''Du Forsvinder'' is a Danish production, directed by Peter Schønau Fog and starring a pretty heavy cast of top Scandinavian authors such as Nikolaj Lie Kaas, Trine Dyrholm and the late Michael Nyqvist. Frederic is a headmaster who is accused of embezzling his own school's funds in order to invest them -unsuccessfully- in various ventures. Frederic claims that by the time the crime was committed, he was suffering from orbitofrontal syndrome, a psychiatric disease which includes symptoms like instinctive disinhibition (hypersexuality, hyperphagia and urinary behaviour disorders). The patient of this syndrome is distractable, impulsive, euphoric and unable to abide by social rules. This problem is caused by a tumor on Frederic's brain which is diagnosed after an accident causing skull fractures. The story is narrated by alternatively showing the courtroom procedure of Frederic's case from the beginning until the final verdict and intermittent flashbacks which help the viewer to comprehend the emotional dimension of the film's characters as well as their motives for certain actions. The director focuses almost exclusively to the husband-wife-lawyer triad and their, sometimes complex, relationships between them. The movie raises some interesting questions regarding the subject of free will vs. deterministic neurophysiology and brain chemistry, as well as portraying the struggle of Frederic's family facing an illness which changes a person's demeanor in such a profound way that even his closest relatives, literally, can't recognize them. The performances are great, as expected by such a shining cast and in the end, ''Du Forsvinder'' manages to shake and oblige the reader to think a bit harder about fundamental questions concerning his own existence. Danish cinema continues to produce engaging films. My precise rating is 3,5/5.
9 Reviews
Cinematic Pea and Thimble Trick !
spookyrat118 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Frederik Halling is the principal of a prestigious Danish private college school. Mia is his teaching wife who works at the same campus. You Disappear at a base level, outlines the impact on Mia's life, of Frederik, being discovered to both have a brain tumour that can cause behaviour disturbances and also being charged with embezzlement from the school coffers.
Writer/Director Peter Schønau Fog begins his distinctly overlong and ultimately underwhelming film with ironically, an extremely tense, suspenseful prologue culminating in a near car accident and a fall from a cliff. From there, like the unfortunate body, everything begins to go downhill. He sets up the basis of what, in the hands of a far better story-teller, may have been a half-way decent mystery. However Fog doesn't want to tread that path. Blow-up like, he wants his audience to question the reality of what they think they have seen. To that end, he plays out the rest of his story with a series of jump forwards and backwards in time sequences, all designed to set up a couple of late in the movie twists/reveals; one extremely predictable, the other, less so. Unfortunately, by that time, due to his poor narrative abilities, much of his audience will have tuned out.
His trouble is two fold. Frederik's crime preposterously is just deposited at our feet as a given. There is no police investigation and we are expected to just accept that this outwardly, non-fiendishly, clever - looking family man is somehow capable of stealing over US$14 million from school funds undetected by the school finance staff. Fog naively asks us to believe that Frederik just wrote all the cheques unimpeded. There is also never any cinematic evidence of where the money went apart from a couple of vague references about "investments to benefit the school". Frederik, Mia and their teenage son Niklas, live in very non-ostentatious, middle-class, suburban surroundings.
There follows a lot of dry, narrative exposition about mutable identity in courtroom scenes of Frederik's trial. Various personal and professional witnesses, attempt to determine how much, if at all, Frederik's medical condition factored into his wrongdoing. All dramatic tone is lost, as Fog, documentary - like, wants us to appreciate how deeply he has researched neurological disorders. Thrown into this potpourri, are completely unnecessary sub-stories concerning Michael Nyqvist's defence lawyer's brain - damaged wife (Yes, that's right. More neurological disorders!), serving to set-up an even more unlikely romance, which by the bleak finish of this cluttered up tale, we understand may not have taken place anyway.
The saving grace of You Disappear and why I have managed to give it the score you see, is the central performance of Trine Dyrholm as Mia She compellingly proves to be a highly watchable performer, warm, sympathetic and vulnerable even if Mia's coping mechanisms ultimately point to behaviour as erratic as Frederik's.
This taxing drama is far more convoluted and drawn-out than necessary, lacking the emotional payoff or psychological illumination to justify the long, two-hour sit. Fog goes to great lengths to consider whether Frederik is cured or forever compromised, and whether Mia has been irreversibly unbalanced by the experience. But many audiences will have stopped caring before any conclusions are reached. Unsurprisingly, though selected as the Danish entry for the Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards, it was not nominated.
Writer/Director Peter Schønau Fog begins his distinctly overlong and ultimately underwhelming film with ironically, an extremely tense, suspenseful prologue culminating in a near car accident and a fall from a cliff. From there, like the unfortunate body, everything begins to go downhill. He sets up the basis of what, in the hands of a far better story-teller, may have been a half-way decent mystery. However Fog doesn't want to tread that path. Blow-up like, he wants his audience to question the reality of what they think they have seen. To that end, he plays out the rest of his story with a series of jump forwards and backwards in time sequences, all designed to set up a couple of late in the movie twists/reveals; one extremely predictable, the other, less so. Unfortunately, by that time, due to his poor narrative abilities, much of his audience will have tuned out.
