The advantage of this film is that it puts out as many erotic elements as possible. However, it is only "multiple", but it does not flow. What the film conveys is not a process of "experiencing" lust, but an essentialist, truth-finding story of "from repression to liberation".
This is not to say that this kind of inspirational story is not possible. I think that the diversity of erotic desires can be expressed in two ways. One is to focus on expressing fragmented and fluid private feelings (looking from the inside out), and the other is to focus on its relatively complete and fixed public political state (from the outside to the outside). Look inside). If you want to show the former, the film needs to show private erotic tension (the "different" entanglement in each state, and this entanglement cannot be completely completed; even the conversion between different entanglements is reversible to a certain extent) ; And if the film is to show the latter, it must show the political/social reasons why it is depressed. (The former means that there is no one and only true self, so "self" can never be fully expressed; the latter means that there is a only true self, and the reason why the "temporary" is not fully expressed is due to the social and political environment—— Therefore, gradually getting rid of these external repressions, this self can be fully expressed.) But the
film did not achieve both. I think the failure of the film lies in its greed for completeness and incompleteness. I guess whether the director wants to reconcile the two aspects and perform a comprehensive performance, but this reconciliation seems to have failed, and it has become a twitchy and nondescript, as if both literary and commercial films want to dominate, but none of them dominate.
The title "New Girlfriend" obviously refers to both the male protagonist and the female protagonist. They are each other's "new girlfriends". (For David, Claire is his new girlfriend; for Claire, Virginia is her new girlfriend. Both old girlfriends are Laura.) So the question is, why do they need to be each other's new girlfriends?
The male protagonist David’s erotic desires show the change between the two states of "private" and "public" (or the transition from flowing to fixed, from fragments to the whole), not with Rolla's death as a turning point, but with Claire's discovery was a turning point. It seems that when the male protagonist is alone, with Lola, and with children alone, his very personal sexuality does not become a "problem"; in other words, he can enjoy the "fuzzy self" without any problems. It is necessary to "socialize", "politicize" and "label" one's own passions-that is to say, although there is certain social pressure, this pressure does not become the reason why he cannot enjoy himself. After being discovered by Claire, he started in sequence: there is pressure to come out → the surprise of the initial coming out → the frustration of coming out → the successful coming out of the closet, the process of obvious directional change. Why didn't David need to define his own desires before, but then he must define his own desires? The only explanation is because Claire is not Lola—Lola is in a private state, and Claire is not in a private state. If the film is to be balanced in the public domain of political correctness and the private domain of irrelevant political correctness, the state of David and his old girlfriend Laura should be as free, complete and happy as the state of David and his new girlfriend Claire—— At least equal weight. But the film is obviously not the case. Because the socialization of David’s lust is not forced, but voluntary. His surprise, his anger, his pain and ultimate success all make David ever completely voluntary in front of his “old” girlfriend. The status of ""active", "beautiful" and "sincere" is put on the question mark, and the audience is presented with a tendency that only politicized and stereotyped gender orientations are more valuable. (Because the narration of his state in front of his old girlfriend is completely self-reported, it is only a solitary testimony. Then there are two possibilities: one is that it is true; the other is that he has not discovered the "truth" at that time, so the happiness he thought was actually Not happy enough. And the development of the following article completely confirms the second possibility.) This seems to make people think that David’s sexuality and gender actually have a single “truth” (the truth is that he is a woman o(╯□╰) )o),) And this truth only begins to seek the road in the "new girlfriend" period.
To reiterate, it is not impossible to tell stories like this, and I am not an avid fan of queer theory; but if this is the case, the David + Rolla story that has been trying to be queer-oriented almost half of the time will appear to be tedious and procrastinating.
