Without even watching this documentary I could imagine what it was going to be like, I mean the title says it all, don't isn't it, an explanatory film that would give us the truth about the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and those who are at the origin of it, the American Psychiatric Association. However, within the first five minutes I was struck by the fact that this explanatory film was quite brutal and, in my opinion, somewhat clumsy. The general tone of this documentary was almost caricatured. Within the first minute of the video, they were showing DSM disorders on decks of cards atop a poker table, while I can appreciate the symbolism behind this - hinting at the fact that the committee of psychologists who decide what to include in the DSM treats DSM disorders. process as if it was a game and they are playing with people's lives - it came across as a joke and ridiculous. Worst of all in this overall metaphor was their depiction of psychologists playing poker with DSM cards and prescription chips, as if the filmmakers thought that by casting the people involved in the development and additions of the DSM as childhood cartoon villains, we would instantly root against them. It was way too obvious and honestly funny, I had a hard time taking it all seriously. Not to mention the exaggerated reactions and attitudes of the narrators who guide us through the many different points of why the DSM is the worst thing to happen to mental health care since its inception. All explanatory documentaries try to persuade the viewer to see a different perspective, but the filmmakers behind this documentary forgot everything they knew about subtlety and simply opted for an almost propagandistic methodology instead of letting the source material do the talking. 'themselves. The film contained testimony from many people who had experienced the suffering caused by psychologists using the DSM, as well as many experts in the field of mental health revealing how they really felt about the DSM. I would say it was the best. tactic employed by this documentary. They obviously hand-picked those they interviewed in order to find the one who would best match their views on the DSM, but they still implemented pathos by allowing those who had bad or harmful experiences with the medications they were prescribed only after being diagnosed unexpectedly to talk about what they experienced and what they felt, the filmmakers also included stories of those who could not cope with their illnesses and the drugs with which they were treated and committed suicide. This could arouse emotions in viewers, so it was a well-used “explanatory trick”. The film even appeals to ethics and logos by including statistics and specific data, as well as testimonials from professionals who practice within the DSM. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay After carefully considering all the ways the video attempted to influence me, I have to say that it wasn't very convincing. As I said before, it seemed cartoonish and funny at times. Not only that, but some of the things he claimed seemed unfounded or ridiculous. Although I understand where those behind this documentary are coming from, because there are some underhanded practices going on behind the scenes in terms of DSM and drug treatments..