Madness is the thing: REPRISE 2008
Laurel Gildersleeve
June 14, 2008
REPRISE 2006 (2008 U.S. Release) follows the frustrations of two aspiring Norwegian writers, Phillip (Anders Danielson Lie) and Erik (Espen Klouman Hoiner). The story is structured a bit like a Nouvelle Vogue send-up with a heavy narration and rapid editing, as the two men wax poetic about their creative passions, fumbles and frustrations. Their lives cross and converge as they chase after their literary successes. Both submit manuscripts to a publishing company at the same time in a small artistic blood-tie. Phillip´s is accepted right away, making him an overnight literary success, while Erik´s is rejected.
Phillip falls victim to a severe psychotic episode, supposedly triggered after being hit by a car (indicated by a high ringing coming from his head after he picks himself up from the street). The dynamic between the men changes as Erik waits tensely for Phillip´s discharge outside of a mental hospital with their group of crass and misogynistic friends. Now, Phillip is blocked. He cannot write and spends afternoons on his couch under heavy medication, longing for his girlfriend Kari. Phillip´s doctors attribute his breakdown to his intense relationship, and so, have advised the two separate. Erik produces another manuscript, which is accepted to be published. Ironically it tells of a man´s descent into insanity as he searches for a ´pure language´. The film levels its focus to the madness of one genuinely talented, conscientious writer, and one who clings to it. There are ideas of romanticism at play in Erik´s story of an artist longing for the ´one true language´, while Phillip is truly suffering in a decidedly un-romantic manner.
Oddly, for a story following the men´s images as themselves as artists, we never see them write anything (with the exception of a flashback and one sleepless outburst of creativity from Phillip). They talk constantly about writing, writers, reading, but never about their own work or ideas. Once the film dissolves into the men´s personal challenges as they tool through their social circle, it seems no longer concerned with their writing and becomes something like a soap opera for mid-twenties, middle-class men. Although Phillip´s mental instability provides a window for the other characters to gain more depth and take account of their own lives, that window is never opened. Instead, it functions as a dry flat sub-plot that serves no purpose except to pepper in a few scenes of Phillip´s dramatic breakdowns. His fall is not really examined; it is only presented, with a slight aside for an explanation. Neither Phillip´s, nor the other characters´ feelings on his breakdown are given any attention. This would be a perfect opportunity to take advantage of the easy device of the narrator´s account of the characters´ innermost thoughts. But, even he is absent.
Erik is presented as talent less, perhaps in too much control of his faculties. He is so grounded in the practical and the realistic, that he cannot create without a weight of self- consciousness. It is only when he writes about the condition of his companion that he is noticed. When asked by a talk show host about the connection between his character and his relationship with Phillip, Erik only dismisses it.
The difference between the inherent artist and inherent mediocrity in the two is also apparent through their conduct in their relationships. Phillip is passionate and sure about his love for Kari. He tells her their destined for each other, and takes her to Paris. In contrast, Erik barely sees his girlfriend Lillian. He decides that once he gets published, he´ll dump her, but quickly realizes there´s no need. She supports him in everything he does. She even supports his absence as he continuously blows her off to chum with his friends. When Lillian finally does break up with him, she articulates his entire problem: he is a cliché. Erik very much lives his life in safety. He lives with his mother, is polite, has good posture, etc. Like Phillip, he travels to Paris, but for him the experience seems empty, distant. After a rotten review he leaves Oslo. While gone, his friends all stabilize. They get married, find girlfriends, go to school or maintain jobs, while Erik only wanders. He is now envious of the happiness his friends have all attained in their new adult lives that they all formerly scoffed at. Erik remains arrested, coasting. Without any real feeling or risk, his life is a parallel of the title of his poor review, all form and no substance.
Phillip falls victim to a severe psychotic episode, supposedly triggered after being hit by a car (indicated by a high ringing coming from his head after he picks himself up from the street). The dynamic between the men changes as Erik waits tensely for Phillip´s discharge outside of a mental hospital with their group of crass and misogynistic friends. Now, Phillip is blocked. He cannot write and spends afternoons on his couch under heavy medication, longing for his girlfriend Kari. Phillip´s doctors attribute his breakdown to his intense relationship, and so, have advised the two separate. Erik produces another manuscript, which is accepted to be published. Ironically it tells of a man´s descent into insanity as he searches for a ´pure language´. The film levels its focus to the madness of one genuinely talented, conscientious writer, and one who clings to it. There are ideas of romanticism at play in Erik´s story of an artist longing for the ´one true language´, while Phillip is truly suffering in a decidedly un-romantic manner.
Oddly, for a story following the men´s images as themselves as artists, we never see them write anything (with the exception of a flashback and one sleepless outburst of creativity from Phillip). They talk constantly about writing, writers, reading, but never about their own work or ideas. Once the film dissolves into the men´s personal challenges as they tool through their social circle, it seems no longer concerned with their writing and becomes something like a soap opera for mid-twenties, middle-class men. Although Phillip´s mental instability provides a window for the other characters to gain more depth and take account of their own lives, that window is never opened. Instead, it functions as a dry flat sub-plot that serves no purpose except to pepper in a few scenes of Phillip´s dramatic breakdowns. His fall is not really examined; it is only presented, with a slight aside for an explanation. Neither Phillip´s, nor the other characters´ feelings on his breakdown are given any attention. This would be a perfect opportunity to take advantage of the easy device of the narrator´s account of the characters´ innermost thoughts. But, even he is absent.
Erik is presented as talent less, perhaps in too much control of his faculties. He is so grounded in the practical and the realistic, that he cannot create without a weight of self- consciousness. It is only when he writes about the condition of his companion that he is noticed. When asked by a talk show host about the connection between his character and his relationship with Phillip, Erik only dismisses it.
The difference between the inherent artist and inherent mediocrity in the two is also apparent through their conduct in their relationships. Phillip is passionate and sure about his love for Kari. He tells her their destined for each other, and takes her to Paris. In contrast, Erik barely sees his girlfriend Lillian. He decides that once he gets published, he´ll dump her, but quickly realizes there´s no need. She supports him in everything he does. She even supports his absence as he continuously blows her off to chum with his friends. When Lillian finally does break up with him, she articulates his entire problem: he is a cliché. Erik very much lives his life in safety. He lives with his mother, is polite, has good posture, etc. Like Phillip, he travels to Paris, but for him the experience seems empty, distant. After a rotten review he leaves Oslo. While gone, his friends all stabilize. They get married, find girlfriends, go to school or maintain jobs, while Erik only wanders. He is now envious of the happiness his friends have all attained in their new adult lives that they all formerly scoffed at. Erik remains arrested, coasting. Without any real feeling or risk, his life is a parallel of the title of his poor review, all form and no substance.
Print
Email
