RSS

My Name is Khan & I’m Spoileriffic

17 Feb

Note: I’m not kidding about that title, so consider yourself warned.

The trend in Bollywood these days appears to be the well-made indie movie that slips so smoothly past the viewer, it’s all but impossible to find an interestingly gnarled corner to catch and react to. My Name is Khan is the extreme opposite with all the things it manages to pack in, not always happily, so that I came away thinking I’d seen several movies in the span of one and wasn’t particularly thrilled with any of them.

Odd as it seems, My Name is Khan is merely Karan Johar’s fourth outing as a director. It has turned into an event. It is a cause celebre, a media circus, an expression of public sentiment, a celebration of our democracy and anything else you want to throw at it. Unfortunately for all of us, it is all these things due to the moronic actions of a bunch of self-styled “patriots” who don’t think twice about terrorizing their fellow citizens in the name of national pride, rather than any cinematic merit the movie itself might possess. Somewhere in Mumbai, Aamir Khan takes a moment off from needling Javed Akhtar to stick a few pins into his SRK voodoo doll.

The Good Will Bring a Tear to Your Eye

I’m not one of those people maddened by the sight of a movie star acting like a movie star. There are people from whom I expect art and craft, and others from whom I expect craft and charisma. A happy few will give me both but I’ve never understood why I ought to sneer at those who will give me only one of the two. If artistry takes a considerable amount of effort, so does stardom – you have to earn your audience the same as anything else. Consequently, the thing I was dreading the most in MNIK was Rizwan Khan (Shahrukh Khan) and his Autism! Face!

SRK also happens to be one of the few actors we have today with a really distinctive voice and command of language. He doesn’t lisp his way through his dialogues in carefully neutral urbanized accents – he has a cadence to his speech (insert your favorite K-K-Kiran joke here) that sticks in your mind and knows how to enunciate without making it sound like a painful lesson he memorized for class. So by the time Autism! Face! was followed in the promos with Autism! Voice! I was looking forward to this movie about as much as getting syphilis.

And for the first twenty minutes or so, I found it fairly difficult. It wasn’t as cringe inducing as I’d feared but nor was it particularly good. It was SRK talking funny. And that’s where he deployed his movie stardom to good effect because all of a sudden, as he bantered with various women onscreen the way he’s done a million times before, he managed to transform himself into SRK with a speech defect. Then came the moment in which the object of Rizwan’s affection turns around and asks him to marry her and Rizwan blushes, giggles and hides his face.

The sheer charm of that moment is why SRK is a movie star. It was also the moment in which I saw the character rather than the actor. It didn’t last (more on that below) but if ever a single scene elevated a movie, that was it.

The other scene that left me shattered was when Rizwan’s stepson gets the shit kicked out of him. Mere seene mein bhi dil hai – black, withered and three parts concrete but it is still a dil and occasionally it goes splat. Especially at the movies. Johar’s greatest flair is not for romance, it is melodrama; in MNIK, he really goes the distance with an extended sequence that manages to harness the audience’s natural aversion to watching a child get fatally hurt and hitch it to outrage sparked by the bigotry that set it in motion.

The tragedy of MNIK is that it could have been a lovely little intimate drama about a family coping with the butterfly effect of world events. A bunch of rotten apples fly a plane into a building on one coast and across the country it costs a little boy his best friend, his innocence and his life – how does a family pick up from there? When Mandira (Kajol, bringing tons of natural charm to an underwritten role) tells her friend that she simply doesn’t have the time to be Rizwan’s wife because she’s consumed by the urgency of being her son’s mother, you see that most useless and terrible thing a viewer can see – the movie that could have been.

The Bad Will Enrage Your Tear Ducts Dry

But this is a movie that has higher aspirations! Which forces you to think that if Johar really wanted to kick his game up a notch, maybe he ought to have looked into hiring a research assistant or perhaps a culture consultant as Beth (read her review here) suggested. That would have been the smart thing to do. If you’re going to set your movie in someone else’s country, against a backdrop of events that have a deep and ongoing cultural and political significance to them, then maybe you ought to know what you’re talking about. Even if you don’t particularly care about that country’s feelings, it might help your film in the long run.

