Cancer portrayed too grimly in movies, study suggests

Though a few years old, the article below points out something interesting that most of us had probably already noticed, or would readily agree with when informed of it. That is, that the way many movies depict cancer in their story lines is often grimmer than the way cancer actually happens in the real world.

The likely reason for this, according to the article, is that because the film's script calls for suffering on the part of one of the film's characters, who happens to have cancer, the cancer is made more severe than it might be in reality, in order to achieve the film's goal.

From the article:

"Movies rarely portray a cancer patient's chances of survival accurately and need to show audiences that a cancer diagnosis is far from always a death sentence.

" …the movies tend to offer a bleak outlook for cancer patients."

"Very often the ill person doesn't get over the disease and his death is somehow useful to the plot's outcome."

However, on the positive side:

"Cancer is no easy matter to portray, and seeing it in a movie gives the audience a chance to give voice to their emotions.

Arguably as well films just reflect the common cultural misperception that so many people have of cancer, that it is always vicious and fatal, and usually in short order.

But knowing ahead of time before seeing it that a given "cancer film" may have an agenda in the way it depicts cancer onscreen, a depiction which may or may not conform with reality, brings a balance to our viewing of the film.

/consumer.healthday.com/cancer-information-5/brain-cancer-news-93/cancer-portrayed-too-grimly-in-movies-study-suggests-668846.html

Some of this "over-acting" may be the same as we are taught in public speaking classes. I used to do a lot of seminar presentations and one point that the trainers always made was to "over-do" emotions. They said that the audience is always farther away than they would be in normal one-to-one conversation and much of the speaker's emotion is lost over the distance. If the speaker over-emphasizes emotion on-stage, it will appear to be merely "normal" levels of emotion from the audience perspective.

OTOH, this could also be just the screenwriter's tool, using the disease as a prop. I wouldn't be surprised if a thorough study of films made to-date showed at least one actor/character dying from a hangnail.

No offense taken BillyBob. You said what I was kinda thinking myself. The word "Cancer" is an attention getting word. We all "sharpen up" when we here of someone we know, or, as in your case, a loved one....when we here they're diagnosed with cancer. This disease earns it's reputation.

One man's opinion.

BillyBob –
You make a very good point, a view that needs to be considered and respected. At least in some cases art truly does imitate life, and some cancer films are nailing it when it comes to accurate depiction of the beast.

What you bring up sort of reminds me of something I noticed in an old prison film I watched on TV not long ago. The film was "Cool Hand Luke" (1967), which most of you have probably either seen or know about.

I'm thinking of the scene in the film where actors Paul Newman as Luke and George Kennedy as a fellow inmate engage in a brutal boxing match, leaving Newman's character badly beaten. But then the scene shifts to the following day, and there is Luke looking just fine, with handsome, untouched face, going happily about, as if nothing had happened. Whereas in reality his face would have been puffed up, bruised purple, eyes likely swollen shut, and his physical condition a mess.

But of course film plots distort reality as they see the need to, if they consider that’s what the plot calls for.

So what about films in general, what about what the article says? Do they portray cancer as "grimmer " than it really is, or do they describe it as it in fact is?

Well, maybe the truth of the matter is that what they are saying is: "This isn't the way it usually is, but this is indeed the way it can be."

David –
I wasn't familiar with this film, "Venus," starring Peter O'Toole, but here are some facts on it, and it does indeed look like a good film, a film worth the watching.

The Wikipedia article for this film quotes a critic:

"Audiences may attend to witness Peter O'Toole's Oscar worthy performance, but they'll also be treated to a humane, tender exploration of maturing with both dignity and irreverence."

/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_%28film%29

And here is a Youtube trailer for the film, and the film is of course available on Amazon and other places for those interested in it:

/www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-XsErH6WJI