The night when I watched "Freedom Square" (also known as "Square") in Peking University’s Centennial Lecture Hall, the crowds were very crowded, because this was the closing film of this year’s "EU Film Festival" and the best film that won Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival this year. All the viewers came here admiringly. The facts have proved that this is a wonderful movie-watching experience.
Accompanied by constant laughter and long silent deep thoughts, this feature-length film of nearly two and a half hours came to an end, but everyone seemed to be still unfulfilled. At the end, there was thunderous applause from the audience, which is the best affirmation of the film. This is really a wonderful movie, you can interpret it any way you want, just like a polygonal prism, standing at different angles, you will see different projections of reality.
There may be a thousand "Freedom Square" for one thousand viewers.
Interpretation angle 1:
Life is from one restriction to another restriction
The protagonist Christian is a successful person in the eyes of people. As a well-known museum curator, he is a pivotal figure in the art world. He strictly abides by the urban jungle rules, and the rules of social operation are unimpeded on him. He is a regular office worker. He is conscientious and has a high EQ. He is good at dealing with all kinds of problems. He has no "bad marks" of deviance. He can be called a model for modern people. So of course he is respected.
But this kind of life made him, and it also restricted him invisibly. He lived in a state of dying and undead life. Like many modern people, although he has gained social recognition, he can live longer. It's not like myself, living in a peaceful despair.
And he needs a breakthrough, an escape, to completely surpass this unbreakable limitation. The fuse of this "deviance" was that "accident"-mobile wallets and cufflinks were stolen in the square. With the vigorous instigation of his subordinates who hurt his friends, he finally did something "extraordinary", breaking the boundaries of this life. He wrote a threatening letter and stuffed the threatening letter into the mailbox of the residents of the "suspected thief" community.
He is like a thief, going from house to house, doing this with extreme trepidation. This "feat" is probably unique in his life, right? Although this incident is indeed "extraordinary", it is emotionally understandable. Letting the thief be deterred and returned to the original owner is actually to achieve justice. But the facts proved that his strategy of "knocking the mountain and shaking the tiger" worked. The thief was frightened and then obediently returned his things to him.
Christian was overjoyed. But the matter did not stop there. His action of "rather killing ten thousand by mistake and not missing one" annoyed the innocent residents. He also received a threatening letter saying that you have wronged me, and I want to "make chaos." with you" (to make trouble for you), so he began to panic again all day long. I was afraid that things would be revealed, and then let him as a "decent man" be ruined. And when the little boy who was wronged came to the door in person and made trouble for him, he was really helpless. And the series of events that brought him nightmares can't be said to have nothing to do with this incident.
From our point of view, there is nothing to blame for Christian intimidating the thief in order to get his things back. But his naivety is that he forgets that life is a domino, and some things break through without breaking through. Once a hole is opened in the wall of life, justice may be done, or nightmarish storms may be introduced.
Facts finally proved that his "deviant" behavior did not succeed in breaking through the boundaries of life, but instead caused him to get into big troubles, leading to new injuries and restrictions. When you want to break through the limits of life and do something that you think is right, you will accidentally touch other traps, fall into an unknowable black hole, and be wrapped in greater limits. It's extremely scary to think about it, but it's true. This is the paradox of existence and the contradiction of human existence.
Interpretation angle 2:
The hypocrisy of urban civilization, the split personality of modern people
When discussing the "Christian Threat Letter Incident," we need to discuss a question: How contradictory are modern people?
When this happened, the protagonist Christian was going all out to plan an art exhibition called "The Square" (Cube Art). A line of words was specially engraved on the square to the effect-"The square is a caring and A refuge of trust, within the box, we have the same rights and responsibilities.” According to Christian, the box is the ideal state of human society. The purpose of this exhibition is to stimulate altruism in the soul of the audience and change their indifferent attitude towards others. But has he really accepted and achieved this? This is not the case. He is still a loyal practitioner of "exquisite self-interest".
Many beggars appear in the film from time to time, shivering in the streets. The director specially used the shabby performance of these disadvantaged groups to compare with those well-dressed "decent people." Although beggars need sympathy, no one really cares about their life or death. Take Christian as an example. He pretends to be sympathetic to beggars, but he doesn't really feel that they deserve sympathy (including us, who doesn't think that beggars who are vulgarly dressed and lack education are an abomination?), even occasionally. I think they are pitiful, and there are conditions attached, that is, to make myself look like a civilized and polite modern person, at least not to make myself feel embarrassed. For example, when a beggar actively asks for money loudly, he must maintain his demeanor for the sake of face, and he can neither ignore it nor disperse the money casually, so he bought a hamburger and threw it to the beggar.
Christian said to others, "Trust in others and be friendly to strangers", but he was stubborn after his valuables were stolen, and he even took it back in a malicious way like threatening letters, even if it hurt the whole The residents of the building still don't feel ashamed. His explanation was, "I always felt that the character of a person living in that kind of house would not be so good, not just me, but many people in our class think so." When the wronged little boy asked him to apologize At the time, he responded rudely, pushing him like a madman, pushing the little boy down the stairs. Although the camera didn’t show the little boy, he was definitely injured because of this. The sentence kept echoing in Christian's heart. His "life-saving" is the reflection of his sinful behavior in his heart. Although he realized that he was too much, his inertia still made him so "hypocritical" and "uncivilized" involuntarily.
When he was interviewed by an American reporter, he involuntarily praised that he knew art well, but he couldn't answer even a simple art question, which was embarrassing. While he looked at the beauty reporter with salivation, he said, "I won't fuck with her", and he went to bed with her in a blink of an eye. Even when he was in bed, he was always on guard against the female reporter. It was evident from the two people fighting for condoms after the incident. He didn't like her, but couldn't help not having sex with her, and then when a female reporter asked him directly because of being alienated, he advertised that he was a bit interesting to her.
