(SPOILERS) Oddities in the portrayal of schizophrenia

Rating: 6/10 (6 July 2002)

I've seen plenty of movies that deal with delusions, and I'm used to
the fact that generally they try to make it clear what's real and what
isn't. So I felt like this one played a dirty trick on me. I wonder if
anyone figured out that Charles wasn't real before Rosen said he
wasn't. In the beginning, everything about Charles is perfectly
plausible and consistent. The second time I watched, I looked
carefully for any hints that he wasn't real. The first thing I could find
was that he overheard Nash's remark about fluid exchange, even
though Nash spoke too quietly for anyone to overhear. By that time
Charles' reality was too well established.
I can understand Nash seeing and hearing Charles even though
Charles isn't there. I find it hard to understand that Nash could
see Charles turn off the record player, failing to notice that he had
really turned it off himself. I see this as deliberate deception of the
audience. (Notice that after Nash's hospitalization, there are no
more examples of the imaginary characters manipulating real
objects.)
Perhaps Nash's brilliance is reflected by the fact that in the early
stages, he could create a completely consistent and plausible
delusion. In contrast, after his hospitalization he claimed that
Charles had a cloaking device. This sort of tampering with the
laws of physics is what I expect from a delusional schizophrenic.