Similarities between Hitchcock’s PSYCHO an Eminem’s STAN music video

By George Hobson

“Stan” by Eminem is no doubt on of the famous music videos of the 21st century. The song and video are told from the point of view of obsessed Eminem fan “Stan”. In the video we are introduced to Stan who has a pregnant girlfriend (played by singer Dodo who makes an appearance in the song). The story details how Eminem-obsessed Stan writes letters to his idol - but due to Eminem repeatedly not replying to the letters, Stan sends more angry letters - the story comes to close when Stan drives his car with his pregnant girlfriend in the boot into the lake, whilst sending an angry voice recording to Eminem due to not responding to his mail - Eminem doesn’t get this angry voice recording though as before driving the car into the lake, Stan humorously realises - “Well, gotta go, I'm almost at the bridge now. Oh shit, I forgot, how am I supposed to send this shit out?”

 Obsessed fan Stan writing to his idol

We then cut to the real life Eminem, who upon reading one of Stan’s angry letters, Eminem respectfully explains how  “I meant to write you sooner but I just been busy”. During this scene, it cuts to a shot of the post office in which one of Stan’s letters falls out of the post - referencing Stans early line “there must have been a mix up at the post office or somethin’”. Whilst Eminem is respectful to Stan in this letter, he also expresses concern about his mental health - “You got some issues Stan, I think you need some counseling to help your ass from bouncing off the walls when you get down some.”  In further expressing his concern he recalls “this one shit on the news a couple weeks ago that made me sick. Some dude was drunk and drove his car over a bridge and had his girlfriend in the trunk, and she was pregnant with his kid. And in the car they found a tape, but they didn't say who it was to. Come to think about, his name was, it was you” Upon realising that the perpetrator was Stan, Eminem lets out a “Damn!”, and the songs ends, with and sudden burst of lightning near Eminem's rainy window, in which the face of Stan appears in the window for no more than a second.

(Stan briefly appearing in Eminem’s window)

The story for “Stan” sure is entertaining with interesting characters and unique premise - by following the letters Stan sends, we are intrigued throughout and want to know how the story ends. By making Stan a “family man” with a pregnant girlfriend, it makes him relatable to the average viewer, and thus his downfall is all the more tragic. The duality of Stan’s life is communicated visually with Stan's girlfriend (his “normal” life) placed at the top of the house.  A shot pans down to the layers of the house and reveals Stan’s basement which is a dark and gloomy shrine dedicated to Eminem, with poster’s everywhere, and where he writes his disturbed fan mail. This is reminiscent to the house in Alfred Hitchcock’s film PSYCHO, in which deranged character Norman Bate’s house has three layers (basement, middle and top). This is reference to influential psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud and his idea that there are three stages of human consciousness “Id, ego and Super ego”. The “Super ego” is what one would call one’s “good self”, the self one presents to the world to appear morally pure and agreeable with society.

“The iceberg model often used to describe Freud’s theory of consciousness”

Freud associates the “Super ego”, with parental figures and the responsibility they take on to raise their children on ethical morals and thus they they alter themselves to appear to be the “Super ego” role model in hopes to better influence their children, saying - “the super-ego also takes on the influence of those who have stepped into the place of parents — educators, teachers, people chosen as ideal models”. We see this in “Stan”, in which the symbol of parental maturity is present in the form of Stan’s concerned pregnant girlfriend at the top of the house. We also see this in PSYCHO, as in the top of the house, we see Norman’s “mother’s” bedroom as well as Norman’s childhood bedroom, complete with teddy bears and a child-sized bed. These are all featured at the top of the house and represent the “Super ego”.

Norman and “mothers” room – symbol of parental authority at the top of the house (super ego)

Stan’s pregnant girlfriend at the top of the house (super ego) another symbol of parental authority

Also, when describing the motives of the super ego, Freud mentions “the task of seeing that narcissistic satisfaction from the ego ideal is ensured”. The character of Stan indulges in “narcissistic satisfaction” during the beginning scene, in which in the upstairs bathroom (super ego) he is seen bleaching his hair blonde to look like his hero Eminem - he is altering himself to fulfill his super ego. As I mentioned how the super-ego is often associated with going along with the ebb and flow of society, could the reason why Stan is altering himself is due to the fact that Eminem is a pop culture idol? Does he think be altering himself, he will gain more approval from society, thus satisfying his super-ego?

