Speaking of the movie itself, I was honestly putting up with it for the first half hour of watching The House That Jack Built today, and I could easily find some political correctness for myself - a typical middle-aged Caucasian man with nothing on the screen. Showing the indiscriminate killing of women with no scruples, but in the end it's really Matt Dillon's perverted grin every time I shudder and want to give him a middle finger and yell at him, and I'm looking forward to a turn and a match. It's a pity that I didn't wait for an hour into the film when Jack looked down on the children who were running away in panic from the high tower built for hunting, and pressed the children with a straight face. The children fell in response to the trigger, and the mother's heart-wrenching cries rang out in the field. The camera swept too far to the close-up of the child's corpse. At the moment I wanted to throw the computer out of the window, and in my heart I thought about this sanctimonious pervert. Slashed by a thousand swords
I claim that my psychological endurance is not bad. Since the rise of the mass media represented by film and television in the 1920s and 1930s, the proportion of violent content in the media has increased. Violence and sexuality in the content are already "not surprising" Some even know the planning of a perfectly planned alibi homicide, and some have even begun to master the steps of dismemberment through movies. Trust me This is not alarmist
Violence is almost produced along with human history, but the formation of violent culture is expressed, formed and promoted through mass media, and has a profound impact on people's psychology, cognition and behavior.
The presentation of violence and sexuality by the media is also a topic of content and effect of communication. Researchers have been debating topics from gun-target theory to weak effect theory to limited effect theory. One side supports symbolic catharsis from hunting in primitive society to make a living with violence The subject of natural selection has allowed the human species to survive, not to mention various forms of sacrificial warfare. In a civilized society, violent behavior is suppressed and needs to be vented. Media violence solves people's anxiety and violent emotions in an illusory form, and finds a reasonable outlet for law and morality. However, the other side also shows no weakness with quantitative scientific data. The causal mediators that mediate violence and aggression have a socially constructed role, constructing in our minds our perception of society and the meaning of the world. For violence, "people's mental images of reality are more like the distortions described in newspapers. The violence of the world rather than the real world, these contents activate the role of anti-social personality is also "indispensable"
The Frankfurt School is a good thing and they do reveal certain facts without question - why should the media go to great lengths to present them? Cultural forms such as film and music can be collectively referred to as mass culture. The mass culture of the 21st century is an industrial system in which the cultural industry uses modern technology to produce cultural products. The goal of the cultural industry is the economic level. Why does the media like to show violence? Because "most acts of violence are newsworthy"
It is audiences who like to watch these kinds of programs. In order to pursue the circulation and ratings, the media will produce a large number of violent reports or works to meet this demand.” Elements have become 90% of the media’s reporting content, and drama and entertainment have become an important reference for deciding whether to be on the news agenda.” And the influence of the cultural industry is that everyone at the ideological level loves KFC just like everyone loves plastic chickens. pollution-free
But these are actually not what I want to focus on. I don’t stand for elite culture or popular culture. Go back to the movie itself and talk about it. People who like it will say that because human nature is evil, the director just faithfully shows it with the camera. You feel uncomfortable just Just got seated? But what I want to discuss here is the problem at the screenwriter's level, not the director's problem at the director's level. Why do we want to spread the screenwriter's level? Why do we need to analyze when an indiscriminate murder case has occurred because of the chronological order that has occurred. Is the psychoanalytic theory that has become an inevitability for the murderer a ridiculous remedy and reminder, or a presupposition mixed with empathy? In short, do we really need to understand the psychological motivation behind a heinous homicide?
While watching the movie, I always couldn't help but think of Jiang Fangzhou's commentary on Nabokov's Lolita - isn't his story scary but isn't his story beautiful? In Homer's epic, Achilles brutally killed the national hero of Troy, Herak, in order to avenge his friends, dragged the corpse on a horse, dragged him three times, and raped all his female relatives. But when you read this story, personally The passion of heroism is likely to fill you so much that you won't even realize this brutal and vicious Fang Siqi's first love paradise says that everyone has a reason, even people who rape others have psychological, sociological reasons Only raped people in the world need no reason. Our psychological analysis of indiscriminate killing
Is Lars von Trier's footage a moral torture? When we spurn him for killing so many people indiscriminately and brutally, are we nervously worried about him because of the sudden sound of a police car? No I don't think it's a moral dilemma because I didn't like him in the first place. Lars von Trier is honest about that. There's no question he's telling you straight up without a cover. Necrophile, anti-social and anti-human serial killer even at the end of the film he directly sends Jack to hell but can he get our understanding and forgiveness? not at all
I am thankful to Fang Siqi's Paradise for First Love. This book allowed me to see the story of the shadow behind the moon, a victim's story. I mean, if you watch a movie like this with a little empathy, it's like a kind of torture. The dialogues - excuses disguised as philosophical sophistry, those cinematic essay-like interspersed artworks, Glenn Gloud and David Bowie, Dante's Divine Comedy and Lacroix's Crossing the Styx with Virgil are simple accumulations of material and ideas such as Lord Yeh and the Dragon are Politically correct self-castration? Isn't it an artist's attitude that deviance is an artist's attitude in today's flood of postmodernism? Art doesn't need its humanitarian boundaries? I vomit at works that try again and again to glorify sociopaths. We don't need to be rhetoric. Art may have his freedom of interpretation, but images of shooting children are never art or entertainment.
View more about The House That Jack Built reviews
