Sindre Kaspersen American screenwriter, producer and director Frank Perry's feature film debut which was written by his first wife, American writer Eleanor Perry (1914-1981), is an adaptation of psychiatrist and author Theodore Isaac Rubin's novel "Lisa and David" and an American production which was shot on locations in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in USA and produced by American film producer Paul M. Heller. It tells the story about David Clemens, a young man with Obsessive-compulsive disorder who after having been brought to a residential treatment centre by his mother and somewhat reluctantly left there in the hands of a doctor, meets a young woman named Lisa Brandt who only expresses herself through rhymes. David takes an interest in Lisa and begins to communicate with her on her conditions. David and Lisa finds a connection, but many obstacles arises when he learns that she has dissociative identity disorder and she learns that he can't stand to be touched by other people.Finely and acutely directed by American filmmaker Frank Perry (1930-1995), this finely tuned independent film from the early 1960s which is narrated from various viewpoints though mostly from the main character's point of view, draws an incisive and humane portrayal of an institutionalized young man's conflicting relationship with his parents and his growing relationship with a shy and charming young woman. While notable for its naturalistic milieu depictions, fine art direction by Paul M. Heller, black-and-white cinematography by American cinematographer Leonard Hirschfield (1928-2008) and use of sound, this character-driven and dialog-driven story which examines themes like coming-of-age, interpersonal communication, mental illness, family relations, friendship and trust, depicts two in-depth studies of character and contains a fine score by American composer and producer Mark Lawrence (1921-1991).This romantic, at times humorous and empathic character piece about the internal struggles of a young man and woman who are striving to learn how to trust one another, is impelled and reinforced by its cogent narrative structure and the prominent acting performances by American actor Keir Dullea in his second feature film role, American actress Janet Margolin (1943-1993) in her debut feature film role and American actor Howard Da Silva (1909-1986). An authentic, illuminating and gripping psychological drama which gained Academy Award nominations for Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay at the 35th Academy Awards in 1963.

bandw The movie opens with David's mother admitting him to a private facility for emotionally disturbed teens. David has a deathly fear of being touched by others (literally, he thinks he will die if touched) and he is obsessed with time and clocks. At the facility is a young girl Lisa who is schizophrenic, speaks in rhymes, and is quite disassociated from reality. The movie details how these two meet and the changes they effect on each other.Keir Dullea is perfectly cast as David. His gradual transformation from a near automaton, virtually incapable of interacting with others, to someone a little less rigid is a fine feat of acting. Dullea has played rather stiff personalities in other movies, most notably "The Fox" and "2001," and one wonders if his portrayal of David is but an exaggeration of his own personality. Janet Margolin is equally accomplished in her portrayal of Lisa. Howard Da Silva is very believable as the benevolent psychiatrist Dr. Swinford, but his role is not terribly demanding and we come to know very little about him personally.The black and white photography is effective and appropriate for the stark subject matter which is concerned exclusively with people and mental states. There are dream sequences that Alfred Hitchcock would have envied. The period details of the late 50s, early 60s (apparel, cars, home décor) are interesting.When the kids from the home venture into the wider world their behavior is often viewed as bizarre and threatening by others. It is one of the strengths of the movie that in this context, our having been with the kids for awhile and gotten used to them a bit, their behavior is somewhat understandable. Maybe the next time we see someone behaving oddly in public we might reflect on this movie. However, it is a question whether the sympathy we come to have for David and Lisa is in no small part due to the fact that they are so attractive.A psychiatrist might have a more accurate opinion, but for the lay person the story has many difficulties. We are led to believe that mere socialization can lead to rapid improvement in treating some of the most intransigent mental disorders such as obsessive compulsive disorder and schizophrenia. While it is true that Dr. Swinford is always lurking in the background, he is not shown here to have any deeper insights or worth beyond that of a good friend (not to underrate the value of a good friend). While we come to understand that at the root of David's obsessions is a fear of death, we have no idea how he wound up in the condition he is in. Lacking any further evidence we are left with the implication that it has something to do with his having an absent and remote father and a domineering mother. But surely that could not be the total cause of an impairment as serious as David's. What was David like before we meet him? It is hard to picture him functioning in the day-to-day world. We know even less about Lisa's background, nothing really. We are offered the common stereotype that schizophrenia is the same as multiple personality disorder, since Lisa alternates between being Lisa and Muriel. As to the others in the facility we get only a sketchiest idea as to why they are there; they all seem rather harmless.There is no mention of drugs. Even in the early 60s, drugs would have played a part in treatment. Also absent is any mention of sex which would have to be a major consideration in dealing with late teens, emotionally disturbed or not.We are left with the idea that things end on an upbeat note, however unrealistic. But, upon further thought, what is the future of David's relationship with Lisa? One cannot be optimistic about a sexual relationship - neither would be capable of caring for a child. And, if David is so afraid of simply being touched, there is going to be a long road ahead to any kind of sexual contact, let alone a satisfying relationship. And introducing sex into the mix of Lisa's problems is not going to simplify anything for her. Dr. Swinford is going to have to be more than a friend to deal with that situation. David's obsession with clocks and time leads to a moment of great prescience. It is his secret dream to have a master clock that sends out radio signals so that all clocks can be synchronized and everyone can have the exact time. Interestingly this foreshadows the existence of the atomic clock at the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the existence of "atomic watches" several decades later.While it is admirable that this movie tackles the important topic of mental health in an era when such was not common, it would have been a more valuable exercise if it had gone deeper.

whpratt1 This was an outstanding film dealing with two young people who had mental problems that were deep seeded into their minds and how they both struggled; to help each other find the light at the end of the tunnel. Keir Dullea,(David Clemens) "De Sade",'69, played the role of ayoung man coming from a rich family, who had a big hang up about anyone touching him in any way, even with a pinkie finger. If you did touch him, he went crazy and carried on like a brat of a child. Janet Margolin,(Lisa Brandt),"Annie Hall",'77, was another mentally disturbed young girl, pretty and seemed to glow when she looked at David. Howard Da Silva,(Dr. Swinford),"The Great Gatsby",'74 was the shrink in charge of the mental facility and had a full time job just trying to get David & Lisa to open up their twisted and disturbed minds. Great acting and a very enjoyable film, which at times is depressing and very down to earth.

Doug Galecawitz Fruedian psychology must have been real real popular in the early sixties. Between Psycho, The Manchurian Candidate, Dr Straelove, and this dime store matriarchal film making seem to hit a cheesy crescendo. Why? This seems to be an interesting enough premise for a movie, but (at least in today's standards) seems meek and unwilling to commit itself to anything more than skipping along the surface of it's quirky characters. Plenty of interesting elements lurk right beneath the surface, but in this heavy handed melodramatic bird's stool, it falls flat.The movie does serve as an oddity (or perfect example) of lazy film making, perhaps because of budget. Every scene is repetitive. The movie follows so closely to the idea of one set set-up, establishment, and fade out, that it seems less and less like a movie and more and more like a series of scenes. To a modern audience it should seem striking. Quick cuts, and lead in being today's norms.5 out of 10, not bad, but Jimmy Stewart in Harvey is less of a waste of time.........