Personally, I don't think Burn Anderson's acting skills are perfect. He was a little hunched, and he didn't seem to know where to put his hands and feet when he walked. In addition to being unfamiliar with his acting skills, he doesn't seem to understand the nature of this character: a symbol of "beauty" that is watched, appreciated, admired, and has no self. Every time he passed by, looked back and smiled, his expression was thoughtful, but at that time, the actor at such a young age probably didn't realize that this smile would be regarded by the male protagonist and the audience as an invitation to sex. Compared to the actress who played his mother, Burn Anderson obviously doesn't know how to act with a calm and elegant "stunner" feeling. I don't know if it's because the actress is better at acting, or if women are always in a more objectified position. All in all, although he is beautiful, and the film is often seen as a tribute to "absolute beauty", I think it is precisely this actor's performance that has caused a crack in the so-called "absolute beauty". But if he was fully aware of the character's objectification of himself, I'm afraid he wouldn't be able to show that beauty either. Because anyone will have an instinctive resistance to self-objectification. What external force can make an actor devote himself to pondering the beauty of perfection, just to play an object that can make others lustful? In reality, the actor's suffering also confirms how inhumane the appreciation and taste for this external beauty is, and out of harmony with real life. In any case, no matter how people try to put a "beautiful boy" into the mold of "absolute beauty", there is always a part of him who is not obedient. That kind of beauty exists only in the imagination and should not be placed on people. No one should bear such unnecessary expectations.
View more about Death in Venice reviews
