MovieChat Forums > In Dreams (1999) Discussion > Is she he or what? Any opinions?

Is she he or what? Any opinions?

posted 21 years ago by kiss1094
19 replies | jump to latest

Well, I just finished watching and wanted to share some thoughts on the film...
To say that Claire is Vivian may seem to be stretching the plot a bit far, but there seems to be no reason not to.
The director here has provided lots of images and details for this film to be stretchable.
So first, there is the story-as-is, and second there is another story that is possibly by taking advantage of those stretchable materials.
Taking the second interpretation, we can imagine the story being imaginations of Claire...
In this case, Vivian would be an imagination of Claire, made up to excuse her from her child's death, by kidnapping then saving Ruby, and to punish her cheating husband, by killing him.
Vivian is Claire's unspoken childhood, possibly causing all the desires to be violent.
Thus, it is natural that Claire could escape from the hospital, just as Vivian, which really is Claire's forgotten childhood, did.
This probably doesn't make sense because we clearly see both Claire and Vivian in the same frame...
But note the following...
The story follows Claire's perspective till the very end.
In the end, the perspective switches to Vivian's; however, we can interpret this as Vivian inside Claire taking over.
Then, the perspective is consistently held by Claire-Vivian throughout.
Also, the only people who witness Claire and Vivian together are Ruby and the sniper towards the end.
Ruby is a child, and Vivian is clearly playing mother and father in front of her. Thus, it is possible that Ruby is seeing Claire-Vivian as two people, like in a way children play with their dolls.
The sniper shouting at Claire is seen from Claire's perspective, so it is possible that the sniper's image is her imagination.

Well, that's how I think...so what do you think?
I only watched it once, and so may have missed other clues for/against Claire and Vivian being the same person...
Let me know if you find some.
Thanks.

[–] Zodyac 20 years ago

I think it's more likely that Vivian was a real person.
In the end we see him after Claire is dead, so if he were a part of her mind how could he still be there.
Also after Claire escaped from the hospital we see that the doctor finds a record of Vivian having stayed in the same room.
And if he wasn't a real person who was responsible for killing the little girls?

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] gorgsharpy 20 years ago

I agree with you, totally. Totally. And thanxxx.

The motherly Claire part of her dies and and the neurotic Vivian part of her is locked in the asylum. She has a spilt personality. It's a beautiful, but grimm movie.

[–] farrell_of_ireland 19 years ago

Vivian is a serial killer with the same psychic capabilities as Claire. That is how she can see his clues as to who his next victim is and his moves. On the back of the movie it says "Mind-link" so that is what i always assumed and thought even through the movie. He is a psychic serial killer who has linked himself with Claire because he can and wants to find someone like himself.

[–] ToonsNTeases 19 years ago

Sounds interesting, but when Claire's husband is killed, she is safely locked up in the mental facility. So if Vivian is not real, who kills the husband? We know the husband was killed while Claire was in the asylum because the husband had even come to the door of the "padded room" at one point to see her.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nuckingfutz 18 years ago

Quote:So we can't be sure if she set that up herself and sent him there, or if Vivienne (RDJ) did it.

Umm... yes we can. In the movie, they show her having the dream of her husband being killed, and then her husband showing up at the door to her room. He is escorted away while they pump her full of drugs. He goes HOME, and the psychiatrist comes in to try and "talk some sense" into Clair. She tries to convince the psychiatrist that she's NOT crazy, and this really IS going to happen. Meanwhile, her husband recieves a phone call, telling him where to go to find the dog.

People in mental institutions aren't allowed to make phone calls, especially people who were just pumped full of drugs because they had what appears to be a breakdown.

Therefore, there is no way on God's green Earth that she would have been ABLE to have any part of his murder.

I used to have a handle on life... but it broke.

[–] LittleMe123 17 years ago

I can see the original posters point of view. In short I would like to add that ALL of the mental institution stuff COULD be in her imagination - what she tells herself to make it all "okay". For example, "good Claire" in the padded cell/mental institution is there in her mind only while "evil Claire" (actual physical Claire) kills her husband for cheating. That would explain why they even had to include that he was cheating. The Vivian papers that the psychiatrist finds could, again, all be part of her imaginative mental hospital story for "good Claire". "Good Claire" believes in Vivian and for her to be locked away is convenient while "bad Claire", in reality, takes over. It would also cover how both Vivian and Claire died at the end. Its kind of open ended and has possibilities for further discussion - it can kind of go either way.

