But of course I still have something to talk about, and it's something important to me.
Before I start talking about this movie, I want to talk about my topic. The heroes here are Nixon and David. Frost. Of course, I don't mean these two people. Life is the life of a hero, but the flash of the hero's role in them made the interview of "Conversation with Nixon" a highlight and a successful interview.
Let me talk about my thoughts on heroes. I think men in this world can be roughly divided into these categories, heroes, gentlemen, villains, and others. Regarding the meaning of the word "hero", I don't intend to give it a high standard. I just regard it as a value for those who are on the battlefield and who are fighting against each other. Success is always accompanied by blood, accompanied by the sacrifice of value, they are some people with blood on their hands, but heroes have a characteristic, that is, at least they have their own beliefs, and are willing to act for this belief. And what about the so-called "gentleman"? Some people who are dizzy with blood, they are afraid of getting a little blood on their hands, and they have a clean obsession with righteousness and goodness, so "gentlemen" are often literati who "hide in small buildings and become unified". Although gentlemen and heroes seem to be at odds with each other, at least they both have ideals and the urge to fight blood or fight to the end for a certain value. But there is still such a type of people, I will call them villains for the time being, they have no beliefs, only desires, they may be well versed in the operating rules of the world, and even full of knowledge, but they never live in a certain value, In other words, this is a bunch of things that believe in nothing, so their knowledge and skills are all used to survive, to satisfy desires, and to mock heroes or gentlemen—just as Socrates despised the wise.
These three types of people rarely exist purely on their own, I mean they often exist as part of a person, but we can still clearly identify those around us and in public life, those who are heroes and those who are Gentlemen, those are villains.
Now let me talk about the documentary "Conversation with Nixon", which tells the whole process of a British entertainment talk show host (Furo) from the beginning of planning to the final completion of Nixon, who was just impeached and ousted because of the Watergate scandal.
Every detail of the entire event is meticulously recorded here, from Furrow’s sudden desire to make a fortune and his intention to land in the American media industry and high society, to his spending a lot of money to invite Nixon, to the American media industry’s response to him Repulsion and obstruction, to his formation of his own team, to his initial meeting with Nixon, we can see clearly that Furrow's purpose is completely different from that of one of his assistants, Jim, a famous Nixon critic at the time. However, the former is concerned only with ratings and the latter is intended to give Nixon an unprecedented trial.
Nixon, however, was an articulate political veteran, and Furrow, a "good woman" playboy, was no match for the first 11 days of the interview. The entire interview, not only did not play the role of trial, but instead became Nixon's whitewashing of his preaching.
However, things took a miraculous turn. After the penultimate interview, Furo was in tears, and his career reached a critical watershed. If his interview continued as before, his gamble this time. He would fail, maybe he would go bankrupt, and yet he felt that he was no match for Nixon at all. But at this time, Nixon gave him a late-night phone call. It was an impassioned speech. Nixon released some of the backlogs in his heart. He believed that he and Furrow were the same kind of person, politician and host People are clowns who are despised by spiritual aristocrats such as Oxford or Cambridge, but Nixon is a person who likes to swim against the current. He wants to win these people through the manipulation of real power. It was a duel between these two "clowns," or what I call villains, and they all knew that.
As we have all seen, the interview was a success. Furrow completed the trial of Nixon on the "Watergate Incident". Through his precise grasp of logic and evidence, he broke through Nixon's rhetoric and forced Nixon to the edge of the cliff. , and Nixon finally admitted that he was anti-democratic, admitting that he had abused his power and fell like a man.
If you are looking for a model of that nihilistic "little man" in today's world, I think entertainment stars and politicians are the most appropriate. Here I will first talk about the nihilism here. These people are not the "outsiders" described by Camus, they are "insiders". For them, nihilism is not something innate at all, and the nihilization of the world is completely It is the result of their self-suggestion, in other words they are just some cowards, they once had the opportunity to be a hero or a gentleman, but accidentally used the so-called "dark reality" to brainwash themselves, and eventually become money and power slave. In a sense, the two protagonists of this film are such people, but they still have a heroic complex - a little man's self-esteem, Furrow hates people saying he is an entertainment host, and Nixon hates all kinds of things. Flirtation. But God's will tricks people, and in the end it is precisely the interests that bring the two of them together, and at the same time force them into a dead end. Do readers know why? My understanding is that the public is spending money to buy more than just some entertainment, they need justice. In other words, if both sides of the conversation want to escape from this dead end, they must show their true selves, pull down their masks, go into battle, and fight to the death. Nixon's remarks aroused Furrow's heroic complex. He was no longer timid like a woman, but pierced Nixon's sore spot like a man, forcing him to submit.
As for why Nixon made that call, the film did not give an answer. According to the record of the film, Nixon even said that he did not know anything about that night. Even when he asked Furrow about it when he was leaving the United States to say goodbye to him, Furrow didn't tell him, but gave him the leather shoes that Nixon thought was feminine he was wearing during the interview.
About this movie, I will finish here. If readers want to know more about Nixon, they can go to some books. If you are interested, you can also watch this movie. However, one of my biggest impressions about this movie is that the world is not as simple as we imagined. Many "little people" think that their so-called reality will only force People become their kind, but is "reality" like this? At least we can see from this film that reality can turn a "villain" into a hero. Thinking that being a "little person" can make life comfortable - I mean no anxiety, isn't this a kind of wishful thinking? It can be seen how ridiculous the declaration of "I'm a bitch and I'm proud" is, and it will inevitably end up being tripped over by his own "smartness" in the end.
Finally, I would like to talk about one point. I am against rushing to a conclusion, but I am not against labeling, because as Hegel said, this is just a starting point for analysis, and after long-term practice, we can naturally make progress in understanding. If we don't even dare to define and form a basic impression of a person, then you can only be a "little person". How can a person who doesn't believe that a person can learn to swim at all be able to swim? Such a person would just pray that he would never fall into the water.
View more about Frost/Nixon reviews