From the strange sight of San Francisco, California doubling up as Hicksville, USA – the kind of cheery place where people get off the tram and scream in unison at a man clearly having some sort of psychotic episode in the middle of the street – to the creepy environs of Wilhelmina, Georgia aka the Town That Time Lifted Its Leg On, Johar’s Amreeka is a troubling mishmash of ugly stereotypes that does not pause to acquaint itself with its surroundings.

I’m sure there are federal agents who make you want to pop them one, it is a universally acknowledged truth that the TSA is terrible, and perhaps there even exist federal judges who get relevant info from the BBC (the fuck?) but do any of them address brownies as “bloody Pakis” is the question.

Lest you think I’m nitpicking, this is the sort of relentlessly casual acquaintance with ground reality that Johar continues to build up throughout the movie. A couple of lapses here and there, and the viewer can rise above it; when the entire movie is stacked from top to bottom with lazy stereotypes flung in wherever they can find a space, you start to hold your nose.

Who on earth is the audience for this movie? is the question that kept occurring to me as we exploded gracelessly into the third act. SRK fans and those of us who have a nostalgic fondness for Ye Olde SRK-Kajol Romance, I guess – but if this is a movie about More, about Ideas, and Important Things, the way we were informed all through its making and marketing, surely it speaks to others?

Who are these others?

If it’s people like myself who’ve actually had an opportunity to travel to some of the places and meet some of the people this movie portrays and stereotypes, we’re hardly going to emerge from the theater brimming with fondness for it or its badly espoused ideas. And if this is a movie for people who’ve never been to these places or met these people and expects them to retain a message about the power of love and understanding – do you expect them to get it in a movie whose makers seem to have made no effort whatsoever to understand the country in which it was set?

The most incredible thing about MNIK’s trainwreck bits is that it got made. The Anil Sharma set get plenty of snark about the way they portray the world but at least they’re honest about who they are and how they view it. Johar & Co. on the other hand are supposed to be the very opposite – and come up with this caricature. There’s a reason why Fox Searchlight chose to premiere this out of competition at the Berlinale. And it’s not because it’s a Bollywood film. Thank you, Fox Searchlight!

The Fugly Makes You Wonder: Was The Shiv Sena Unwittingly Doing Us a Service?

Depending on who you are, there is plenty in this movie to push your buttons. Sometimes several of them at once. The one that everyone talks about is the sequence in which Rizwan journeys back to the weird black hamlet where he’d once happily commandeered an Iraq war veteran’s memorial service to air his grief, to save it from nature’s fury.

It’s terrible for a number of reasons but I find myself less angered by its elevation of Rizwan as a savior and Wilhelmina’s general creepiness (if they wanted to go Southern Gothic, couldn’t they have at least chosen something vaguely contemporary like True Blood as their model? Just erase the vampires and leave their lairs intact and presto!) than the truly stupid thing that the movie manages to uphold as a virtue:

The last thing a catastrophe-stricken area needs is a deluge of well-meaning volunteers. Unless you have specific skills like those of a doctor or a nurse or work for an aid agency that knows what it’s doing, land up at a disaster site with a heart brimful of human kindness and all you’ll be is a useless drain on scarce local resources. Rizwan and his flood-mojo might have worked out but all those people he attracted in his wake? Terrible.

The problem with making a movie about massive real world problems is that they actually exist and they’re… well, massive problems affecting real people. They demand at least a little bit of respect. I’m all for growth and kudos to Johar and his team for trying out something hatke – but they should know better than anyone that different styles of cinema require different approaches. You could create a half-British fantasyland in the middle of New York City for Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna and get away with it, because that’s the kind of movie it was. But My Name is Khan is just sufficiently different for that kind of fantasy to go terribly wrong.

PS – Also? Stop trying to make that “My Name is…” meme happen. I’ve got Eminem on the brain now.

