After you have watched a movie, you should blog your general impressions of the movie (by 5pm on thursdays) and provide 1 example from the movie (scene, character, etc) and how it relates specifically to a theory or construct in Motivation and Emotion.
Your full analyses are due the following Tuesday turned in via eLearning (aka WebCT).
Have you ever wondered how different things would be if one aspect of your life had been altered in some way? If you had gone back to get your coat would the car accident have been avoided on the way to work? If you hadn’t gone to the party with your friends that night would you have ever met that special someone? A majority of us have probably pondered similar scenarios in the past, and the film Sliding Doors allows us the opportunity to see how one woman’s life is impacted by whether or not the tube doors open on her way home from a job she had just been fired from. People have set points that regulate their happiness and subjective well-being. Two emotional set points exist—one for positive and another for negative emotionality. Reeve (2009) explains that “the status of our happiness and unhappiness set points can be explained by individual differences in our personalities. The happiness set point emerges mostly from individual differences in extraversion. The unhappiness set point emerges mostly from individual differences in neuroticism.” The protagonist, Helen, finds herself faced with neuroticism and extroversion personality characteristics through both of the potential paths she is headed down. Reeve (2009) defines neuroticism as “a predisposition to experience negative affect and to feel chronically dissatisfied and unhappy.” It is relatively easy for us to see that the life events Helen is facing at the beginning of the film contribute somewhat to the negative affect she is experiencing, but the way she handles the situations she is faced with result from individual differences and tendencies to experience greater stress, more negative emotionality, and a steady stream of mood states such as anxiety, fear, and irritability. “That is, bad life events bring the neurotic not only a bad life event but also a host of upsetting and pessimistic thoughts that have a way of hanging around long after the bad event is over,” (Reeve, 2009, p. 372). Helen is canned from her job at a PR firm and heads homes to share the news with her “faithful” boyfriend. She either catches the tube and arrives in time to find her boyfriend in bed with his ex-girlfriend and is horribly distraught about it, or she misses the tube and must take a taxi but is almost mugged and suffers a cut to her brow. It’s easy for viewers to become so caught up in how the stories are played out differently from each other without actually seeing that negative life events are happening to her in both options. Her responses in both seem to be relatively similar in that she is reacting to something so dramatic to her life in a manner that most of us would find respectable as we would behave similarly. In terms of neuroticism, she is more susceptible to negative emotions such as fear and anxiety in these situations than extroverts would be. There are many moments throughout the film that Helen is motivated to avoid potentially punishing situations (BIS motivational system activates). Perhaps the most profound example of this is her never finding the “right” moment to inform her boyfriend that she is pregnant with his baby. We may also consider that extraverts are generally happy while neurotics are generally unhappy. “The personality dimension that predisposes the individual toward a positive emotionality, the BAS and an approach temperament is extraversion,” (Reeve, 2009, p. 373). Helen is presented as a somewhat extroverted character prior to her misfortunes, and regresses to a more avoidant and distant figure in the scenario involving the missed tube ride compared to the scenario in which she makes it and meets another man (James). She is depressed in both at first, but cutting her cheating boyfriend out of her life seems to do her good in the latter scenario. She begins displaying sensation seeking behaviors—what Reeve (2009) defines as “the seeking of varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take physical, social, legal, and financial risks for the sake of such experience.” She moves in with her friend and begins looking for a new job. She cuts her long her and dyes it platinum blonde and begins seeing James. The time she spends with James and his friends brings out her desire to seek varied and unique experiences. She goes to James rowing competitions and parties with the team at a pub. She also is motivated to start up her own PR business and is quite successful. Her affect intensity is relatively stable as she shows only minor fluctuations in her emotional reactions from moment to moment.
The Sliding Doors was definitely more a long the lines of the types of movies I watch. However, I have to say that I was confused when the whole time reversal thing happened, which caused two Helen's. I definitely had to look up the plot line of the movie so I could understand what was going on. I didn't realize that it was showing the "what if" scenarios in both situations if she did or did not catch the train. Overall, I definitely have to say it was not too predictable for me like others, and it definitely kept my attention throughout the whole thing. Throughout this movie, we see Helen go through two different possibilities of how her life may turn out. We see her continue staying with her cheating boyfriend Gerry, while she works her butt off so he can continue to "write a book" and have an affair with Lydia. In the other scenario, we see Helen find Gerry cheating on her with Lydia, and thus meeting James, someone whom she connects with but is unsure whether or not it is the right time to have a relationship. We also see in this side of Helen that she has started a new PR firm, and is making a better life for herself, as opposed to the other side where she is pulling doubles everyday being a waitress and sandwich deliverer.
The part I would like to elaborate on is the Helen and James relationship. James entered into Helen's life after it has just given her every reason to express sadness, anger, and frustration. Her joy has left her body, and at the current time James is not an interest of Helen's. However, James helps Helen to change her bitter mood, into something better. James just wants to cheer Helen up, and he does that by just being happy himself. Helen then mimics his happiness and quirkiness in time, which is known as emotional contagion. Reeve (2009) describes emotional contagion as the "tendency to automatically mimic and synchronize expressions, vocalizations, postures and movements with those or another person and converge emotionally." In reference to James and Helen, James states in the movie that sometimes people are put in place to cheer up other people, and that's his job for Helen. As James and Helen's relationship develops, Helen starts to mimic many of James habits, quirks, expression, and even jokes. the more Helen mimics James behavior, the happier Helen feels, because James is genuinely a cheerful person. This social interaction between Helen and James allows for James to be a listener, and a supporter for Helen, an important factor in reconfirming self-concept according to Reeve (2009).
