I think this is a film about "Exchange" and "Change". In the film, Dr. Lecter (played by Anthony Hopkins) mentioned to Starling (played by Jodie Foster) that the original English text was "Quid pro quo". I asked the cousin Quid pro quo, who has a profound foreign language background, what does it mean? He said that this is Latin, and it means something to something, doing one thing with another thing to make up for. In my cousin’s language, Chinese is the third language, so after examining his statement and the Chinese translation in the film, I defined it as an Exchange and Change film. If we want to change the status quo of Change, we usually have to use something to exchange Exchange.
Starling wants to change the habit of having nightmares, she has to exchange bad childhood memories with Lecter.
Lecter wanted to change his cell, he had to trade the analysis killer Bill with Starling.
Where's the killer Bill!? He wanted to change himself, he used murder and skinning in exchange for the devil.
Lecter once said to Starling when Starling was at a loss: She has the ability to solve crimes. I think Lecter has already seen that Starling has the same childhood shadow and desire to change like Bill. The director used the metaphor of the pupa to become a butterfly throughout the film.
The film won the five most important awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Actor, and Leading Actress in 1991. It is said that Oscar is the first time that the best picture has been transferred to such a thriller genre. In addition, Anthony Hopkins appeared in the film for no more than 30 minutes, which also created a classic.
Starling experienced the weakness of women before half of the film (the tall FBI colleagues in the elevator, the mouth of the psychiatrist, and the man alone with the golden roof to open the door, but the man stood by and watched, the smallness in front of the state police, Dr. Insect But at the end of the film, she was relying on her to solve the case alone to rescue the hostages. At this time, her male chief Crawford committed a misjudgment for nothing. Female audiences should quite agree. At the same time, there is also a lot of ink on Starling's male identity. The flashback father image brings out the mood of Electra. Later, she found her own solution to the male image comprehensively from the rational logic of Chief Crawford and the perceptual interaction of Dr. Lecter. . Starling finally succeeded in "change", and she no longer heard the lamb's screams.
Before the climax of the film when Starling found Bill’s residence, there was a period of Crawford leading the team to attack the tough, the tied congressman’s daughter tricked Bill’s pet dog, and the parallel editing of Bill’s transgender makeup doorbell ringing was quite beautiful. The compact arrangement put the audience until the end is about to be known. But in a state of tension that I don't know why it is developing. But in it, I think the director made a mistake. It shouldn’t let the audience know that he had misjudged from the picture of Crawford holding the suspect on the plane. This move made the subsequent attack and the parallel editing of the doorbell lose its suspense. Personally, it is a pity.
View more about The Silence of the Lambs reviews
