How many times of bitter love can finally bear fruit?
In fact, I have been thinking about a question, how can it be regarded as "fruitful"? Does it have to have a happy ending, like most romances and Hollywood comedies, or does it have to be unrelated, like Keats and Fanny, as long as you know you care about each other? I tried to look at this problem with my humble knowledge of physics, and then I found that this seems to be a false proposition about the frame of reference. "There is no ending, but the heart is with each other" is for "the heart is elsewhere", while the prerequisite of "happy ending" is "the heart is with each other". Which movie novel's protagonist "has his heart elsewhere", but can finally have a happy ending? Before the happy ending of the prince and the princess happened, the audience had already clicked "the default is that the two are deeply in love" in their hearts.
It's still drama after all. In life, the relationship between male and female protagonists is only limited to "can be together" and "cannot be together". Let's shift our vision. Does happy ending mean "the heart is with each other but can't be together", or is it "together but the heart is elsewhere"?
Apparently my shameful physics can't answer this question with the acceleration formula I only know. Of course, I believe that the gravitational estimation also does not work.
Freud's psychoanalytic psychology said that the subconscious mind is the main source of human behavior. The subconscious mind is not controlled or even detected by the human will. So——the subconscious psychological source of "to be together", is it "love" or "desire"? I mean, when our will and preconscious regard "love" as the supreme and beautiful sentiment, in fact, the most instinctive source of love is "desire" from the subconscious, but our will is unwilling to admit it. It really is a sexual instinct!
Frankly speaking, this nonsense has nothing to do with "Bright Star". "Bright Star" is not such a film that can give a lot of ideas. Although Jane Campion from "Piano Lesson" can barely be called a young sword, one is because "Piano Lesson" is not a peerless film, and the other is that "Bright Star" is beautiful. The coat hides its hollow heart. It's a bit reluctant to say that the coat is beautiful. I can hardly imagine that if the protagonist's identity is not the embarrassed poet Keats, but the embarrassed stonemason "Tzu Chi", where would the gorgeous clothes of this film come from? In addition to the poetic language, the whole film rarely sees the calm temperament of the Victorian era, but the rhythm of the film is slow, so that literary films of the same type have to worship it.
However, "Bright Star" is about a "love". Again, the vulgar we are all caught up in "love".
Today, a few of our close friends got together and were surprised to find that T among them had made a new girlfriend. The crowd was in an uproar. This man is steady, introverted, and has a very good character, but his appearance is mediocre. One is that he voluntarily abandoned it, and there are always solid reasons.
I have always been on good terms with him, so I directly sighed, "It's too frequent!" It's less than 2 months since the last term! He replied lightly, now this is my classmate, simple and reliable, I want to stabilize, and I can get married in a stable manner in the future. .
I feel like my eyeballs have fallen out.
I'm sure I'm the same year as him. And I just finished my sophomore year. More importantly, his favorite first love is a typical glamorous girl.
I'm not saying that today's love should not be for the purpose of marriage, but I don't understand that if the purpose of marriage is to decide to fall in love, is the object in the picture really the "love"?
From this point of view, Keats is destitute, talented, but has no house, car or even income, and can only be a married son-in-law or a naked marriage. Such a person is obviously not worthy of a "suitable" marriage partner, so he is already at the age of marriage. Fanny, decisively, should you pull back from the precipice?
Of course it doesn't work that way in the movie. But in life, would you do this? Rationally you should do this, right?
At the station at dusk, I turned my head inadvertently, and saw a figure walking from a distance, and my mobile phone just dialed a number, so it showed the wallpaper with that name printed on it, I thought I was hallucinating, so He bowed his head and said nothing. But in fact, there is a sense of satisfaction that has filled my heart unknowingly. Not directly, but we can use air as a medium. It was like Keats and Fanny stretched out their hands and pressed them to the sides of the wooden door, but the warmth was quietly passed through the thick door, as if I was whispering and babbling to the unwitting stars in the middle of the night. The stars and the moon don't know, but the dark night knows my secret.
That should be love, because we are all mortals with desires. So paranoid I am willing to choose an unreliable way to fulfill my life, my life.
A happy ending is: my heart is on you, I admit that I want to be with you, but you don't know; but luckily, at the same time, you are on my heart, and you admit that you want to be with me.
Although, I don't know what you think. Only the stars know.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------
Explain it:
My heart is with you - this is called love;
I want to be with you - it's a sexual desire;
you don't know - it's the medium of love, like an old wooden door;
your heart is with me, you want to be with me - it's called "heart" in the same place".
I don't know what you think, so will we end up together? Sorry, that's out of the scope of the happy ending in the story. It's up to life to answer.
View more about Bright Star reviews
