Refugees, Roma beggars, gender equality, family relations, the disguise of a specific class, the pretentious gestures of contemporary art, the paradox of public relations. . . Ruben Östlund has to say too much in two and a half hours. Some are problems he sees from within Swedish society, and some are more general thinking and projections. Compared with the more focused, down-to-earth, and more popular predecessor "Tourist", this film obviously deliberately does not please the public, but tends to the serious "politics" of many "pretending" European directors to go forward and rejoice. The road of “art film” is not intended to entertain the majority of people, but only to a few people who “understand” it—only when interspersed with warm humor and embarrassment, did I take care of the experience of watching outsiders such as me. In a word, this kind of starting point and finished product are not expected to be favored by Hollywood, which advertises popular tastes, and perhaps also in the director's plan.
So does Östlund really want to make everyone confused? Then we will try to see if we can understand it.
refugee
At the beginning of the film, the "childcare" stealing experience experienced by the protagonist is not very representative in the Nordic society of Sweden. The politics is incorrect. Do citizens living in a welfare society still need to steal a wallet and mobile phone to support themselves? Although the thief duo (or is it a trio?) looked like Swedes, the refugee immigration building that the black brother's assistant helped locate with the mobile phone may be more in line with most people's associations and speculations. The effect of sending the complaint letters in this building and after that, the little boy who appeared aggressively, looking for the actor to ask for an explanation, and was angry for the little brother to despise his immigrant accent (I really admire the little actor gangster The gangster-like style and acting skills) and the male protagonist's attitude towards him further expand the refugee problem in Sweden. The question that the director wants everyone to think about seems to be, are refugees the culprit in all crimes? Considering that in the past few years, Sweden has become the country that receives the most refugees per capita in the world. Many foreign non-mainstream media have been optimistic about all kinds of misreports mixed with fear, prejudice, gloat and ulterior motives, and were scolded by the heavenly people as "the mother bitch." So objectively, does their government have the courage to spread the problem and divide it into two, instead of blindly politically correct and even more rebellious, causing the latter to cover their heads and run into the dark? At the end of the film, the actor is unsurprisingly reconciled with his suspicion of refugees. What about in real life? It is not easy to find the answer.
Roma beggar
While most Chinese people are still accustomed to using the term "gypsies" for the European vagrant people that seems to only appear in movies and novels, the West has long abandoned this term considered discriminatory and replaced it with something more " "Humanized" "Roma". With the opening of the EU's internal borders, the Roma, who seems to have a chance to live in their blood, naturally cannot lag behind other citizens who move within the EU due to work, study, family and other reasons. Therefore, as long as you go to Sweden two years ago, you will see a Roma sitting at the door calmly begging at the door of almost every ICA supermarket in every city. You said, how does this make Sweden, which is famous for its cradle-to-grave welfare system, so embarrassing? The government cannot give orders to drive out these Roma beggars, but people cannot ignore the embarrassing urban scenery. In the film, the few interactions between the male protagonist who is the representative of successful immigrants from Denmark and these less-received Roma immigrants are very interesting. The former looks like a dog in a neat suit, while the latter looks like a beggar in shabby clothes. However, in the beginning, the superb human appearance was twice forced to lower his posture by the beggar. But the director is not satisfied with simple satire and preaching. The contrast between the two different beggars before and after, like refugees, splits the issue of Roma beggars into two. The first beggar can make an order request from the protagonist at the 7-11 convenience store: chicken ciabatta (a kind of chicken sandwich), and no onions. The second one is still willing to help him take care of large and small shopping bags after begging for the protagonist to find his daughter. With this comparison, do you still think that Roma beggars are beggars? Yes or no. Like people of any nation and country, no one can generalize.
Gender equality
The term gender equality may be a bit general, or more precisely, it should be a power game between men and women, which is mainly reflected in the handling of the (sexual) relationship between the male protagonist and the American female reporter in the film. . In the rush of #Me Too-not to mention in Sweden, where gender equality is the core value of the entire country and the foreign policy of the current government-the male protagonist is likely to be the next exposed object: use oneself X- The position and identity of the director of the Royal Museum tempted a female reporter who had working contact with him to go to bed, and then disappeared. But in fact, on the one hand, the male protagonist seems to be embarrassed about how many real desires he has and how many drunk chaos that he has barely matched; on the other hand, after experiencing this one-night stand (or before experiencing it) Budding is lurking?), the female reporter has a certain feeling for him and hopes to develop further. Having said that, it should be discussed whether more men can have unemotional appointments, while more women will choose to make appointments with people they like? Or should we explore how much a certain gender’s social identity will account for the attractiveness of the opposite sex? Is the result a game of power? What is right and wrong is as controversial and thought-provoking as the very politically incorrect countercurrent that Catherine Deneuve took the lead in the #Me Too trend.
Family relations
The relationship between the protagonist and the two daughters in the film reminds one of "The Tourist", which discusses the family responsibilities of both sexes. In that previous work, the father instinctively threw down his wife and children when he thought he was about to encounter an avalanche, and ran away on his own. He was always rejected by his wife and a pair of children for the rest of the journey. The entire relationship between husband and wife Even fell into a crisis. This film seems to be a sequel to the former. The father finally failed to keep his marriage. During the week when it was his turn to take care of the two daughters, from the beginning of the quarrel between the daughters to being reprimanded by the female boss and being blocked by a refugee boy. Asking for explanations and rudely confronting the boy, all these were embarrassingly seen by the daughters, until finally he took his daughter to the refugee building to try to find the boy to reconcile, and then he barely painted the relationship between him and his daughter. Up a circle.
