The Stendhal Syndrome (1996)

Ok, so some of the dialogue is a bit clunky, but nevermind that. A few days ago I watched a DVD called Tender Loving Care. It’s pretty interesting from the standpoint of technology (it’s done by the same people who did the computer game The 11th Hour) and psychology, but the story isn’t anything too special.

Basically it’s a story about a couple who have pretty serious psychological problems and the nurse who comes to “help” them. She may or may not be a psycho bitch with a degree.

The interesting thing is that between each segment of film John Hurt (yes, THE John Hurt) pops up with a brief synopsis and his feelings (he is a mentor to the nurse) and then asks the viewer psychological questions that determine the outcome of the film. Many of the questions (pretty much all fill-in-the-blank) deal with art and sex.

The most interesting question, I think, was “Art should never ____.” The answers were a)Disturb, b)Arouse, c)Excite or d)Inspire.

To me there is no answer. Art should do all of that. (Not all at the same time, of course…although it would be interesting if it could.) I chose disturb after much deliberation only because that’s the least pleasant of the four feelings, but I feel that art that doesn’t do at least one of these four things is not art at all. It’s only a pile of paint, or a roll of film or a sheet of paper with ink on it.

I have been a fan of Dario Argento for a few years now and have always found his films disturbing, but in a very fun way. Suspiria, although ultra-violent and not a little frightening, is a fun film to watch and I could watch it over and over again. (Or course, to some of you that may seem a little sick…but screw you, this is my website.) That’s the way a lot of his films are. You feel disgusted watching them, but, if you’re into that sort of thing, you can’t wait to see another one.

With The Stendhal Syndrome, though, Argento has done something new. He has made a truly disturbing and horrifying film. I still can’t wait to see another one of his films, but I don’t know that I could watch this one over and over again. Maybe because it’s so realistic. There are no witches, no phantoms, no little girls with strange powers over bugs…only a female cop and a rapist who won’t let her out of his clutches.

Detective Anna Manni (Argento’s daughter, Asia from B. Monkey and Argento’s Trauma and Phantom Of The Opera) has just had a really rough time in an art museum. She suffers from something called The Stendhal Syndrome, a psychological affliction that renders its victims unconscious and terrified when confronted with disturbing works of art. She begins to hear voices and the paintings start to come to life. Then she falls, knocks her head on a bench and is out.

When she’s finally out of the museum a very nice man, Alfredo (Thomas Kretschmann from U-571 and the upcoming Blade 2) gives her back her purse that she left along with some money for a cab home.

Unfortunately for Anna she meets up with Alfredo again. He is the rapist that she has been after for the last few months. He attacks her and another woman and kills the stranger, leaving Anna psychologically scarred promising her that he will be back for her.

After the attack Anna is a changed woman. She’s cut her hair very short and has started to dress like a man. She won’t let her boyfriend, Marco (Marco Leonardi from Like Water For Chocolate, From Dusk Til Dawn 3 and the upcoming (finally) Texas Rangers), also a cop, touch her. But when he talks about how long it’s been since they made love she nearly rapes him.

So say too much more would be a crime. Let’s just say that the movie turns into a trans-gendered/backwards/turned on its head Vertigo/Psycho. Very Hitchcockian in a great way all the way down to the blonde wig that Anna puts on for the last half of the film which makes her look a bit like Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct. (Only in one scene, though…but you’ll know it when you see it)

There’s really not much bad about this film (except for the occasional trite dialogue as shown above and some nearly bad (and out of place…did we need to see the pills go down Anna’s throat?) digital effects–the first ones in an Italian film). But it’s very interesting from the psychological side of things. It shows us exactly what goes through the mind of women who have been very brutally raped. Hell, after the two horrifying rape scenes (that Asia and her father found VERY difficult to film…can’t imagine why) I felt like I had been raped. I wanted to kill the guy as much, if not more, than Anna did. After all, I had grown to love Anna (in a purely cinematic way, of course). Asia put a lot of heart into this character and it shows. It’s probably the best acting I have ever seen her do. And Alfredo was performed with such vigor and gusto and sheer delight that he seemed all the more evil.

So what are rape victims capable of? Well, watch the movie. And in watching, see what this kind of attack can do to a woman. What kind of world she begins to live in. This may be a very extreme version of it, but I can imagine that every victim in the world can relate to it in their own way. But I’m not sure that I would recommend it to one of them. This is a movie for the rest of us who can’t truly understand. It’s an important film in Argento’s canon and definitely one of his best. To come at a point in his career when a lot of people thought he was over is all the more amazing. Thank you, Troma, for getting this one out here in his original form. (Kind of a strange one for them, huh?)