The main theme of "Big Robbery Pear Flower" is in one sentence: " I am not a perfect victim, but it doesn't mean that I deserve to be gang-raped ."
The film was released in 1988 and is based on real events. It is an extremely regular Hollywood melodrama. Jodie Foster (Jodie Foster) plays Sarah, a woman who was assaulted in a bar. Because of her provocative speech and demeanor, she is beautiful and loves explicit clothes, especially in the case of hiding cocaine. Therefore, after the rape case, public opinion did not condemn the perpetrator, but questioned the victim’s various "moral flaws . "
The Chinese translation of "Bao Jie Lihua" is quite sensational, and has the characteristics of the Chinese translation of that era, that is, it uses idiom-like four-character words to summarize a certain core of the film. If it were literally translated into "The Accused", it would naturally look plain in comparison, even if the content of the film itself is hardly worthy of such a enthusiastic Chinese title.
No matter in terms of audiovisual language or aesthetic construction, "Blood Tribulation Pear Flower" can hardly be regarded as a great work. It has the advantages and ailments of many Hollywood genre films in the 1980s: dry soundtrack, facial makeup, misuse of small scenes, overly neat three-act structure, and display-like ideographic structure. However, to a certain extent, its success can be compared to a certain film that has recently caught fire in the country. Both win with themes, and there is no fatal injury to the public aesthetic in the production.
However, "Blood Tribulation Pear Flower" will still appear more solid and sophisticated. Of course, it looks a bit outdated. Whether it was the creative ideas at the time or the shooting methods, it was naturally inferior to today's works. Especially for genre films, the technically low freshness, coupled with the outdated narrative strategy, modern people's eyes can easily find many flaws in the film. Art films can be immortal with rich artistic and philosophical qualities, and the shelf life of genre films will be much shorter.
But on the other hand, "Bad Tribulation Pear Flower" is an out-and-out reality movie . This makes the film not like a complete 80s Hollywood genre, which creates an audiovisual sense of pungency in order to entertain the audience, but instead reveals a certain degree of classicism. The strength of the film is reflected in the text of the story and the social effects aroused behind it . Because it is a realistic theme, we can even occasionally see the sparks of similar European films in the film.
Therefore, when rewatching this movie, in addition to the attractiveness of the story itself, I can also see that the work frequently reveals the appearance of the Hollywood template and the European art atmosphere that are torn and accommodating each other, so it seems very interesting. Of course, another bright spot that cannot be ignored is Judy Foster's acting skills.
With this film, Judy was sealed at the 61st Oscars in 1989. At the 64th Oscar in 1992, she once again won the Golden Man with "The Silent Lamb". This undoubtedly proves its greatness as an actor.
Kelly McGillis, another Hollywood goddess from the 1980s, played the prosecutor Katherine Murphy. The screenwriter also set a simple character arc on her, but it cannot change the character's facial makeup.
Catherine is the embodiment of justice in the film, but she did not fully stand on Sarah's position at first. There are two trials in the film, the first being the verdict of three rapists. Due to Sarah’s criminal record and low-level status, Catherine was not sure of winning the case. Therefore, she reached a deal with the defendant’s lawyer and was eventually sentenced to nine months in prison for the crime of intentional injury. Let her attend as a witness. This aroused Sarah's dissatisfaction. There was also a second prosecution against onlookers.
Hollywood, as a stronghold of liberals, whether it is a genre or an independent film, can often see doubts and mockery of the inherent social norms. "Blood Tribulation Pear Flower" is no exception. To a limited extent, the film questioned both the law itself and the prejudiced moral public opinion. In addition, the story itself is based on Sarah and Catherine as the main characters, which reflects a certain feminist color .
The 1980s was the stage where feminist film theory entered the stage of cultural criticism research. During this period, scholars such as Teresa de Lauritis began to deny the theories of Lacan and Freud, believing that these theories were ultimately the manifestation of male discourse and were essentially defending patriarchal ideology. Therefore, feminist films at this time began to transform from gender dualism to diversified care. The general "gender difference" is more scientifically transformed into the concept of "sexual orientation-gender difference".
Ever since, similar female films no longer follow Johnston's "confrontational film" path blindly. More directors have begun to use the physiological anatomy (sexual orientation) and social structure (gender) in the concept of "gender" to more clearly and accurately capture themes that involve class, race, age, and sexual preference.