Although there is much more to say about Sliding Doors, I am going to save it for my analysis. I just have to say that I found myself rooting for the James and Helen relationship, and when it came to the end and that Helen's life ended, I was pretty mad. However, the ending of the movie allowed my anger to diminish.
Life for Helen doesn't seen to ever be going the right way. She is in a high stress job where no one likes her, she is in a relationship with an unfaithful boyfriend and overall seems relatively depressed. The movie shows two separate universes in which Helen either catches her boyfriend cheating or does not. When Helen does catch her boyfriend cheating, we see a Helen that moves on with her life. She changes her life drastically, her looks, a new boyfriend and new job. When she doesn't catch her boyfriend cheating she remains fixed in a life in which she can really not be happy. I did enjoy the ending of the movie. I think that this was the real Helen throughout the movie and that she needed to leave her boyfriend on her own. In both realities, Helen is seen as a very introverted individual. She never seems quite content with life and sort of just rolls with the punches. The motivation behind her original boyfriend was very peculiar for me. It made me wonder if he was with Helen because he actually loved her or just because he feared what life would be like without her. I think it was a fear of losing her and also a fear of making her angry. The motivation behind the other woman is also intriguing. She wants to be with Helen's boyfriend very bad. However, I do not think that she really wants him at all, I think she just doesn't want him to be with Helen. Her need is a need for control over him and also a need for affiliation and attention. I really enjoyed this movie and think that it was a bit harder than the others to relate to this class, however overall I really liked it.
In general, I have a positive view of this film because of its unique storytelling approach, but much of the British "humor" was excruciatingly painful to sit through. In any case, there were many concepts applicable to our course. One of the first that comes to mind is goal theory - Gerry had a goal to write a novel, but his goal did not seem to be that specific. He did not have a due date in mind and it is not clear if he was making any progress. Also, there was no one to provide him with meaningful feedback. In contrast, Gerry also had another goal that he placed greater importance on, which was to be with Lydia without allowing Helen to find out. Lydia provided feedback for this goal, although she intentionally tried to thwart that goal later on in the film. Both possible selves of Helen involved her eventually finding out about Gerry's infidelity, and both realizations involved at least some amount of cognitive dissonance. One of the Helens said to herself something like "I can't believe I could be so stupid." She had held such a positive view of Gerry and had been taking care of him for awhile. She initially felt stupid before she realized the deeper part of the problem was that Gerry was not actually the person she had thought him to be. Another concept that merits discussion here is the eventual return of each Helen to happiness following setbacks. In both timelines, the Helens demonstrated the finding that "People react very stronly to life events... but they also seem to return back to the same level of happiness they had before the event" (Reeve, p. 370). This is also directly related to the concept of biological homeostasis. In truth, we are resilient and able to "bounce back" from a variety of terrible situations. Also relating to goal theory, it is worth mentioning that Helen (at least the short-haired one) had begun to set strong goals for herself after separating from Gerry - she started a business and despite set-backs, she persisted. Her friend was also there to help provide support (and perhaps verbal persuasion). Gerry also tried to increase his own self-esteem through his verbal persuasion via talking to himself in the mirror. Many other motivation and emotion concepts merit attention here, but those may be best left for the full analysis.
I don’t normally dabble in the romance genre, and I think this movie is part of the reason why. The soundtrack was maybe one of the worst I have ever heard in a movie. Aside from that, the premise was actually pretty good. The notion that her whole life would change depending on this one moment (and the result of that) – catching the “sliding doors” of the train was really interesting. I noticed a few other moments where there were some sliding doors and significant things happened (elevators, outside James’ office, the train, Lydia’s house, etc.). However, the fact that this one incident could have led her down a completely different path also means that a multitude of other events could have the same opportunity. But that would make for a really complicated movie, so I understand why they went this route and wrapped it up with a somewhat happy ending for both storylines.
Helen clearly has a high affiliation/intimacy need as we see her get herself deeply involved in relationships. The discrepancy between affiliation and intimacy can be seen in Helen’s relationships throughout the movie. Early on, Helen and Gerry have a “good” relationship, and we see their relationship as warm and engaging (i.e., happy), which reflects an intimacy motive. This version of Helen does not pursue a relationship with James because she there is not a deficit in her relationship, which would lead to an affiliation motive. ‘Blonde’ Helen goes out with James because this satisfies an affiliation need after feeling rejected by the infidelity of Gerry. ‘Blonde’ Helen also seeks out her friend Anna immediately after walking in on Gerry and Lydia, which is another indication of an affiliation motive (resulting from perceived isolation and anxiety). She does this again after finding out James is “married”. As ‘Blonde’ Helen continues her relationship with James, her affiliation need is getting satisfied as he brings her into a new social circle, which is a little awkward for ‘Blonde’ Helen at first and becomes emotionally satisfying for ‘Blonde’ Helen as time goes on (an indication of high intimacy need). This opens the door for her intimacy need to be expressed in ‘Blonde’ Helen’s relationship with James, and we see their relationship grow. As soon as this happens, ‘Blonde’ Helen no longer expresses anxiety or feelings of rejection concerning the situation with Gerry, which is another indication of the affiliation need being met. We see examples of affiliation and intimacy throughout the movie, indicating its significance as a need for Helen.
