Nietzsche's Umbrella

It's an interesting movie that you won't see on online platforms because it's a relatively experimental and disturbing movie. Although the supporting characters are a bit one-dimensional, the dialogues are very well designed. When I researched the actors after watching the movie, I was not surprised to see that Erkan Baylav received the Afife Jale 2024 award. His acting in the single shot discussion scene and the camp scenes was extremely successful. In the credits of the movie, the director wrote about his inspirations such as Nietzsche, Jiddu Krishnamurthy, Tabutta Rövesata and Gary Kasparov. This is a sweet anecdote. The director's first novel, Mahser-i Cümbüs, which I read years ago, contained a similar "universe of references". Since I was able to catch many references to that first novel in this movie, it was a much more meaningful viewing for me. Another interesting anecdote is that the screenplay for Nietzsche's Umbrella was adapted from the author's fourth book, Çöl Replikleri, which has not been published yet.

I liked this first feature film of the director. Although the film aims to convey some philosophical ideas and questions, you do not need to be interested in philosophy to enjoy the film. The film is basically the story of three best friends with different characters and different views on life. Hence, if you like to watch the stories of different people from different countries or cultures, you will enjoy this film. Also, the actors playing three best friends were convincing in their roles. I was thinking to give a 7 or 8 stars to the film but I feel like to give 10 stars since the film deserves more attention.

How would you summarise the film?

In the film, I try to show the viewer the blurred lines between individuality, conscience and social responsibility, while telling the story of translator Burak's search for a more peaceful life. When designing the characters and the plot, my goal was always the same - to set up ethical dilemmas and give the characters freedom of choice.

Can you explain the dramatic need, point of view, attitude of the main character Burak and the character change in the film in general?

Dramatic necessity - Burak's conscious desire is to leave Istanbul in order to get out of the stuck life he lives in and to reach a more peaceful life. From the first scenes Burak's cheerful recklessness and callousness, trying not to care about anything, do not seem convincing to the viewer. As the scenes progress, it is seen that under the mask of trying not to take life or himself too seriously, there is an effort to be accepted. As the events progress, Burak's basic contradiction is revealed. On the one hand, he desires a peaceful and worry-free life. On the other hand, he mercilessly criticises this search for peace 'The search for a peaceful and worry-free life is the incapacity of mediocre and tired Nietzsche translators who cannot create a satisfying meaning in their lives!' Burak's main dramatic need is parallel to Nietzsche's philosophy. Not Peace and happiness, to be able to create a satisying meaning! It is only towards the middle of the film that the viewer can grasp this motivation in the depths of Burak's nihilistic personality.

Point of view - 'If the world were light, there would be no art,' writes Albert Camus in a very clear style. It is no coincidence that Burak, who wrote a doctoral thesis on Nietzsche and translated books about Nietzsche, was a nihilist with a dark personality. This dark personality of Burak has two important characteristics. The passive side of his personality - the person who cannot get out of the emptiness created by being detached from society, who no longer wants or does anything. In other words, a tired person. The active side of his personality - the person who rejects everything but tries to find his own value judgements instead of the things he rejects... The struggle between these two points of view is felt throughout the film.

Attitude - Ballerina Twyla Tharp, who thinks that art is an escape, writes: 'Art is the only way to escape from home without leaving home.' Throughout the film, Burak's general attitude towards life is to avoid conflicts as much as possible, to retreat into his own shell instead of struggling with problems, and to reduce the tensions he experiences by dealing with music. For Burak, music, which makes life more bearable, has a healing effect. This general attitude of Burak is constantly criticised throughout the film. Selin interprets Burak's passivity and his effort to stay away from negative energy and stress as a deficiency in their marriage - 'We divorced because of your loser behaviour!' Serkan, on the other hand, emphasises at the end of the second act that Burak cannot escape from his responsibilities forever - 'Even if you run away, even if you deny it, we started this business together!"

Change - Burak's mask of 'cheerful recklessness' in the introduction part of the film turns into an 'active nihilist' struggling to create meaning in his life from the second part onwards. After the tragic events, at the end of the second act Burak turns into a character who traces the lost time and surrenders to a melancholic inertia. The third and the final part is a reflection of Burak's endeavour to find his inner peace again. To put it in a sentence inspired by Nietzsche, 'Amor Fati! If you don't regret, if you don't curse your past, you will wander in the depths of your memory, you will smile, you will live you again and again, as if it is engraved in your mind like a childhood memory that never fades...'

