L'amour est un oiseau rebelle
que nul ne peut apprivoiser,
et c'est bien en vain qu'on l'appelle,
s'il lui convient de refuser.
......
L'oiseau que tu croyais surprendre
battit de l'aile et s'envola ...
l'amour est loin, tu peux l'attendre;
tu ne l'attends plus, il est là!
Tout autour de toi, vite, vite,
il vient, s'en va, puis il revient ...
tu crois le tenir, il t' évite,
tu crois l'éviter, il te tient.
(Love is a rebellious bird that no one can tame. If it refuses you, it will be useless! ... You think the bird caught in your hand, flapped its wings and flew away. You can wait With the love that has long gone, it will be right in front of you when you don’t wait anymore. Right by your side, fast, fast, it comes and goes, goes and comes again, you think you have caught it, but it avoids You, you thought you avoided it, but it caught you.)
Georges finally caught the pigeon, but did he really catch love?
No solution. The whole movie vaguely raises many questions, all of which are unsolvable. I think this is why those plots still linger in my mind for a long time after watching it. The title of the film is love. Yes, love is random, unsolvable, and full of uncertainty. People chase certain things, but are fascinated by things full of uncertainty.
Haneke refused to give an answer even after the characters asked questions in the film. For example, Georges asks Anne, if you try to change his situation, Anne will definitely do his best to take care of him, right? Anne replied, I don't know, and I don't want to think about this kind of thing to make myself a headache. Either it stops abruptly. For example, the father asks his daughter if you have any serious suggestions, let's talk about it, and then switch the scene directly.
I was very uncomfortable when I watched it, but since then I really admire Haneke's handling. Because the answer is not important. What kind of answers were so small before Anne's collapse. No one can resist the cruel jokes of life. In fact, I do everything possible to make myself feel at ease. As long as the heart is at ease, what else is important?
Anne realized this early and wanted to keep her last dignity and the way she was in her lover's heart. Her pain stems from the embarrassment of her changes, the self-blame she burdened Georges, and the doubt that she is no longer the perfect partner in Georges' heart. Riva's performance is heartbreaking. The naked body and mind double collapse. After the first attack, the appearance is a hard shell, but the inside is gradually broken. After the second attack, the body collapses quickly, just like a building has been blasted.
And Georges knew it late, and he just wanted to keep her. His panic lies in losing her and worrying that he is not doing well enough, so he can't understand why Anne is unwilling to cooperate. The sudden anger and lonely dream actually originated from this panic. And that anger deepened the panic by making Georges deeply blame himself. That slap hurt both sides. Yu Anne was affirmation of her suspicion, and Yu Georges affirmed that he was not good enough.
The two are almost in the same feelings as their first love, but they hurt each other carefully. The rift in love is born out of such mutual incomprehension. No one is right or wrong. But that's it, it's gone.
Then Georges realized what was important to both of them. Twice, the first time before he booed the pigeon away, and after understanding it, he tried his best to hug the pigeon in his arms.
The film has a perfect ending.
The scene where Anne played the piano was so beautiful after years of experience, Georges was dumbfounded, and I was dumbfounded.
Anne washed the dishes, put on her coat, and went out first. Georges' hands and feet were a little slow, so she closed the door when she left.
The important thing is that you have not changed in my heart, and I have not changed in your heart.
It's just that the two will never come back. But why is this important?
——————————————————————————
Some
original soundtracks viewed by LZ with mixed feelings , without subtitles, it is inevitable that there will be deviations in understanding at the level of LZ’s French.
In fact, this movie looks quite boring, at least for people from non-major classes like LZ. But it can still be seen that the lens and light are very beautiful. So beautiful. Of course you will find it good later.
Riva’s performance was mentioned above, but Tritignant’s performance personally feels better. After all, the role of Riva is more showy, and it is difficult for an actor of this age to perform wrong. Trintignant's performance is really difficult to describe, it can only be said that it is like walking directly from life to the screen. Or, simply let you forget that this is watching a movie. The performance of the two is impeccable. I have encountered many old French couples in my life. The performance of the two actors directly overlapped my memories of those old couples on the screen: tone, tone, eyes, and small movements. . . Very cordial.
The filming of the first dining table scene is amazing, especially the use of the sound of running water, surpassing all the sound effects of suspense films. The scenes of the two opponents are also sparkling, very enjoyable.
Two-sentence translation of names, according to French pronunciation Georges is Georges not Georges, Anne is Ann not Anna, the male protagonist Jean-Louis Trintignant is called Jean-Louis Tandignan is not Louis Trintignant, Emmanuelle Riva translates It must be okay. I like English pronunciation translation when I didn’t say it.
There was no emotional ups and downs when I watched, only one tear was in my eyes. Georges asked Anne what I was like in your heart, and Anne replied, "Sometimes, you are a beast." That look and tone hit tears instantly, and suddenly felt that the title of the film was nothing more appropriate than Amour.
What a strange tear.
---------------------------------------------
Posted by French classmates Comment, I’m too lazy to translate, just refer to it if you can. Overall it is great.
Je suis loin d'être un grand connaisseur en cinéma mais sur le plan de la réalisation, j'ai trouvé que le film était bluffant. Les plans choisis sont superbes même s'il ne s'y passe quasiment rien. De plus le jeu d'acteur est magistral. On sent vraiment l'amour qui unit le couple, on comprends leur douleur, tous les sentiments qui les anime. Et le film n'en est que plus touchant. Enfin pour ce qui est du scénario, je n 'ai pas trouvé la fin bizarre ou incompréhensible. C'est malheureusement un drame avec une montée lancinante de la tension.
Ce que tu n'as sans doute pas compris, c'est le départ du mari qui suit sa femme à la fin. Pour moi il hallucine évidemment, mais au-delà de la simple llusion la présence de son épouse signifie qu'il est temps pour lui de la rejoindre et donc de quitter son appartement sans se retourner. J'ai beaucoup aimé le dernier plan avec la fille seule dans l'immense appartement et ses deux parents partis. Et enfin, j'ai oublié de parler des dialogues ! Un français parfait! Le couple manie les mots avec une aisance folle.
I asked him if the story Georges told was related to his behavior:
selon moi il n'y a pas beaucoup de rapport. George raconte cette histoire pour la tranquilliser au début. Puis sur un coup de folie enfin surtout par amour pour elle, il la "délivre". L'histoire qu'il raconte est assez émouvante mais le rapport entre les actes qui suivent l'histoire et l'histoire en elle-même est tellement ténu que je ne peux m'avancer. On voit bien qu'il n'y avait rien de prémédité, il est en train se raser, sa femme l'appel au secours et puis tout se déroule "quasi" naturellement. On est du coup un peu mal à l'aise.
View more about Amour reviews