My overall impressions of the movie was that it was confusing towards the beginning until I was able to distinguish between the two different sides of “what if” she got on the train or missed it. Towards the end I could tell before it happened that Helen would have ended up being with James either way. Basically if she would have missed the train her life would have been better off except for the whole dying part. On the other hand the only way life would have been good for her was if she did get on the train because then she would have lived the accident and still had James in her life in the end, which the movie kind of portrays in the last scene where Helen meets James in the elevator. Overall, if it is meant to be, it will. The two scenarios eventually overlap and Helen realizes that she does not want any part of Gerry in her life in the end while she is lying in the hospital.
In our textbook Reeve (2009) talks about happiness throught extraversion and neuroticism. Extraversion explains "Who is happy?" while neuroticism explains "who is unhappy?" (p.388-389). In the movie when Helen goes down the path and find Gerry cheating on her with his ex-girlfriend Lydia she shows neuroticism because she is saddened by the fact that she was the faithful one, she gets mugged and so on...just a horrible day to find out your being cheating on after also being fired from work. In the other scenario Helen shows extraversion, because she is finding a new love James who makes her happy until she thinks he is not really any different from Gerry when he is seen still married.
I actually really enjoyed this movie. I enjoyed the overall themes that one moment can change a person's life and that everything happens for a reason. Although totally unrelated to motivation and emotion, my favorite quote of the movie was when Lydia was yelling at Gerry in their hotel room in Dorset: "I'm a woman. We don't say what we want. But we reserve the right to be pissed off if we don't get it... That's what makes us so fascinating." I love it! :)
One of the very first scenes is Helen being fired from her job. As many people experience when an unexpected event like this occurs, I think she was struggling with identity. She related to society through her identity as a career woman (Reeve, 2005, p. 274), more than other roles, like a girlfriend (Reeve, 2005, p. 274). However, because we take on several different roles as members in society, we can see her change her behavior and actions while "assuming one role rather than another" (Reeve, 2005, p. 275). We see the way she acts as a career woman, such as dressing in suits and socializing with others at the restaurant's opening; the way she acts as a girlfriend to Gerry and James, kissing him goodbye, cuddling, wanting to be emotionally intimate; and the way she acts as a friend to Anna, opening up emotionally, casual language, etc. (Reeve, 2005, p. 275).
We witnessed many emotions throughout the movie. When Helen was getting fired, we saw her become angry. This anger was displayed due to her plans, goals, and well-being being interfered with and because she believed that their reason for firing her was illegitimate (Reeve, 2005, p. 307). Then, when she came home to find Gerry cheating on her, she acted out in anger because he totally betrayed her trust (Reeve, 2005, p. 307). She later demonstrated sadness from losing her job and her boyfriend (Reeve, 2005, p. 309). However, this sadness allowed her to become closer to Anna and James (Reeve, 2005, p. 309). Finally, she illustrated many instances of joy. For example, she felt joy when her and James became more intimate, when she was notified her small business application was accepted, when her company was progressing (Reeve, 2005, p. 309).
One thing I found interesting was the difference in levels of competence between the two Helen's. In the life where she found Jerry cheating on her, she hit bottom for awhile, and then rose above the adversity and pain and was able to start her own business which quickly became quite successful. The parellel Helen, on the other hand, got a low paying job with crappy hours being a waitress. I think this increased level of competence came from the high need for power Helen may have attained when she left Jerry. As you saw, when she was with Jerry, Jerry kept preaching that he was working on his novel and Helen probably expected to get the waitressing job only until Jerry finished the book and made money off of it. On the other hand, when Helen left Jerry she was dependent on herself only and understood she needed to make her own money. Reeve (2009) states that "when we find ourselves face-to-face with a challenge, we give the moment our full attention. When given the chance to grow our skills and talents, we all want to make prgoress. When we do so we feel satisfied, even happy" (p. 155). This explains how Helen felt quite accurately as you could see she was putting full effort in getting her business off the ground. Once it got going she appeared to experience great joy and pride in what she was doing. Helen was put in a situation where she faced a difficult task, which increased her competence, and resulted in her creating a successful business where she could help others.
Unlike some of the other movies, the course material relates only after a closer look at the characters, their behaviors, and what motivates that behavior. Other movies had evident application to the course immediately, but I rather liked having to probe deeper into the characters to apply their experiences in the movie to the textbook.
The concept from the book that most interested me is the section on how “extraverts are generally happy, neurotics are generally unhappy” (Reeve, 2009, p.373). The personality characteristic of neuroticism seems to fit Helen fairly well. There are several scenes that indicate Helen has a more neurotic personality, but the one that sticks out most is when she and her best friend are talking after James saw Helen and Gerry together outside of the party and he hadn’t called in a while. Helen’s friend brings up the point that after Helen left Gerry and was with James, she was constantly wondering if Gerry had called. Now that Gerry is pursuing reconciliation with her, she is worried and bothered that James hadn’t called. This illustrates her general unhappiness in several different situations, indicating she has some level of neuroticism in her personality.