However another stage of human conscience - the bottom - is what Freud described as the “Id”. Id represents our natural instincts,that often go against the norms of civilised society (the super ego) and often represent our primal sexual and aggressive traits. The “Id” is present with us straight at birth as a natural setting, whereas the “super-ego” is taught to us by the morals set by parental figures and society. In the basement of Stan’s house lies his “Id” - his aggressive and primal nature that he hides from the world, and similarly in PSYCHO, the fruit cellar shows Normans perverse and sexually suggestive nature, in that we see the corpse of his murdered mother, that he hides from the world.

The bottom of the house, in the fruit cellar (Id) where Norman hides his darker side of himself – his mother’s murdered corpse

Stan’s basement (Id) in which his unhealthy obsession for Eminem is present

The association of the “Id” being associated with children/babies (“present at birth” as Freud would say), is communicated visually. In Psycho, as I mentioned before, there is emphasis on Norman’s bedroom, in which the bed appears to be recently slept in, and in another scene, Norman is scene eating “candy” - food often associated with babies and children. In Stan, we see our main character whine to both his girlfriend and Eminem, the way we would expect a spoiled child to do. In the beginning scene, before the music starts, Stan locks himself in the bathroom, with his girlfriend pleading him to come out - the way we would expect a mother to reason with a grumpy child from locking themselves in a bathroom as part of a temper-tantrum. The idea of Stan being a symbolic child/baby is also communicated in the shot where his pregnant girlfriend sits on the toilet. The shot pans downs from her sitting on the toilet to Stan at the bottom in his basement. Now this may be crude, but the downward shot from the woman on the toilet to Stan at the bottom, could be interpreted as a birth metaphor - as if Stan has dropped out from his girlfriend’s vagina from the top of the house to the basement at the bottom - the newborn child in which the “Id” is present.

The pan shot in which it shows the layers of the house (human consciousness) and possible birth metaphor

Freudian ideas aren’t the only psychoanalytical themes present in “Stan”. The ideas of Carl Jung and his idea of “the shadow” are present in “Stan” as well as Hitchcock’s PSYCHO. Jung was influenced by Freud, although the two disagreed on many things.

When discussing the shadow, Jung says - “Everyone carries a shadow, and the less it is embodied in the individual’s conscious life, the blacker and denser it is. At all counts, it forms an unconscious snag, thwarting our most well-meant intentions.” In black and white terms, the shadow is the dark side of us - the “Id”. He also says - “The ego confuses itself with the façade personality (which is of course in reality only that part of the personality that is tailored to fit the collective), and forgets that it possesses aspects which run counter to the persona his means that the ego has repressed the shadow side and lost touch with the dark contents, which are negative” 

Psychoanalyst Carl Jung pictured

In PSYCHO, themes of the shadow are present and are communicated visually - the scene where Norman makes Marion “sandwiches and milk”, Norman on the surface appears to be a beta-male “nice guy”, in his interest to help Marion, but behind this polite facade, lies his primal sexual interest in Marion. For example the room is adorned with Norman’s “stuffed birds”  (a harmless yet somewhat creepy ornament), but the shadows of the birds point at Marion imposingly - the beak shadows are quite phallic. In fact the beak shadows are similar to the phallic knife that the shadowy figure of “mother” uses when she (he) stabs Marion. Mother of course being Norman’s repressed shadow.   

Note the similarities between the shadow beak and the shadowy knife held by mother (credit due to Rob Ager for pointing out this similarity - check out his film analysis for pyscho on his website Collative Learning)

Jung also says “Closer examination of the dark characteristics – that is, the inferiorities constituting the shadow – reveals that they have an emotional nature, a kind of autonomy, and accordingly an obsessive or, better, possessive quality.” When talking of the “obsessive” and “possessive” aspects of the shadow, this is relatable to both the characters of Stan and Norman. Stan of coursed being obsessed with Eminem and Norman being obsessed with his mother.

Despite the shadow being associated with negative traits, one can also link Jungian psychology with creativity. For example, underrated philosopher Walter Kaufmann (best known for being the translator of many works by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche) said - "in spite of its function as a reservoir for human darkness—or perhaps because of this—the shadow is the seat of creativity”. This is true of Eminem, as his creativity is often inspired by dark aspects of humanity which are often suppressed by many, with “Stan” being no exception. Interestingly, the brief shot of Stan appearing in Eminem’s window as a reflection of sorts - could be suggestive of Eminem’s shadow.  Like Kaufmann would say, “the shadow is the seat of creativity” with Eminem being inspired by a dark subject matter to write this very song. Also the “shadow” of Stan could be a symbol of Eminem’s repressed guilt for partly being the cause of the murder/suicide of Stan and his pregnant wife.

