The Sweet Hereafter - group analysis

For anyone interested, we’ll be starting this coming Monday an analysis of 1997’s The Sweet Hereafter written and directed by Atom Egoyan, based on the novel by Russell Banks.

Here’s the IMDB page for anyone interested.

All are welcome.

SUBJECTIVE CHARACTERS:

MC: Mitchell
IC: Hotel Owners --> Hippies --> Billy --> Nicole

CHARACTER DYNAMICS

MC RESOLVE: Steadfast
MC GROWTH: (skipped for now)
MC APPROACH: Do-er
MY STYLE: Linear

PLOT DYNAMICS

DRIVER: Action
LIMIT: Option-lock
OUTCOME: Failure
JUDGEMENT: Bad

DOMAINS:

OS DOMAIN: Situation
MC DOMAIN: Activity
IC DOMAIN: Manipulation
RS DOMAIN: Fixed Attitude

CONCERNS:

OS CONCERN: The Past
MC CONCERN: Understanding
IC CONCERN: Developing a Plan
RS CONCERN: Memories

ISSUES:

OS ISSUE:
MC ISSUE:
IC ISSUE:
RS ISSUE:

PROBLEMS:

OS PROBLEM:
MC PROBLEM:
IC PROBLEM:
RS PROBLEM:

Hey @Jerome can we delay this by one day? I don’t think I can watch it again until Monay night and I’d like to participate … In fact, I’d like to offer to moderate because I’ve always wanted to out this one up on the main site as an official analysis. When I first saw it I didn’t think there was a complete storyform but I understanding has changed much since then.

Just let me know and thanks for keeping the momentum going on this stuff.

No problem. I’ll be the secretary then, and use the top post to list our choices as we go along, that way we’ll have an updated and complete list of the analysis for reference. Does that work for you?

Sounds great. Thanks again!

Ok, for those of you who enjoyed the happy excursion up north that is The Sweet Hereafter … how would you describe the Overall Story?

A lawyer tries to unite the people of a small town to initiate a class action lawsuit against those responsible for a school bus accident that killed their children.

1 Like

Sounds good to me, though that seems more geared towards Mitchell’s throughline (mixed with his role as Protagonist). Probably something more general like “Town’s Children Killed in a School Bus Accident”. Just trying to get something short and sweet for the OS Name - and something that doesn’t really involve a specific person. But it’s a good start!

What about MC (easy) and IC (not-so-easy)?

1 Like

For a throughline title, yeah, that’s a lot better.

Obviously the MC’s Mitchell, the lawyer. I think the IC is Zoe and, by proxy, her childhood friend Allison who forces Mitchell to face the truth regarding his daughter whom he’s lost, much like the townspeople.

1 Like

Hello.

I agree with OS as “Town’s Children Killed in a School Bus Accident”

I think MC is closer to what @Jerome wrote. I’d say MC’s throughline is “Mitchell tries to convince people to join a class action lawsuit”

IC… hmmm… still thinking about this one.
-Is it Nicole? Something related to not joining the class action. But I don’t see her actively opposing it until the end (and then, it’s more against her father than to Mitchell), Billy would be more proactive opposing the lawsuit, I’d say he’s the antagonist. Also the IC? Probably not.

-Could it be Zoe, Mitchell’s daughter? Mitchell does so much to save her when she was a baby, but now that she’s grown up he practically gave up on her. I’d say he is trying to save other people’s children because he couldn’t save his own. Could that be Zoe’s influence?

Anything that has to do with the class action lawsuit belongs in the overall story throughline. It isn’t part of the subjective, emotional story.

Nicole’s relationship with her father is almost like it’s own mini-story; resonating Mitchell’s relationship with Zoe. Her anger and disgust at her incestuous father was well played, I thought, with the “I need a lock” scene, and then ending where she stares at him while lying during her testimony.

1 Like

I wouldn’t agree with the statement that ALL of the class action lawsuit belongs in the Overall Story Throughline – it has more to do with what Mitchell is dealing with personally.

How does Zoe challenge Mitchell’s point-of-view? What is different about her now that would actually warrant a story? Or could it be that Zoe is part of the MC Throughline …

1 Like

True. Zoe doesn’t challenge Mitchell as much as drive him. It’s his sense of loss that drives him to visit the town. It’s his anger over losing his own daughter that drives him to seek justice with the class action lawsuit.

But it’s also Zoe that challenges Mitchell’s belief that there’s a reason behind everything. The reason Zoe became a drug addict isn’t clear, in fact it’s implied that Mitchell was the kind of father who went beyond the call of duty to take care of his daughter, but that despite his best efforts, lost Zoe to drugs and pornography.

Allison does inadvertently corner Mitchell to confront his feelings regarding Zoe.

Billy challenges the need for a lawsuit, insisting the accident was nothing more than a random incident and that there’s no one to blame. He himself serviced the bus and knew there was nothing wrong with it. Though it could be argued he was trying to protect his own skin because of his involvement with the maintenance of the bus.

Nicole doesn’t exactly challenge Mitchell as much as sabotage the whole lawsuit.

So, er… “challenge” would be… Billy? :confounded:

Who does Mitchell establish a relationship(s) with?

Allison: seated next to each other in the airplane, sharing a flight.
Nicole: buying her a computer, visiting her in the hospital and at her place to discuss the law suit.

I’m not sure exactly how Allison works as an Influence Character to Mitchell or what kind of relationship they create. She does bring up his past but she really doesn’t have a viewpoint on it.

Nicole however does.

But how does Nicole challenge Mitchell? She cuts the legs off the class action lawsuit, but never actually challenges him on a personal level.

Unless… wait, she outs him? Mitchell presents himself as a crusader for justice when, in reality, he’s just there for the money, playing on people’s greed / gluttony; buying Nicole a computer, promising her father money, etc. I guess the exchange, “You’d make a great poker player kid” supports that.

My take on it was that Nicole was exacting her revenge on her father, not outing Mitchell, and that Allison was forcing Mitchell to face his past by being an agent of the truth. Otherwise, why have the incest and airplane scenes at all?

The airplane scenes give Mitchell a chance to go through his Main Character Throughline - the incest scenes illustrate part of the Influence Character Throughline (particularly the problem). And I don’t know if I necessarily believe that Mitchell is there solely for money.

Think of the “You and I” connection - who does Mitchell have a You and I are both alike connection with?

You mean the scene where Mitchell explains to Nicole there are two sides? One side wants to maximize compensation while the other side wants to minimize it, effectively telling Nicole they’re both on the same side? They both want the same thing, to get as much money as possible.

There’s actually another one, when he confronts Billy next to the bus. He almost says “You and I are both alike” (Hint @chuntley for the you and I montage!) but in a modified way.

In short, I think the town itself acts as Influence Character to Mitchell - they both ‘lost’ their children, one side figuratively, one side literally. And both have different ways of dealing with. I think there is a handoff situation starting with the hotel owners, going to the “hippie” couple and then eventually Nicole.

The relationship is business oriented – lawyer/client relationship.

So the Overall Story Throughline could be more like “Trying to cope with the loss of children”?

Re Nicole’s influence: I think we - the audience - and not Mitchell - are the ones who know why Nicole decided to lie. Mitchell never knows what happened between Nicole and her father before and after the accident, how and why their relationship changed and why she lied. Just as the town people never know about Zoe-Mitchell and therefore about Mitchell’s true motivations. (Well, Billy is the only one that learns a little bit about Zoe)