MovieChat Forums > Insomnia (1998) Discussion > How much of the film is in his own mind?

How much of the film is in his own mind?

posted 14 years ago by Pearl_Jade
5 replies | jump to latest

I get the impression that perhaps we are meant to question whether some events actually happened or whether they only played out in Jonas Engstrom's mind. I read that if someone is chronically sleep deprived, even a few seconds spent with eyes closed can thrust the body into much-needed REM sleep (the stage at which dreams occur) -- which would be like experiencing a vivid "walking hallucination."

In a couple of instances, it's obvious that what he sees isn't "there":

(1) When he is lies alone in bed at night, recalling a conversation he had with his deceased partner, we briefly see another man sitting in the room, watching him. I had trouble making out who this was. Sometimes it looked like the Norwegian police chief; other times I wondered if it was Jon Holt (my TV screen is kind of small). Could anyone get a clear ID on who the other figure was?

(2) When he visits Zak in the hospital, he glimpses a man walking down the hall who looks like his deceased partner.

(3) When he ransacks Holt's summer home, he turns around and sees a woman asleep on a divan in the living room. When the other police officers arrive on the scene, he looks toward the divan and it is empty. Whom did he see there? It looked like it might have been Hagen, the police woman... or was it Tanja Lorentzen?
________________________________________________________________

Then there are scenes in which reality is debatable:

(1) At the beginning, during the examination of the victim's body, he goes into another room to change clothes, and he overhears the whispers of gossip among the Norwegian investigators regarding his past indiscretions. Paranoia on his part, or was it for real?

I'm sure this incident in his past did occur, since it tells us about his character. But what I'm questioning is whether his police colleagues would even indulge in that kind of gossip -- and even laugh at him behind his back -- within his hearing. For all we know, he might not have even been caught; it may be his own little secret... but his paranoia betrays his fear that somehow others know what he did.

(2) Does he actually touch teenage Froya so inappropriately? Does he actually attempt to rape the innkeeper... or are these fantasies of his mind?

(3) It is hinted that his partner, Erik Vik, is experiencing memory problems and confusion: He tells Engstrom that he went through a red light, and he repeats a story about a strange couple showing up in his and his wife's hotel room (with the audience meant to infer that it was Vik who wandered into the wrong room). But we see that Engstrom did drive through a red light. And later, when he recollects his conversation with Vik about the hotel room incident, it turns out that it was the hotel who made the mistake, not Vik (the hotel booked two couples for the same room). So is it Engstrom who is having the cognitive lapses? Maybe he did tell Vik to turn right during the pursuit of the killer -- but in his own head he heard himself say "left"?

(4) The biggest question of all... did Holt really die by sheer accident -- in the process of running away from Engstrom, he fell through some rotten wood on the dock, hit his head, and drowned? Maybe this is a scene in which we can trust our senses that it actually played as shown. It doesn't offer an "alternative version" like the scene above (#3), nor does it have that weird "mind's eye" perspective that segments 1 and 2 have. But still, you can wonder...

What do you think?

[–] Cobra12 14 years ago

I have to watch the film again now!

[–] Zerose 14 years ago

1) When he is lies alone in bed at night, recalling a conversation he had with his deceased partner, we briefly see another man sitting in the room, watching him. I had trouble making out who this was. Sometimes it looked like the Norwegian police chief; other times I wondered if it was Jon Holt (my TV screen is kind of small). Could anyone get a clear ID on who the other figure was?

It's Erik Vik.

(2) When he visits Zak in the hospital, he glimpses a man walking down the hall who looks like his deceased partner.

Yes, Erik Vik.

(3) When he ransacks Holt's summer home, he turns around and sees a woman asleep on a divan in the living room. When the other police officers arrive on the scene, he looks toward the divan and it is empty. Whom did he see there? It looked like it might have been Hagen, the police woman... or was it Tanja Lorentzen?

Tanja. When he sees her on a divan, he's facing a truth - he was this close to sacrificing the truth of her death to save himself. It's luck - Holt's death and the discovery of her clothes which connected her to Holt via the summer house - that ultimately saves him.

(1) At the beginning, during the examination of the victim's body, he goes into another room to change clothes, and he overhears the whispers of gossip among the Norwegian investigators regarding his past indiscretions. Paranoia on his part, or was it for real?

The chief inspector mentioned in their gossip isn't him. It's meant to show that people will gossip if or when a person makes a mistake. This is something he doesn't ever want to do, which foretells his actions (the mistake over shooting).

(2) Does he actually touch teenage Froya so inappropriately? Does he actually attempt to rape the innkeeper... or are these fantasies of his mind?

