Sling Blade 1996, Movie Review Example

The plot of the movie surrounds twelve year old Karl Childers who is classified as somewhat mentally ill and further abused by his father all of his life. He goes into a frenzy when he sees his mother in a seductive state with another man and kills both his mother and lover. Years later he is released from the insane asylum whilst declared safe to return to society and returns back to the town that he grew up. He lives with some townspeople and becomes close to the family. Doyle is abusive to the family and Karl eventually kills him and returns to the mental hospital after the murder to the safe haven he has been used to all of his younger life.

Criminologist research shows that criminal minds have the ability to choose not to commit crimes and they choose not to commit crimes if they believe they will be severely punished. “Further research shows that current sentences for violent crimes are already quite severe.”(Siegel 2008). The death penalty is the most influential deterrent to murder of all choice theory research. “Further research shows that people will commit crime and delinquency if they perceive that the benefits outweigh the risks.” (Siegel 2008). The choice theory suggests that criminals have the ability to carefully choose whether or not to commit a crime and in order to deter such criminal acts punishment should be severe enough to deter such acts in the future. Further people with specific skills are more likely to commit crimes than others. Perhaps this is suggesting that the common criminal may possess an average to above average intelligence. It is further suggested by the choice theory that offenders carefully study their targets before commencing on their course of action and show signs of rationality.

“The deterrence theory has been severely criticized for it does not take into consideration that some criminals such as Karl Childers are mentally ill and do not pre-meditate a crime with rational thought and does not take into account the social and psychological factors that may influence criminality.”(Siegel 2008). The death penalty has not been deterrence for murder such that it does not support the premise of the deterrence theory.

Perhaps Karl had a choice to commit the second murder but it is not that simple because he is mentally ill. It has been stated that he paused for a moment and thought about calling the police rather than committing the crime thus he did possess some rational ability to make a choice however when a person is mentally ill their ability to make rational choices are hampered of which will be further explained in the next two theories.

It is important to consider the relationship between brain function and crime. “ This particular view of crime received national attention in 1979 when Dan White, who confessed to killing San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and City Councilman Harvey Milk and claimed that his behaviour was precipitated by an addiction to sugar-laden junk foods.” (Siegel 2008). This was the well known ‘Twinkie defence’ in which White was convicted of manslaughter rather than murder. It is important to note that White committed suicide in prison.

Biochemical make-up, genetic code, neurological conditions, social influences such as parents, peers, schools and neighbourhoods can play an important role in the development of a child and influence criminality of a person. Further a healthy diet can provide for normal brain functioning and growth especially in the early years of development. Research has shown that certain chemicals such as sodium, mercury, potassium, calcium and amino acids can lead to depression, hyperactivity, cognitive problems, memory loss and abnormal brain functioning. Further, hypoglycaemia and hormonal influences can lead to criminal activity. It has been shown that menstrual cycle triggers can stimulate antisocial aggressive behaviour which link to crime. Environmental contaminants such as dangerous amounts of copper, cadmium, mercury and inorganic gases and chorine and nitrogen have been found to contribute to depression and unstable behaviour disorders such as schizophrenia and other antisocial behaviours.

Research has shown that brain function impairment such as abstract reasoning, problem solving skills and motor impairment have contributed to aggressive behaviour and can be detected in children at quite an early age. “Both violent criminals and substance abusers have impairment in the frontal lobes, thalamus and medial temporal lobe areas of the brain.” (Siegel 2008). Repeat offenders have decreased cortical blood flow and hypometabilism I their non-dominant frontal and temporal lobes. Some show slowed reasoning in the prefrontal region which affects cognitive reasoning ability.

Karl appears to have brain functioning impairment I the frontal lobes, thalamus and medial temporal lobe areas of the brain because he has committed violent crimes and is a repeat offender. He already shows signs of decreased cognitive functions because of his mental impairment.

Further neurotransmitters influence brain activity and Karl’s brain function is not normal. Karl appears to have low levels of dopamine, nor epinephrine, serotonin, monoamine oxidize and gamma-aminobutryic acid in his brain. Further it appears that his condition cannot be fully treated with medication. He is a slow learner. His condition is biological and may be genetic. The fact that in the movie it states that Karl realized that his mother was not being raped and killed her because she consented to the sex shows that he made a choice to kill her but this was not a rational choice. Perhaps it was out of anger from a childhood social issue.

Psychological trait theory focuses on criminals that have deviant, violent and antisocial behavioural patterns. “The psychodynamic psychology was originated by Sigmund Freud who theorized that a person carried with them all significant emotional attachments of their childhood which guides future interpersonal relationships.” (Siegel 2008). The ‘id’ is the primitive part of a person’s make-up which has a drive for necessities in life. The ‘ego’ develops as a child learns he/she cannot get instant gratification. The ‘super-ego’ judges the behaviour along with moral standards. With respect to Karl, his psychological trait depicts an aggressive and frustrated person which is dominated by events that transpired early in his childhood. He obviously suffered experiences of unhappiness that have been unresolved where his parents or other significant others did not nurture him with love and affection and his ‘ego’ was damaged. As a result he cannot cope in a normal, traditional and conventional society. Karl has weak, immature social skills and exhibits a firm dependence on others for his feeling of love. He has difficulty understanding the consequences of his actions and that is why he commits crimes.

Karl further has the presence of a mood and mental disorder which creates turmoil and instability in his life. He has been diagnosed with a partial mental incompetence of which that is why he was detained in a mental hospital as a child rather than put to jail with the first offense of killing his mother and her lover. He expresses uncooperative, defiant and hostile behaviour toward authority when in fact his temper and mistakes of behaviour are part of his mental disorder. He does not possess the ability to understand reality and to respond emotionally. Sometimes he does not possess the ability to communicate and act appropriately because of his mental impairment. Social factors may also contribute to increase criminal behaviour with mentally ill people as such Karl was again living with people in an unstable environment. The environment was filled with stress and dissonance.

Perhaps all three perspectives played a role in Karl’s repeated killings of his mother, her lover and the latter killing. The choice theory was most probably the weakest theory of the three because Karl was mentally ill and not fully capable of making a complete rational choice to murder his three victims. As some point before the murders he did consider other choices, but his cognitive thinking was not rational as a normal person’s thinking would be.

Biological and psychological theories are most prevalent with influence to Karl’s criminal behaviour because Karl did not possess the mental capability to make an informed choice to murder; hence his thinking process was not capable of doing so. Further his behaviour was influenced by his negligent childhood experiences. The behavioural theory would play a part in the murders because they are developed through learning experiences and Karl was most probably punished the most part of his life and his good acts were most probably extinguished by negative responses which led to poor self-esteem and helped to form aggressive and violent behaviour. It is possible that Karl learned to be aggressive by watching others act violent in his presence.

For the most part, sociopath/psychopath temperament is a lack of emotional depth coupled with the fact that Karl possesses a low IQ because he is mentally impaired has led to the murders. Intrapsychic processes such as mood disorders, unconscious conflicts and anger have all equally contributed to his criminal behaviour. Further whilst in the mental institution he should have been rehabilitated with counselling to get to the ‘inner child’ to resolve his conflicts.

Works Cited

Siegel, L. (2008) Criminology The Core Thompson Higher Education Belmont, CA 3^rd ed. 2008