Schizopolis

Schizopolis, like every other movie out there, is a movie that you try your best to understand. Although, Schizopolis is like a Lego set that you only realize has some missing pieces when you’ve already invested so much time and effort on it. Like an unfinished Lego figure, this movie gives you a sort of idea on what it is but your understanding of it will still be sort of incomplete or unfinished. In my opinion, the movie is a mystery on purpose. It gives you elements to understand it, but it also lacks information which leads you to assume.

I divided the movie into 2 layers that I later on combined into one after watching the entire movie. The first layer is the dialogue used by the characters at the beginning of the movie. As an example, I will take an exchange between Fletcher and his wife.

Upon entering his home, Fletcher says “Generic greeting!” His wife then replies by saying “Generic greeting returned.” This type of literal dialogue goes on for a certain portion of the movie but is then replaced by the second layer I would like to talk about. The next dialogue involved the characters speaking in different languages. It can be assumed that the movie intended the dialogue to be unknown to the viewers considering that the audience would most likely only understand English.

To combine the two parts I saw them as complementary pieces rather than two entirely different layers. The first layer presented a literal and honest expression from the characters that showed the viewers that actions do not necessarily reflect what the characters of the movie really intend to do. An example of this is another exchange between Fletcher and his wife. Fletcher asks his wife what she prepared for dinner and she replies by stating a phrase that sort of goes like “I prepared this certain meal even if I know you are only pretending to like my cooking.” Fletcher smiles in return and from this we can see how the action of pleasantry coming from Fletcher is a complete lie from what he really feels. It can even be assumed that the dialogue for this part of the film is the internal thoughts of the characters being brought out and because of this I decided it would be more efficient to focus mainly on the dialogue and less on the actions. The second part is a “flipped image” of the first due to the fact that the actions of the characters were the only basis on understanding the film. As mentioned earlier, the characters spoke in languages that were unknown to the viewers and trying to decipher it on the spot would be a tedious process. Although, because of the build-up done by the first part of the movie, the viewers already had a vague idea of what intentions, characteristics, and ideas the characters had so seeing them act a certain way for the remainder of the film did not really require that much verbal explanation. The switch up on this part just proves how important the dialogue was in the first part of the film. This is why I considered the two parts that work hand in hand to build a single cohesive unit than opposing forces that only aim to confuse the viewers.

Even though I tried my best to dissect the film with this algorithm, I still found myself lost majority of the time. The presence of Elmo and the sudden appearance of Korchek’s brother are only a few of the certain parts of the film that still remain a mystery to me. To wrap it up, I see Schizopolis as movie that interacts with you as you watch it. You can’t stop thinking while watching it and right when you thought you caught on with the flow of the movie, you get surprised with something new. It was an entertaining film nonetheless, but in the end, I am still longing for the day that I may possibly understand this puzzle of a movie.