Advertisements
 
21 Comments

Posted by on February 17, 2010 in Celebrity, Entertainment, Movies, Newsmakers, Review, Video

 

21 responses to “My Name is Khan & I’m Spoileriffic

  1. sitaji

    February 17, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    Amrita-ji!
    Yet another fantastic dissection of MHIK. Shukriya! I’ve already left my scathing comments at Beth, theBollywoodFan, and Darhit’s blogs, so I will back off and keep it brief and just say that I totally enjoyed your review. Too funny and too true. I too thought that the Shiv Sena were unwittingly acting as film critiques and ambassadors of peace in trying to halt the release and screening of this…go figure? 🙂 It had nothing to do with the IPL statements of Khan, simply about only good films being screened. 😉 Most of all I love this statement you wrote…”expects them to retain a message about the power of love and understanding – do you expect them to get it in a movie whose makers seem to have made no effort whatsoever to understand the country in which it was set?” This movie touched me as a rather hateful piece of work in the end and a real lost opportunity. And a big LOL to calling the town a hamlet (I think village would be good too) and your further descriptions of it. HILARIOUS. I find it wonderful that so many people who’s blogs I read have had similar responses to this film, sort of heart warming really that people can see through the muck that Johar threw at us with this one. I think we should commission a bunch of people to take part in a “Bring America to KJo” extravaganza. Invite him here and take him around to places he would be confused by. I’ll take him to work at an inner city high school. Maybe I’ll do a post, “Where would you take KJo?” I’ll work on that soon. He needs to feel the love of America and taste a bit of the hate that may come from some places he wouldn’t expect, like sweet ‘lil Wilimena. 😉
    All the best!
    Sita-ji

     
  2. Arti

    February 17, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    You know… from K.Jo’s first film (including the one he starred in, DDLJ) I had never really expected him to make “real” movies with “real emotions”, because his fakery also takes talent, he’s a good director and I wanted to see more escapist cinema from him. This new twist of his, where he’s trying to outdo all the “real” directors because he wants to be called a real director.. it’s honestly exasperating, and as you point out, cringe-inducing more recently.

    First, I don’t understand why Indian film directors want to hitch on the 9/11 bandwagon so badly. I have a couple of theories though.

    One, K.Jo and fellow directors who like to use the misunderstood Muslim angle, are consciously or sub-consciously trying to project the plight of the typical Indian Muslim on to a seemingly comparable, but safely foreign situation. Since making an upscale movie about the constant state of distrust that Indian Muslims live in would make the middle-income audience in India squirm in their seats and/or inspire Shiv Sena to set fire to the screens, the directors have decided that they’ll use that famous American event from 9 years ago to send their message. They can then claim metaphors and abstract messages about how the “world” treats Muslims.

    Or, my second theory – and the one I’m more prone to believing, is that the idiots actually believe this is what happens on a daily basis to us poor Indians stuck because of our insatiable greed in this evil country called America. If I had a penny for every time I have heard an Indian cousin or friend say, “I have heard you guys have a lot of racism towards Indians in America!”. The implication being that there is more racism here than in India, which is at best, a laughable premise. I suspect that K.Jo and fellow directors might have heard from a few gushing fans about how awesome it would be if they could represent the “other side” of the poor NRI’s life in the foreign lands, and they decide to rip a few headlines, take their story cues from the trigger-happy yellow journalism industry in India and give Indians the stereotype they expect of living abroad. Then they pat themselves on the back when Indian journos gush at how “real” the story is, and how the world must stand up to tell the Americans how to treat Muslims.

    I largely avoided reading any Indian reviews of this film, because they all seem to be gushy and thrilled, just like they were for New York. I made the regrettable decision to watch that, and … [blocks your ears while ranting *(@#$&(*#]. I thank you for saving me from a repeat experience.

     
  3. Gradwolf

    February 17, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    I like what you wrote about SRK. The kind of effort it takes to be a movie star as much as a great actor. And it’s worth watching for him alone. For me it was all fine till the whole Georgia episode. Caricatures galore, at least the characters remained lovable. And after that it was one WTF moment after another.

     
  4. Nandini

    February 18, 2010 at 1:29 am

    I haven’t watched it yet, and will watch it with my mother in law who is a huge SRK fan. I’m an SRK fan only coz of his stardom. It takes something to be where he is, with no industry support ( to quote the cliche ) However, I have no great expectations from this movie that I have from any other movie.

    Extremely well-written review. Thanks Amrita.

     
  5. Srinivas

    February 18, 2010 at 5:19 am

    Thank you so much. KJo and co [all these directors that keep making movies set abroad] have been doing this kind of ridiculous stereotyping all this while. I always wondered why they were never called out for this shit. Will not be watching this one. 🙂

     
  6. M

    February 18, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    Loved the Autism!Face and Autism!Voice – the promos made me decide VERY firmly that I was NOT seeing this movie…and your review just adds to that decision.
    Thanks for the public service…now if there was some way to get all this data back to KJo and for him to actually do something constructive about it….sigh. Yes, pigs will fly sooner….

