svenbremberg

At the centre of the film is a middle-aged couple, Anja (Andrea Bræin Hovig) and Tomas (Stellan Skarsgård) who had lived together in 20 years. The crisis develops when a mortal brain metastasis is detected in Anja. Up to this point, they got children together but both had lived independent lives on their own. Anja had been a successful ballet dancer and had felt she had taken the responsibility for the children herself while Tomas' energy had been occupied by his role as a leader of a theatre. Several times Anja had been on her way to separate from Tomas while Tomas said that he always wanted to stay with Anja. Thus, their relationship did not seem to have been much alive. When Anja got her death sentence the core of their relationship was unveiled. For Tomas that was apparent not in is words but in his gaze on Anja. Neither was Tomas grief expressed in words but instead in his gaze on Anja. So their deep love was apparent. Due to the excellent performance of Anja and Tomas, I as a viewer I was able to sense their true relationship.

In my mind, the film deals with a Norwegian way of handling a difficult situation. Being av Swede, a neighbour of Norway, I think that the film is also relevant for my own country. In our countries, people in problematic situations try to be kind, try not to be too emotional, and try to avoid the crucial question. In the film, one of the teachers was expected to guard at the break at the moment when Lykke killed Jamie. He did not do that. That was, however, not revealed until the end of the film. This remarkable delay was a consequence of the non-confrontational way of communication between the people in the film. Another aspect was the handling of the very causes of events. Obviously, Lykke had hit Jamie in a way that resulted in his death. We do not learn in any detail how this implausible event could happen. The was obviously due to a lack of any serious investigation. That, in turn, was due to regard to Lykke as a person who still was a child. An investigation would not result in any legal action. In the film, many people felt guilt. Due to the lack of clear common understanding of what had happened some people felt guilt unnecessarily. And for those that had actually contributed, the guilt could not be resolved since it was no common understanding of what had happened. So in my understanding, the avoidant way of handing a difficult situation, more people will be left with unresolved guilt.

I was moved by this valuable film. I was especially affected by the core idea of the film: a few words from Deok-soo's father that patterned Deok-soo's whole life. Since I myself have grown up in a individualistic Nordic country the very idea that a father should form my life as a son seem very foreign. Yet, it's not that simple. Also in the Western tradition the idea of a "Father" (God) is a prominent organising principle. The Western "Father" is, however, quite abstract. This "Father" is far from some actual spoken words from a biological being. In understand that in the Western antiquity, people actually perceived gods that spoke to them. These gods called them to carry out specific tasks. This is very different from the present situation. Most people today, at least i NW Europe, reject the very idea of any "God". Therefore the "Father" in the film Gukjesijang presents an potential model that does not presuppose any supernatural figures and is relevant both i the East and the West. The film is highly recommended.