Was April bipolar?? - Revolutionary Road (2009) Discussion

[–] MaximusXXX 11 years ago

Oh it was almost entirely on April.

Frank time and again showed to be a very caring and understanding husband and she kept having tantrums like a child. Yes she was stressed but what the film showed certainly implied she did have a mental disorder of some kind.

Those foolish enough to move from canada to america increase the average I.Q. of both countries

reply

[–] blanche-2 10 years ago

Bipolar - no. She definitely had a form of depression, but bipolar means that people go through a manic stage. She was not manic. A person in a true manic mode does things like tell jokes to an entire restaurant when he's just there for dinner, or pulls a knife on someone in a parking lot if there's an argument, or tries to jump off of a plane. To me she never exhibited true mania. Severe depression, yes.

I think the breakfast scene at the end was her acting and perhaps apologizing for what she planned on doing.

reply

[–] Beautifully_Twisted 9 years ago

You aren't very educated on Bipolar, are you? That's not all that being manic can be and not every person with Bipolar gets manic often. Also, there is no excuse for cheating! If April caused him to be so unhappy, get a divorce. Women were blamed for divorce back then, even though it was frowned on.

~The insane are blessed in a beautifully twisted way~

reply

[–] blanche-2 9 years ago

I was suspected of being bipolar and told I wasn't because I did not have manic stages. That was a by two psychiatrists. That's why they call it BI polar. Otherwise it's DEPRESSION. So yes, I know something about it, and I never saw April as manic. Perhaps she was at times other than in the film.

reply

[–] Beautifully_Twisted 8 years ago

I said that not every person with bipolar gets manic OFTEN. There are people with bipolar who only do once in a blue moon.

~The insane are blessed in a beautifully twisted way~

reply

[–] catbird-18939 8 years ago

Bipolar is a complex illness. There are many different symptoms -- and several different types -- of bipolar disorder. There is not a one-description-fits-all as medical professionals in the field will tell you.

reply

[–] janet-flowerchild58 11 years ago

April woke up the next morning seeming content and like nothing happened because she had already made her decision to do the self-abortion. It's similar to the same reason people who commit suicide seem happy again right before...

reply

[–] puplover 11 years ago

Janet- you beat me to it! That was my exact answer to the OP. Yes, she wasn't a Stepford wife the next morn, she was resigned. No fighting left. Peace and relief washed over her as she knew what she was about to do as soon as Frank left. Her problem was solved.

As for her being bi-polar, that's been mentioned before. She could be. He impulsiveness: (deciding to go to Paris just like that; having sex w/ neighbor just like that etc.) And then her depression of course. Unfortunately, no diagnosis for that back then.

reply

[–] janet-flowerchild58 11 years ago

Thanks puplover! Your answer was excellent :) janet :)

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] puplover 11 years ago

Wiped- Octupolar- that's funny. But, no Frank just REACTED off of what he was getting from April. Yes, he was wishy-washy and did not have good boundries. And he was co-dependent. He didn't have great empathy but he tried. He was just somewhat stunted. But, I do not think he was mentally ill in the least. If infidelity makes one bipolar than half the world would be.

reply

[–] bootblack987 10 years ago

If April was bipolar, what on Earth did that make Frank?

Making up a procedure at work instead of doing actual work, sleeping w/ a vulnerable secretary from work, flip-flopping about going to Paris, arguing w/ his wife when she was trying to be reasonable and not let things get out of hand (at the beginning, after the play) and exploding at Shannon's character after stewing for minutes instead of answering his retorts.

Sheesh, Frank must've been octuple-polar. April's behavior the next morning should be quite apparent to anyone who paid attention.

Brilliant post, thank you. This old "blame the woman" game is SO last millennium...

reply

[–] mikeleg34 10 years ago

No April wasn't bi-polar, she became depressed because her hopes were dashed. She was ahead of her time. She was really onto something; the notion of passing on the perfect home, perfect little life in the suburbs, with 2 kids mentality. She didn't want to be another drone in the system. She didn't want to live the same meaningless lives everyone was expected to live. Frank's day-in, day-out was filled with thousands of drab suits, toiling for "The Man". So she appealed to what made her husband feel most alive, and for a few short months he began to really live. But in the end, he was too afraid to make the move.

Frank cheated because he couldn't truly see his wife. She exceeded the desires of the flesh, but the appeal of the "matrix" was too much to overcome. She was trying to appeal to something much more ancient, the spark of life.

It was the 19050's. She couldn't very easily divorce her husband, take 1/2, and move on by herself. What would society think?

"Comprehension is not a requisite of cooperation." - Councillor West

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 10 years ago

If she was so ahead of her time then she shouldn't care about what society would think.
Many people become bored, disillusioned, feel they're in a rut, etc. It's often referred to as a midlife crisis though shouldn't always be so easily dismissed.