James, on the other hand, is more extraverted, which makes him more generally happy than the more neurotic Helen. He displays his extraversion in scenes like on the subway when he strikes up a conversation with the then-stranger, Helen, and when he approached her confidently in the bar after she left Gerry. His extraversion clearly leads to his being generally happier than the other characters. For example, when we learn at the end that he has separated from his wife, was soon getting a divorce, and was trying to keep his ill mother happy, his previous behavior is extraordinarily positive and happy considering what we now know he was going through. His extraversion clearly allowed him to cope better with a difficult life situation and still maintain fairly positive affect throughout the movie despite the pending divorce and a sick family member.
This movie's big question as stated before was, "what if?" This is a question as some of us are graduating are asking ourselves, what if I move away, what if I don't and miss opportunities elsewhere? You feel so bad for Helen, right away at the beginning she is late for her job, and ends up losing it all together. So right away her mood is down, and in one scenario her mood is worsened and in the other Gerry surprises her, takes her out to have a good night to make up for her bad day. Right away you can see the connection between Helen and James, just the fact she turns around to say something else tells you she was slightly attracted to him. They are good together, they have fun and enjoy themselves. Nothing is tense about their relationship. She does things with James she normally wouldn't do, like rowing. Gerry on the other hand is always frantic and cutting her off because he is cheating on her, she should have noticed it earlier though, because normally a husband away on business would be excited to talk to his wife back home. She is trying to tell him she is pregnant but he "has to go". At the end all of Gerry's dishonesty bites him in the butt, because she catches him cheating on her. He is over at Lydia's and Lydia sets her up to come over when Gerry is there. She ends up in the hospital, and it takes all of that, to make her finally realize that she doesn't want to be with Gerry and that they aren't right together. It just goes to say the saying, "love is blind" is true. You don't want to see the bad or the dishonesty in someone you love. You just want them to love you back. Throughout the movie Helen goes through numerous emotions and moods and at the end you are confident that she ends up happy.
I really liked this movie, it gives us a look at Helen’s life. Helen gets fired from her job and she tries to go home by taking the tube. This is when the movie gets interesting. We see two different views of what could happen to Helen. The first view Helen makes it onto the tube and gets to her apartment in time to see her boyfriend cheating. Helen ends up leaving her boyfriend and ends up falling in love with another man. She also opens up her own PR firm which becomes successful. The second view Helen does not make it onto the tube and while hailing a taxi a mugger tries to mug her and she ends up with a cut on her head and has to go to the hospital. By the time she gets back to her apartment its just her boyfriend there and the other woman has already left. Helen stays with her boyfriend who is writing a book and she ends up working two jobs to support them.
I think that Helen has a high desire for control. Reeves (2009) describes high desire for control as “They are not content to take whatever life throws their way but instead are motivated to influence life and what happens.” We can see this several times through the movie. Helen in one view leaves Gerry right away; even though she does want Gerry to call her, she never ends up going back to him. She really takes control of her life and she starts seeing James and starts a successful business. In the other view Helen does have some suspicion that Gerry is cheating on her and instead of just trying to ignore that fact she tries to do some investigative work to find the truth.
This movie was very interesting and I ended up liking it. First off you see Helen playing the "what if" game? What if she finds out Gerry is cheating on her, or what if she doesn't find out. When the part of her finding out he cheated on her, she is down in the dumps for a little bit, but moves on with her life. She seems happy for once. But when she doesn't find Gerry cheating on her or confronts him, she is still stuck in the same old life of hers. When she is with Gerry, he pushes her away and is too into his novel. Gerry is extremely motivated to write his novel, even so he pushes Helen away. Helen has many different roles that she plays. According to Reeves, in our society we all play many different roles, whether its from daughter, mother, sister, student, etc. Throughout the movie you see her changing her roles as a career woman and a girlfriend. But in the movie she is strugging with the two and is more opt for the career woman than the girlfriend. We all have or will go through a similiar scenario just like Helen, playing the what if game about relationships, careers, or maybe ourselves. This movie definitely was good for motivation and emotion.
I actually liked this movie. I was confused for a little while with the whole switching between two lives, but then i figured it out. I really like the concept that one moment or action can really have a big impact on the life you live. I think power and control are shown by Helen. When she finds Jerry cheating on her, she is crushed for a while. But she moves on with her life and starts her own business. She pushes all her energy towards her new business and finds something else to make her happy. She does not let her relationship with Jerry ruin love for her and finds James. She takes control of her love life and her career and you can see this in how happy she is.
Reeve (2009) writes that dramatic life events can produce strong emotions and that intuitively events in our lives affect our emotions and moods. The author further quips that, “Is it not true that people who get all the breaks are happier than those who do not? Happiness is the outlying theme being chased in this movie as we see what happens when Helen catches the train home vs. what happens in her life if she misses the train. When she catches the train she meets a stranger named James and they small talk and eventually say good-bye. Upon her arrival home she finds her boyfriend, Gerry, in bed with another woman. Helen leaves Gerry and stays with her friend, during which she soon begins a relationship with James. When Helen doesn’t catch the train home her boyfriend, Gerry has time to get his mistress out of the house. The story then shows the relationship she has with Gerry and his ability to keep his affair going without Helen finding out. Reeve (2009) states that most people are happy and this is true almost irrespective of their life circumstances. In the catch the train story, Helen still finds happiness with James. It may take her a while to get over Gerry, but she doesn’t dwell on the negative aspect of what happened. In the miss the train story, Helen works to find happiness with Gerry even though she works a couple jobs. Overall this movie wasn’t too bad. The hardest part in watching it for me was fighting through the fake English accents.