His trouble is two fold. Frederik's crime preposterously is just deposited at our feet as a given. There is no police investigation and we are expected to just accept that this outwardly, non-fiendishly, clever - looking family man is somehow capable of stealing over US$14 million from school funds undetected by the school finance staff. Fog naively asks us to believe that Frederik just wrote all the cheques unimpeded. There is also never any cinematic evidence of where the money went apart from a couple of vague references about "investments to benefit the school". Frederik, Mia and their teenage son Niklas, live in very non-ostentatious, middle-class, suburban surroundings.
There follows a lot of dry, narrative exposition about mutable identity in courtroom scenes of Frederik's trial. Various personal and professional witnesses, attempt to determine how much, if at all, Frederik's medical condition factored into his wrongdoing. All dramatic tone is lost, as Fog, documentary - like, wants us to appreciate how deeply he has researched neurological disorders. Thrown into this potpourri, are completely unnecessary sub-stories concerning Michael Nyqvist's defence lawyer's brain - damaged wife (Yes, that's right. More neurological disorders!), serving to set-up an even more unlikely romance, which by the bleak finish of this cluttered up tale, we understand may not have taken place anyway.
The saving grace of You Disappear and why I have managed to give it the score you see, is the central performance of Trine Dyrholm as Mia She compellingly proves to be a highly watchable performer, warm, sympathetic and vulnerable even if Mia's coping mechanisms ultimately point to behaviour as erratic as Frederik's.
This taxing drama is far more convoluted and drawn-out than necessary, lacking the emotional payoff or psychological illumination to justify the long, two-hour sit. Fog goes to great lengths to consider whether Frederik is cured or forever compromised, and whether Mia has been irreversibly unbalanced by the experience. But many audiences will have stopped caring before any conclusions are reached. Unsurprisingly, though selected as the Danish entry for the Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards, it was not nominated.
Disappointing
werwolf_dk24 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This film asks serious questions, but it seems that it hardly scratches the surface for answering them. The main plot is a courtroom drama. Frederik is accused of fraud, but it turns out that he has a brain tumor that might have changed his personality, so that he possibly wasn't aware of doing something wrong. If he in legal terms was insane, he cannot be declared guilty. But is it so simple? It turns out that some changes that he tumor might have cause were present before the tumor grew in his brain. This interesting part of the story-line is however not sufficiently developed.
Another subplot is the crumbling marriage between Frederik and his wife Mia. The tumor has, so it seems, made Frederik more aggressive, also in bed. Mia therefore seeks comfort with his husband's lawyer. Or does she? We learn at quite late that Mia is an unreliable narrator. This could serve the point that individual experiences and memories form our perception. But it turns out that the narrator is not only unreliable, but quite nuts. This could at best illustrate a point how the brain works.
Indeed, essential issues of brain research and relevant philosophical implications are mentioned, as if the plot was a drama-documentary from Learning Network. But letting the narrator paraphrase these tendencies in brain research almost kills the point of the film. We get the impression that we are witnessing a lecture of a mad scientist. This was probably not the intention of the director.
I liked much of this film, but altogether it was an unconvincing attempt. Maybe the script is too close to the novel.
Another subplot is the crumbling marriage between Frederik and his wife Mia. The tumor has, so it seems, made Frederik more aggressive, also in bed. Mia therefore seeks comfort with his husband's lawyer. Or does she? We learn at quite late that Mia is an unreliable narrator. This could serve the point that individual experiences and memories form our perception. But it turns out that the narrator is not only unreliable, but quite nuts. This could at best illustrate a point how the brain works.
Indeed, essential issues of brain research and relevant philosophical implications are mentioned, as if the plot was a drama-documentary from Learning Network. But letting the narrator paraphrase these tendencies in brain research almost kills the point of the film. We get the impression that we are witnessing a lecture of a mad scientist. This was probably not the intention of the director.
I liked much of this film, but altogether it was an unconvincing attempt. Maybe the script is too close to the novel.
Could have been good
EskeRahn20 April 2017
The story had the potential to make a really good film.
Unfortunately this realisation of it has some serious flaws. One technical is that the monologue/commenting sound track sounds VERY much like someone reading of a paper. I have no idea if the director or the actor is to blame, if you see this in a foreign language with subtitles you MIGHT not be bothered by it.
A few of the attempts done to dramatize the story, unfortunately destroys a crucial plot element. It is only a few scenes (three!), and small alterations from explicit to subtle or omissions of the scenes would have solved it, but as is it completely destroys the main plot IMHO....
Many characters are portrayed fine by the actors, unfortunately this does not include the leading female role...
SOME parts of the film are really good, and others really really bad, so I ended giving it a (sub)mediocre grade...
Unfortunately this realisation of it has some serious flaws. One technical is that the monologue/commenting sound track sounds VERY much like someone reading of a paper. I have no idea if the director or the actor is to blame, if you see this in a foreign language with subtitles you MIGHT not be bothered by it.
