I smirk a little every time I see the long, dreary face of Nicolas Cage in new trailers nowadays, amused by the “just having fun” phase of his career he has sunk in and out of so frequently since the early 2000’s. My smile at these projects is usually short-lived, as I skip the trailer after five seconds, but every few years he’ll catch my attention, and I’ll let it play out. There was Pig in 2019, and there is now Dream Scenario, Norwegian filmmaker Kristoffer Borgli’s new film.
The film follows unassuming college professor, Paul Matthews, who inexplicably suddenly begins to appear in an increasing number of people’s dreams. His lectures about evolutionary biology are soon filled with students eager to see his familiar face in real life.When they describe their dreams, though, he doesn’t actually do anything in them—he simply walks idly by. Nonetheless, he receives worldwide recognition for his part in the phenomenon. This is until he begins to assume a more erotic, Freddy Krueger-esque role in people’s dreams, murdering people. His public perception is destroyed. He can’t eat at restaurants or teach at his university anymore, and even his wife is almost fired.
I agree with many that Borgli only dips his toes in the critique of celebrity culture but doesn’t actually add a lot to the conversation. That didn’t detract from the experience for me. It is a fundamentally unserious film, a dark comedy in every sense of the genre, and it didn’t set out to tackle an assortment of larger questions. The emotional resonance instead lies in the tangibility of Matthews’s rise and fall, in large part due to Cage’s performance. We all know someone like Matthews: a well-intentioned, often clueless dad, making it quite easy to understand why Matthews reacts the way he does to his newfound fame. We are so intimately acquainted with his ambitions, shortcomings, fears, and internal crises that we empathize with him in the same way that we would with a close friend or family member. What more could a storyteller ask from their audience?
I also understand why many are disappointed with the third act and ending. This is because the third act is barely a third act and the ending is not an ending. Yes, Paul Matthews has finally written a book, but his wife has left him and he must forever face the world’s muddled view of him. He attempts to infiltrate his wife’s dreams in a David Byrne suit hoping to win her back, but his success remains in the dream world, and nothing is resolved. That’s the key: nothing is resolved. Dreams don’t resolve themselves; they pose the questions and we are meant to interpret and act upon them. The same goes with movies; we, the audience, are asleep, and only wake up when the credits roll. Borgli may not have known how to end his film, but it just might have worked.