     
  7. sachita

    February 18, 2010 at 2:06 pm

    I dont understand the concept of star as much. But Shahrukh barring KANK (and swades – that just seems me because every one else seems to have liked his performance) has done a good job on pretty much all the roles i have come across – Rnbdj, cdi and so on. And here I could see he did good from the promos.

    What I cant stand is Johar’s cinema – as much as everyone is asking him to go back(atleast the ones that werent paid by him i,e few from the media and most of the bloggers), I cringe at very thought of another hawa transmitting ma ka pyaar waves between Jaya and Shahrukh. And Kank(which had a good story knot) showed clearly that guy lacks the depth to deal any real life scenario. Looks like from reviews, he ahs really tried hard.

    And regarding the misrepresentation of a country as some one who has been receiving end of the snake charmers stereotype, this isnt new at all.

     
  8. Je m'appelle...

    February 18, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    Oh Amrita, am I in the minority here for seeing this movie as merely a “Spot The Fairytale Elements” Puzzle Grid as opposed to a Failed Exercise In Entertainment/Film-making? 😦

    First things first. Yay! I finally went and saw my First Bollywood Movie On The Big Screen. In The U.S. This Monday. And (ok, I intend to blurt this out then bolt to hide under my rock but) I REALLY enjoyed it. For its “irrational love” aspects. For its “Quixotic quest” aspects. For its “Pelican”, its “Panther” and not to mention its “Monkey”. 😀

    Yup (call me crazy but) from the moment I first spotted my (metaphoric) Pelican, I’d cottoned on to the fact that the movie itself WAS the Puzzle Grid hinted at by the smaller one (at The Discovery Museum). So of course I proceeded to presume that all other aspects/themes — “The Terrorism”, “The Autism” (aka “Standard-Issue Orientation”), “The Cultural Stereotypes” — were all padding…
    the too-trivial, inconsequential items put up there, as a side-show, to simply keep the “puzzle solver” confused, annoyed, distracted etc. from the Real Deal — those 10 buried “bird and animal names”, those brilliant moments, begging to be discovered.

    I loved what Rachel Saltz of NYT wrote of the movie: “[it’s] an effective exercise in Bollywood high emotionalism, is less political than movie-ish” — and I loved it even more when I went and re-read BR’s defense of Slumdog (yet another fairytale situated in a milieu its maker had no (firsthand) familiarity with, that was as widely condemned as it was celebrated — again, for all the wrong reasons) and realized that (for the most part) one could swap out ‘Slumdog’ for MNIK, ‘Boyle’ for ‘Johar’ and ‘real India’ for ‘real America’ and have a near-accurate map of how to “navigate” *this* particular Puzzle Grid.

    Beth makes a solid case for the way *she* processed (her disappointment from) the movie — I loved reading her take on it. “But COME ON, KJO. COME ON,” she beseeches. And you can totally tell she loves the guy’s work, in general, and can’t fathom, for the life of her, why he did what he just did. “If you had tried just a little bit harder, you could have supported your message — and your central love story — so much more. Instead of being ridiculous and crass in the ways I feared, it reveled in stereotypes that didn’t even make sense to the story.” Bingo. Exactly the words I needed to hear coz it gave legs to *my* notion that somehow the stereotypes *intentionally* didn’t make sense to the story (see Grid Theory above).

    You ask “who on earth is the audience for this movie?” and I’m impelled to say it’s anyone who (secretly or otherwise) believes in the triumph of irrational love. The kind that drives one to blindly believe in doing their beloved’s bidding, no matter what. It kills me every time I recall that moment when (a much-underwritten as you rightly note) Mandira asks Rizwan to get lost and he
    replies “ok… but when do I come back” (I’m guessing the real power of that moment sinks in fully only if you have experienced something similar in real life). It’s as if from that point on, all that matters to him is the quixotic obedience of her “command”, for he sees it as the only way to repossess the key (recall how he emphasizes the “Monkey” at the museum … his beloved’s “mann” ka
    “key”?) that he’s just lost, to the Sanctum Sanctorum of The Temple (“A Mandir”) without which his heart is much-riddled with that dull, constant ache.

