Psychoanalysis of “the Sweet Hereafter”

Psychoanalysis of “The Sweet Hereafter”

“The Sweet Hereafter” portrays the grief stricken citizens of a remote Canadian town traumatized by a terrible accident, and the impact of an ambulance-chasing lawyer who is attempting to deal with the grief in his own life. The film also depicts the grieving subjects susceptibility to convert grief and guilt into both blame and monetary gain and the transformation this small community faces after such a devastating event.

The motives of Mitchell Stephens, the lawyer trying to file a class-action lawsuit, and of the townspeople are questionable throughout the film. Some in the community feel that attempting to win money in a court case is unnecessary and in fact will tear the town farther apart. Nicole’s parents are after the money, when others, such as Bear’s parents want to make sure that this amount of pain and suffering does not come upon others in the near future. They are not after the money as much as the answers that a lawsuit will bring about how the accident was caused and allow them some closure.

The film chronicles the histories of three fathers, and manages to relates and link their events and situations. First is Mitchell Stephens and his relationship with his drug-addict daughter. Second is Sam, and the secret affair he is having with his young daughter Nicole. He is somewhat of a narcissistic character because of his preoccupation with himself and pleasing himself, and his lack of empathy throughout the film for the others in the town. Third is Billy, who loves his two children so much that he follows behind the school bus every day waving at them. Billy is also having an affair with a married woman who owns the town’s only motel. On the exterior the town is an average place with good people just living their lives. But, beneath all the small town simplicity is a web of lies and secrets, some which must be dealt with in the face of this tragedy.

Mitchell Stephens is attempting to deal with the grief and angst of the townspeople, while at the same time, deal with his own problems and difficulties with his daughter Zoe. He obsessively retells the story of when his daughter was bitten by a black widow, and he had to assume complete control over her life. The scene in the car on the way to the hospital is shot from his perspective only. However, in the previous scenes where Zoe is shown playing with her mother, there are no shots of just Stephens and Zoe alone. In fact, there are no shots like that in the whole movie. Either a huge distance, or some sort of emotional boundary always separates them. The viewer is not sure what kind of relationship the two had during the time in between the two stories, however one can only wonder why Stephens allowed it to become so destructive.

It is strange how Billy follows behind the school bus every morning all the way to his children’s school. Why doesn’t he just take the children himself? In fact, because of this unusual act, he is the only eyewitness of the accident. The way in which the accident scene is shot is very interesting. Firstly, it is not shown at the beginning of the film where one would presume that it would be shown. Second, the only perspective shown is that of Billy. There are no shots from inside the bus, when it is falling down the side of the mountain, or once it has broken through the ice. This is interesting because the only way the viewer can see the accident is through Billy’s eyes, instead of through the eyes of one of the many children who were passengers on the bus. Billy is strictly against using Mitchell Stephens to obtain money as compensation for the accident because he does not want to relive the whole ordeal and have to recount it among strangers. Billy loved his children