Not sure if I believe this theory, but its fun to entertain the thought that it could be this way and look at it all from a very different perspective.

Please forgive my horrible description, its late and Im tired! But hopefully you get the point! :)

[–] FuturePrimitive666 18 years ago

Yes, Aidan appeared at the door to her padded cell and what were her remarks, "That can't be!", because subconsciously she knew she had killed him already! Obviously, the murder on Aidan was committed before she was incarcerated in the Mental Hospital. Try explaining the Apple Problems earlier in the Film and the Computer's "apple virus". Did Vivian have Claire's E-Mail Address, as well? I don't think so. Did Mary store all of those apples in the Kitchen? Hardly. The only logical conclusion is that Claire & Vivian were one and the same, split personality, Schizophrenic (I think I wrote psychophrenic in another thread! lol), etc. When did Claire take the time to cut her hair, by the way? After the accident? In a Coma? Notice Vivian always had long hair and later she had short hair until the end when the loving Mother part of Vivian / Vivienne died and Vivian was locked up indefinitely, then she has short hair, as well. The Warden / Judge made her cut it? Her defense lawyer? No, if she was playing the insanity card there would be no need to try to impress the Judge & Jury with her brash looks. Red. That's the thread that connects the two. Face the Facts. In any case, a well thought out, scripted, acted and directed Film that cries out for a Sequel. FuturePrimitive.

[–] mellowknees72 17 years ago

I'm going to have to say that Vivienne and Claire are definitely two different people.

Of course the story follows Claire - she is the MAIN CHARACTER.

I never got the impression that they were supposed to be the same person; I think it's fairly evident that they are two separate individuals, but it's *supposed* to be confusing. A large part of the story revolves around the fact that NO ONE BELIEVES CLAIRE. That's central to the story - her frustration at trying to get people to listen to her, listen to what she knows, and understand that although she has no hard evidence, she knows this man is a killer; although she doesn't know WHO he is, she feels/senses him and can see tiny glimpses or hints as to what he's going to do.

Remember that the psychologist does not believe her until he goes and searches through the files at the institution and finds evidence of Vivienne. Sure, Claire could have imagined it, but WHY? The story is much more interesting, much more gripping (imo) if the antagonist is someone who is almost not real - someone that only the protagonist can see...and once someone else figures out that what she's saying is real, it's nearly too late.

This is a common formula with thrillers and horror movies. A very, very common theme - main character knows something but cannot prove it; protagonist harasses main character; main character reaches out to others and it is decided that main character is crazy; protagonist eventually does something to reveal him/herself, but by the time it happens, main character is either dead or beyond saving. It's the ultimate horror/tragedy formula.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] aef-6 17 years ago

They are two difrent people. JUST THE MOVIE IS NOT MADE SO GOOD.

How do you wake up from a nightmare, when you're not asleep?

[–] mydog8themoon 17 years ago

Actually, I agree with the people who are arguing that Claire and Vivian are one person. In addition to what was already mentioned, there's the part (I can't remember exactly what was said) where Claire is talking with Ruby, and Ruby says something about how Vivian plays Mommy, and that his voice changes when he does.

That made me think that by the end, Claire was just a facet of Vivian.

[–] SBL84 9 years ago

and Ruby says something about how Vivian plays Mommy, and that his voice changes when he does.

I took that to mean sometimes Vivian dresses up in his mother's clothes and he acts like her.

If Ruby was talking about the female component (Claire) of the person with the split personality, why would she be talking to Claire about it? Basically, Ruby would be talking to the Claire personality (whichever one is real) "Sometimes you dress up and talk like a woman like you are now"

If Claire was the person and Vivian was her alternate identity, then why would Ruby talk about a guy dressing up and sounding like a woman? Since all she would ever see would be Claire going in and out both of her personalities, and never see a man.

If Vivian was the person and Claire was his alternate identity, then why would Ruby tell him what he does when he slips into his Claire persona, while he's in his Claire persona?

Is Ruby just a third identity?

[–] crystalrope 15 years ago

The first time I saw this movie, I assumed there were two separate, living people (Claire and Vivian). But it's fascinating to "re-read" this film as being either Claire as real and having MPD or Vivian as being real and having MPD.

Not too many films you can interpret three different ways!

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] psdhart 13 years ago

It it an interesting theory, I thought they were both real. It was telepathy and mental connections. Some say it was a split personality situation.