The director also threw an interesting question to the audience-do those who make a living by art really care about art? For example, at the opening, a crane was violently carrying artworks in front of the museum, and a bronze statue of a medieval knight crashed to the ground, and the knight’s head was missing. Also, the mound art used in the exhibition was accidentally destroyed by the cleaners. The curator ordered his subordinates to pick it up and restore it, and then the exhibition remained the same. There was also the well-known artist who gave the lecture, who talked aloft, and faced the outspoken criticism of the profanity patient in the audience, his face was full of displeasure, but he was still forced to laugh, and then he faced a special event at the banquet. Performance art, the artist was the first to leave the room in anger, and did not show any respect for the performance of art... All this gave the audience the feeling that this group of people was perfunctory to art and did not have the slightest fear of awe.
There are also many imagery scenes in the film. For example, two "civilized people" in the house are fighting fiercely. The gorilla on the side reads the newspaper while holding a paintbrush to "make art." There was also the climax of the performance art. The banquet was full of decent celebrities. The naked artists helped to imitate the gorillas. They were unfriendly to all of you. After being intolerable, a group of civilized people shouted "Kill him" attacked the artist group.
These absurd scenes are strongly impacting the audience. The wildness of freedom and the artificial civilization are intertwined, but in the embarrassment they point to the terminal illness of modern society-the self-contradiction of modern people, and the hypocrisy of modern civilization is ridiculous. But these problems have been there for a long time. We living in modern society have to face it all the time. We live in a hypocritical modern civilization. We have to act as an insincere and self-contradictory clown at all times, living in this awkward and deadly era. Even if these issues are enlarged and discussed on the screen, they still cannot change the chronic diseases of modern society. This is an age of aphasia, everything is dispelling its original meaning, only absurdity is everywhere. Once spoken, even the speech itself seems to become absurd.
Interpretation angle three:
The indifferent city and how to get along with strangers
This is a work created by Swedish director Ruben Ostlund. Perhaps it is the projection of Sweden on the screen in the eyes of the director himself. In the eyes of many people, Sweden has always been full of poetry, and the perfect social security system "from cradle to grave" has made countless people envy. However, Sweden in this movie is full of cold disillusionment. It seems that there is also a poverty problem. It is full of indifference and mistrust between people (as if it is in China). It is not a "haven from the world" as people imagine.
It is not only the decent middle class who has a crisis of trust between each other, but also the “decent people” who treat the poor have no trust at all. This can be seen from the "threatening letter incident". Those characters interspersed in this incident are all victims of prejudice. On the surface, it was a theft, but it was actually a precarious interpersonal relationship in the city. The property owners hate the proletarians, the proletarians are jealous of the property owners, and the middle-class people despise the low-income people...Even the protagonist Christian, who has a certain social status, is not trusted by his subordinates. There is also the banquet section of one of the climax of the film. When crazy artists harass other people like animals, all guests pretend to be ostriches to protect themselves, even if the screams and calls for help from the injured are so harsh, everyone is indifferent. Those hypocritical sympathy and understanding are vulnerable to the cold urban jungle law.
The so-called civilized wealthy people have an arrogant and indifferent attitude towards the poor proletarians. They are extremely confident in themselves and full of prejudice towards others. It seems that wealth status can determine everything. As long as you have money, you must be self-cultivation, quality, and high-spirited, otherwise there will be no existential value, and even your character must be low. This has led to a variety of indifferent tragedies, a society lacking understanding and love, staged scenes of absurd and heart-wrenching satires.
From the way you treat beggars, you can probably see the warmth and coldness of a place. In the city where the protagonist Christian lives, although people know that beggars are a disadvantaged group, they are not welcome. We saw a little girl dressed as a beggar being blown up by a bomb, and then this video was topped on YouTube. In the end, Christian suddenly found out in his conscience and realized that this hypocritical behavior was wrong. His heart began to change. He deliberately let a beggar help take care of his bag. This in itself is a kind of trust, and the beggar is poor. But he didn't steal either. This result rekindled his confidence in human nature. It can be seen that personality is not divided by money. To resolve the tragedy of indifference and prejudice, love and trust are indispensable weapons.
Interpretation angle 4:
The way of salvation for modern people
A person becomes hypocritical and indifferent, which is largely beyond his own decision. Society is like a cage, and survival is like a curse. If you want to live, you have to succumb and change yourself, in order to integrate yourself into this big world. In the dyeing vat, everyone is forced to dye themselves into a uniform color. And the social atmosphere of selfishness and indifference is not formed in a day, and has its own underlying reasons. How to solve the "crime and punishment" of modern people? It is a question that we should think deeply about.
Although the movie didn't say exactly how to do it right at the end, the actor Christian finally made a change. A series of abnormal behaviors in him reflected his inner struggles and drastic changes. He wants to apologize to the people he has hurt with indifference. He doesn't want to continue to be hypocritical. He wants to take the blame and resign, and then tell the truth to the world.
This is not for himself, but for his daughters. He hopes to be a good father and set a good example for his children, rather than a hypocritical and exquisite egoist that can be seen everywhere in modern society.
Fortunately, he did not go further and further on the wrong path of modern society. Instead, he retreated from the cliff and turned his head back. Although he himself may not know whether this kind of turning back is right or worthwhile, he has been wrong for too long. I need to face my soul frankly and honestly.
Perhaps only frankness is the ultimate salvation.
View more about The Square reviews