What is the key idea and main message of the film?

It is not easy to escape from your past and your responsibilities. The film closes at the end of the third act with this idea - no matter how hard you try, it is useless! Your past keeps following you and at some point you have to face your past, your worst enemy. A pagan maxim says 'You must co-operate with your enemy before it is too late'. At the end of the film, Burak's effort to reconcile with himself and his past is depicted.

What can you say about the general atmosphere?

I designed the physical atmosphere of the film with Orhan Pamuk's novel The Museum of Innocence in mind. An old TV repair shop, Kasparov vs Deep Blue, Pentium 3 processors, a dusty doctoral thesis, an old bookshop, decaying rowboats... All these places and objects tell the metaphor of 'tracing lost time'.

In the film, there is a very long indicative dialogue scene in scene 25. Just like the long sequence before the fire in Cinema Paradiso, the viewer feels that something different will start to happen in the film after this long transition dialogue. The genre of the story, which had been progressing in the form of an intellectual introspection until this scene, changes and shifts to the genre of a detective story, where the events begin to flow rapidly. At the end of the third act, the story returns to the form of intellectual introspection and both genres are merged in the surprise ending at the end of the film.

The film starts with an external voice narration and ends with an external voice narration in the last scene. Many of Burak's lines in the film are inspired by Nietzsche himself. Burak both expresses his own feelings and criticises himself through Nietzsche's thoughts. In Nietzsche's philosophy, vicious circle and creating/not creating meaning are of key importance. Burak's mental development is shaped by these two concepts.

A separate parenthesis should be opened for the music, which is woven into the fabric of the film in many scenes. The Ney instrument is one of the common points that connect Burak and his uncle Neyzen Arif Baba. The most important common denominator between Burak - Serkan - Altug is the fact that they make music together in mountain camps and their desire to turn their compositions into an album. The film opens with the music made in the cave and an external voice narrator, and in the last scene, it is again connected through music and external voice.

What you want to add about the main character Burak?

One of Burak's most prominent character traits is that throughout the film, just like Hamlet, he is constantly in contradictions and indecision. On the one hand, he claims that he has no responsibility towards anyone in life, including his uncle, and on the other hand, he is under a terrible responsibility as of the end of the second act. On the one hand, he does not take seriously the fact that his translations of philosophy have sold a hundred copies, but on the other hand he blames society for the lack of interest in philosophy and philosophy departments. On the one hand, he says that he cannot finish his doctoral thesis and does not want to become an academic, but on the other hand he is proud of his identity as a philosopher.

On the one hand, he tries to stay away from tension and negative energies, but on the other hand, he constantly invites bigger problems because he cannot break away from Serkan and Altug. On the one hand, he believes that he is lazy and untalented in music, but on the other hand, he has been trying to release his album for three years. On the one hand, he says that he enjoys simple life and modesty, but on the other hand, he dreams of bringing his music to other people. On the one hand, he wears a mask of cheerful recklessness, but on the other hand, he struggles with the feeling of stuckness that accumulates drop by drop. Most importantly, on the one hand, he desires a peaceful and worry-free life, and on the other hand, he criticises this search for peace mercilessly.

A gripping strange story about a nihilistic character, combined with soulful music. The close relation between the past and the resposibilities of the main character is given in an effective manner. However, I believe the film would gain a deeper perspective if the story was developed more to allow the audience to learn more about the nihilistic worldview of the main character. Of course, people who have read Nietzsche before would be able to engage more in the subtext of the film. Even people with dark souls or pessimistic worldviews would easily find something peaceful in this film. This is the real touch of the movie.

The anti-hero character is a passive protagonist and he is very much swayed by the events unfolding around him. Burak, the main character of the film, is to a certain extent a character who is at peace with being a loser. He is a philosophy assistant who translates philosophy books that do not sell more than ten copies, who cannot get the money from the publishing house for the ones he translates, who has been rejected many times from the doctoral thesis he has been working on for years... Not to mention the fact that he has to take care of his blind uncle who is a book seller and that he has not been able to make a music album for years.