And why can't Claire settle for a private state? It can only be considered that she is different from Claire in the novel, and her lust can be qualitative and fulfilled. ——As mentioned above, according to the ideas provided by the movie, metaphorizing Claire as David's social aspect and David as Claire's inner aspect, this can still be a good story. However, the director did not explain clearly the ins and outs of this single-line Claire. Why did she suppress her feelings for Laura in the first place? It is obviously not convincing just to say that it is "not yet awakened" or because of having a husband. (The obvious contrast is that Lola accepted David's transvestism; while Claire's husband suspected that Claire and Lola had a "familiar relationship" but did not show signs of fierce opposition, Claire has not been frank. It means that in the social state shown in the film, husbands and wives have the possibility of accepting each other; then Claire’s so-called "repressed" loses its external reason); but even if we accept this (brain-filled) explanation, Then why is he still depressed even after seeing David's cross-dressing and being touched and apparently awakening? (The depth of its depression is reflected in her anger and condemnation of David.-Just as David was curious, why can Claire reveal to her husband that David is gay, but he doesn't want to reveal that David is a transvestite? Her husband didn't care about these things.) The very important point is that the film did not present a social atmosphere that [the public likes to judge the private lives of others]. Claire frequently said that David was sick because she felt she was sick, and she insisted that David was a woman because she wanted a girlfriend. But why why why? ? On this issue, the film hardly gave any clues; even did not give Lola's reaction at all (assuming she was suppressed by Lola's refusal, it might be a reason at all; but the existence of Lola in the whole movie is like a vase; If Claire is stereotyped, Laura’s image should be fuller; but since Laura is set to be absent, then Claire should not be described as such a flat surface without tension.)-the only clue is to set it from the beginning A Catholic background. But it's a bit far-fetched to explain it only by religious background, don't you think? At least they are religious extreme rightists banning homosexuality, at least! !
In my opinion, the biggest failure of the film lies in the interpretation of the heroine's erotic desires as unitary and monolithic, and further stereotyping of her erotic desires. A woman fell in love with a transvestite man, but escaped from wasteland. This can be a very interesting story, which embodies the tension of lust that can never be reached. It can be a very high and philosophical story. But what did the director express it as? Through the lavish rendering of the ambiguous relationship between Claire and Laura, and the continuous emphasis on Laura’s absence afterwards, as if she were present, especially the metaphors of the two dreams, a stereotyped and rigid hint was given: Claire is an incapable Coming out of the closet, Les, her fascination with this transvestite is just a reflection of her fascination with the lost lover. After she released her own eroticism (or legalized homosexuality), she was reborn (indicated by pregnancy).
(This does not mean that she must become gay, but that after legalizing her own eroticism, or being fully recognized by the society, or obtaining a legal gender identity, her own eroticism has changed from instability to a stable State, as to whether this stable state must be homosexual is another matter.)
A good story was wasted, I can only say so.
(In short, this could have been a wonderful story of a "new girlfriend", but the movie only expresses a story of "I am a woman" superficially. sigh)
————————————— —————————From a
comprehensive point of view, the pseudo-queer elements here are just decorations. Abandoning these, isn't the whole story a love triangle of [My girlfriend and my man have sex] + [Actually I just haven't discovered the love of the soul] A Hollywood love movie that is logical and true love is supreme!
In addition, the overall viewing effect is slightly worse. The plot is too predictable. When I saw the host running from the hotel to the road, I screamed "Don't get hit by a car"! ! The result was really hit. . Then "don't be a vegetable"! The result was really unconscious. . . When I saw the hostess singing to him, I made 10,000 wishes "Don't wake up!" As a result, he really woke up and he was alive and kicking as soon as he woke up. . . There is almost a sense of sight when watching a movie of Tianchao………………
(Actually, even if the film’s expression is not in-depth enough, cutting off the small part will not make this defect so obvious; taking a step back, even if there is this defect, if the final ending expresses a more magical or more open ending, It also makes the story at least make sense-do you believe that singing a song can wake the critically ill patient!)
In my opinion, the performance of the actor is really unconvincing.
Originally, I was quite cold with this director. . Really disappointed this time. I really want to know why it has such a high score. . . . .
The highlights of this film are only: I think the song is very beautiful, the t in the bar is very handsome, and the baby's smile is very cute.
View more about The New Girlfriend reviews
