondi
Pretty good overall, although they gloss a lot over and I think they blew all their momentum at the end with that "hole in the soul" crap. Check it out. I also want to read the original paper, and once I get myself set up at the Weill-Cornell Hospital I'll download it there. But anyone with access to download articles can find it here.Alexander is among a vocal group of addiction researchers who argue that focusing on a pill to treat addicts fails to address the primary cause of becoming and staying hooked: our unhappy, disconnected lives. Beginning in the late 1970's, Alexander and his team of researchers at Simon Fraser set out to study the role of our environment on addictive behavior. Until that point, most scientists studying addiction put rats in small, individual cages and watched as they eagerly guzzled drug-laced solutions and ignored water and food, sometimes dying in the process. This phenomenon was noted — first by researchers, then drug czars, then parents trying to keep their children off drugs — as proof of the inherently addictive quality of drugs and of the inevitable addiction of any human who used them. This was false, of course. Most people who use drugs don't become addicted.
So what made all those lab rats lose their minds? Bruce Alexander and his research team had a rather simple hypothesis: The rats had awful lives. They were stressed, lonely, bored and looking to self-medicate. To prove it, Alexander created a lab-rat heaven he called Rat Park. The 200-square-foot residence featured bright balls and tin cans to play with, painted creeks and trees to look at and plenty of room for mating and socializing.
Alexander took 16 lucky rats and plopped them into Rat Park, where they were offered water or a sweet, morphine-based cocktail (rats love sweets). Alexander offered the same two drinks to the control group of rats he left isolated in cages. The results? The rat-parkers were apparently having too much fun to bother with artificial highs, because they hardly touched the morphine solution, no matter how sweet Alexander and his colleagues made it. The isolated and arguably depressed rats, on the other hand, eagerly got high, drinking more than a dozen times the amount of the morphine solution as the rats in paradise.
"I don't make a band's next album," he says. "I don't like making someone else's songs better. I'm not interested in that. This is where the Woody Allen thing comes back in. I have to be in control of the project I'm doing. I can create different kinds of musical worlds, but the artist needs the desire to go into that world. I won't fight with people to try and make the sounds I hear inside my head. What I want is for the leader of a group to come to me, and then I lead that person. Because even with some of my favorite bands, I only like 30 or 40 percent of what they do. I'd want to make that 30 percent into the whole album."What do you guys think about the artist's desire to go into the world he's created? I'm trying to look at it from an authorial standpoint, which is obviously problematic, because unless you want to write yourself into your own story (aka be an asshole/postmodern) you can't interject yourself into your work in quite the same way. But I'm not sure of too many other directors who cast themselves in their own movies, or who even write characters so clearly based on themselves. But then again, I'm not sure of too many other directors that I like as much as Woody Allen, or that have made a body of work as impressive as his. So go figure. I'm not sure what my point is here, but it's an interesting idea I hadn't thought of before.