This was a wonderful movie. I have to admit, I waited until the last minute to watch it, so I was expecting to be rushed to watch it, not enjoy it, and frantically looking for connections between the chapter and the movie. But this was not the case. The humor was perfect, the characters were genuine, the actors were believable, and at the end, I was screaming in my head "James had better be in that damn elevator!" I think that this was by far the best movie of the entire class.
Who doesn't know someone (Helen) who is taking a complete fool (Gerry)? He's a lazy bum who has her supporting him because he's too lazy to get a job or actually write his book. He's not putting anything into the relationship and is off ****ing his b**** ex. However, the movie had a twist - I look for these in movies. The twist is that it showed both sides of one (some might call fateful) incident. It showed the results of her getting on the train and missing it. I absolutely loathed Lydia, felt for Helen, laughed hysterically at Russel's insensitivity, and smiled when Gerry was kicked out. Again, wrap that up in some of the wittiest humor I've ever heard in one movie - like a son telling his mother that she'll be able to buy better crack in the city - and you have the gist of the movie.
I over two years ago (holy crap I'm getting old) when I was in my introduction to psychology class, I was fascinated by Maslow's concept of self-actualization. What I remember of it was that it was essentially striving to be the best possible you that you can be and through that you are happy and completely content with life. The book explains that self-actualization combines autonomy and openness in order to mature developmentally.
In real life, I'm always trying to help people do this. I hate flaws and repeated mistakes, and I warn friends before they do something stupid because I know they're better than that. I warn them that they're dating an idiot or that they're good enough to achieve X,Y or Z. I also am highly critical of myself because I always want to improve some facet of my life. Change isn't scary. It's rolling over, not caring, and never fulfilling what I innately know that I can do is what's terrifying to me.
This movie is a great example of the self-actualization process because Helen is just setting for so-so. Gerry doesn't deserve her, and I would blatantly tell her that if I knew her. The whole movie I couldn't help but see where her decisions leading her, and I knew that the version that stayed with Gerry was not going to be happy. She didn't have that encouragement to start her own business. She was stuck working two crappy jobs and supporting a cheating jerk. It's unfortunate but sometimes you have to hit bottom before you find the strength to pick yourself up. And that's what she did. It took Lydia's horrible plan to put them all together, Helen's accident, and her losing the baby for her to hit bottom. Unfortunately, that's the key to self-actualization. It's inherent. It's a personal desire that others can't push on you. It's something you have to discover and do on your own. And her telling him to leave because she was tired of it all proved that she no longer wanted to be dependent upon him.
This movie had such an interesting concept. How many times in our lives do we imagine "what would have happened if I would have done this." And we can imagine what that would be, but in reality we'll just never know.
Down to the emotions of it...
It was interesting that at points in the movie, even though in a different life (so to say), her emotions were parallel.
So when we experience the "life event" we will appraise the situation and some will say that our interpretation of that event will determine our emotion. This is a cognitive approach to emotion (Reeve, 2009). This approach states that the appraisal will determine the emotion and without appraisal one does not feel any emotion. So Magda Arnold came up with a theory of emotion that Reeve (2009) summarized as follows: First is the life event, second is the appraisal of whether the event is good or bad. Third comes the emotion from the appraisal and then an action to follow.
To put this with an example from the movie we notice that she gets fired from her job, then (in the one life) she makes it onto the subway. The life event is that she lost her job, her appraisal of that is bad, her emotion according to Reeve (2009) will be disliking but we could also perceive her emotion as upset, anxious, stressed, sad, depressed, etc. The action which results from the emotion is withdrawal. At that moment she only wants to be sad, read her book, and go home.
Some will say our interpretation of they physiological response to the event will determine the emotion.
Another theory Reeve (2009) talks about is Lazarus's Complex Appraisals theory. Within this theory there is primary and secondary appraisal. Primary appraisal will asses the life event as being beneficial, harmful or a threat to the person's well-being. If the perception of the event does not lead to benefit, harm, or threat there will be no physiological response therefore there will be no emotional response.
I think the cognitive theories are easier to think of and give actual examples rather than biological theories such as the James Lang Theory which says we experience a physiological response before feeling the emotion.
We experienced Helen's life going two different ways just reminded me that whatever is meant to be will be.
First off, I have to comment on WOW! I was first angered and then confused throughout the movie.
Helen gets a glimpse of what she could have, if she would of caught her boyfriend cheating on her. Taking the train instead of getting a taxi, almost mugged and sometime in the emergency room for stitches’. She would of met James a guy who is good for Helen. (Even though we at one point in the movie believe he is another sleaze ball, cheating on his wife.) All this happened while she was unconscious, in the hospital after she did catch her boyfriend cheating on her and falling down a flight of stairs.