And since the early 1980s, more and more female films began to adopt traditional mainstream film narrative methods. In the past, the attitudes of female films that deliberately rejected the mainstream and confronted the convention, under the advocacy of Ann Kaplan and Annette Kuhn and other theorists, gradually changed to accept the use of conventional forms to cater to the public's aesthetics. As a result, films such as "Silent Question", "Ordinary Business", "Unkempt" and even "Alien" with feminist elements were born.
"Bad Tribulation Pear Flower" is a member of the female film army of this period. First, it is a work on social subjects. Secondly, from the perspective of the nature of the event and the parties, it is expounded from the perspective of feminism. Of course, it is also a typical Hollywood drama in characterization, with very distinct dramatic passages. So many attributes are dissolved into one, forming the aesthetic form of the film.
At the beginning of the film, the fixed lens was aimed at an ordinary bar under the bridge. As the cast and crew progressed, the time shifted from day to night. When the subtitles were over, we saw Sarah, undressed and barefoot, rushing out of the bar, shouting to stop the car.
The film has a lot of textbook play skills, such as using this set of shots and character behavior to grasp the audience firmly at the beginning. We are unprepared for this set of images, so when it appears, our brains begin to process this information at an astonishing speed, which makes it difficult for us to have five hearts. Then, through the description of the informant Ken Joyce, we learned that the woman had just been raped.
However, there are some problems with this impactful opening. The most obvious is its choice of music, which is a common soundtrack style of the 1980s and 1990s, using synthesizers and electronic percussion. It is a subconscious inertial composition, that is, before the plot happens, it pave the way for the audience and exaggerate the emotions. This approach would seem too old-fashioned now, and it has long been abandoned by authors with ideas. Fortunately, there are not many soundtracks in the film. By the way, this soundtrack style abounds in Hong Kong films.
This film is not a crime movie, nor is it a traditional legal movie, so the plot for investigation and evidence collection is very limited. Although there is a powerful court debate at the end, the focus of the whole film is not to describe the work of the prosecutor or prepare for the trial. In the above two narrative perspectives, the victim often becomes a symbol or a functional role, and the main task is to elicit the entire case.
"Blood Tribulation Pear Flower" did not do this, it showed the mental state of multiple parties under the framework of a complete God's perspective . Whether it is the reproach of the victim Sarah, or the pressure of Catherine, or the hesitation and panic of the witness and the perpetrator. The film almost presented the appearance of the entire case to the audience, and finally stood on an absolute standpoint to conclude, basically in one go.
After the report was reported, the film showed a series of treatments in the hospital and the process of taking photos and collecting evidence. The cold legal system is in stark contrast to the rape counseling center that was absent afterwards. Using the fast-paced foreshadowing of the first few games, we have a kind of confusion and anxiety that were forcibly brought into the incident, and there is no channel to know the full picture of the case. The overall structure of the film is under the "recovery three-act drama". At the end, with the help of the witness's recollection perspective, the director reveals the complete process of the rape case to the audience.
This technique undoubtedly has a strong impact on the audience, and it also releases the tense sense of suspense in the story. The topicality brought by the original material also allows the content of the work to be continued in constant discussion. The flashback of the rape case is the best shot, the climax of the whole film, and the most emotionally charged passage. Through shaking hand-held photography and subjective lenses that are almost out of focus, as well as the switching of various viewpoints, and the sound effects in place, the audience has almost all kinds of psychological and physical discomforts. The panoramic view presents this heinous Case .
From Sarah entering the bar in a bare-bones dress, to discussing topics like gun dating with friends, to all kinds of ambiguous hints with strange men, and very provocative dances, she did not even refuse the strange man's kiss. After this series of behaviors, anyone would think that Sarah is a very open girl. But this obviously does not mean that she can have casual relationships with people, and even deserves to be gang-raped in public.
On the other hand, it does not show reservations about the entire case, and avoids making the film a simple curiosity and sensationalism. On the one hand, the absolute rational judicial power is seeking justice; on the other hand, the victim uses perceptual impulse to fight the distorted social moral filter. Under the joint promotion of multiple perspectives, we can deeply feel the secondary harm caused by public speech to victims. Mentally, this may be more harmful than rape.