    This probably sounds like an all-too-simplistic worldview, but methinks the real problem lies with all the “serious” debates around the themes (so poorly) treated in this movie. Makes me want to recall what BR wrote — decrying the Slumdog-centered misperceptions — in his “Fiction, not Fact” piece: “The problem isn’t one of plausibility… The problem is when something this ridiculous begins to be taken as real, as representative of a nation’s reality, as more than a mere movie.”

    Now if you will please Mr. Johar, raise a hand and (continue to) repeat: “My name is Karan, and I’m not your perception’s keeper.”

     
  9. Beth

    February 19, 2010 at 12:53 pm

    It’s driving me a little krazzy4 that the more I think about this movie the more complicated it becomes – and that I keep thinking about it in the first place! AAH! Especially because the thing I most want to know – what were the director’s and writer’s intentions – I will probably never figure out or be told with authority. I don’t think the author’s intentions are the only ones that matter but they just baffle me so much in this case that I’d really love to know what they were trying to do – because then I could pick up the things that confuse me and relate them to that.

     
  10. Rahul

    February 19, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    Arti, I guess I am being cynical but if I would have to pin down the reason,it would be SRK wanting to become a global star.I think the super stars are the real auteurs of Bollywood cinema, in the sense of the auteur theory. Any new movie has to be viewed as a new phase in their life,according to where they want to see themselves.Everything else falls into place accordingly.

     
    • Arti

      February 19, 2010 at 5:40 pm

      @Rahul – I agree with Amrita – that is very perceptive and regardless of K.Jo’s motivations in making the film, is probably true of SRK’s motivations. Come to think of it, when I watch a Bollywood film, I certainly watch it with all the baggage that the Star! brings with him or her, their past flops, their friendships, their rivalries, so it makes sense to think of every Bollywood film as the next chapter in their life, and we are watching the whole book unfold over our lifetime.

      Btw.. did anyone hear SRK’s NPR interview? Better yet was NPR’s Entertainment blog writer Linda Holmes’ response to SRK’s interview, and I quote, “And we’ve got an incredibly sweet interview I was happy to hear again with Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan. In a huge, predominantly Hindu industry, he’s a Muslim, and one of its biggest stars. More people around the world watch Shah Rukh Khan than Meryl Streep and Brad Pitt, and he talks here about his new movie, which challenges stereotypes and explores national fantasies. “. Ignoring the Meryl Streep reference, “Incredibly sweet”?? Uhm. SRK delivered, with admittedly more charisma than Ash, the stock line of every desi celebrity trying to bridge the gap with Hollywood, “You think we’re crazy?! We think you’re crazy! What up with the blue people from Pandora??!!”.

      The story is titled “His Name is Khan (And It’s One You Might Know)” or to go there (semi)directly, go to the NPR website, and add this part after the domain name – /templates/story/story.php?storyId=123589668.

       
      • Arti

        February 19, 2010 at 5:42 pm

        Correction. It was Neda Ulaby, NPR Staff Writer, being all gushy. Not Linda Holmes. She’s awesome. And very funny.

         
      • pitu

        February 19, 2010 at 5:51 pm

        I heard 5 minutes of it when it aired and turned the radio off. So gushy and stupid. However, SRK did his best to sound intelligent despite the dumb interviewer. Totally agree with him abt the America is our Pandora bit.

         
  11. Amrita

    February 19, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Sitaji – omg, that’s exactly what he needs! isnt he on twitter? we should all send him pics and stuff! and a link to your blog! this can be one of those shattering the mystique things that beth was talking about! PLEASE do the post!

    Arti – I have no idea what the fascination is either! I’d watch all these silly Koffee with Karan epis where they’d all troop in and dutifully bash Bush and even when I agreed with the sentiment, I’d think, WTF? You’re probably on to something with 9/11 being both “safe” to take on and sufficiently famous enough so that everyone knows what theyre talking about.
    Pls do not talk about New York. Everyone convinced me it wasn’t that bad and then I saw it and I still havent recovered. :mrgreen:

    Adithya – I know, right? Just when the movie had won me over, the hubris took over in the third act and the whole thing sank.

    Nandini – welcome to the blog! I think your mom in law wil be pleased because it really is a great performance.

    Srinivas – on the other hand Slumdog Millionaire got everyone talking at the top of their voices about stereotyping 😀 It really just falls apart in the third act. Until then, it veers between good and bad.

