The reason is hopeless, because no matter from the connotation, the scene, the plot, or the character arrangement, there is no bright spot, and even a very failure. The director tries to integrate the social problems he perceives into a movie. In the end, every problem can only be clicked so that the problem is still a problem. The movie is just like a brief news report reminding the audience of the existence of these problems.
However, even if it is a piece of news, there is more room for interpretation than this film. The film discusses death, organ donation, running away, transgender, and AIDS. But in the final analysis, all the topics finally reached a compromise and forgiveness. When compromise and forgiveness became the theme of the film, these problems that actually existed in society and affected countless people who were born in it, it was lightly understated that they were harmonious in the tears between the heroine and the father of the two children who appeared at the end. ended.
1. Connotation of
leaving: the heroine ran away because of pregnancy, and returned to the same place again because of the death of her son. But what does this exodus represent? Is it the heroine's despair and escape from life, or the yearning for a new life? Coming and going are just connecting the locations of the story development in the movie, and the location changes brought about by this exodus will not help the plot and the characterization of the characters. From one city to another, from one country to another, or even from one street to another street, there is actually no difference in the film. On the surface, this kind of exodus and return is the heroine in order to stay away. And re-searching for the transgender husband, but between the two locations, between the actions, there is no concrete manifestation in the film, and it has become only a tool for connecting the plot.
Death: Death is an important topic in the film, and there are two ends of death, AIDS and organ donation. The first time the heroine’s son’s death came suddenly, but this time the death is only an introduction. The film neither discusses the relationship between mother and child, but also uses the simplest mother’s crying to show the heroine’s loss in a few shots. The pain of the son. The protagonist's rehearsal for organ donation as a nurse in the opening seems to have become a prophecy, but the heroine quickly signed a consent agreement after learning that her son could not be rescued. Although the rehearsal itself seemed to have an early adaptation, it was only It's just that this adaptation cannot make organ donation a concern in the film. The second death was a predicted death. It was the death of a volunteer played by Cruz due to AIDS. Although the volunteer played by Cruz is one of the protagonists in the film, the discussion about AIDS is only due to the test after pregnancy and the few scenes where the heroine wipes her body during pregnancy. I can't imagine that this level of inking can make AIDS truly the main theme of the film. In this way, the volunteer's death became the material to fill the film, and only for her death to be justified, and it looked eye-catching, that is, it did not affect the main line of the film, and it could not make the volunteers' dangers deserved. Pay attention (Cruz did not cause illness in a dangerous environment, but a dangerous sex she committed voluntarily).
Transgender: I saw someone praise Sheng Huang's acting skills. Her role as transgender in the film is indeed wonderful. But it is precisely this wonderfulness that finally dissolves the truth of transgender people as a group. If you make a rash guess, the director hopes that through such a happy transgender who can laugh when being raped, can make everyone laugh in the theater, and can abandon suffering through a few jokes to resolve other male harassment transgenders. Da Qiu Shen's stereotype, I think the director actually ignored the film not to describe such an optimistic and happy individual on the basis of narrative problems, but to simply throw this individual to the audience. Except for the other transgender who constantly chose to escape in order to satisfy his own desires, and finally softened his image with a few tears and embrace of the child. This is the only individual who appears in the film. The optimism of this individual, even her ease on stage and the cheers of everyone in the audience afterwards, are all covering the real problems. In the end, the audience does not know where these transgender people come from or where they will go. What is left to the audience is happiness and straightforwardness. Any smile lacking tears is hypocritical and pretentious.
2. Shots, plots, characters
If someone tries to say that this film is a commercial film, and not every film must have deep connotations, I can totally agree with this view. The elements of a successful commercial film are the unique lens language, good narrative logic, and the characters in the film serving the plot. Does this film have enough highlights in the lens, plot and characterization? No.
What is worthy of recognition is that this film has strong Spanish characteristics and is happy to fill the entire lens with extremely gorgeous colors. Red as the main tone, appeared repeatedly on the rainy night when the heroine's son died. And "Red Smoke" has a gorgeous red hair and a room full of patterns rented by the heroine, all of which show the bold and unique understanding of contemporary Spanish cinema in terms of color. (Digression: As one of Almodovar's masterpieces, "Speaking to Her" inherited this boldness in color, but also inherited the narrative weakness and disease-free groaning).
The most admirable scene in the film is the footage of the heroine running towards her son who was hit by a car. The camera is transformed into the perspective of his son before he died, recording the despair and grief of the heroine. In addition, there is no such thing as a lens language that is truly unique. It is even mentioned above that the use of San Juan’s speech and the cheers of the audience as a switch between two comparative perspectives is a real cover rather than a revelation. Not to mention the inexplicable description of the organ transporting several minutes in the film, which is redundant, lengthy, and meaningless from any angle.
If the story of a movie often depends on the relationship between the characters in the movie, every character in this movie seems to represent a side of the society that the director hopes to show, but it can't really help the story. The relationship between the characters and the heroine in each play is a linear and parallel relationship, appearing in the film because of acquaintances, and has nothing to do with the main storyline. Just like a messy table in a photo, the table itself seems to be the subject of the shot. The messy debris enters the lens because it physically stays on the table. This random placement does not affect the photo. Even arbitrarily moving positions or changing specific objects will not affect the purpose of the photo shooting table. The other characters in this film are like that.
The son is the most important role, because his death promoted the return of her mother. But all the following characters have become the director's tools, and exist for existence. The characters in each play just exist in parallel with the heroine in the same place, and their relationship does not have any direct influence on the heroine's search for his son's father. Saint Juan’s former sister as the heroine told her that the man who was looking for stole the money and ran away. This is the only association. As for the next job of taking over the heroine and becoming the hero of the rescue, it has become a branch of the plot completely independent of the main line. Volunteer is the second role. She somehow became the target of the heroine after she got AIDS, just because she was also pregnant with the child of the man the heroine was looking for. Regardless of how reasonable the story is, the volunteer's selfish mother and Alzheimer's father have become the tools for the director to show himself, pick out a certain problem, and paste it in the film as a label. The same is true for the lovers of Red Smoke and Red Smoke. The inexplicable development of friendship, the inexplicable change in the attitude of the characters, the inexplicable sudden disappearance, there is no reasonable explanation, no reasonable arrangement, and no reasonable effect.
3. Conclusion
This is not so much a film as it is a label box. Each label reads a topic: death, AIDS, transgender, etc. They are posted on the director's body to tell his audience: I'm here, I'm paying attention, and I'm leaving. In fact, no matter in terms of connotation, plot or characters, director Almodovar has just created a new type of "Killing You 3000", connecting many elements in parallel in one film, and there is nothing between each other. There is no connection, and because of the limited time, each element can only be a label. There is only space to write the name, and there is no way to have any room for development.
This is a rare movie where additions are constantly being made. The director tried every means, hoping that every detail could show an aspect, but this is precisely the biggest failure.
View more about All About My Mother reviews