Therefore, the film’s verdict on the three rapists is basically a one-off. The verdict partly reflects the weakness of the law, but also explains Catherine's incomplete trust in Sarah. After a series of follow-up incidents, the prosecutors repented and tried to find new ways to make up for the regret left by the first sentence. So she sued the onlookers who abetted and made a fuss at the scene.
The film has thus ushered in its second trial. For such a "very imperfect" victim rape case, it is obviously more difficult to prosecute the onlookers. But Catherine, who recognized the facts, did not trade with the defendant as in the first trial, but used Ken Joyce, a key witness, to get a fair verdict. The story seems to usher in a bright ending, but in my opinion such a solution is far from perfect, after all, the real rapist is still sentenced too lightly.
The film's handling of Ken, the key figure, appears to be more blunt. On the one hand, he was the informant, and on the other hand, he was the best friend of one of the rapists, and he himself was a member of the onlookers. Although he was not present to make a noise, he did not take action to stop the case from happening. He was constantly disturbed by his conscience, but before he appeared in court, he tried to retract his confession because of friendship and other reasons. It was at the final critical moment that the film only described the two-sentence dialogue between him and Sarah, and he once again stood on the side of the victim. In addition to Sarah and Catherine, as the third character who was greatly affected by the case, the final change in attitude seemed a bit sloppy and dry.
In any case, through this controversial case, the film tries to tell the audience a fact: when a man tries to have a relationship with a woman, the other party’s free will will play a decisive role, not based on his identity, occupation, class status, or previous Any behavior is transfer. For this reason, Article 412 of the U.S. Federal Rules of Evidence stipulates: "In a rape case, the victim’s sexual history (who has had it with and how many people has had it with), the reputation of sexual life (such as debauchery, prostitutes, accompaniment, etc.) Dance girls, etc.) are not admissible as evidence in rape cases. The purpose is to prevent the trial of the crime from turning into the trial of the virginity of the victim, and to prevent women from not reporting the crime because of embarrassment in the court.” This provision is promoted by feminists. .
Thanks to the wonderful performance of Judy Foster, the role of Sarah, the victim, is different from other relatively symbolic characters in the film, but is portrayed in a very full-blown. We can see her most real first reaction after being assaulted, and we can also see her courage to bring the police back to the scene of the crime that night to identify the murderer, as well as the rage and pain after being criticized.
So that when Catherine did not trust her a little, she was so angry that she refused to communicate with her further. As Sarah's "life-saving straw", Catherine, who has received higher education, will inevitably fall into the predicament of moral public opinion. We can imagine Sarah’s desperation at this time, and there is also her bloody cross-examination: "Why do you decide that it is not good for me to testify? If I also go to law school and not come from a humble background, would it be advantageous?" This points to a deeper dialectical relationship that the film wants to explore, and it is more reminiscent of Benjamin's "Criticism of Violence." The meaning behind this sentence is also the key to sublimating the theme text of the film.
This Hollywood movie 30 years ago still has thought-provoking social value and practical significance. In June of this year, a 23-year-old woman from Guangdong took an online taxi late at night, but got in an unfamiliar car by mistake. She was sexually assaulted by the driver and then killed by netizens, but was commented by netizens as "Who told you to take a taxi in the middle of the night and wear so little". In addition to the previous sensational incidents of flight attendants being raped and murdered in a downwind ride, and the disappearance of Zhang Yingying, who had no "blemishes" in her conduct and pre-incident behavior, and even in various incidents of sexual harassment while wearing cool clothes in the hot summer, we Many people who "condemn the victim" can easily find outlandish words. This distorted psychology of "flies do not bite seamless eggs" is nothing more than a sickly and unconsciously bad social atmosphere.
Reality is always crueler than movies, and the phenomenon criticized in this film still exists on a large scale. Countless "Storms of Pear Flower" are still being staged around us, and countless maggots are still making disgusting accusations and ridicules to the victims. These are not only frequently happening in China, but also overseas. The power of a film may be too small. In any case, there is still a long way to go to build people's concept of the rule of law, and to establish correct ethics and values.
Of course, the more probable fact is that we can never change those selfish individuals who are born with malicious intent.
View more about The Accused reviews