A few of the attempts done to dramatize the story, unfortunately destroys a crucial plot element. It is only a few scenes (three!), and small alterations from explicit to subtle or omissions of the scenes would have solved it, but as is it completely destroys the main plot IMHO....
Many characters are portrayed fine by the actors, unfortunately this does not include the leading female role...
SOME parts of the film are really good, and others really really bad, so I ended giving it a (sub)mediocre grade...
one thing to say: BORING
ravindratalkies27 December 2020
Whatever the festival, academy nominations, that didn't help stop yawning to the audience. Yes, there is a story, there is performance, besides this there is also slow moving images and lazy screenplay that made film is utter boring.
what to look for? entertaining or experience..? no nothing.
basic storyline is good, but screenplay is very boring..
so as I used so many BORING words.You can find more in the movie while you watching.. take a risk, if you..?
so as I used so many BORING words.You can find more in the movie while you watching.. take a risk, if you..?
The Directors Statement
xjzbbqtpjqlmiec27 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
After watching "You Disappear" my head was full of questions so I googled it and this very interesting statement of the director came up: "YOU DISAPPEAR isn't a movie in the traditional sense. It is a collage of experiences dealing with the challenges we face as neuro-science forces us to re-think what we are as human beings. If we're simply biological systems with unreliable brains, being flung through our chaotic and fragmented lives, then none of the traditional tools of storytelling will apply to filmmaking anymore.
For example, the linear causality of Aristotle, character development via Freud's thoughts on realisation, rigid genres, and the backbone of mainstream cinema; that we are all strong-willed heroes in a meaningful world consisting of obstacles that are only meant to shape us into better people. All of that stuff will be obsolete.
Cinema as a medium is based on the ability of the human brain to piece together fragments into meaningful wholes. YOU DISAPPEAR uses disjointed fragments of fiction, facts, memories and imagination, which will prompt both curiosity and confusion, empathy and emotional detachment. And that's fine. Our brains are all different; they shape the way we experience the world around us. As such, we want to allow the experiences and narrative connections to form in the mind of each individual moviegoer.
It is probably fair to say that YOU DISAPPEAR is a demanding movie. It demands of its audience that they let go of conventional ideas of what a movie should be and instead view it with no preconceived notions welcoming YOU DISAPPEAR as a life experience. Kick back and enjoy the ride."
Mind blowing masterpiece
lbyuxpukis24 August 2017
Watching and afterwards discussing "You disappear" with a friend, this became a mind blowing experience for me. At first everything seemed like a mess, but then my brain started to make an order out of things. It began to piece everything together into a story. When the film was over I had a really strong idea of what film I've been watching, but when I talked to my friend I realized that he had a completely different experience of what the story was. I think this is one of the points of the film. We are our brains. Our brains perceive the world different. I've never watched a film like this before. What it does to you, does it really well, which makes it a masterpiece for me. For me this film is taking filmmaking into new territory. It's a film about how YOU think.
Wow, what did I just watch?
mtfttxqnpayg8 September 2017
Try to imagine Ingmar Bergman directing a movie thought out by Alain Resnais! Pretty hard, right? But not after watching this movie. Its digging that deep into the human condition, but also the science behind it. The movie succeeded in making a satisfying whole out of what seems to be opposites: empathy and verfremdung, fiction and facts, science and imagination, real life and theory.
A lot of food for thought here and glowing performances, solid direction and a mind-bending, intelligent screenplay.
Well done!
A lot of food for thought here and glowing performances, solid direction and a mind-bending, intelligent screenplay.
Well done!
Brilliant
sjanders-864301 April 2021
Trine Dyrholm's husband embezzled 12 million kroners from his school. Nikolas Kaas is the husband who stole the money. But he had a brain tumor. Is he liable? Are we all products of our brain chemistry? Do we have free will or is everything determined by the synapses in our brains? The tumor was removed, but his behavior is still erratic. Bernard, Michael Nyquist, is Frederick's
lawyer. His wife was terribly brain damaged in a car accident.
Frederick's Impulse control was lost by the frontal lobe tumor. Frederick's son said in court that the tumor had made his dad more fun, like a friend. The sum stolen was large and it took a complicated set of moves to get it. How could he be impaired? The opening shots of a reckless Frederick driving too fast on a narrow curvy road almost killing people does show impairment. Then an epileptic seizure causes a fall. He was impaired. Dryholm gives a star performance, but is she reliable? There are no clear answers, but that is exactly the point. This film is masterful in the depths it was able to investigate and still be a fascinating viewing.
Frederick's Impulse control was lost by the frontal lobe tumor. Frederick's son said in court that the tumor had made his dad more fun, like a friend. The sum stolen was large and it took a complicated set of moves to get it. How could he be impaired? The opening shots of a reckless Frederick driving too fast on a narrow curvy road almost killing people does show impairment. Then an epileptic seizure causes a fall. He was impaired. Dryholm gives a star performance, but is she reliable? There are no clear answers, but that is exactly the point. This film is masterful in the depths it was able to investigate and still be a fascinating viewing.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
