Deleuze uses Umberto D as his approach to time-image discourse. He also quoted Bazin's understanding of neorealism many times. But then again, what makes Umberto D defined as a neo-realist film? Deletz is actually cheaper than Bergson. The latter is secretly addicted to drugs, waiting for you to relax, you will already be very sick. Delici is playing with you blatantly. Ya doesn't tell you about neorealism at all.
Let's talk less gossip, let's talk about movies.
Bazin’s comments have been enough: what “uninterpreted reality”, “reality was hit directly” and so on. My personal feeling is that neo-realism prefers grinds to the narrative. Constantly, repeatedly, to commit adultery to the same incident repeatedly. (Of course, nostalgia has not risen in Europe after the war, but at least it has set a model for such kind of obscenity) Obscenity means just mind-fucking, but never intervenes in actual action. Just like the old man in the movie, he constantly wants to make money. The difference is that he really "want" to make money. But never get money. He kept thinking, looking forward, and looking forward. But Fang Fo's character is so cowardly. Live forever in the time and space of being "dried", (in contrast: I discovered that I was a single-cell pure impulse person, and used my impulse to create various consequences that are irrelevant to good or bad.) My feet have never been touched. land. This feeling of suspension comes from the fact that the film does not make too much interpretation of the character: whatever you (the audience) understand or guess, he is such an incompetent character.
Driven away by the landlord and feed the dog.
Deletz therefore interprets this "being aired" as the existence of a purely visual/auditory situation. In the film, a series of clips after the maid woke up in the morning brought this illogical existence through neorealism to the extreme: she walked to the kitchen, lit the fire, received the water, and looked at the dilapidated buildings around through the windows, subconsciously Touching her pregnant belly, she couldn't help crying, sitting on a stool grinding coffee and crying while grinding, and wanted to close the door with her feet... I strangled it. It's tiring enough. In fact, this purely audiovisual situation is a bit similar to what we usually call "stupefaction": all actions are subconscious mechanized behaviors. It seems to be dominated, but you have no time to take care of the subject that dominates you---this is more like a psychic at the intersection of two or more universes/worlds: your body is just a carrier. You have never seen so clearly how you live on the edge of various frames: there is not much space left for you by this existence, pregnant belly, father to be determined, the control and squeeze of the hostess, and the future. It was only in this short moment of being aired that she truly possessed herself, the teardrops that couldn't help but the existence of this girl.
From the inability of the elderly to the emergence of pure audiovisual scenes, the questions raised by neo-realism led by Umberto D go beyond the "movie" itself: What is a movie? What is the difference between movies and us humans?
It’s not that I don’t want to reflect and act. The question is when all beliefs and hopes are broken, how can you still accept the linear way of thinking like "a lot of money-people are stupid-come quickly"?: We will always have a result, she must Will love me, the bullet will definitely hit the target, the movie always has a statement, it will definitely change, Internaxnell will definitely come true...Unfortunately: there is no Yang Jia in neo-realism. This is a place where the price/performance ratio is relatively fucking, because fantasy does not exist all the time: she may be my mother, the bullet may be an empty bullet, and the movie can give you both a comment and a comment at the same time (AV with plot) , Internaxonel realized it, but in the way of globalization, etc.
It can even be said that neo-realism is anti-film: if our understanding of film must have a clear theme. Neorealism is not about wandering again and again for the subject, just like the old man in Umberto D: on the street, in the relief deposit, in the hospital, in the dog slaughterhouse. These have nothing to do with the theme, because umberto D has only one theme: wandering in post-war Italy through a sensory vehicle (the old man). New realism is born out of wandering. And this sensory carrier has determined the nature of this wandering: like a piece of waste paper drifting in the wind, it feels uneasy and uneasy. This is why De Sica likes to use the elderly or children.
Would you ask what is the meaning of a piece of paper that has been blown by the wind?
From another perspective, these spaces (streets, hospitals, slaughterhouses, etc.) are essentially the same: these are ordinary spaces, and they have the same effect on the advancement of narratives. They are just scene changes in their wandering behavior, but they themselves are not born out of logic. It's not that the old man has to do something in the 1st scene, so he comes to the 2nd scene. These scenes are all the same insignificant or the same significance. (Any-space-whatever) The film director’s choice of events is no longer for drama---whatever is the case, it’s just that actions will not trigger a change in the nature of the overall event. The old people get money everywhere, sell watches, sell books, and find acquaintances. Unexpectedly, the queen just doesn't eat this set: you have to move out all the time. However, this series of frustrations and frustrations did not bring Habrett's turnaround and climax. He is just an old man, what a word "weak" is! how realistic.
Realized by wandering.
You m unreal. Lost all the impulse to look forward to fantasy ideals --- Nietzsche's nihilism was completely confirmed in post-war Europe: it doesn't matter whether it is forward or backward. You just live, or you can only live. It's on the edge of the up and down. Wandering carelessly, lost, lost, disheartened, and devastated, this is an era where faith has failed.
View more about Umberto D. reviews
