Rich has been an orphan since he was three years old, and he has spent time in various social institutions. When he was released from mental illness at the age of twenty-three, he had only three wishes: to find a wife, to form a family, and to have a job—to live the life of an ordinary person. Although immature, he knows that for him, an ordinary life is a luxury and must be obtained through hard work. Rich fell in love with the porn star Marianne and kidnapped her. He immediately told her after he kidnapped Marianne, "I kidnapped you to give you a chance to get to know me, because I'm sure you will fall in love with me, just as I have fallen in love with you." Looking at the person in front of him, he was shocked and stunned. Richie continued to talk about his life plan: "I am twenty-three years old this year and have fifty thousand pesetas (Spanish currency unit). I am alone in this world. I am willing to be your good husband and your child’s Good father." The
end result was that Marion fell in love with him hopelessly.
In Lao Wa's movies, there is always only one protagonist, and that is a woman.
In this movie, he started to deviate a little bit, leaning towards love. But the angle he cuts into is really shocking. Such love, both in form and in essence, is astounding.
When watching the audience, they must keep their heads clear, and at the same time, they must also try to completely change the concept inherent in their minds, and make a 720-degree turn.
This reminds me of Copernicus.
As we all know, Copernicus's heliocentric system made the entire Middle Ages turbulent, not only almost shut down everyone's heads on the spot, but also made the square of the Inquisition scorched and smelly for a while. In fact, in ancient Greece, the astronomer Alistark already proposed the heliocentric theory, but at that time everyone was very equal. There was no fate of being sent to the stake after the theory was proposed. The old man Alistark proposed this When learning the theory, everyone was busy discussing ontological matters. No one paid attention to such a broken problem, so he could only mutter to his own shadow all day long: "Ah, you are really amazing. It’s such a wonderful doctrine.". Then he died and brought this doctrine to his coffin.
When Copernicus re-excavated this doctrine (I didn’t say that he ran to steal Xiao Ah’s tomb), he himself knew that this thing would cause him great trouble, after all, his publication meant that he and the Inquisition And Aristotle did it against him, which is a thankless thing. But in the end he did a vote, and he did it smartly (this guy published the book when he died, so angry that a bunch of people in the church looked around and asked about the cemetery).
The proposal of the heliocentric system is revolutionary. The revolutionary significance I am talking about is not just a huge achievement in natural science that everyone knows. What I want to talk about is the impact on people's thinking at that time.
Copernicus asked his readers to imagine that they were outside the center of the world and to observe the universe from a completely different perspective. His theory requires the ability to look at the world and humans from a completely new point of view: human beings, as subjects, must look at the universe and themselves from a completely different point of view. This reflective perspective alienation and perspective reversal are called A Copernican revolution, Kant used this revolution to interpret human cognition in a new way. For some others, this is seen as a realistic criticism of the overly optimistic beliefs about humans and the unique status of humans in the universe (for a long time, many people have been like Protagora’s Like the old man, standing on the high ground with his voice hanging and shouting: Man is the measure of all things!) In the past, human beings viewed the world from an individual perspective, and now he must give up this false self-elevation and regard himself as knowledge The dust of a universe, and later Darwin's theory of evolution and Freud's theory of unconsciousness, this vain belief in human reason has finally been reduced to its true value.
Almodóvar inherited the tradition of Copernicus very skillfully.
He did not choose the sweet old routines of heroic beauties and love at first sight to express his feelings and understanding of love like ordinary movies. If he obediently followed the usual routines like a primary school student doing homework, he would not be called Almodovar. Like Bunuel, he is the kind of master who won't let you watch a movie with a crooked mouth and slanted eyes. His biggest goal is to make your head buzz when you see the first shot. The classmates described it well: a room with a head as big as a bucket), and later it was foaming at the mouth.
This SM-style love variation not only abruptly distorts people's understanding of love in people's minds, but that kind of conformist understanding also abruptly rapes people's way of thinking. So I can imagine how happy this blessed Spanish director would be when he saw the audience stunned.
In this society, too many of us are used to it.
This is not tongue twister, but fact.
So, in this sense, Copernicus is great (although his way of doing things is not too gentle), Xiao Ah is also great.
Many things we think are the way they are, but in fact they are not what you think they are.
In other words, it is possible that the things you think are justified are the most assholes.
Xiao A once said that the happiest thing in his life is to say to others: Oh, no!
He said this when answering a reporter, who was also terribly cute and opened his eyes wide and said: How can you say the same if a beautiful woman undresses you?
Xiao Ah replied: There will be no such situation.
The reporter asked why.
Xiao Ah said: Under normal circumstances, it is the sentence they call me.
This is the director I like.
At the same time, I also thought of Stockholm syndrome.
On August 23, 1973, two criminals with previous convictions attempted to rob the largest bank in Stockholm and failed, and they kidnapped four bank employees. The two possible robbers took hostages for six days, during which time they threatened the lives of the captives, but sometimes showed a benevolent side.
Under unexpected psychological changes, these four hostages resisted the government's efforts to rescue them. A few months after the incident, the four bank employees who were kidnapped still showed compassion for their kidnappers. They refused to accuse these kidnappers in court and even raised legal defense funds for them. It is said that one of the abducted women later became engaged to a kidnapper who kidnapped her before, and was engaged to him while he was serving his sentence.
This incident inspired social scientists to understand the emotional union between the abductor and the hostile, whether it was a special case of the Stockholm bank robbery, or whether this emotional union represented A general psychological reaction. Later studies showed that this incident, called "Stockholm Syndrome" by researchers, was surprisingly common.
Researchers have found examples of this syndrome in a variety of experiences, ranging from concentration camp prisoners, war prisoners, and even victims of prostitutes, battered women, and incest.
The conclusion of this survey is that anyone can suffer from Stockholm syndrome if certain conditions are met.
First, the captive must truly feel that the kidnappers threaten their survival.
Secondly, in the process of being held hostage, the kidnapped person must recognize that the kidnapper may give some small favors.
Third, in addition to the views of the kidnappers, the captured must be isolated from all other views;
finally, the captured must believe that escape is impossible.
Experts believe that this psychological transformation of Stockholm syndrome can occur within three to four days, but it must be emphasized that people who experience this syndrome are not crazy, but they are fighting to save their lives. This type of syndrome represents a strategy for the captives to secure themselves by courting the kidnappers.
The captives do their utmost not to provoke or provoke the kidnappers; while the captives do so, they gradually lose their self-awareness until they fully accept the views of the captors. If the captives now look at the world from the eyes of the captors, they no longer desire freedom. As a result, when rescue comes, the victim may resist it.
I don't mean that it is only natural for Marion to fall in love with the stupefied Rich in the end, so that someone would slap me on the bricks. I mean, from a technical point of view, it is reasonable for the heroine to fall in love with the male protagonist (note the wording).
After I came to this conclusion, I felt that my head buzzed, and then I was about to move. Of course, I'm not encouraging everyone to see a girl who is pleasing to the eye and kidnap someone with her shoulders tied and two arms, and then getting along for a while will be a matter of course. After all, you are not a stranger, and that girl is not Marion either. Even if you succeed for a while, there is no guarantee that she will be accusing you of kidnapping at the time when the chicken fly egg is beaten, but you can't eat it and carry it away.
What I mean is that no matter what we do, we should have some unique characteristics. Russell’s utterly bad quote: It’s important to know that diversity is the source of happiness, and it makes sense.
View more about Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! reviews
