It looks like a brave story. The film is often interpreted as breaking through the written fate and changing the unchanging life. But compared to the sense of restlessness and freedom it symbolizes, I pay more attention to its impact on the TV industry. , The wonderful irony of the TV audience (of course we are all). The "how to end" mentioned several times in the film generated something more thoughtful and scary for me. A simple sentence "If I never see you again, good morning, good night and good night" can't kill me, I think What I got was from the perspective of questioning Truman himself. Perhaps this show will need to end sooner or later. It has been booming for thirty years. The audience is tired of the protagonist’s unremarkable cycle of life. TV producers want to create more drama conflicts but they have no abilities. Therefore, This beautiful ending may also be in the script? You said that the content of the off-screen interviews is obviously contradictory, perhaps it is deliberately contradictory, to pave the way for the audience's excitement, climax, and symbolize the "free yearning" ending? I noticed that in the last line of the film, the two defending uncles were eating bread while questioning and asking: "What else is there? See what else is there." This seemingly casual remark actually refers to us as the audience. Normality-Everyone is actually willing to be immersed in endless and unreal TV shows. Even if they cheer for Trumen, after the show is stopped, they have no interest in paying attention to the follow-up of Trumen, just like abruptly. In the movie itself, how can Truman walk into the real world for Truman and between them without being tracked by TV? They are not concerned. They have lost the ability to distinguish the authenticity, or that they cannot distinguish the authenticity no matter how great they are. This is not because the audience is numb and incompetent, but because the TV shows are always so shrewd, and even the producers themselves are lost. Is this an inspirational story in which an unknowing person escapes from the cage, the show producer is counterattacked, and the supporting actress is pulling the leading actor attentively, or is it still a seamless performance that cooperates with each other? Is it just for the "audience" in the movie, or is it also for the audience outside the movie? who konws? who cares?
All in all, I think there are two angles to look at the film. One, seeing oneself and the audience in the movie as a group of the same dimension, then this is an inspiring comedy; second, seeing oneself as the audience of this movie, the audience of the fictitious TV show in the movie, and also the fictitious TV The onlookers of the show’s joy, anger, sorrow, and sorrow are also the audience of the “audience”. This is a world view that can be directly substituted into the world of “me”, impeccable, and extremely scary. "Black Mirror" tragedy.
I prefer the latter.
View more about The Truman Show reviews
