Now to make up for my mistake of the previous weekend.  What is not an error is being regular about your daily and weekly activities.  As a practicing Catholic, I go to Mass every morning (save for the Saturday Vigil), which is followed by running, saying my Rosary, and then movie watching.  Fridays is my preferred day for going to the theater, and my routine has become familiar to the staff.  My go-to venue is one of those new age (though this is increasingly becoming the norm) cinemas where you order food at your seat.  The server recognized me, remembered that I review films (I had to tell him about The Legionnaire this time), and was able to recite in its entirety my usual order.  This is not exactly a Dream Scenario, but handy.  As for the movie, prepare yourself for a strange review to match with the film’s content.

The first thing you see in Dream Scenario is, appropriately, a dream.  Before going on, be prepared for me using the word “dream” a lot as I do not know how to avoid it given the peculiarities of this film.  Anyway, we witness the sleep-time images of Sophie Matthews (Lily Bird).  She is sitting by a pool while her father, Dr. Paul Matthews (Nicolas Cage), calmly rakes leaves nearby.  Soon, random objects start falling from the sky, a set of keys shattering the class table next to her.  Panicked, she looks to her dad, who stands idly by as she begins floating into the air.  The next morning at breakfast, she describes the dream to her dad.  The fact that he does nothing is the point of interest on which he focuses, reassuring her that he would help her in real life and citing examples in which he had done so.  After this, it is off to the fictional Osler University where Dr. Matthews is a tenured professor of evolutionary biology.  In the midst of talking about herd instincts and the advantages and disadvantages of standing out, a couple of his students tell him that he had appeared in their dreams, not doing anything other than witnessing the events.  At this point he has not recognized a pattern, so he heads to a lunch with a former graduate school friend who is about to publish a paper that he believes borrows from his own theories.  She points out that he has yet to publish anything, and his begging for recognition in her piece does not earn him credit.  Later that evening, Dr. Matthews is out with his wife, Janet Matthews (Julianne Nicholson), when he is spotted by Claire (Marnie MacPhail), Dr. Matthews’ ex-girlfriend.  Claire informs him that she, too, has had a dream about him and that she would like to write about why this would happen for an article.  Though her wife is slightly suspicious, he agrees, eager for some kind of recognition.  In her piece, she ends up linking his social media account, which results in hundreds of people coming forward to say that they, too, have seen him in their dreams.  In most cases, as with Claire and Sophie, he is simply there and doing little else.  In other words, he is starting to become famous, and at his next lecture the majority of his students share about similar situations they had while asleep.  This leads to him being interviewed for a news program.  While everyone wants to talk about this odd phenomenon, one over which he has no control, he instead wants to use his notoriety to promote a book he wants to write, though has yet to put a single word to paper.  Then comes those who wish to capitalize on his fame, namely a company called Thoughts, headed by Trent (Michael Cera).  They see Dr. Matthews’ ability as a huge marketing opportunity, and try to get the professor to agree to doing an ad campaign with Sprite.  He is confused because he thought they were going to help him get a publishing deal, but Trent clearly has other priorities.  One of Trent’s assistants, Molly (Dylan Gelula), has a more personal interest in him.  Her dreams of Dr. Matthews have been of a sexual nature.  She invites him out for a few drinks, which ends up back at her place and demands that he re-enact her dream.  There are a few whimpers of protest about his marriage, but what actually prevents a more serious indiscretion is . . . well, let us just say flatulence and a few other performance issues.  It is not long after this that Dr. Matthews learns that Claire has printed her article without crediting him, triggering a profanity laced tirade in his living room.  From this point, the dreams in which he appears for others turn violent.  Pretty much every nighttime vision of him features him murdering the dreamer, or some other form of physical harm.  These people begin turning against him, fearing his mere presence.  It starts with his students, who stop coming to class.  A therapist comes to try to show that he is harmless, but it ends with them walking out and spray painting “Loser” on his car.  He tries to go to a restaurant, but he makes the other patrons uncomfortable.  When he refuses to leave, another patron beats him.  He then has a dream where he is hunted by a version of himself wielding a crossbow.  This prompts him to put out a video on social media trying to cast himself as a victim, which Janet accuses him of being self-serving.  Because of this and her job demoting her because of her husband, not to mention his daughters having problems at school, he is kicked out of the house.  He is then barred from seeing Sophie’s school blame, and accidentally breaks the principle’s finger when she tries to shut the theater doors on him.  From here, there is a confusing time jump forward that features a new product that allows people to project themselves into other’s dreams, which is mostly used for advertising.  Dr. Matthews is trying to move on with his life, which includes a settlement from the university and a book tour, but he is still separated from Janet.  Though the dreams stopped, he uses the new device to put himself into his wife’s mind to show that he still loves her.