(Eminem’s shadow)

On The Hero's Journey

By George Hobson

The scriptwriting process can be difficult for many writers, with many struggling to come up with ideas and to keep up the process of writing without getting into a mess and eventually giving up. Many filmmakers who wish to emulate mainstream Hollywood-productions and secure themselves a career in the industry will often follow strict guidelines that will please both executive types and mainstream movie going audiences. This will include using established character tropes and often following the three act “hero’s journey” structure used in many blockbuster films. The “hero’s journey” goes back to ancient mythology, with the same structures that we would find in Hollywood blockbusters appearing in fairy tales and classic literature. It has been studied by many academics, but the hero’s journey was popularised by Joseph Campbell, who discussed the story structure in his book “The Hero with a Thousand Faces”, taking heavy inspiration from influential psychoanalyst Carl Jung and his view of the myth. When describing the hero’s journey, Campbell writes - “The usual hero adventure begins with someone from whom something has been taken, or who feels there is something lacking in the normal experience available or permitted to the members of society. The person then takes off on a series of adventures beyond the ordinary, either to recover what has been lost or to discover some life-giving elixir. It's usually a cycle, a coming and a returning.”

The description given by Campbell sounds like the plots of endless Hollywood blockbusters that follow the three act structure. Citing an example of a popular Blockbuster that emulates this is the first Star Wars film. The first act introduces main character Luke Skywalker who (as Campbell would say) “feels there is something lacking in the normal experience available or permitted to the members of society”. Luke’s homeland is a dull empty desert – his Aunt and Uncle want him to live his life as a farmer, despite Luke wanting to be a space pilot and explore the vast galaxy. Luke spends the first act of the film stuck in a boring predicament, so in the iconic scene where Luke looks out into the sunset, we the audience also share his desire to break free from mundanity. The relatability the audience shares here is one of the reasons why the hero’s journey archetype has stood the tests of time and continues to be told in stories to this day – the feelings of longing and desire for purpose described that are present in the hero’s journey are essential traits of the human condition. We like Luke seek an escape from the mundanity of our everyday lives, so when Luke’s life takes a change for adventure, which includes him taking on the empire in the second act and him blowing up the Death Star in the concluding third and final act, it satisfies our inner desires.

George Lucas did an excellent job of bringing The Hero’s Journey to script form and it is one of the reasons why Star Wars is one of the most successful films of all time. Whilst the hero’s journey structure works well here and in many other blockbuster movies, many scriptwriters will imitate the hero’s journey structure robotically, so much so that it comes off as a poor imitation of other successful films, in which the same recurring plot points and character tropes become noticeable, so therefore the film appears uninspired and unoriginal. Ironically, Joseph Campbell wrote in his autobiography “You enter the forest at the darkest point, where there is no path. Where there is a way or path, it is someone else's path. You are not on your own path. If you follow someone else's way, you are not going to realize your potential.” This is true of so many scriptwriters who try so hard bit by bit to imitate this structure. Interestingly, George Lucas (who many scriptwriters try to copy the structure of his work in order to get approval from studios) was disapproved by studios when pitching Star Wars. The sci-fi space adventure prospect was something completely different to the films being made at the time – it was so unique that studios saw the idea as stupid and that audiences wouldn’t take to it. George Lucas was so passionate about his vision however, that he decided to go independent and finance the film itself. In a way, the story of how Star Wars was made serves as George Lucas’s own hero’s journey - the underdog filmmaker whom the big studios disapproved of, took on the trial and tribulations of making and funding his own independent film. Despite being told that it would fail, he chose not to sell out for mainstream approval, and instead pursued his original vision. The final third act conclusion being that Star Wars is one of the highest grossest films of all time and George Lucas becomes a billionaire. 

As the hero’s journey is being copied and pasted by many scriptwriters, this can lead to unoriginal scripts, and over-simplified versions of Campbell’s structure. Stewart Farquhar, who holds Screenwriting and Advanced Screenwriting certificates from the Professional Program at The UCLA School of Theatre Film and Television, comments on how this structure is seen as “The Holy Grail” by executive types when greenlighting blockbuster scripts saying how audiences are “force-fed a pre-sold, path predictable stream of recycled CGI”, and how “often this cookie-cutter approach leads to a super abundance of sequels, prequels and rehashes ad infinitum”.