You can tell that she wants to have love and feel loved and if she imagines all of this because that is her unconscious mind telling her what she really wants or is her mind telling her that her boyfriend is actually cheating on her. Freud and Reeve make this connection with using the dual-instinct theory. This is the body's drive to give her a sign, either to live or die. In her mind, her dream like life, she dies at the end, but to be awakened in real life to want to move away from the situation that she is in, leaving her boyfriend and moving on in life, because she would probably die (emotionally) if she stayed. Her own mind was subliminally motivating her to move on, by showing her that her boyfriend was wrong for her, as well as his own actions. There was the flower incident at her work, with the arguing couple, his stuttering, and the jumpiness of his mannerisms as well. Everything was set up for her to catch him, but she couldn’t really see what was going on because of his ability to be quick and her tiredness from two jobs and then being pregnant.
You can tell in her unconscious life she moves on and accepts James. She changes who she is externally, by changing her hair. She changes becomes her own boss. She just seems to be a happier brighter person overall. She is surrounded by happier people, motivating or inspiring people, and shows interest in life. James also gives her reasons to feel loved; he helps her move on from her ex boyfriend by inviting her out, making her laugh and giving her the idea to start her own company. While her real life, it’s darker, she her hair seems darker, her attitude is less interested in anything and she is working two jobs that are not related in her field. He boyfriend also never takes her out, even though she worked a lot, he didn’t motivate her, and frankly he could of gotten a job, to help her out. Her mind was telling her to leave him and find someone, maybe James.
Motivatedly drained.
What is really interesting is the fact that at the end of the movie you can tell that she remembers some of her unconscious state, like the Might Python thing, but cannot remember what this guy James looks like, but you can see that she knows there that everything is going to be different.
I really enjoyed this movie. I think that everyone has probably thought to them selves at one time, what if? What if i didn't breakup with my significant other, or what if I would have gotten caught? These are all things that people ask themselves, but never know the answer to them. In this movie, we were able to see the "what if?" to Helen's life. It was interesting to see how different her lives were just by one small difference occurring.
The Helen that meets James on the train goes through a lot of different things in a short time span.Reeve explains self-actualization as an inherent developmental striving. I think that Helen experiences this. After walking in on her boyfriend cheating on her,she moves in with her best friend, begins to spend time with James, and starts her own PR business, she realizes that her boyfriend was limiting her and that she can do so much more with her life. She cuts and dyes her hair, begins to date james, and has success with her new business. She finally has opened herself to new experiences and a new life. She begins to gain autonomy and openness. She begins to make her own decisions, stand up for herself, and not allow others to walk all over her. She leaves behind her past when she takes Gerry out of her life. In the end,things seem to be going right for her, but then is tragically killed. This is when we see the other Helen survive her fall, break things off with Gerry, and we see her meet James for the first time. At the end of the movie, we are given the impression that things are going to start looking up for Helen and her knowing the answer to James's saying has them form a connection.
Overall, the movie was very good. I think it did a great job of separting the two lives of Helen and showing self-actualization.
As people have already iterated, this movie is based on the philosophy of "what if" and the notion of fate. It sends a pretty powerful message as one watches Helen's fate seemingly determined by the sliding doors of the train, thus the title. It is true that many people often wonder what if I would have talked to that girl at the party or what if I would have attended another university--how would my life have been different. It'd be interesting to analyze this parallel universe of fates as we were able to do with Helen and ultimately her tumultuous relationships and life in general. This idea is interesting to look at within the Appraisal Model of Emotion. As Reeve states, "Given an encounter with the environment (moment at the doors, which is a life event), the individual first makes a primary appraisal pertaining to the event's relevance and personal significance. Unknown to Helen, she analyzes this situation like most of us would, pretty much subconsciously not really foreseen as a potential benefit, harm, or threat to her overall well-being. It's kind of like the fork in the road instances many of us subconsciously choose every day in our lives. While the audience at the end of the movie sees this primary appraisal as important, Helen is obviously oblivious as we would all be in our daily lives at such a circumstance. It's a different way to look at it within the movie, and hopefully not a too confusing one, but I thought it was interesting to consider in psychological terms of emotion and process appraisal. These life events, alongside her relationships with Gerry and James, are also to be considered life events which affect her well-being and her ongoing coping efforts were displayed (for better or worse) which had important implications depending on which circumstance of life she was in.
Although this Sliding Doors wasn't the type of movie I would take the time to watch on my own, I did like just a little bit, mostly because I found comfort in the unmistakable (for the most part) predictability this film offered. That statement aside, I did think the directors did a good job of engaging me emotionally, allowing me to really feel sorry for Helen, enjoy James' character and screen time, and learn to despise the despicable Gerry and Lydia (in both the lives). In both scenarios Gerry was a characteristically indecisive worm, leeching off Helen's happiness, financial input, and overall quality of life. He constantly made up excuses and lied straight to her face just to maintain his own selfish lifestyle choices (i.e. infidelity). He was a personified parasite, sucking the life out of both Helen and eventually Lydia. You would think the choice to either leave Helen or Lydia would be easy, but it was clear that he gravitated towards Lydia's hedonistic qualities and Helen's emotional and nurturing qualities. The book talks about the conundrum of choice, and how offering choices should influence one's autonomy, but it was obvious that Gerry was far from autonomous. Helen was there to provide that emotional support. In the short haired Helen life, when she left him, Gerry openly stated that he could not even finish his novel without Helen being there for him. For so long, Helen had been his autonomy-support, and when that support was removed, he lost all sense of direction.
