TRANCE

UK, 2013, 101 minutes, Colour.
James Mc Avoy, Vincent Cassell, Rosario Dawson
Directed by Danny Boyle.

On exiting a screening of Trance, this reviewer would not like to be asked to write a synopsis, let alone be cross-examined on dramatic logic of the plot. For a while, it was quite straightforward with Simon (Mc Avoy) a dealer with a London auction company, explaining auctions, security (in the event of an event, as he says) and explaining that no work of art is worth a human life. More than a bit of irony there by the end of the film.

We see the event, an in-detail, boldly staged robbery of a Goya painting, and the aftermath where Simon is brutally hit and suffers amnesia. The head of the gang, Vincent Cassell, intense as usual, agrees that he should undergo hypnosis. A first session makes a good impression of the skills of the therapist, Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson). From then on…

The film’s title refers to the hypnosis sessions and the trance into which the subject goes, revealing more and more about themselves. But, what happens is that we have trances within trances, the suppression of memories, the installing of alternate memories and the subject (and the audience) finding it very difficult to know which trance he is in. This does give the film-makers opportunities to dramatise alternate scenarios, hallucinatory experiences, death in one trance but not in another.

And, if that sounds complicated, when an explanation of what has been going on is offered towards the end, there are twists and turns we had certainly not anticipated.

The performances are effective (though strangely eclectic, a Scots lead allowed to speak with his own accent, a French villain and an American therapist). The film looks very stylish. And it is directed by Danny Boyle who, in the 1990s when he was directed Inspector Morse films and his cult films, Shallow Grave and Trainspotting, might never have dreaded that by 2008, he would have a directing Oscar and Best Film with Slumdog Millionaire and by 2012 would be celebrated as the inventive genius behind the Opening Ceremony of the London Olympics. He has made eclectic choices for his films (The Beach, 28 Days, Sunshine, 127 Hours) and Trance is quite a different genre.

One comment was that Trance was a ‘hypnotic mess’. There’s something in that. It is certainly intriguing, despite the difficulties in following the plot and psychological character changes. Perhaps it is best to allow oneself to be hypnotised and watch it in the equivalent of a trance state. It is something of an Inception in its states within states of consciousness.

1. A blend of heist thriller and psychology?

2. The films of Danny Boyle, his reputation, flair, diverse genres? The international cast?

3. The title, hypnosis, stages of consciousness, memories, recall? Suppression? Implantation? Stages within stages? The blend of realism with hallucinations and dreams?

4. Audience response? Reality or not? The plot complications, logic? Truth?

5. London, locations, views and atmosphere? The overhead shots of the overpasses and the psychological references? The auction house, the streets? The atmospheric score, sometimes pounding?

6. First impressions of Simon? The close-ups, his talking, knowledge of art, explanations of security, his work as an auctioneer, as a guard, on standby? In the event of an event? His impression of being genuine? The auction, the Goya, the auctioneer? The arrival of the gang, Franck, the associates, blocking the car of the Ukrainian mercenaries? The fire bombs? Simon taking the painting, the guards, put in the painting in the case? Meeting Franck? The laser? Franck hitting him, unconscious, waking in the hospital, the newspapers and his heroism, the visit of the auctioneer, his amnesia? The audience not seeing some of the essential facts until later?

7. His going home, the wreckage of the flat? The gang contacting him, torture, the nails, not giving in, no information? The discussion about hypnosis? His choice of therapist?

8. His arrival, false name, the sessions, meeting Elizabeth, the gang listening in, the issue of the keys, the nature of the session, his going home, finding the keys?

9. Elizabeth, the collage of her sessions and indications for expertise? Her personality?

10. The group, Franck as leader, harsh, the other members, their role in the robbery, car, the smoke?

11. The second session, Elizabeth with the notes, the silence, the gang listening, her having studied Simon on the Internet? These episodes also misleading the audience?

12. Elizabeth meeting with Franck, the discussions, the bargain, partnership, for Simon’s confidence, overcoming his fear?

13. The later Simon, the revelation that he was in the gang, his character, dependence on Elizabeth, love for her? Her creating scenarios in his mind? The effect on Elizabeth?

14. Franck, his attraction, sexual, the episodes, real or not?

15. The change in Simon, his dependence, violence, obsessions, his imagining the shootings of the gang, his anger?

16. The story of the car, the driver and the episode with her discussing art, the scene with Elizabeth and their looking at art and the books, the focus on Goya and art tradition? The driver reappearing in Simon’s consciousness, interchanging with Elizabeth? Reality, his killing the woman, hiding the body, and the painting?

17. The truth, the revelation through flashbacks? His gambling, the scenes of his playing cards, his sessions with Elizabeth, the explanations, the affair, trying to move away from obsession? Too much? His violence? The sessions and the suppression of memories? Revisiting the robbery, Elizabeth and her involvement? Shooting the gang and their attack on Elizabeth? Taking Franck? In the car, tying his hand? The body in the boot? The painting? Simon and his madness, the petrol, the fire, shooting at Franck, Franck desperate, driving the car, killing Simon? Elizabeth, the vehicle, crashing through, Franck in the water? Saved?

18. The finale, Elizabeth with the painting on the wall, talking through the screen, winning?

19. The overall effect on the audience and their coming to grips with what happened and the nature of their experience?