The ending of Dream Scenario is poignant, but it added to my confusion as to how I feel about Dr. Matthews.  A part of me views him as an anti-hero.  His lack of heroic qualities is intentional, though he is clearly the protagonist.  Yet, when we use a term like “anti-hero,” we typically think of examples like Travis Bickle (Robert De Niro) in Taxi Driver (1976), or a modern one in Wade Wilson/Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds) in Deadpool (2016).  These are people one would consider to be morally ambiguous, to say the least, and yet they end up achieving some kind of “good.”  Though that label for their actions can be debated, one thing they all share is agency.  In cannot be argued that Dr. Matthews is the focus of Dream Scenario.  Yet, he does virtually nothing.  He has no control over the events happening to him, and to be frank, it is pathetic.  Perhaps with a character like him, we need a new category for the term “anti-hero?”  Still, I could not help but feel sorry for him.  As a victim of bullying, my heart went out to him.  He may be limp wristed and willing to compromise his values for the sake of recognition, but I could not understand the anger society directed at him.  Name the last time you were able to decide the contents of your dreams, let alone being able to purposely project yourself into a dream of another person.  If you are able to do so, then you possess a unique ability.  The film makes the point that people have no say in their dreams.  The fancy way Dr. Matthews explains it is as a necessary hallucination our brains go through at night in order for it to effectively process the day’s events.  He does not know why he is showing up in the dreams of so many, therefore why should they ostracize him.  In short, I bristled at how unfair is the treatment he receives, despite his foibles.

I could also point out that Dr. Matthews’ ostracization in Dream Scenario is the result of a society that is steadily moving away from Christian ideals.  Granted, Christian or atheist, it would be strange to see in real life a person about which you dreamed.  Of course, the events of the film are impossible, save for God.  Biblically speaking, God has used dreams throughout the centuries it has covered.  Since those early centuries, He has continued to appear to people in their dreams.  This is not to say that everything you see when you sleep comes from God.  The contents of what you see in the film differs from the way God has traditionally used them.  In the Bible, perhaps the most famous dreamer is Joseph, son of Jacob.  Joseph’s dreams bring him banishment by his brothers to Egypt, not unlike what happens to Dr. Matthews.  Yet, Joseph’s visions are prophetic in nature, and they bring him an exulted position with pharaoh.  One can also equate dreams to visions, though this is not a perfect analog.  When they do line up, it is a gift of the Holy Spirit.  Since then, Christendom has seen many instances of God speaking to the saints while they sleep.  In the movie, we only see one of Dr. Matthews’ dreams, and I am not sure it qualifies as prophetic.  Those of the saints are also different because they are happening to them and not to others.  Dreams can be a blessing, though one can twist oneself around in trying to make sense of their content.  Interpreting God’s will through such visions can be tricky, but it does not seem like the movie is concerned with such things, which is sad.  In the context of the film, there are two types of dreams: relatively benign ones with some of the wilder imaginings the mind can conjure, or nightmares.  There are more to dreams than this simple divide, especially those that comes from God.  In case you are wondering how to know the difference, I recommend seeing a spiritual director.

Unsurprisingly, God is far from Dream Scenario.  As this review suggests, I am ambivalent about it.  There are negative and positive qualities to it, and I cannot decide which is the dominant tone.  I will concede that Cage delivers an Oscar worthy performance, but such determinations are above my pay grade.  For now, I will not give a recommendation one way or another on this one.