The Froyer incident can be interpreted in two ways. One) he was testing, imagining Jonas Holt's position, or two) he stumbled to temptation. There is another interpretation, I'm sure.

The Innkeeper incident - he didn't try to rape her. He's lost control of his emotions and desires, which was too much for her. He's embarrassed and ashamed of letting himself to be that weak in front of her. I believe this scene is supposed to show the effects of insomnia. Such as, if he wasn't so tired and disconcerted, he wouldn't even mix personal business with work (remember his comment to the crime-reader detective in a hallway at the end). He's lost the sight of that line between personal and business.

(3) It is hinted that his partner, Erik Vik, is experiencing memory problems and confusion (cut for space) So is it Engstrom who is having the cognitive lapses?

Hagen the female detective has stated the others noticed Vik's memory issues. When she asks him about it, Engstrom denies the truth. Perhaps because he doesn't want her to see a flaw in Vik either. Vik was part of his world.

(4) The biggest question of all... did Holt really die by sheer accident -- in the process of running away from Engstrom, he fell through some rotten wood on the dock, hit his head, and drowned?

He really did die. His death allows detectives to assume it's Holt who shot Vik, which allows Engstrom to hide his mistake, leaving his highly esteemed professional reputation still intact.
--
Engstrom is all about perfectionism. He cannot tolerate people seeing his mistakes or anything wrong with him and his world. Remember his story about his brother? He admits he told lies to cover up the fact his brother died. He didn't want the others to see a crack in his mirror.

The story is essentially Engstrom vs. his ego, and Engstrom's stamina vs. the nature (the endless day). He makes a mistake with shooting his partner and does everything he can to cover it up. The media would have a field day - a supposedly perfect and celebrated Swedish detective brought a gun to gun-free Norway! And accidentally shot his case partner! His ego simply cannot allow that scenario to happen.

So not only Hagen the female detective is watching closely, he's battling against the deepening psychological and physical effects of insomnia while attempting to cover his tracks without getting caught.

The only person who saw what really happened on the beach is Holt. Engstrom understands that Holt will drag him down with him if Engstrom arrests him. Engstrom's ego or pride is big enough for him to be willing to cover up Holt's crime in order to cover up his own mistake. It gets worse and worse until, luckily for him, Holt dies. He can finally do what he's famous for - catch a murderer. (Edit: remember Engstrom was prepared to kill Holt in that hut, but a ship nearby stopped him.)

It all works out in the end, but his ego/pride still suffers a big dent - Hagen knows, anyway.

[–] Sleepless_84 14 years ago

There's another interesting detail in the film : after being accidentally pushed by car Engstrom ( who has blood on his face ) sees face of Holt in the
car's mirror

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zerose 14 years ago

Wow. I've been a fan of this film for years & always thought they were referring to Engstrom. I've watched many times the R1 Criterion DVD subtitled in English ; I don't speak Norwegian. Does the Norwegian dialogue make it more clear who they're talking about?

I was wrong, actually! I realised my mistake once I understood that he didn't fly into Norway from Sweden as a Swedish police officer. He flew upwards towards the Arctic Circle from Olso, Norway, as a specialist Norwegian police officer.

I now understand that Engstrom was the Chief Inspector in the Swedish police force who got caught in bed with a witness. He ran away to Norway and got a job (demoting himself) as an investigating officer with a specialist police task (similar to F.B.I.) within the Norwegian police force.

I see him more as a pathological compulsive liar than a perfectionist for perfectionism's sake. I suppose one could call him an "imperfectionist", as he'll do whatever it takes to maintain the illusion of wellbeing. This could explain why he lies about Vik's memory. And his dead brother definitely has something to do with his scarred psyche. The film gives us enough info to know it has a meaning, but doesn't go all Freudian on us & say "Engstrom's behavior can be 100% explained by _____." That's what makes it so brilliant. That's why we're still talking about it. Some things can never be understood or solved.

True. I, however, still stand by my interpretation. His actions are driven by perfectionism, ego and guilt. Why would a compulsive liar lie? To maintain the illusion of well-being, you say, but doesn't that back my interpretation up? Maintaining the illusion of well-being is part of his desire to appear perfect to people, surely?

Slightly OT: I know you wrote this post nine months ago, but this takes on a new context after the tragic recent massacre in Norway. I wonder if the Norwegian police will change their tactics & this film will become a time capsule.

I doubt it. Britain had had a few similar incidents, like the Hungerford massacre, the Dunlane massacre and recent Cumbria shootings, and it still doesn't permit all of its police officers to carry guns. Only a selection can and even then, they still can't carry guns in public whenever and wherever they want.