Some want more and a few need that extra stimulation. She though helped to bring those children into the world. She could have used birth control. They were then her responsibilities.

Frank was far from perfect but he was a good provider. He should have had a wife like Millie and April should have had her adventures prior to marrying and having children, like Rose of Titanic fame.

reply

[–] sunchick116-872-583383 9 years ago

if she wasn't bipolar, she was just batsh*t crazy. and yes i am gonna take sides and yes i am one of those that believe actions have consequences. april was insane and drove frank to cheat. can't blame him since this was the 1950's and leaving wasn't an option.

reply

[–] maarten_vw 9 years ago

I sympathised with April.
I guess that makes me a maniac, too. LOL
And I am guy..

She wanted to do something exciting with her life instead of the mundane )*&)*! 90% of the people choose to deal with, and pretend like it is the only sane thing to do.
Frank first went along with it, half into it, not sure if he agreed or that he was just pretendig he felt the same, and then completely crushed her dream when he could get a raise, telling her that her deepest desires where simply childish.
At that moment he ceased to be the man she loved, in her eyes.

I don't think she was being erratic. She was very consistent in what she wanted.
It was Frank who changed his mind halfway.

What I like about this movie how different people watching it arrive at completely different judgements on the characters.
I suppose it one of the hallmarks of great cinema.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

It is interesting how divisive the movie is, considering the different "judgements". It seems to split along gender lines.
Reading over a lot of the posts, it seems most posters seem to fail to remember that April's dream of a different life in Paris is mostly an attempt to fulfill her husband's wish. It was he who had told her that he'd like to live there and had kept telling her that he really didn't like his job and wondered if he was living up to his potential.
It's fairly depressing actually to see how a lot of people have interpreted the movie and are so quick to indict April for her unwillingness to accept the endless emptiness of conformity for conformity's sake.
Was April bi-polar, crazy, what-have-you? No, I doubt it very seriously. Manic, probably but only because it depressed and frustrated her that Frank was able to settle for less than what either of them had professed to want.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

Her husband though liked the city when he was there years before. They good have taken a vacation or just enjoyed the memories. She was the one that wanted something more than she had. It just happened to be that she chose Paris, maybe believing he'd then agree to it. Many complain about their jobs but they also feel lucky to have what they do.

She was born too early. She would have enjoyed social media. Some need the extra stimulation of feeling that others live vicariously through them. I believe April had an issue with happiness in general. Living in Paris may not have been any better or at least not for too long.

They should have kept in the deleted scene in which her father visited her at her aunt's house. It would have helped to explain her issues with attachment and wandering spirit.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

The movie has to be perceived in the context of the '50s. I believe too many who are critical of either Frank's or April's situation fail to realize just how much men and more so women's lives have changed since then.
True, April was dissatisfied, but so was Frank. Clearly so. I think both of them were grateful for what they had, but it's also true that both of them clearly wanted something different, something not necessarily described as something 'more'.
I believe April was far more perceptive than her husband. Obviously far more sensitive. She saw the solution to their dissatisfaction in helping him to figure himself out, figure out what it was that would fulfill him. Listening intently to what he dreamed of as the ideal life, she rejected Frank's strategy of "doubling down" on their current path as a way to success.
By more perceptive, what I meant above is that I believed she envisioned (by mere extrapolation of their continued course) that sooner or later their marriage would collapse.
For a housewife with two small children and another on the way to stand before her husband and profess not to love him anymore is a desperate, dangerous, but brave thing to do even today, imagine what it would have felt like for a woman in her situation back then?
As far as the deleted scene, perhaps you're right. I would have liked a more straight-forward interpretation of the novel myself because as far as deletion is concerned there's far less of the writer's intent concerning Frank than what made it to the screen as well.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

Frank was mainly dissatisfied mainly because of April. Many men of the era didn't find their jobs exciting but they didn't decide to drop everything and move to a foreign city. The film was a type of 'the grass is greener story'.
I agree that April thought it could save their marriage. I don't believe she was though thinking of anyone else but the stimulation she needed.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

'I don't believe she was though thinking of anyone else but the stimulation she needed.'
On what do you base that upon?
'Frank was mainly dissatisfied mainly because of April.'
What makes you think so? Take the idea of them moving to a foreign city/country out of the picture. Would that have made him less dissatisfied? Was the idea of moving what made him complain about his circumstances?
No, I don't believe it was. The idea of moving was simply a solution to their problems. It was one of several they could have chosen. And Frank surely was capable of suggesting something other than that if he had a mind to, wasn't he?
The way I see it, April knew that their way of life dissatisfied her. And going by what her husband had been telling her about his having questioned his career path and how uninspired he was at his job, she knew he was dissatisfied as well.
The whole Paris 'thing' was just a solution that she came up with. It might not have been the best, but it was clearly not the only option.
As much as April yearned for something (maybe not 'more') but certainly different, Frank did as well but was just too "programmed" into thinking like society groomed men to think like. April had far more balls than Frank.
It's interesting to me how some want to blame one over the other here (April/Frank) when really all the story is about is how constrictive society can be.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

I decided to elaborate. I apologize for quickly dismissing this as a back & forth thing. It's just that I hate when I see those and I've seen too many on these boards just by trying to get through through some of the threads.

