I tried my best to search in my mind when was the last time I lost sleep because of a movie, but what I thought of was [Damn], that's right, Peng Shun and Peng Fa, and then I continued to think about how many times I lost sleep because of a movie in my life, so I just thought of it again, [ Mulholland Drive].
This time, the same thing is that I kept thinking about all the details in the movie, the difference is that I only watched half of the movie last night.
This movie is so complicated that it seems powerless to write it. However, it can be summed up that only the form of "movie" can give this movie the greatest vitality. What is said is the most valuable. It seems very casual to say this, but it is actually quite extravagant. Just imagine, how many movies only "talk" to the greatest extent when it is a movie? [Citizen Kane] counts one, [Rashomon] counts one, [rear window] doesn't count, but [entering the room] does count.
Okay, here's what I've come up with.
1. Text/Reader
Movies change the relationship between text and readers.
These two concepts hold because the text is closed and self-sufficient, and it is foreign to the reader. Just like most movies, after they are made, they have a self-sufficient world. For "readers", they can only read and not modify.
However, this is not the case with the two texts of the film.
The first text is Gilman as a teacher, which is a pretty solid world the director has built for us.
But in the second text, you find the demise of readership. This Gilman sometimes represents for us, but not completely.
The reason why the narrative inside the film is ambiguous is that the story written by Claude on paper, the story that was performed, and the real characters in the story are slightly misplaced. In the process of watching, in the process of distinguishing what is literary creation and what is a fait accompli, we become the author of that story. Similar to Gilman trying to change the direction of things to his will. The difference is that we see the "real" image of things, which is the embodiment of the superiority of the film itself.
Therefore, different from the layered structure, and different from the three narrative systems of [Rashomon], [Dengtangchengshi] really provides a quasi-text that can be written by oneself without caring about what is true. If you don't believe it, ask yourself what to look forward to in that story, what to dislike, and what to change.
2. There are many movies/movies
that are self-reflexive, and the [rear window] is definitely typical. If the [rear window] is a fixed camera that can only be viewed from a distance and can be adjusted at most, then [enter the room] is simply a variety of buried pinhole cameras, all kinds of omnipotent tracks, all kinds of handheld shoulders, let you see. Also, the protagonist of the [rear window] is more like an audience, because his leg is injured, and he seems to be tied to the seat. He can't move while watching, just like you can't move as you want in the theater. And Claude in [Entering the Room] can travel freely, enter events, observe events carefully, and is completely able to change events through his own efforts. Find something to make him stand out. In fact, Claude is directing a movie of his own.
So who is the audience, apparently Gilman.
Gilman, as a moviegoer, lost his freedom by being "too close." Just as the Raphael couple's presence at his wife's exhibition made him uncomfortable, how could it be possible that the "actors" were so real.
As the audience of this film directed by Claude, Gilman seems to be very dynamic, because he always advises the director, and even suggests which classic texts the director should refer to, and point fingers at a work that should be very personal. However, the more he intervenes in the creation, the more he is bound, and the more and more trapped he becomes an accomplice to the story. This is somewhat representative of the mindset of the majority of the audience and reveals the mechanics behind the movie, the more you engage the more manipulated it becomes. The fact that the audience has become complicit is best illustrated by the case of stealing the papers, and as Gilman's wife said, in this teacher-student relationship, Claude is actually teaching. Gilman even felt good when he saw that he and his wife were written into the "novel" by Claude, and it was not without sarcasm, which also reflected a certain masochistic tendency of the audience.
Combined with the clue of Gilman's wife's art exhibition, something more interesting actually happened. As audiences, especially those with more knowledge, we have always felt that our intelligence quotient is extraordinary. In the process of watching movies, we especially feel that we are superior to the story and the director, and we have a sense of superiority in watching the fire from the other side. We think we know art well because we are planning exhibitions, and we think we are proficient in narrative because we have read more than n classic texts and wrote one ourselves. But Claude's ironic disdain for the couple shows us just how powerless the opinionated audience can be. Those things that are called art may just be garbage, and the tireless French teacher is described as "eccentric", these words are said by Claude through Raphael, but how do you know it is not Claude himself of?
Moviegoers are definitely offended here, but that might be the case.
3. Desire/Projection
If the text in the film is regarded as the film that Claude made or wanted to make, then this film proves two more laws.
The first is that creators always fill in the blanks for themselves through creation, project their own desires into their works, and make up for their many deficiencies through works.
Since the "foreign text" is real, let's take a look at the relationship between Claude's life and the narrative he constructed.
First, Dad is paralyzed. We have seen this paralyzed dad in person, and Claude takes him out of bed every morning and makes him breakfast, that's all. But in the narrative he constructed, he chose the role of the "father" as a lively and powerful man who loves to play basketball (with high demands on his legs), whose "tags" are green jerseys and the NBA for the first time. broadcast. The lack of one's own father's athletic ability and the emphasis on other's father's athletic ability. However, note that reinforcing this does not mean that Claude is submissive to him, (Claude said he has no interest in playing basketball) Just like every son is always replacing his father, in Claude's narrative , Mr. Raphael is a complete loser in his career. To put it bluntly, he is simple-minded and developed, and he can't give his wife what she needs.
Second, my mother left. Mom is so absent from Claude's life that fantasies about mom become the pursuit of a perfect female figure. When he first described Madame Raphael, Claude's tone was full of irony, but this may be his inferiority complex in the face of a perfect female image. Here, Claude projects all his desires and imaginations, so as to completely possess Madame Raphael. Moreover, this method of possession is still achieved by highlighting his own value and IQ. Since Mr. Raphael is a simple-minded loser, only I can write a poem that hits her at once.
Finally, the family and Raphael. If it is said that Claude intervenes in such a family, or chooses such a family as a creative blueprint, then he himself is likely to be the role of a son, needing a father and possessing a mother. So, what about the original son Raphael? Isn't it superfluous? Or a hindrance? Well, Raphael created by Claude has become a rather ugly guy. What does bad math mean, no rational thinking, stupid. What did that kiss mean, he was a "freak" with homosexual tendencies, so he didn't deserve to be their son, only let him kill himself. Get rid of him, and you will change your name in this family.
The second rule is that the viewer always projects his own desires on the author, letting them "write" in his place.
In the process of writing, Gilman always intervenes and guides, and even guides too seriously, but he never writes it by himself, as he calls it, he is mediocre and has no talent, but Claude has this talent, so he expects more Talented people to complete the story. This shows from one side that movie audiences always look forward to getting the story in their hearts, but they don't actually shoot it. They always expect more skilled people to realize it, and the filming is not good or doesn't resonate well. The director's level is limited.
In addition, Gilman in real life has no children, and the son-like expectation of Claude is also an aspect of his desire to satisfy.
4. Peeping/Implicit
As mentioned above, the viewpoint of the [rear window] is only fixed, and what we see is only a picture frame with a large window, however, [Entering the room] satisfies all the details you want to the greatest extent. This film interprets the peeping mechanism of the film to the greatest extent.
Any narrative film contains the audience's spy on the life of the people in the play. What is special about this film is that Claude's desire to spy on the characters in his creation is closely related to the space of his life. This is interesting, exploring that house is part of his creation, he is familiar with everything in this space, and he leads us to explore together, making it part of the credibility of the creation. The reason why Gilman is so devoted and attracted to Claude's story is largely due to voyeurism, especially when the characters in the story are real life, this attraction is even greater.
Aside from voyeurism, the reason why the audience, or perhaps Gilman, read Claude's story so curiously and voraciously, is that it satisfies a lustful desire. In fact, since the first assignment, Claude's "novel" is no longer an assignment. It is almost exclusively created for Gilman alone. To a certain extent, it is deliberately catering to the curiosity of the audience, which is exactly what The stuff behind these kinds of movies. Just imagine, if Claude did not write such words as "the fragrance of middle-class women" in the first assignment, but wrote "the labor of a housewife", would the audience still be willing to find out. It is this slightly curious brushstroke that has become the magic weapon to seduce audiences like Gilman, so that the further back you write, homosexuality and infidelity become commonplace, and even tell you that he saw a picture of two couples making love, you If you want to see something "different", then let's see. And the constant "to be continued" doesn't it remind you that there is a next episode?
Peeping and prostitution work because there is something to see. And I know what you must want to see.
5. Conclusion I
won’t say much about the many Chinese elements and metaphors in politics, economy, culture and art that appear in the film. After all, it’s not enough to talk about three days and three nights, and secondly, it’s not important for the film narrative itself. .
In fact, aside from many things, when teachers and students discuss "homework" in the classroom, it is actually like the master of a narrative or the director of a movie discussing with his audience, and the two are co-creating. And the omnipotence of creation comes into full play immediately, including Gilman, the audience who participated in the narrative, his own home can also be easily entered into the room, and his wife will also become the protagonist of another narrative.
At the end of the film, two people sit on the bench to watch the residential building, and the feeling from the part to the whole comes out. This panorama similar to the rear window shows that there is a movie going on in any window. Do you want to make this movie? Movies, then use your imagination and find your way into the room, although not everyone needs a math tutor.
View more about In the House reviews
