The Dreamers

The Dreamers (2003) is a film directed by Bernardo Bertolucci. Set in the late 60s in France, a young American student Matthew encounters two French siblings, Théo and Isabelle. It is a highly sexual, controversial and political film. With many references to classic cinema and artworks, the film-in-film style sheds light on reflections of the reflected.

You notice the characters' "double" acting. But not anymore can we recognise the truth - we are lost in the immensity of realities. Are they acting the acting of acting...? (Please!)

Just like an infinity mirror, what we see is a mere reflection of the reflected. When standing in-between two mirrors, you will see infinite images of yourself. And the "yourself" is also a reflection - a visual representation of all other realities. It is quite metaphysical. Have a look at the image above. What is reflecting and what is being reflected? (I am lost). It is this idea that reflection is a set of reflections. It's continuous. It is not a matter of being truthful to the original but having multiple truths. In fact, the original does not even exist. It is only a reflection. Meanings are already (self-)reflexive and so they multiply.

The characters' love for a legendary past is creating a new situation where they can revisit the past. It is a sort of imitation. Sort of. Not quite the same, because we know the past is a re-created past, not the past.

What we see is a fusion of past and present. We are invited to a chaos where there is no right/wrong, high/low and old/new. There is no hierarchy. There is nothing that the protagonists are to be. They can be everything other than what they should be. We will inevitably lost in freedom. Don't worry. It's okay. Because it is so fun and exciting. I am sure Bertolucci will never mind if we call the film "a wonderful anarchy".

But remember, they are only "acting". A parody it is.

The bathing scene is probably my favourite one. Three of them take a bath together and suddenly we see the blood arose to the surface. Yes, Isabelle is on her period. I liked it (maybe) because it was not so disturbing as it sounds. The film did not portray menstruation so sexual nor aesthetic unlike other scenes (well, who knows how to make one's menstrual bleeding so appealing). (Maybe it is too much to say but) it represents a powerful yet most peaceful feminist uprising. I could almost hear Isabelle saying like "Oh sweet Matthew, why are you so dramatic?". It ironically criticises all those that believe in patriarchy by mocking them. Don't you think it's ridiculous to have a bath in menstrual blood and be masturbatory? If you do, then you can do nothing about it. You become powerless. The only thing you can do is perhaps have a laugh together to ridicule those sexist bastards. HA HA HA! Beautiful humiliation.

I also think this scene can be seen as a show of acceptance. Isabelle and Théo's abnormal sensuality is now in synch with Matthew's pacifist views. Matthew understands that the almost incestuous relationship of Isabelle and Théo is a purest act of peacemaking. Just like Matthew when he first saw the blood coming up, we immediately link human blood and violence. But here, it is actually the opposite. It even brings a sense of joy and lots of love.

I just want you to tell me that it's forever. It's forever.

Isabelle and Théo open a door to a whole new world for Matthew. It is a loving life. It is a utopia. As if actually living in fantasy, there is absolutely nothing to worry about, as long as they keep "acting". Cinematic memories and artworks become alive and "real". Matthew's knowledge of cinema functions as an act of "remembering". It gives a form to their fantastic quality. In this way, three of them can all be in a "real" fantasy. Not that they are dreaming one fantasy. They are individually dreaming their own; within which they are "acting" for each other.

You can only re-present something that already happened or something that is already existent. Naturally, the characters long for something that cannot change, something that stays the same eternally and something that keeps reminding them that they exist - a record of past. This is why they are not interested in the future. The unknown is terrifying. The three university students decide to stay away from the idea of challenging and rebelling...the revolution. It is so much more fun to indulge in art whose quality is visually pleasurable and satisfactory (I call it beauty hereafter). Beauty creates a most indiscriminate communication between the artist and the perceiver. It is always open to any interpretation and criticism. So...why do you bother fighting for a better "future"?

A revolution is an uprising, a violent act by which one class overthrows another.

The Dreamers (2003) highlights its historical setting: the '68 student riots in France. The erotic melodrama between Matthew and Isabelle (and Théo) corresponds to the true events happened in the 60s. It is said that this revolution was a "sexual" revolution before it was even a cultural or political one. The revolution began with students' anger over the "ridiculous" rules set by authorities. A protest against the regulation that prohibits visitors of the opposite sex staying in university rooms was thought to be a main cause of this event. If that is the case, aren't they (Matthew, Isabelle and Théo) already being rebellious? Yet, interestingly, the film ends as Théo and Isabelle join a mob of protesters with molotov cocktails despite Matthew's shout against violence. Why do they decide to leave Matthew behind in the end? Are they taking a piss? Why do they have to take a bottle bomb instead of a kiss? Isn't that what people were fighting for? Ultimately, what is revolution?

No, (this is not wrong). This is wonderful!

Let me say...the ending is fantastic. Matthew, Isabelle and Théo, all three of them want a revolution. Perhaps they love the idea of it. They know (and we know) that we should challenge all forms of discriminations, injustice and violence. But, if "a revolution is a violent act"...what do we do then? Having another revolution to counter that revolution? And then have another one... ugh. They are stuck in the loop of revolution from which they cannot escape. They don't even realise that they are part of it. Revolution and dictatorship, ignorance and innocence, liberation and resistance, freedom and chaos.. these are self-reflexively structuring one another; this constructs our living. For example, when making a decision, you are given all possible situations that lead to your ultimate decision. The beginning of "what if" questions. But you will, reach a decision. The decision was, however, already pre-made and inevitable. Your decision reflects all the other decisions that could have been "the" decision but you didn't select nonetheless. So, all those "decisions" were equally likely to be your (ultimate) decision. They are pre-facts. What could have happened and what actually happened are basically the same thing. In order to understand what happened, we imagine what could have happened.

Okay, now let's go back to the film.

Matthew, Isabelle and Théo are protagonists of this infinite chain of possible realities. The student riot happened. It is a fact. But it is up to us to structure how the event happened. The film enjoys the potential of the time before the revolution. It shows us the prior liberty, the freedom of individuals before the revolution.

The ending is highly ironic. The revolution does indeed overturn the "revolutionaries" as Isabelle and Théo take part in the riot and Matthew gives a kiss to them. And yet, they are part of "a" revolution.

Who are the Dreamers?

If you liked this film, you may also like...

Il Conformista/The Conformist (1970) by Bernardo Bertolucci, I Cento Passi/A Hundred Steps (2000) by Marco Tullio Giordana, Il Deserto Rosso/Red Desert (1964) by Michelangelo Antonioni, La Dolce Vita (1960) by Federico Fellini...

If you like this topic, have a look at this exhibition: "You Say You Want a Revolution? Records and Rebels 1966 - 1970" at the Victoria and Albert Museum in London (unfortunately it is already finished).