Also, simplified versions of Campbell’s structure can make content over simplified and black and white when it comes to its morality and intellectual complexity. By this I mean that modern interpretations of the hero’s journey follow simple “good vs evil” structure in which “good” always triumphs over “evil”. These over-simplified themes and structures are most likely prominent in modern blockbusters, as they serve as ego-boosters and reassure viewers of their own perceived moral purity. People are aware of this facet in the modern interpretation of the hero’s journey. For example Hollywood screenwriter Sean Hood wrote in his article “Is THE HERO’S JOURNEY dead in screenwriting today?” about when writing the script for blockbuster “Hercules”, his scripts version of the ancient Greek hero was “a Hercules who subverted the Greek myth of the Hero, a Hercules with doubts, fears and divided goals, a Hercules who winced at pain, avoided conflict and resented the role he was born to fulfill.” When director Brett Ratner read the script, he dismissed it with Hood saying that he “had made Hercules too metrosexual” and that Ratner demanded that “Hercules needs to be BADASS”. Due to this, Hood’s more complex script was replaced with one that fits the stereotypical, over-simplified hero’s journey that we’re all familiar with.

When talking of the oversimplified morality of many modern hero’s journey stories, he cites how the ancient myths that were influential to the likes of Campbell and which are being told and retold to this day, have some ugly facets that don’t find their way into modern storytelling, saying – “The sanitized Monomyth tends to cover up the violence, horror and perversity of myths. In the original version of Sleeping Beauty, Prince Charming rapes the princess while she is unconscious, and she awakens nine months later with twins suckling her fingertips. Then, Prince Charming, who is already married, burns his wife alive so he and Sleeping Beauty can live happily ever after. As I’ve argued before, Real Myths Are Weird”. The over simplified “good vs evil” morality is pushed by the likes of Disney when re-telling these ancient myths, whilst ignoring the more ugly aspects of history, mythology and life in general.
These oversimplified scripts and, more specifically, the mass amount of people who crave the feelings of moral-reassurance that comes with them, lack what Friedrich Nietzsche described as “the intellectual conscience”. In his book “The Gay Science”, he writes “the great majority of people lack an intellectual conscience. Indeed, it has often seemed to me as if anyone calling for an intellectual conscience were as lonely in the most densely populated cities as if he were in a desert. Everybody looks at you with strange eyes and goes right on handling his scales, calling this good and that evil.”  He also states - “But what is good heartedness, refinement, or genius to me, when the person who has these virtues tolerates slack feelings in his faith and judgments and when he does not account the desire for certainty as his inmost craving and deepest distress--as that which separates the higher human beings from the lower.” These ideas put forward by Nietzsche are relatable to the modern hero’s journey script writing structure and the masses that love it. It is why these generic movies are so popular, and why the scriptwriters and directors whose themes stray beyond “good” and “evil” (pun intended) and veer into more complex, and sometimes uncomfortable, territory aren’t as popular with mainstream filmmakers who follow the algorithm. As Nietzsche said these filmmakers are “as lonely in the most densely populated cities as if he were in a desert”. However, although they might not receive the greatest mass appeal, their “desire for certainty” and ability to go against common thought “separates the higher human beings from the lower”. In this case it separates the higher film makers from the lower.

What is impressive is when what I call “higher filmmakers”, write scripts that emulate the three act hero’s journey structure, but instead of giving into “the intellectual conscience” mind-set, they’ll delve into more complex and intricate ideas that surpass common notions of “good” and “evil”, but still gain mainstream appeal by following the beloved hero’s journey. For example, avant garde filmmaker David Lynch’s 1986 film Blue Velvet has the basic three act structure premise. It introduces a romanticized 50s-esque American town, complete with picket fences and all the images associated with suburban utopia. It starts by introducing the average viewer to the safe and familiar. We are then introduced to our “hero” Jeffrey Beaumont – a decent college student who has an ongoing romantic relationship with the typical, blonde haired girl next door, Sandy. Jeffrey appears to be normal, but as Campbell would say, Jeffrey “feels there is something lacking in the normal experience available or permitted to the members of society.”
When news of a murder case breaks out, Jeffrey becomes intrigued and begins breaking from the romanticized 50s-eque world he is used to and goes into more gritty territory. During the second half, Jeffrey starts having an affair with nightclub singer Dorothy, who can’t escape the clutches of psychopath and sexual sadist Frank Booth who has kidnapped her child. Frank is introduced as the story’s “villain”, but during Jeffrey’s affair with Dorothy, our “hero” begins to show perverse, sexually sadistic behavioural traits similar to Frank. For example when engaging in intercourse, despite resisting Dorothy’s pleas that she wants to be abused, he eventually gives in and pleases Dorothy’s sadomasochist desires and persists to beat her, the same way that “villain” Frank did in a scene before. The similarities are communicated visually with Frank telling Jeffrey “you’re like me”.

