The film attracted me very much from the beginning, mainly because of the messy school scene, which gave me a sense of real and absurdity. This feeling is very good, especially after I drew a picture for a day.
I saw a few things in the description of school life.
One is causality: the revival of schools leads to class antagonism, class antagonism leads to oppression, oppression leads to resistance, and resistance leads to alliances. This should be the most obvious route.
The second is the absurdity of formalization. The revival behavior of the school is originally a kind of oppression that belongs to a larger category. When this kind of oppression from society enters the school, various behaviors in the school tend to be superficial and formal, including question-and-answer physical examinations and loud warnings. After checking up before going to bed, everything looked orderly, but in fact it was just pretending. When the form was over, everything returned to chaos.
The third is class. The film separates several classes very clearly, because the hierarchical relationship in the school is very clear. At the beginning, the lowest-level freshmen were introduced, without status; then the senior students were bullied by the superintendent, but they seemed to be slick with the superintendent; the third was the superintendent, which was opposed to the students. The relationship, the ugly face is self-explanatory; the fourth is the teacher, this level is very special; next is the principal, and finally the rebel class with three students as the core.
The other classes are clear at a glance, but the teacher class is a bit confusing. On the one hand, there are differences within teachers. They are open-minded and generous, encouraging students to think independently, and contrast with rigid dogma, compulsory indoctrination, and cursing if they are not beaten. On the other hand, in such a school, teachers as an authority class have a natural antagonistic relationship with students. In other words, the school atmosphere leads to the fact that no matter whether it is a good teacher or a bad teacher, the students will not recognize them, and they will be silent. There is also the teacher’s management of students only in the classroom. As for the time after class, the school supervisor’s 24-hour supervision is the responsibility of the teachers. Therefore, the school has to form an alliance with the school supervisor and decentralize the punishment power. The supervisor became more domineering, the contradictions intensified, and finally led to the revolution.
Another interesting thing in the film is the motorcycle stealing and the female shop assistant. This is a boys' school, with restrictions on leaving school, no women can get close except for two middle-aged female teachers. Sex is also suppressed as a dirty thought in school. When the boy saw a young and beautiful woman, the romantic plot happened. Finally, the girl appeared in the school and participated in the revolutionary plan. I wonder if she is also facing the problem of boss oppression~~
The development of the plot is still a bit lethargic. It was unexpected and expected. Especially when the three teenagers pledged their blood and allied themselves to take out the bullets, I looked forward to a happy massacre. However, the massacre seemed to come to an end with a handshake in front of the drawer, which disappointed me. But then the arsenal in the basement made me excited again. The final battle seemed to have evolved from a causal relationship into a farce: a crowd of people swarmed up, quite the feeling of a stage play.
Why is the title IF...? if i was him? if the teachers ...? if the kids...? if the school ...? or if the society...? or if this was not just happening in this film? The way of thinking seems to tell us that he is also thinking about this question. . .
View more about If.... reviews
