Against Her Will: An Incident in Baltimore

Walter Matthau delivers a stunning portrayal of a near defunct attorney who takes a desperate case. In this film, Matthau's character must gain the release of severely troubled patient of the "corrupt" state mental hospital of Maryland. With a performance such as this, many must wonder why Matthau settles for such poor roles on the big screen.

A phenomenal movie with superb performances by Walter Matthau and Harry Morgan. Both would reprise their types of roles 2 years later in "An Incident in A Small Town."

While the latter film was also quite good, this one is even better because it exposes conditions in a mental institution in 1947's Baltimore. At the beginning, some of the harrowing scenes reminded me of Olivia De Havilland's memorable performance in 1948's "The Snake Pit."

Matthau, as a widowed attorney who has moved to Baltimore with his widowed daughter-in-law and granddaughter, takes on the case of a woman who committed herself to an asylum for depression and then was held there totally against her will. You will see plenty of corruption, abuse and other things that we unfortunately read in the papers about such institutions. You'll also see how this was a profitable business and the definite need for state intervention.

As if the picture isn't good enough, the sidebar story is where Susan Blakely, the daughter-in-law finds happiness with the 4-F math teacher in the town. This angers Matthau and he insults her in a memorable scene. The picture depicts the adjustment of finding a new life for the war widowed after World War 11.

The film is truly remarkable from beginning to end.

When I began watching "Against Her Will: An Incident in Baltimore", I was completely unaware that it was the second of three films with the same actors and characters. In 1990, the TV movie "The Incident" debuted and in 1994 "Incident in a Small Town" debuted. I know that these three films are currently posted to YouTube.

Harmon Cobb (Walter Matthau) and his daughter-in-law and granddaughter have just moved to Anne Arundel County in Maryland. This is because retired Judge Bell (Harry Morgan) has given Cobb a job at his legal practice. But Bell is odd in that he not only gives him a job but buys him a car and house....and apparently this generosity is related somehow to the previous movie...which I'll be seeing next.

At this law firm, Cobb is well paid but also a bit unhappy, as he doesn't have much to do and Judge Bell is too generous. In the midst of this, a man comes to Cobb and asks him for help. It seems his Greek girlfriend is stuck in a hellish Maryland state mental hospital. She checked herself in but cannot check herself out...and the hospital isn't being very cooperative.

I assume this is not based on any particular true case, though the story rings true in many ways. Back in the 1940s, some psychiatric facilities were indeed awful and did more harm than good. In essence, many were just dumping grounds for the unwanted. Now I am not attacking current psychiatric treatment, after all, I am a trained psychotherapist...but things were often quite bad back in the 'good old days'...and the film does a nice job of addressing this problem.

There's plenty more to the film, including a subplot involving the daughter-in-law, but the bottom line is that the film is well worth seeing due to the fine acting and lovely period look of this story. Well worth seeing...and it left me eager to see the other two movies.

This is the second movie in the "Incident" trilogy starring Walter Matthau and Harry Morgan. It was not as good as the first one, but much better than the third. In this film, Judge Bell has gone into private practice in Baltimore and recruits Harmon Cobb to be his partner. The judge gives him a good salary, a house and a car, but no interesting cases.

Mr. Cobb discovers one, however, when a stranger in a diner follows him after he leaves and begs him to get a young woman out of a state mental hospital. (Mr. Cobb was telling lawyer jokes in the diner, so his occupation was obvious.) Judge Bell is against taking the case since the state will have to be sued, but his partner won't back down.

There are some very distressing scenes in the hospital, including what the young woman looks like, but it's still TV type distressing. While there are two evil money-making psychiatrists in the movie, there is one heroic one, too, trying to stop the abuse and lies. Barton Heyman gives a touching performance as an orderly in the mental hospital who had been there since he was three. The reason he was committed? He was a "feeble child".

While the case is going on, Harmon Cobb also has to deal with his daughter-in-law dating for the first time since her husband was killed in the war. (She and his granddaughter moved to Baltimore with him.) He is not doing a very good job dealing with the matter, because it's forcing him to deal with the death of his son. The regulars in these movies are all likable characters, and these movies are good when the script is good.

BACKGROUND ON THIS FILM

1992 Made for TV starring Walter Matthau and Harry Morgan, a "family approved" story about improving legal protections for those improperly incarcerated in state mental institutions circa 1947. Although Baltimore was chosen, the state of Maryland should not be singled out. Mistreatment of the mentally ill was, and is, a nation wide problem.

As recently as yesterday [11/02/2002], the news services reported on the failure of major federal and state programs to deliver on promised multi-agency initiatives to help the mentally ill WITH NO ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE LEVELS. Where there is ignorance and fear, there is apathy and inertia.

The film's Primary Issue is sovereign immunity: the ability to sue the state AT ALL on behalf of inmates.

Related issues are covered: overuse of insulin therapy. electro-shock therapy, budget-limited feeding (49 cents a day), billing for therapy and other treatments not provided, "ice-pick lobotomy, and on an on, in a system with no checks and balances. etc.

A fascinating and typical story told in a film style without the horrific raw edges that would make the film impossible to show to younger children or citizens' groups.

I say "family approved" because if you surf the internet you can find this film pointed out at various sites which list films that treat issues for specialized populations. The following is illustrative of the TYPE of group that honors AGAINST HER WILL by placing it on their list. I have changed a word here and there to protect their privacy.

QUOTE This website presents a list of 3000 feature films which involve in one way or human disabilities. It is directed towards teachers, students and anyone who has an interest in how disability is represented in films. UNQUOTE

The pacing and intensity of the film is along the lines of the TV series MURDER SHE WROTE or MONK, but with most (not all) of the humor extracted. Issues are introduced gradually and fully elaborated. Gradations of issue, and new points, are "acted out" by having a character embody or manifest the plot development so that the viewer does not have to bring a large vocabulary of prior knowledge. (However, ice-pick lobotomy is left to the advanced viewer who either knows, or doesn't know. No illustrations provide.)

This film is not BIRDY (1984)or DON'T SAY A WORD (2001) or even ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEXT (1975).

I might especially recommend this for parents of children who--and this happens--were led to tease, bait, bully, or disrespect the mentally ill either in specific (a classmate) or in general ("those wackos").

While it won't build compassion from scratch, the film may build back compassion that was there, and may educate. It's also a great film for the budding attorney in your brood.

Besides which, watching Harry Morgan and Walter Matthau circle each other, and then bond, in typical "old Disney" style, can only be fun for all age groups.

Six out of 10 for basic made-for-TV film accomplishment plus a bonus point for casting equals 7 out of 10.