First of all, biographical films have their own set of development logic and expression methods. Similar to adaptations of classics, one of the keys to biographical films is the choice of events. What to keep, what to abandon, and how to lay out the article in detail. Here, the choices of directors and screenwriters are generally divided into two types: one is basically to show the ups and downs of life according to the positive sequence of the characters from birth/childhood to death/present, and most of them bring out some climax points in the straightforward narrative; One is to single out an important period of time and a decisive event that the character has experienced, and dig in depth. Of course, this film clearly belongs to the first category.
Because the protagonist Sissel is black ethnically and professionally as a white house steward, the dual identity is special, so it is just right to portray the protagonist from the side through the replacement of presidents and the different attitudes of different presidents toward the black civil rights movement. The years experienced by the protagonist are exactly the decades when the black movement has been surging. From the unfair treatment of racial oppression, to the staged victory of the struggle, to freedom, equality and fraternity seem to be within reach, the protagonist is in the White House, the center of political rights, and has witnessed historical moments (precedent presidents introduced bills) And other measures), but because the identity is on the edge of this center, in the gap between the white camp and the black camp (especially the conflict with the eldest son), this adds contradictions and complexity to the characters themselves. Sex, which in turn adds to the spectacle.
However, it needs to be pointed out that the descriptions of the previous presidents in the limited space obviously have flat characters and traces of excessive praise or derogation. The director's handling of this point is suspicion of being too subjective.
In fact, the themes of black films are relatively single, and they are generally placed in the anti-racism movement, the struggle for democratic political power, the opposition to hierarchical division and material, educational poverty and other issues. The film's director Lee Daniels also filmed "Treasure" before. In contrast, this film is limited by the types of biopics and needs to portray characters, and the intensity of reflection is slightly insufficient. The rare questioning reflections are all directly uttered by the protagonist’s monologue, which weakens the depth.
Secondly, let's talk about the audiovisual language of the film. The film is remarkable in terms of lens language. There is a wonderful cross-editing at one third of the film. The scene of the protagonist serving the white man in the White House restaurant is in sharp contrast to the scene of the eldest son and other student movement representatives being rejected for service in the restaurant and being driven out by the white man. On the one hand, there is the peace and obedience of the fathers, serving the white people, and on the other hand the stubborn rebellion of the children, fighting against the white people. From being deprived of rights to fighting for rights, whites from being served to being likely to be served, the roles of the middle groups are secretly interchanged, increasing the dramatic effect and forming a powerful picture and emotional impact.
Here, it does bring out the difference between the father's generation and the children's generation, and it also highlights the power of the change of times and the development and progress of history. (One question is, when the president learns about Sissel’s son, will he unconsciously vote for black people in mercy. In several places in the film, the president feels that Sissel has pity for blacks. I don’t know if it’s the director. Intentionally)
In addition, it can be seen that, as a black minority, the director is sensitive to black and white. For example, after Sissel’s proposal to increase salary was rejected, a black back (light color in the depth of field) opened the door of the black frame, dissolving a Martin Luther King in the same position on the screen, wearing a white shirt, standing Picture of a white balcony (darkness in the depth of field). The frustration of the black waiter and the purity and sacredness of the black leader are self-evident.
From black and white to color, the medium of television, as a product of the times, also played a big role in this film. Every president's speech on black issues is broadcast on television, creating the feeling of a pseudo-documentary. Different groups of people always watch important news through TV. More importantly, there are a large number of historical news films interspersed in the plot development, becoming time coordinates, adding authenticity and historical weight to the film.
After all, the film's performance is quite satisfactory, there is no breakthrough type stereotype, and there is no particularly shocking memory point. Moreover, the focus of the film does not seem to be particularly on the protagonist. Instead, it focuses on the various African American democratic movements, with more descriptions of encounters than characterizations. Although the film appears to be critical and cruel on the surface, in essence, it is still praising America's great democratic process, and it is still the main theme. Average.
View more about Lee Daniels' The Butler reviews