The other characters were also shown to be living out their day to day lives and wanting more. It's human nature, too often. It's natural to be dreamers. Frank though understood that not all dreams were to be realized. He had a wife and children to support and was thankful to have a good job which allowed him to do so. There are movies, TV shows, real life stories, etc. of many thinking/saying what if but not taking chances as if they didn't have any responsibilities.

Frank knew April was unhappy. She never let him forget it. He seemed somewhat content during their final breakfast together. She had either already decided what to do or realized it after playing the part of the dutiful 1950s middle class housewife that morning.

So we disagree, it happens.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

I understand not wanting to get into the whole 'back & forth thing' but this is merely a decision of differing perspectives on a shared experience and certainly nothing contentious. I always find something to learn from something like this.

I'd enjoy knowing if after you've read the novel whether or not you still felt the way you do presently.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

I didn't read the book. I've only been commenting on the movie as it was presented.
I have though seen deleted scenes. One involving April living at her aunt's house and receiving a visit from her on the road father I believe should have been left in the final cut. It helped to explain how she was.

It was on again so I have it on in the background.
I wanted to mention their beach scene and the fight at home afterwards. Frank knew the importance of being a good provider and making sacrifices for their children. The world then seemed smaller. Many men wouldn't want to leave their secure job and risk what their family had by giving it all up and moving away to parts not well known to them. He realized they could travel but not have to move. She was unhappy and needed more. Wanting is one thing, as many characters in this movie did that, but April needed more.

April's talk with Shep when they were alone at the bar was also telling. I'd rewrite the ending that April survived but had a partial hysterectomy. She and Shep would run off together. He though would soon become disillusioned. It's easy to believe you love someone and especially something about them if you don't have to put up with it 24/ and support them. The grass is often greener.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

The film is most definitely a derivative of the novel but there was much of the writer's intent lost in the translation. The better adaptations to me are the ones which retain as much of the writer's perspective as possible.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

Those scenes I mentioned though are part of the story so I doubt my mind would be changed if I read the book.
Frank didn't quit his job and take the kids to live more of an adventurous life after April died. If anything, her death would have made him realize how short life can be. He chose to remain responsible for them.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

It's entirely logical and reasonable to have the impressions you do concerning the movie adaptation. I did not come in "fresh" whenever I saw the movie. Having read the novel, I had been exposed to more of the author's subtext than one who hadn't.

However, "I doubt my mind would be changed if I read the book" is a fairly presumptive thing to say.

If the screen-play had been an original concept and not an adaptation from a novel there would be no need to interpret it beyond it's own merits. No deference would be necessary.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

Your didn't quote the entire sentences which was "Those scenes I mentioned though are part of the story so I doubt my mind would be changed if I read the book".
The scenes I mentioned were telling ones.

reply

[–] truetexian 9 years ago

Sorry not to have quoted your sentence entirely. Since you were referring to deleted scenes, scenes which did not make it into the final cut, I didn't see the importance of it.
"The scenes I mentioned were telling ones". Yes they were, but only in the context of continuing to support the screenwriter's interpretation of what he deemed important from the source material. Note that he didn't even deem them ultimately "telling" enough to make it to final cut.

reply

[–] IcingOnTheCake 9 years ago

I wasn't referring to deleted scenes. I'd already mentioned a few of the scenes that made it to the final cut. I had mentioned earlier a scene that was cut but all of these would have been part of the book story anyway.

It was on again so I have it on in the background.
I wanted to mention their beach scene and the fight at home afterwards. Frank knew the importance of being a good provider and making sacrifices for their children. The world then seemed smaller. Many men wouldn't want to leave their secure job and risk what their family had by giving it all up and moving away to parts not well known to them. He realized they could travel but not have to move. She was unhappy and needed more. Wanting is one thing, as many characters in this movie did that, but April needed more.

April's talk with Shep when they were alone at the bar was also telling. I'd rewrite the ending that April survived but had a partial hysterectomy. She and Shep would run off together. He though would soon become disillusioned. It's easy to believe you love someone and especially something about them if you don't have to put up with it 24/ and support them. The grass is often greener.

reply