Lykke (13), the daughter of a prominent Labour Party politician, has accidentally beaten her classmate Jamie, the son of a local right wing-politician, to death. Lykke claims Jamie's death ...
See full summary »
Lykke (13), the daughter of a prominent Labour Party politician, has accidentally beaten her classmate Jamie, the son of a local right wing-politician, to death. Lykke claims Jamie's death was an accident, but nobody believes her. The school's principal, Liv, is an idealist who, against her political beliefs, has been living in a secret relationship with Karl Erik, Jamie's father. When they can't keep their relationship a secret anymore, the surroundings react with disbelief. Liv's brother Anders is Lykke and Jamie's class teacher. He was supposed to be in the school yard when the accident happened, and is overwhelmed with guilt for not having been able to prevent the accident from happening. Like water surrounding an undertow, we'll experience how the community relates to the accident and the aftermath. How could it happen - and how is it possible to continue living afterwards?
In my mind, the film deals with a Norwegian way of handling a difficult situation. Being av Swede, a neighbour of Norway, I think that the film is also relevant for my own country.
In our countries, people in problematic situations try to be kind, try not to be too emotional, and try to avoid the crucial question. In the film, one of the teachers was expected to guard at the break at the moment when Lykke killed Jamie. He did not do that. That was, however, not revealed until the end of the film. This remarkable delay was a consequence of the non-confrontational way of communication between the people in the film.
Another aspect was the handling of the very causes of events. Obviously, Lykke had hit Jamie in a way that resulted in his death. We do not learn in any detail how this implausible event could happen. The was obviously due to a lack of any serious investigation. That, in turn, was due to regard to Lykke as a person who still was a child. An investigation would not result in any legal action.
In the film, many people felt guilt. Due to the lack of clear common understanding of what had happened some people felt guilt unnecessarily. And for those that had actually contributed, the guilt could not be resolved since it was no common understanding of what had happened.
So in my understanding, the avoidant way of handing a difficult situation, more people will be left with unresolved guilt.
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this