Without even watching this documentary I could imagine what it would be, I mean the title says it's not true, an expository film that would give us the truth about the Manual diagnostic and statistical analysis of mental disorders and those behind it, the American Psychiatric Association. Although, within the first five minutes, it struck me that this expository film was rather heavy-handed and, in my personal opinion, a bit clumsy. The overall tone of this documentary was almost cartoonish. In the first minute of the video they showed the DSM disorders on decks of cards on a poker table, while I can appreciate the symbolism behind this: allusion to the fact that the committee of psychologists who decide what to include in the DSM treat the disorders process as if it were a I play and gamble with people's lives - it just seemed like a joke and ridiculous. Worst of all in this overarching metaphor was their depiction of psychologists playing poker with DSM cards and prescription chips, as if the filmmakers believed that by making people appear to be involved in the development and additions to the DSM, like childhood cartoon villains, we would immediately lash out at them. It was too blatant and honestly funny, I found it hard to take it seriously. Not to mention the exaggerated reactions and attitudes of the narrators who walk us through the many different points as to why the DSM is the worst thing to happen to mental health care since its inception. All expository documentaries attempt to persuade the viewer to see a different perspective, but the filmmakers behind this documentary forgot everything they knew about subtlety and simply adopted an almost propagandistic methodology instead of letting the source material speak for itself. 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 mental health field revealing how they really felt about the DSM, I would say this was the best tactic used by this documentary. They obviously cherry-picked the interviewees to find who best fit their views on the DSM, but even so they implemented the pathos by allowing those who have had negative or harmful experiences with the drugs prescribed to them only after they were unexpectedly diagnosed to talk about what they experienced and how they felt, the filmmakers also included the stories of those who were unable to cope with their illness and the drugs they were treated with and committed suicide. This could arouse emotions in the spectators so it was a well-used “exhibition trick”. Ethics and logos were also appealed to in the film by including specific statistics and data, as well as testimonials from professionals who practice with the DSM. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay After carefully considering all the ways the video attempted to influence me, I would have to argue that it wasn't very convincing. As I mentioned before, it felt cartoonish and funny at times. Not only that, but some of the things claimed seemed unfounded or ridiculous. While I understand where those behind this documentary are coming from, because there are some underhanded practices going on behind the scenes in terms of the DSM and mental health treatments, I feel that it is a misplaced animosity fueling this documentary rather than a true desire to inform viewers. The DSM is a guideline that allows the.