What is life? it depends on the liver.
The film starts with this sentence, so our film review also starts with this sentence. First, I will talk about Shali Chicken's understanding of this sentence.
When watching a movie, the subtitles translated the word "liver" into "liver", which is obviously more appropriate to the plot of the following movie, but Shali Ji thinks that the screenwriter here is actually using the "one-language pun" technique very cleverly. "Liver" means both "liver" and "living person". "What life is depends on the person who lives." In my understanding, this is the core point that the director hopes to express in this film.
Then let's take a closer look at the typical "living people" in the play, as well as the social microcosm they constitute, giving this suspenseful drama, what kind of realist irony.
NO.1 Akash-pretending to be a blind person seeking music inspiration, but ultimately becoming morally blind
When I watched the movie for the first time, I thought that when the man and the widow Simi were locked in a warehouse, the two helped each other to find an exit. He turned around and said, "Mrs. Sanha, would you like to be with me? When I went to the police station, it was an arc of humanity. After that, he gave up revenge, even kindly interceded with the doctor for the evil woman, and finally got the favor of God and was miraculously saved by a rabbit. This is the ending we usually have in movies, but in this movie, our director is not so romantic about human nature.
What is the real ending? This is to be discussed. But Shali Chicken, after watching and thinking about it, at least feel that what we thought of as happy ending is actually like a lie on the surface. It seems reasonable, but it is full of loopholes.
First: At the end of the process, when the director's car drove over a big tree shaped like a liver for the first time, he observed carefully and found that after the doctor finished saying "What is life? it depends on the liver?" ." After this crucial line, the actor fell into silence for a long time.
In order to highlight the silence at this moment, the director specially arranged for a car like laborers to pass through the right window. The bustling voices from outside the window seemed to mark this critical moment of silence. Afterwards, the small car drove past the tree and drove to the distance. Thinking about the playback, the silence at this moment is no longer unfamiliar. When Akash faced the false witness statement made by the police station, he struggled, but was silent; when he witnessed Simi killing the principal's old lady, facing everyone, he stood alone in a corner, silent; this moment Under the temptation of money and rejuvenation, too, he chose silence. His life will bury the truth forever, pretending to be blind, and continue to live like a blind man.
Second: The overall structure of the film is very clear. At the beginning of the film, the director specially added the background sound of "Long story, coffee?" when the actor recalled Sophie, and then brought out a surreal farmer. The scene of the rabbit, as the beginning. And then at the end, after the two met in a foreign country, the same sentence reappeared, and then the actor told Sophie the unexpected and magical ending. Of course, we can simply understand that this is the narrative strategy of flashbacks in this film, but we are more willing to think that the director specially used such a "top and tail" design to imply the audience that the actor is lying at this moment. In fact, the real ending, before the male protagonist said this sentence, the image has already told us, and the subsequent story, which is the so-called arc of human nature, is only the appearance of the lies that the male protagonist hopes Sophie will hear, not the real ending of the story. . An unexpectedly drawn rabbit head cane; facing Sophie’s rhetorical question about Mrs. Sanha’s ending, the male protagonist showed a conspiracy smile; and in the last scene, a blind lie that was dismantled by a kicked can, these The details can't help but make your back chills.
Are many things not as simple and superficial as we imagined? !
Third: Attentive viewers may be impressed by a big tree that looks like a liver. This different scene of the same scene appeared at the end of the film at 02:00:02 and 02:04:49, but the director’s The processing is very interesting.
In the first scene, the doctor's car did not stop under the tree, but went straight away, as if we saw Simi being sent to the plane by the actor and the doctor, becoming a liver transplant to help the rich man's daughter. Of course, we can't help but think about it. Maybe the actor also took off Simi's cornea and restored his vision, or he was paid a huge amount of money and went to Europe for corneal transplantation elsewhere. In short, in the face of injustice, the male protagonist still acquiesced and once again chose to turn a blind eye.
In the second scene, the actor retells Sophie the scene at this time. We saw the reversal. The car stopped by the tree because of the movement in the trunk. The doctor got out of the car and checked, planning to anesthetize the sago again, but was seriously injured by the sago and fell on the road. So much so that all the endings afterwards have changed. The male protagonist was almost hit to death on the street by the cruel Simi, but was rescued by a magical blind rabbit. Simi was also burnt to death in the car.
Comparing these two images, we can't help but sigh at the director's hard work. The same scene, at the same time, is separated by a seemingly useless Mary Su bridge, but it achieves a peculiar viewing effect. Not only does it form a closed loop visually, it also gives the film a huge plot reversal and audience's imagination.
Fourth: If you still think that the black belly of the male protagonist is the Shali chicken’s conjecture, then please ask yourself a few questions: 1. How exactly did a blind rabbit chased by a hunter hit it? How did you escape the scene without incident after breaking the windshield of the car?
2. How did the protagonist, who was blinded by simi poisoning his eyes, learn in a panic that a rabbit was the one who saved him, and then he used the rabbit as his own cane? Is this a gesture of respect? Or is it a joke?
