This film asks serious questions, but it seems that it hardly scratches the surface for answering them. The main plot is a courtroom drama. Frederik is accused of fraud, but it turns out that he has a brain tumor that might have changed his personality, so that he possibly wasn't aware of doing something wrong. If he in legal terms was insane, he cannot be declared guilty. But is it so simple? It turns out that some changes that he tumor might have cause were present before the tumor grew in his brain. This interesting part of the story-line is however not sufficiently developed.
Another subplot is the crumbling marriage between Frederik and his wife Mia. The tumor has, so it seems, made Frederik more aggressive, also in bed. Mia therefore seeks comfort with his husband's lawyer. Or does she? We learn at quite late that Mia is an unreliable narrator. This could serve the point that individual experiences and memories form our perception. But it turns out that the narrator is not only unreliable, but quite nuts. This could at best illustrate a point how the brain works.
Indeed, essential issues of brain research and relevant philosophical implications are mentioned, as if the plot was a drama-documentary from Learning Network. But letting the narrator paraphrase these tendencies in brain research almost kills the point of the film. We get the impression that we are witnessing a lecture of a mad scientist. This was probably not the intention of the director.
I liked much of this film, but altogether it was an unconvincing attempt. Maybe the script is too close to the novel.
Another subplot is the crumbling marriage between Frederik and his wife Mia. The tumor has, so it seems, made Frederik more aggressive, also in bed. Mia therefore seeks comfort with his husband's lawyer. Or does she? We learn at quite late that Mia is an unreliable narrator. This could serve the point that individual experiences and memories form our perception. But it turns out that the narrator is not only unreliable, but quite nuts. This could at best illustrate a point how the brain works.
Indeed, essential issues of brain research and relevant philosophical implications are mentioned, as if the plot was a drama-documentary from Learning Network. But letting the narrator paraphrase these tendencies in brain research almost kills the point of the film. We get the impression that we are witnessing a lecture of a mad scientist. This was probably not the intention of the director.
I liked much of this film, but altogether it was an unconvincing attempt. Maybe the script is too close to the novel.