I thought this was a neat way to spin a romantic film into more of a psychologically-based piece of entertainment.
Sliding doors was very different from all the other movies we have watched this semester. It was less emotionally deep and lacked a really strong plot line. I thought many parts were predictable and generic. The only thing that made it different was that the strong kept up with two different plots of Helen’s life.
Helen became very motivated by sadness in her life. After she was fired from her job and found her boyfriend cheating on her after being mugged, all in the same day, she was very distressed because of her recent failures. According to our text, “Because it feels so aversive, sadness motivates the individual to initiate whatever behavior is necessary to alleviate the distress-provoking circumstances before they occur again. “ To avoid this sadness, Helen completely cut her boyfriend out of the picture instead of getting hurt by him again.
Helen used other coping functions to make herself feel better. She started seeing James which satisfied some of her social needs by going out with new people and eating and drinking and having fun. She also communicated a lot with her friend whose home she was staying at. She talked to her because she was an emotional outlet where she could express herself.
Overall the movie was a little cheesy, but for the last film of the year, maybe it was a good choice! It’s so different from all the other movies we can analyze it differently from the other, more serious films we have watched this semester.
I thought this movie was really interesting. Even though I didn't really get alot of the British humor, I still thought the basic plot of the movie was really interesting and entertaining to watch. I thought it was really cool how the movie kept somethings between the lives of the two Helen's consistant, such as getting pregnant at the same time. It reminded you that these two people were really the same, just living two different versions of the same life. Although the two lives to appear very different, they are battling with the same problems. Both are dealing with difficult and confusing relationships, even if those relationships appear compeltely different on the outside.
Blonde Helen is dealing with a break-up, as well as diving into a new relationship with James. On the other hand, Brunette Helen is working really hard to keep money coming into their household, even though she suspects Jerry is having an affair. One of the theories that I was thinking about durring the movie was the nature of emotion chart (two-systems view of emotion, Reeve, 306). The chart shows how social and cultural history effects how someone deals with their emotions. On the other side of the chart, it shows how evolutionary aspects can effect someone's emotions and decisions. This kind of matches up with the two lives because Blonde Helen is basing her decisions off of her history and social situations with Jerry. This causes her to strive for a new career and do what she really wants with her life. On the other hand, Brunette Helen sticks with Jerry and works her butt off trying to support them (a more evolutionary, survivalistic point of view).
One area where we can clearly see the differences between the two lives is when Blonde Helen chooses to go after her career goal and open her own business, whereas Brunette Helen settles on working 3 jobs that she hates. The support that Blonde Helen gets from James helps her to get the confidence she needs to go after what she really wants. Brunette Helen doesn't get any support from Jerry, rather, she supports him financially. Jerry shows no real appriciation for Helen's sacrifice and continues to have an affair with Lydia while Helen is contantly working so that they can afford to live. This shows how much your partner can influence your life (either positively or negatively) and how important it is to have trust in that person that they will help you succeed in life, rather than settle.
Lydia is another story all together. Her need for power is obvious and overwhelms all of the rest of her needs. She goes through the steps of power as if she has read the text herself. She deomonstrates impact (Reeve, 195) when she returns from the U.S. and forces Jerry to get back together with her, even though he is with Helen. She exemplifies control (Reeve, 195) when she shows no remorse or feelings of guilt about the affar, as well as when they go on the business trip. She gets mad at him on the phone when he tells her he can't go anymore, and puts him down until he gives into her. She shows influence (Reeve, 195) when she constatly tries to reveal their affair to Helen, in an attempt to expand her power and make Jerry her boyfriend.
Overall, the movie was really good and showed alot of theories we have discussed in class. Even though not all of the theories could be clearly picked out, they were twisted within the plot of the movie, creating an even more interesting film.
I really enjoyed Sliding Doors. I thought that it was an interesting plot and really enjoyed following the two interweaving stories. It was really intriguing to see how each circumstance affected Helen. When she made the train and caught Gerry cheating she was much more active in her own life. She started her own buisness and made new friends. The Helen that did not make the train, was much more passive. She let Gerry walk all over her and not contribute to the household income, while she worked two jobs. It is weird to think about how much one event can change a person.
The two main men in the movie, Gerry and James, are incredibly different. The most interesting comparison between the two men is when Helen is mad at each of them. When Helen catches Gerry cheating on her (in the scenario where is makes the train) she leaves him. Gerry goes to one place to try to find Helen and then goes to the bar to talk with his friend. When Helen believes that James has been cheating, James searches everywhere he thinks he could be until he finally finds her. This also shows that the relationships that each man has with Helen were motivated by different needs. Gerry seemed to be motivated by a need for competence. He was unable to actually complete the novel that he was writing, so he was attempting to satisfy his need for competence by successfully having an affair. He did not care about how Helen feels and he did try to make his relationship with Helen reciprocal, which demonstrates that the motivation behind him continuing his relationship with Helen was not to fulfill needs for relatedness or intimacy. This was shown when he did not try to get a job to help pay the household expenses after Helen was fired. Gerry on the other hand was motivated to begin a relationship with Helen to fulfill his needs for relatedness and intimacy. He tried to understand and give Helen what she needed as shown by his urging her to start her and by supporting her after her and Gerry broke up.