To understand these questions, I think the interpretation of such a protagonist's character is almost the same.
NO.2 Is the appearance of Sophie really just to make the movie add a "love" in the tab bar?
Of course not, although Shali was once bewildered by the first 20 minutes of the movie, thinking that he had opened an Indian romantic love song and dance film that sang and danced. Even after watching the entire movie, I feel that the screenwriter’s writing of Sophie’s character line is superfluous and tasteless. It wasn't until after the second movie that I had a question, and this question helped me interpret the character of Sophie. Why at the end of the story, the screenwriter had to design a line for Sophie: "She killed so many lives, you should listen to the doctor and remove her eyes." This line seems to be irrelevant, but it is crucial to think about it. It gives Sophie a three-dimensional portrait of the person.
There is no lack of such people in our lives. They are like puppets of public opinion. They are convinced of what they hear or see. They only touch the surface, but not the deep. What is the truth? He thought he knew, or they didn't care at all? Just always stand on the commanding heights of morality, to criticize and judge. As the hero's lover, Sophie should have been aware of it as early as when the two men watched a movie and the hero was able to reach out to eat popcorn accurately, or when the hero was in a daze facing his sketch portrait on the wall. She always only saw the surface of the matter, and was convinced that even when the actor was in danger, Subtotal Simileo deceived her away from the actor. Until the end of the movie, when the actor and her reunited in Europe, it was also in the time of a cup of coffee. She completely believed in the man in front of him who had lied to him before, and she even thought she had the right to suggest that the actor should remove the sago. Eyes, even if the truth is unknown. Didn't she notice that the heroine swallowed back and forth when the actor was lying? Didn’t you know that the waiter took out his own bunny cane without touching the actor?
The truth may be as simple as the surface for some people.
NO.3 Who is the neighbor kid who is greedy for money? ——The media epitome of greed, indifference, and snobbery
This child appeared at the beginning of the film. He tripped Akash with a rope, and helped the male protagonist call a car and tipped him. It shouldn't be what a child of this age should look like. When he inadvertently realized that the male protagonist was not really blind, he was the first to find an opportunity to obtain evidence that he could sell money, climb the window and secretly record the video to expose this lie that has no interest in him. To put it bluntly, this child is either a heart-wrenching benefit or a pain in idleness.
He is very much like some of the media in our current society, all day long for fear that the world will not be chaotic, even relying on the gossip to make a fortune, but he has no courage and courage to explore the truth at all, just staying in gossip. Although this is innocuous, their indifference and ruthlessness towards the weak is stinging like a needle. When I saw the child went upstairs and found that the hero was really blinded by poison, he could have called the police or called for help, but he left without feeling. Is this indifference just as simple as children being naughty and bullying the disabled? A child who lives in a government low-rent housing and has received social help but has no mercy for the plight of others. Isn’t this painful enough? !
So far, let’s come to a small episode to praise Indian movies. Although they always sing and dance when they don’t agree with each other, the portrayal and understanding of the little people can sometimes make the audience think deeply. The director of our film is the same. He inherited the Indian director’s deep understanding of music, and used images and music to the fullest. In the key points of the film, the director used its mellow lens language combined with sound coordination. Give the audience a unique audiovisual impact.
When I watched it for the first time, the moment of physical tremor was not the high point of many plots, but a moment similar to when Simi made a coffee in Akash with a face to test the protagonist. The director is good at giving the audience unexpected excitement in a relaxed moment, a loose scene, as if to describe an objective fact casually, but in the motion of the camera with a slight shake, with the accent of the music, it brings out unexpected urgency. Sense and oppression. (There are many such treatments in the film, you can find out one by one by yourself)
When I went to work on this film, I paid special attention to the piano music throughout the film. It is interesting to find that almost every male protagonist’s changing point has a song suitable for the situation. Here, the song is not only as simple as the background sound, it seems to be the emotional window of the male protagonist. He will write love into the song, and at the same time express fear and helplessness. What’s more interesting is that the director even hid his tribute and remembrance of classic Bollywood movies in the song. There are many classic bridge replays in the film, including the subtitles after the end of the movie. The original source of the music. It can be seen that our director wanted to express a lot in his first conscience masterpiece after a lapse of more than ten years.
So back to the first sentence "What is life?"
It seems that the director of our film did not give us a very optimistic answer. With so many vivid characters portrayed, they all have their own lives. In order to achieve his goals, he did not hesitate to kill and poison, but there was no good Sago after all; the police chief who covered the sky with one hand and focused on power, faked his own public and helped himself; the greedy, selfish but cowardly and superstitious taxi couple; After the analysis of three people, all of them constitute a microcosm of a society. Although it is overly pessimistic, it has to be said that after such a distraction of human nature, the truth of the story is no longer scarier than the truth of society.
This also corresponds to the second half of the sentence "it depends on the liver." There are thousands of people, so live a good life and respect each other's inner order.
View more about Andhadhun reviews
