Is It Over? (2023) – 3.5 stars

Director: Julian Cruiming

Writer: Julian Cruiming

Cast: Willem Bleijenburg, Isabelle Schoorl

Running time: 7mins

Late capitalism has given a new dimension to the character of the toilet. Besides its primary utilitarian functions – or indeed its second long-standing role in Britain as the ‘basis for an entire culture’ of puerile humour – it has also become a sacred place of refuge; a plot of holy ground, offering beleaguered workers sanctuary from the office panopticon. But as much as we might all be able to relate to the joy of Homer Simpson sitting on the toilet “all the live-long day” while at work, I’m not sure the phenomenon quite translates to the private sphere.

In the opening scene of Is It Over we find ‘Ex-Boyfriend’ (Willem Bleijenburg) sitting in quiet, melancholic contemplation. Sad piano music drapes itself over the scene, emphasising the fact that this is supposed to be an emotionally impactful moment, in which one of our protagonists comes to terms with his lover leaving him. But this is somewhat undermined by the bottle of Toilet Duck looming conspicuously over Ex-Boyfriend’s shoulder – perched on what we soon realise is the cistern of his lavatory.

Mercifully, the only items of clothing Ex-Boyfriend seems concerned with removing are his shoes, before rising from the throne to look at himself – through a thick, unkempt fringe – in his bathroom mirror. Distracting thoughts persist though. Initially, I find myself wonder why this man felt he had to walk through his whole house to sit on the toilet before taking his shoes (Converse, fitting with his sweeping emo haircut) off. But then, as action on the other side of the screen progresses, I begin to wonder what might have been if writer-director Julian Cruiming had asked his leading man to go out on more of a limb here.

Like Sando Heijnen and Charlotte Bernson’s experimental short COMPLEX, Cruiming is using dual-screens to build a two-sided narrative, which develops separately before colliding in the film’s finale. While Ex-Boyfriend wallows in self-put on the left of the screen – pitching a thousand-mile stare at the wall, or gawping unblinkingly at the pale, blue glow of an LCD screen – the right is taken up by the more pro-active Ex-Girlfriend (Isabelle Schoorl). Having binned Ex-Boyfriend, she is wasting no time in moving on – dressing up and heading out to a bar with another woman.

Everything delivered in that lens has more energy, more life to it. The colour palette immediately catches the eye – from the bright and cold interior of a bike shed, to the moodily-lit bar, or the neon-framed mirror which Ex-Girlfriend attempts to apply makeup in – while Schoorl conveys a full range of emotions. Early in the evening, she is filled with optimism as she heads out with her friend, only to sink into rage and regret when her friend seems to hit it off with someone – leaving her alone to think about the relationship she just ended.

That’s a problem because while this is happening, Ex-Boyfriend is doing nothing. There are no diverse interiors, there is no arc to his story, nothing being communicated by his expressions beyond sadness, and a vague, heavy-eyed tiredness. Frankly, he’s a dud – or at least, the framing presents him as one – and it feels like when Ex-Girlfriend thinks about contacting him again, she might just be settling for the sake of it, rather than remembering some unseen x-factor that drew her to him in the first-place.

To be fair, constructing a narrative through two lenses is difficult, and you always run the risk of an audience missing something on theatrical viewings – without being able to rewind. Cruiming has pulled it off here, delivering a story that does carry us along – all without any sound or dialogue. There is real skill in being able to deliver that kind of storytelling.

But… that delivery is partially aided by the fact that half of the story has very little at all that we couldmiss. There is no worry that we might overlook some grand action of Ex-Boyfriend when our eyes are on the right of the screen, because he doesn’t really do anything. That’s a problem, in so far as it doesn’t help us connect to him at his lowest most human moment, or to ultimately want things to work out for him. Perhaps, in the moments where Ex-Girlfriend is in the ascendancy, he might be depicted as a more pathetic, howling mess.

For example, perhaps more might have been made of the fact that his first venue for sombre reflection is the WC? As it is, the inclusion of the shot of him slumped on the seat feels like an accident, and so it feels weird and out of place. But if it were played up as an intentional choice, it could have been used to really hammer home how he is at his lowest – even as Ex-Girlfriend heads out to what could be a glamourous or fun venue. And maybe it could have injected a little, much-needed humour into proceedings to – if not an in-depth ideological analysis of 21^st century toilet habits.

Overall, Is It Over? feels a bit like a screen-test, to make sure that a team’s equipment is all working, and that everyone knows how to do their job before they crack on with the real project. As a student project, that makes a certain amount of sense – and broadly speaking, it’s a successful test. The cinematography, editing and acting is all of a decent standard. On this basis, there are plenty of positives on display, and the future may well be bright for these filmmakers. But it is lacking a little in invention – with little desire on display to have a little fun with this technical experiment, or to put either cast member in a less comfortable position within their respective bubbles. This leads to a conclusion that’s coherent, but a little underwhelming.