I have always been told that "everything happens for a reason," I believe that this is a part of the movie Sliding Doors. Even though we see how both ways of the movie play out in this case and in our lives, we only see how our actions, decisions, and certain external circumstances play out. Where on one hand she misses the train and the other she makes it. Either way bad things happen but in the long run those don't matter because good things happen and bad things happen in the movie. I think there is a lot of emotion in this movie and you see different personalities between the characters. Especially between Helen, Gerry, and James.
James was there for Helen when her and Gerry broke up. He was very supportive and helped her get past Gerry when he was cheating on her. Gerry wanted Helen for support on "writing" his novel and for financial support. But it was different with James and they were more on the same level with one another not just using each other for some kind of gain.
I thought that this was an interesting movie when you see how both of her lives play out, but just missing a train or making the train.
I really enjoyed this movie. It was a good change in paste from all the other movies we have been having to watch. It seems like all the other movies were so depressing and deep, it was nice to finally watch a lite hearted romance movie after all those depressing movies about death and illness and dying and war. This movie focused on Helen and how her life would have played out two different ways and had two different endings. While watching this movie I couldn't help but put myself in a similar situation and think "What if" and think of how my life could have changed or could be better or worse had I made different decisions than what I have made for myself. I can see it going both ways, positive and negative. There are certain things that have happened in my life that I have no control over like deaths and illness, but the there are things I do have control over. In the movie the big life changer was whether Helen made the train or if she missed the train. We see what would have happened in both scenerios, but in the end, she still ends up with him. So, maybe my life would end up the same ending also. I don't think in the end one life event like her missing or making the train could really turn a life around, I believe that everything always happens for a reason and there is a reason for everything. This movie reminded me a lot of the Butterfly Effect, where he could use the butterfly effect to flutter and go back into time to change certain decisions in order to change the outcome of his life and in order to save the people he loves. I think no matter what decisions a person makes that their destinies will play out the way they were meant to no matter of certain choices or events. That is why it is called our destinies, and Helen was destined to end up with Gerry.
This was easily my favorite movie of the course. I thought the concept was very interesting. The idea that one choice could send you in such different directions is something I have personally put a lot of thought into. I was once asked "if you could change one thing from you past, what would it be?" My parents divorced when I was in middle school. My gut reaction was to have them stay together, but I realized that if that were true my father would have stayed in my life, my grades never would have slipped in high school, and he would have made me go to an Ivy League school. I'm so happy here at UNI that I know this is where I'm supposed to be, these are the friends I'm supposed to have, and this is the life I'm supposed to live.
In Helen's case, the "brunette Helen" was better off than the "blonde Helen". Chapter 15 discusses Maslow's hierarchy of needs. This helped me make sense of why brunette Helen had such a different life than blonde Helen. For blonde Helen, she is not fully satisfied in the love and belongingness needs. Because of this, she doesn't have the self-esteem that brunette Helen has to start a business, or try to get work that is at her level. Blonde Helen simply resigns herself to the fact that she'll only get work as a waitress. Brunette Helen, however, has the love and belongingness need satisfied by her best friend and James. This allows her to move up to the next level of self esteem, which I believe she achieves. This leaves her free to work toward self-actualization.
Please note: in my previous post, I got the two Helens mixed up. It should read:
In Helen's case, the "blonde Helen" was better off than the "brunette Helen". Chapter 15 discusses Maslow's hierarchy of needs. This helped me make sense of why brunette Helen had such a different life than blonde Helen. For brunette Helen, she is not fully satisfied in the love and belongingness needs. Because of this, she doesn't have the self-esteem that blonde Helen has to start a business, or try to get work that is at her level. Brunette Helen simply resigns herself to the fact that she'll only get work as a waitress. Blonde Helen, however, has the love and belongingness need satisfied by her best friend and James. This allows her to move up to the next level of self esteem, which I believe she achieves. This leaves her free to work toward self-actualization.
Sliding doors is actually one of the movies that I actually truly enjoy, not just in this class but also from previously. This was a movie in my own home collection. I had always enjoyed how it portrayed the what if question in life, what if I had done this or what if I had done that instead. Throughout the movie you see what Helen's life would be like if she had made the train and arrived home to find her boyfriend in bed with another women, or if she had missed the train and didn't catch her boyfriend in the act of cheating. You find yourself feeling sorry for Helen and thinking she is rather pathetic in the route of missing the train, she works two jobs to try and support her deadbeat boyfriend while he is sleeping with his ex-girlfriend behind her back. You also find yourself rooting for the Helen that made the train and found him cheating, her journey of moving on not just in her romantic life but as well as her career. In chapter 14 Reeves states “growth needs- or self-actualization needs- provide energy and direction to become what one is capable of becoming.” I feel like this is a good way of explaining the motivation behind the Helen that made the train. After feeling sorry for herself for a while, which is very understandable, she picked herself back up and started over starting up her own business and moving on with a new found love.