Very Good Film, But I Don't Consider It Great

Rating: 7/10 (27 September 2015)

This is a very good film, set in the grievously antiquated times of the early 1960's, when psychology and psychiatry were woefully and almost brutally out of their depth.
Doping up patients constituted pretty much the extent of psychiatric capability. I actually worked in a state psychiatric hospital in the mid-1980's. The patients there were even more in that state than what is shown in this movie.
That context is helpful in understanding what goes on in "Cuckoo's Nest." I personally don't remember if it is specifically mentioned that the film is set in 1963.
The performances are excellent, added to the direction and script. The battle of wills pitting Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher is legendary. The assortment of other characters paint a vivid picture of the different kinds of patients to be found in a state psychiatric hospital of that time.
The ending has very much divided audiences over the past four decades. And, it's understandable why. I can see why what happens, happens. It does present a challenging and even brutal commentary on the state of psychology/psychiatry at that time.
Because of that, I had a visceral, negative reaction when I have seen it in the past. This time, I can more see why what happened, happened with the ending. Still, I think another 1975 film, "Dog Day Afternoon," is easily superior to "Cuckoo's Nest." The perfection of that docudrama has been nearly unmatched since then.
So, a very good movie, but I think Academy voters went for this for its message advocating better help for mental patients, than for its actual filmmaking.
******* (7 Out of 10 Stars)