    M – I sometimes wonder if he prowls the net? 😀 I would if I were him and a dedicated net geek. Like I said, this could have been a good movie. It just isn’t.

    Sachita – its like the difference between Kareena and Karisma. The former is a STAR in spite of an extremely spotty career. But the latter is merely a star in spite of delivering more hits than Kareena can dream about.
    And SRK has been a very reliable performer of late. And he’s always been incredibly charismatic. I personally dont care for his KJo movies because I really get tired of watching him weep his way through them. It’s interesting to me that KJo’s got such a low output as a director and that you can see him stretch SO visibly. Its pretty rare I think. In an odd way, I feel more invested in his work because of it because it feels like I was there for baby’s first steps 😀

    JM’A – as per a new term that Beth and I are using, you’ve got a case of SRK-itis! 😀
    Srsly, you know how much I try to get into the spirit of things and I really wanted this to be good but the magic simply didnt happen. SRK gave it a good try and he sold his part but the movie was just struggling under its own weight. I read the Saltz piece before i went to see it and i thought “huh, this just sounds like KJo’s taken bolly conventions and applied it to America, whats so wrong with that?” and then i saw it and …. Not. Good.

    Beth – I haven’t stopped thinking of it either! I know that they wanted to do Important Things with this movie but then did they wish to accomplish it in Bollywood fashion or were they looking for something different? That would be good to know.

    Rahul – i think that’s one of the most perceptive things I’ve heard anyone say lately!

     
  12. Beth

    February 20, 2010 at 3:33 pm

    http://dearcinema.com/news/shortened-mnik-version-us-market So apparently they’re going to take some stuff out and re-show it in the US later this year! I have a few suggestions….

     
    • sitaji

      February 22, 2010 at 1:17 pm

      Me too Beth! 🙂

       
  13. Bollywood Fangirl

    February 21, 2010 at 1:57 am

    Wonderful review! Will consider your request for a change of font color on my site 🙂
    I actually found myself dwelling on this movie last night as I tried to sleep. I was trying to find some way to justify what happened in the second half. Was Wilhemina SUPPOSED to look like an Indonesian jungle as some sort of symbol of poverty and marginalized people in India? Was this really made as a movie to speak to the troubles between Hindus and Muslims in India only set in America to teach those groups in a sneaky way? I just can’t believe anything so execrable is meant to be taken at face value. Alas, I am now admitting defeat. I cannot justify it.

    I was also glad that you expressed your admiration for SRK as a star. The man has more charisma than I’ve ever seen before and that deserves recognition as far as I’m concerned.

    Will add you to my blog if you don’t mind.

     
  14. Srinivas

    February 21, 2010 at 2:31 pm

    A fellow Karishma Kapoor fan 🙂 Its a pity that Karishma, Madhuri etc came when they came into the industry. With the really “different” movies being made today, they would have shone.Or perhaps not..haha.

    But anyone who can out-tapori Govinda on the dance floor has my approval 🙂

     
  15. Sid

    February 22, 2010 at 3:37 am

    Fantastic review! My take here…
    http://morethanfilms.blogspot.com/2010/02/film-review-my-name-is-khan.html

    I think Karan Johar may have a bitten a little more than he can chew, he is obviously incapable of handling human complexity!

     
  16. pitu

    February 22, 2010 at 4:10 am

    I finally saw the movie. Good nostalgia-inducing romance bits. LOVED ‘Intercourse for Dumbos’ 😀 Second half was tripe. Arggh at Wilhemina, GA! I spent many carefree afternoons in Elijay, GA eating deep-fried apple pie and somehow I never spotted Mama Jenny. Wonder if it’s because she walked off the Roots set :p This movie had a serious identity crisis. Is it a love story? A family drama? A movie about Asperger’s? A movie about Muslim identity? WHAT is it about? Goddamned khichadi I swear! Painful.

     
    • sitaji

      February 22, 2010 at 1:16 pm

      pitu,
      Perhaps you’ve just stumbled upon the issue, not a movie about it, it’s a movie WITH Asperger’s as a side diagnosis to the overall Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD or AD/HD); OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder), Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD); and also a Hystrionic Personality Disorder, and megalomania just as a start of my diagnosis. I am also getting a bit of ODD (oppositional defiant disorder) too.

       
 
%d bloggers like this: