Before watching this film, I read Wallace's commencement speech "This is water" to Kenyon University graduates. Therefore, I had high expectations for this film, and I thought it would be a philosophical film, so I happily went to the innocent chronology book on the mountainside by the West Lake to watch this film. When I got there, the waiter told me that I could only watch a movie in this seat if I made a purchase. I don't want to eat, so I ask him if he can buy a movie ticket? "We don't sell movie tickets here," he said. I think I came to watch the movie, not to eat, so in order to make my behavior appear more pure in spirit, I said to the waiter, "Oh, okay. I'll consume after watching the movie." I watched the movie. After more than 40 minutes, I ordered a small cake. In fact, I shouldn't have ordered it, because it seemed that I was going to the movies, not to eat. This little cake came out in a few minutes and looked delicious. I silently deceived myself that you are here to eat at the "Innocent Era Restaurant", not to watch a movie. This self-deception of mine worked, and I sat in the position of someone who was about to eat here, slowly eating the cake in small bite-sized bites among a crowd of moviegoers. It was delicious! "You're here to watch a movie, not to eat," the voice resounded in his head again. I started to get angry inside and I wanted to fight back. Because a small cake is 30 yuan, I want to eat two more, eat three! If you eat two more, it will cost you 90 yuan! No, I came to watch the movie, not to eat, so after the last bite, I picked up my schoolbag and ran away. On the way down the mountain, my heart gradually became calmer, and I began to think about this behavior of selling dog meat. This place is obviously operated as a restaurant, so why should it be called the Chronicle of Innocence? It's as if she's a bitch why she still thinks she's a virgin. Is it because it's more fun to do it this way? Why do many people ignore or even fail to see this falsehood? Maybe they think differently. I am reminded of Wallace's little fable: "Once upon a time, there were two young fish swimming around, and they met an older fish swimming from the other side, and he nodded to them and said, "Children. ,Good morning. How is it in the water? "The two fish continued to swim in the West Lake for a while, and then one of them looked at the other and said, "What exactly is water?" ”. Postscript: The second night after I came back, I watched the remaining half of the movie on my computer, and my expectations for this movie were really too high. This is not a philosophical movie, it's just about a movie In the biographical film, a large number of trivial dialogues appear in the film, which can only make the picture unconvincing, unable to depict the loneliness of Wallace, his desire to live in the world soberly and profoundly, instead Makes him look neurotic. The movie is the charm of light and shadow. From this aspect, this movie is very unqualified. Although the movie almost faithfully presents Wallace's living environment, these are all superficial lives, and the combination of these superficial lives does not stand out. Instead, the characters become flat and trivial. To sum it up, reading Wallace's sincere and wise words, "This is water", his commencement speech to Kenyon college students, will give you a better understanding of Wallace than watching the film. This is a wise man like Hesse, Krnamurti and others.
View more about The End of the Tour reviews
