For the audience who have seen Diane Arbus's photography work, there is already a subconscious story background, and the curiosity is how the director "interprets" the female photographer
but has no understanding of the film. In Diane's interpretation of truly becoming a photographer, I'm disappointed that
the world is just like that, there's a good side, and there's an ugly, scary, unacceptable side. Normal people will automatically filter these things out as if they never existed in our world, or in other words, it's a fantasy world, as Diane's husband Allan says Lionel in the film, "He just came down from the ceiling. "Monster", Diane came into contact with another world because of the connection with this 'monster', and used her lens to show us - normal people.
No, it's not like that, the world is like that, behind Diane's sad photo, we in general don't have the guts to face
this movie, right? After reading it, I didn't leave any deep impression of the world behind the photo. Is it just that long-haired monster!
ps: The soundtrack in the first half is great I have a bit of a wry smile at the blank photo album Lionel left for Diane at the end of the movie - the one with the title "Untitled" written in advance
View more about Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus reviews
