1. Smoking. There are no fewer than 10 shots of Hannah smoking. Even if smoking is a literary, some literati may have died for it, but not every literary young woman smokes. Even if Hannah is fortunately a smoker, she doesn’t have to smoke for a slower shot while the slow motion is advancing. Hannah definitely has other qualities that make everyone unforgettable besides smoking. I think her old man is lying. One day in the coffin, we heard that our descendants buried her in this way, and they would definitely jump out, pointing to our noses and cursing us for being ignorant and wanting to learn!
2. Gossip. She and Heidegger are a perpetual scandal, an immortal myth. I have to admit that before watching it, I also expected it to be a bit involved in the movie. But it really got my wish, and I was disappointed. When Heidegger sneaked into her room and rushed forward, he was very careful and excited, for fear that he would watch a flower be arched by a pig. Fortunately, the director just clicked to the end, and the rest is for everyone to imagine!
3. Language. The movie language is mainly German, and the auxiliary is English, which is nothing for me. When I speak English, because I mainly use the subtitles, but a few of my friends can’t stand it, saying that the accent is too weird, so I waited for it deliberately. Waiting for the chatter all the way. In fact, I haven't figured it out yet. Why would the director arrange three plots about language, one is a colleague gathering to correct Hannah's pronunciation, and the other is the editor of the New York Times? Discussing language issues with Hannah, the other is that people in the editorial department secretly mocked Hannah's grammar. I don't think this is related to the subject, or that it is not worth so many shots.
4. Concerning the arrest of Eichmann. The scene was so fake that I didn’t realize until after watching it, that I was arrested. This is not the point yet. The point is that the shot gives people the direct feeling that SS reappears, not that a wicked person deserves his sins. More of a kind, the power of state institutions. But this may also be a sequelae of my recent reading of the concentration camp literature.
Recommended places:
1. The application of Eichmann's Jerusalem raw materials. I think this is the first biggest impact this movie has given me. Eichmann’s slowness, calmness, clear logic, expressionless face... is in stark contrast to the survivors’ uncontrollable, incoherent speech, and even collapse and departure. Can not bear. This also largely confirms Hannah's banal evil view.
2. Hannah's private life. What's more moving in the movie is that her two friends, one is ridiculing each other but can't get tired of each other, the other is caring and helping each other along the way, watching them laugh and cry together, I feel that Hannah is very lucky and wins the cold on the heights. There are friends with me at the time. In contrast, most male friends are more crap, including Heidegger.
3. The book production process. If you don’t watch movies or read biographies, most people might not have imagined that this book will bring so much shock and trouble to Hannah. We should still wishfully believe that the world at that time treated this book as we do now. The classic textbooks are the same. Withstand the most difficult moments, and only if you persevere will you succeed.
4. People's reaction to the book. When the school committee rudely decided to stop Hannah's class and Hannah decided to openly defend herself, I applauded her courage and discouraged her helplessness. When the students applauded for her speech, I really cheered for it. Here, young students who are often referred to as "naive" here have left those "experienced" professors far behind, which is very interesting.
5. Regarding metaphysical issues. "Thinking" is mentioned many times in this film, in the words of Grandpa Heidegger, "das Denken". I think Hannah intervened to ask Heidegger why he didn’t explain to the world, or Hannah said that Eichmann’s "banal evil" was not because he was unable to think, but because he denied his ability to think. No matter if you don't want to think, there are two different responses from the school committee and students in Article 4, both of which indicate the ability and willingness to think. In fact, this boils down to a question of "cannot" or "unwilling", and furthermore, it is a question of courage. In the words of Grandpa Kant, you must have the courage to use your own reason, get rid of ignorance, and gradually enlighten.
Generally speaking, in the case of a blend of popular tastes, biographies, historical facts and philosophical thinking, the film can still be made like this, which is worth recommending.
PS: I read this book about the psychoanalysis of Nazi war criminals today. It was mentioned that in 1946, someone organized a systematic psychological analysis of war criminals. A total of 10 psychoanalysts were invited, but no one responded in the end. After analysis, they knew very well what the public’s psychological expectations were, so they dared not make their results public. In 1974, it was done again. 8 war criminals and 8 ordinary people were assigned to 15 psychoanalysts. They were asked to anonymously state that the analysis object belonged to those groups. As a result, no one thought there were war criminals among them, and some even thought Among them are civil rights defenders, artists, and psychologists. . . Interestingly, this result does not actually support Hannah's point of view, mediocre evil, because they are not even evil!
I just saw a photo of Adolf Eichmann, and I would like to ask everyone, can you see mediocrity and evil in this face?
http://baike.baidu.com/picview/347514/347514/0/4e0b3ea48a0b53cb9052eec2.html#albumindex=0&picindex=1
View more about Hannah Arendt reviews
