Evidence of the aforementioned statement is frequent and distinct throughout the course of "Run Lola Run". The movie opens when Lola is required to deal with the repercussions of a situation she and Manni have put themselves in. Although it may be said that the initial trigger of the 'domino effect' (Lola's moped being stolen) could not be blamed on either of the couple, it is apparent throughout the movie that avoidance of responsibility led them nowhere. This is closely related to Lola's grasp on her situation and the self-control she asserts in each version. In the first version she gains no control over her situation: after having her moped stolen and the frantic call from Manni, she displays none of the assertion of awareness that is evident of her in the second or third.

Lola's lack of control is apparent immediately when she resorts to dependence on her father to solve her problems. This is an example of shifting responsibilities onto others which could essentially have led to Lola's lack of control and ultimate downfall. It is evident again when she attempts to ignore the intimidation of the dog on the stairs, rather than confronting or acknowledging it. This indicates that in version one, Lola is not only running to her father to solve the problem, she is running away from the problem. This attitude is complimented by outside parties, such as the security guard in the bank and her father. The security guard's approach to Lola when she first arrives at the bank is patronising, which could almost be remarked of as indicative on his (and perhaps the filmmaker's) view on Lola's empowerment in terms of her current situation. Her control is further diminished when she allows her father to degrade and dismiss her without argument or confrontation. It is with the same diminished sense of power that Lola runs to the crossroads and fails to prevent Manni from robbing the store. Again Lola seems to attempt to remove responsibility from herself ("Why didn't you wait for me?") and tries to find an easy way out of the situation ("Can't we just split?"). When this suggestion is rejected, Lola again follows Manni's lead and assists him in robbing the store, even though she never supported this action. It is apparent at this point that she has nearly lost all control over her present situation, not knowing how to use a gun and simply reacting to the predicament Manni has introduced her to. Similarly, it is Lola who ultimately pays for the negative actions taken in version one. The dream sequence features her telling Manni she feels she has to make a choice, and Manni asking her whether she wants to leave him. As she is dying, she decides "I don't want to leave" – however it is debatable whether or not she had the choice to begin with, considering the course of events in version one.

The second version portrays the same dependence Lola has on her father, nothing having changed until Lola is on the staircase, where she is tripped down the stairs. Although this follows the same pattern of victimisation that was apparent in version one, it leads to a heightened level of assertion and awareness on Lola's part. In this version, Lola is noticeably more aware of her surround, and deals with problems more independently than she did in version one. While she is still dismissed by her father, Lola strongly asserts herself and takes action independent of all external parties for the first time. However, the act of robbing a bank as the first of Lola's individual actions does not lead to a positive end; nor do Manni's intentions to rob the store. Although Lola arrives to stop Manni, he has already approached the store with the intention to hold it up. When he goes to approach Lola, he is therefore his by an ambulance as he crosses the road towards her. It could be suggested that this, and Lola being shot in version one, was a punishment for each negative action made manifest by chance or fate.

In the third version Lola displays more assertion than that of both the second and first. Her aggression towards all opposition is noticeably heightened, at first apparent at the defining moment of passing the dog on the staircase: instead of avoiding it, or being forced into awareness of it by any direct victimisation, she responds directly to intimidation and removes this first obstacle from her path. This self-certainty and awareness is evident throughout her whole journey to the bank: she no longer collides with the woman with the pram and avoids the group of nuns she formerly ran through. Although she nearly runs into the man on the bike, it is that action that directs him to the same place as the tramp, an incident which may also be attributed to fate. The last obstruction between Lola and her full independence is her reliance on her father to supply her with the money she needs. This, however, is removed when she inadvertently prevents Mr Meyer from an accident, and so is too late to reach her father. This can be seen as a further opportunity for Lola to take control of her own situation, and her distance from her father can be considered as a growing distance between her and her irresponsibility. Another symbolic event occurs when Manni sees the homeless man: no longer with intention to take any violent, illegal or in any way malicious act, Manni parts with all these facets of his present life when he surrenders his gun to the tramp in return for the misplaced money. Meanwhile, Lola, with no confidence, but with no one to solve her problem, takes action to get the money completely independent of her father for the first time. It is only when she trusts her money to her own devices that she manages to obtain the solution to her problem absolutely.

This, and complimenting factors, is what leads to the belief that responsibility for one's own actions is a major theme in "Run Lola Run". Only in awareness and responsibility was Lola able to show capability for herself, and as these elements heightened in the course of the story so did the satisfaction of the outcome. Manni, too, added to this: only in trust, rather than in violence or manipulation, was he able to amend his situation.

Back