This ugly and perverse world is a stark contrast to the safe and familiar vision of romanticized suburbia introduced in the first half of the film. The average viewer was no doubt able to relate to the first half, so this contrasting second half in which the “hero” is seen to engage in sadomasochism would have been quite a shock. However, Blue Velvet just manages to keep its mainstream appeal, due to the third act conclusion. Jeffrey ends up killing Frank, ends up winning the heart of girl next door Sandy; Dorothy is reunited with her child and we return to the ideal, suburban world, with the film ending with the same shot it started with of a clear blue sky – these two identical opening and closing shots can be linked to what Campbell described as “a cycle, a coming and a returning”. By giving us a supposed “happily ever after” ending, Lynch is able to appeal to the average viewer who don’t possess the “intellectual conscience” mind-set. It’s why Blue Velvet was a huge financial success with mainstream movie goers and critics alike – the three act, hero’s journey structure with a “happy ending” was just enough to win over the mainstream beings, yet the more controversial, complex Freudian themes, were able to appeal to the more indie, intellectually conscious audiences.

Years later, David Lynch’s 1997 film Lost Highway is released, and like Blue Velvet, contains uncomfortable themes of sadomasochism and contrasting suburban utopia with a dark and gritty underbelly. Whilst the two films had similar themes and content, Lost Highway was panned by both mainstream critics and audiences. Could this be due to Lost Highway not following the three act hero’s journey structure? The narrative of Lost Highway is hard to explain, as it contains the main character changing actors and completely changing their identity (Bill Pullman plays a saxophonist who murders his wife, but then morphs into a young mechanic played by a completely different actor halfway through the film). Also the film doesn’t have a clear conclusion, as the film ends exactly where it started with Bill Pullman’s character talking to himself on the end of house-doorbell saying the words “Dick Laurent is dead”.

The complexity and nonlinear narrative of Lost Highway was hard for mainstream audiences to wrap their heads round and because of this it was a financial and critical flop, with America’s most beloved critics Siskel and Ebert giving the film “two thumbs down”. 

The narrative style isn’t the only reason why Lost Highway didn’t appeal to mass audiences. The film has an “intellectual conscience” and goes beyond “good vs evil” morality that exists in most established hero’s Journey films. Whilst Blue Velvet had similar themes, it still managed to appeal to mainstream audiences as it started off with the safe and familiar and ended with the safe and familiar. Although Blue Velvet had dark content, it included it in the middle of the film, so by ending it with a supposed “happy ending”, it was enough to reassure the mainstream viewer and tie all loose ends. Lost Highway starts with the unpleasant (Bill Pullman brutally murdering his wife), whereas the middle of the film introduces the idyllic suburban fantasy (Bill Pullman becomes a different actor and completely different character who is free from murder charges). However, the film ends with darkness remerging, with Bill Pullman’s wife-murdering character returning to the spotlight and the film ending exactly where it started.

Interestingly, both Blue Velvet and Lost Highway open and close with the same identical shot, with Blue Velvet using the shot of a clear blue sky and Lost Highway using the shot of a desolate highway at night. This goes back to what Campbell was talking about when discussing “a cycle, a coming and a returning”. Whilst Campbell’s hero’s journey concept of “coming and returning”, is often associated with happy, neat conclusions that where supposedly offered to us in more mainstream films such as Blue Velvet, Lost Highway has a much more darker take on the idea. In fact, Nietzsche’s doctrine of “Eternal Recurrence” is a much more appropriate way to describe Lost Highway’s structure. The idea put forward by Nietzsche that events will continually loop up
on themselves and that history will repeat itself with no escape, is a much more nihilistic unifying theory of life compared to the more optimistic “coming and returning” offered by the hero’s journey. The bleak ending and nihilistic conclusion of Lost Highway is another possible reason why it wasn’t a hit with the masses.

 The “Eternal Recurrence” structure isn’t used by many mainstream film makers, but occasionally niche films will use more cynical structures despite the lack of mainstream praise. Interestingly, influential rom-com director Woody Allen seems to be aware of the concept with him saying – “And Nietzsche, with his theory of eternal recurrence. He said that the life we lived we're going to live over again the exact same way for eternity. Great. That means I'll have to sit through the Ice Capades again.”

However, the truth is that the three act, hero’s journey structure that follows basic “good vs evil” morality is what masses like, and if a filmmaker wants to get his way into the mainstream and secure his place in the industry, they are best following the scriptwriting guidelines that have been well established.