Disguise of a specific class
Fashionable suits, cool Teslas, and even trendy red-rimmed glasses all constitute the social image of the curator of the actor museum. But under these gorgeous clothes, there is a layman who takes the definition of his victim's identity as his work priority because he has stolen his mobile phone and wallet. One can discuss trust and care issues in his museum's art works while watching. Roma beggars say that they are two-faced people without cash. In addition, in real life, each of us has more or less been such a layman, and has also been such a double-faced faction. It doesn't matter our identity and status. In the film, the disguise of this particular class represented by the male protagonist (either the middle class or the elite class) was completely torn apart during the cocktail performance of the orangutan imitator. In front of the "orangutans" full of primitive animalism and aggressiveness, these glamorously dressed and pretended guests are waiting to sacrifice others to protect themselves. In the face of certain individuals being attacked and calling for help, it may be understandable to worry about the silence of the people around them involved, just like those beggars and homeless people who pass by the movie scene again and again, and the "save a life" appear again and again. Voiceover, if these other people’s bad luck has nothing to do with them, how many people will care about it and will take the initiative to lend a helping hand? Here again, it has nothing to do with identity and status. But several other embarrassments in the film are related to identity and status. When a group of VIPs were standing still or gracefully half-turned and sitting on the steps before listening to the museum curator’s speech and then applauded, the next second when the chef changed to the stage, Wu Yang and Wu Yang dissipated without regard to politeness. The chef couldn’t bear it. While there was a loud roar, when the conversation with the “Mirror and Crushed Stone Column” artist was repeatedly interrupted by a so-called Tourette neurological disorder patient’s foul language, the lady in the museum who presided over the conversation (I was also one of the objects of abuse) I also want to say "No matter what the point of view, everyone is welcome." When some viewers even solemnly appealed to others, "Please be forgiving, that person is suffering from neurological disorders." When the chef and the patient clearly became "The Emperor's New Clothes" The children in China have stripped away the hypocrisy of these outstanding people.
Pretentious posture of contemporary art
It seems that contemporary art never aims to be understood by ordinary audiences. At the beginning of the film, the female reporter asked the male protagonist’s questions to express the feelings of a rebellious psychology like me who has always been extremely skeptical of so-called contemporary art. She asked him to explain a passage from the museum's official website:
"Exhibition/non-exhibition
An evening conversation that explores the dynamics of the'exhibitable' and the construction of publicness in the spirit of Robert Smithson's site/non-site. From non-site to site, from non-exhibition to exhibition, what is the topos of exhibition/ non-exhibition in the crowded moments of mega exhibition?"
"Exhibition/Non-exhibition
An evening talk in the spirit of Robert Smithson's place/non-location to explore the dynamics and public construction of'exhibitable'. From non-place to place, from non-exhibition to exhibition, what is the traditional theme of exhibition/non-exhibition at the crowded moment of the grand exhibition? "
Such a paragraph that is confusing for ordinary people can appear in the introduction of almost any contemporary art exhibition. Let’s take a look at how the protagonist as the curator of the museum answered:
"If you put an object in a museum, will it make it a work of art?" "For example, if I take your bag and put it here, will this make it an art?"
This answer is too honest! According to its logic, then everyone can become an artist. For example, in the "Stone Columns" exhibition area, the cleaner who accidentally swept away the exhibition objects (gravel) as trash (so that the lady in the museum almost had to find insurance Company processing), or the Tourette neurological disorder patient who fell ill in the auditorium, or the public relations company that threw the blond beggar girl into a square and blasted her to pieces, or even “cooperated” with the orangutan imitator at the reception. All the VIPs present. So what is the significance of contemporary art? Pleasant or stimulate the visual experience of viewers and consumers, beautify or vilify their lives, or raise substantive questions to contemporary society and trigger people's thinking? If these effects are not achieved, then what is the significance of art?
The paradox of public relations
Topic is the favorite keyword of the media, and the preferences of the media are a major survival skill of public relations. So how to create topicality? The two public relations brothers in the film chose to use women, the disabled, racially discriminated people, LGBT people, beggars, and children. . . These vulnerable groups are most likely to attract attention on social media. But this group is also the object that needs to be dealt with most carefully, because once used improperly, it will be self-defeating and become the target of a politically correct society, just like the exhibition advertisement in the film-it is blowing up the little Swedish beggar girl to the sky. At the same time, the actor was also removed from the position of the respected museum curator. But at the same time, the overwhelming attention of the public and the media aroused by this controversial topic has just reached the public relations purpose of the little buddies. So is this PR campaign a success or a failure? It depends on how you define it.
The above does not take the two obvious topics of trust and political correctness that the director wants us to discuss separately, not because they are not important, but because I personally don’t catch a cold with the former, and the latter is too complicated and difficult for me to think about. Under the condition of clear mind, I dare not make trouble.
Finally, I will talk about the most aesthetically pleasing highlight of a movie, that is, the background music of Akabella and classical music that is intertwined throughout the whole process-both solemn and harmonious, echoing the rhythm of the picture, well set off or contrast the visual scene. The story that is happening in China.
View more about The Square reviews
