I originally clicked it when I saw it was classified as a comedy, but I didn't expect it to be a black comedy. It's not a popcorn show, it's recommended to watch it when you're not in a rush.
Although the starting point of the story is in Palestine, but in Paris and New York, the other two cities where the director has lived for a long time, the regional color of the whole film is very light. The whole film is to show, superimpose and connect some small, daily and local life fragments in an exaggerated form of black humor; it seems that the correlation between the fragments is very weak, but as a whole Ask the audience: What happened to the world?
I saw a "deep focus" interview with the director in the book review, which asked why the director rarely used "words". The director's answer mentioned that he hopes to give the audience a more democratic viewing experience, rather than the director as a dictatorship. information exporter. What a gentle and strong man he is. It is true that we need highly provocative films like Capernaum to attract the attention of people who are overly distracted and to call people to come together; but we also need such directors to construct a kind of Daydream-like spiritual world, providing a better interactive movie viewing experience, where everyone can recall a unique and private emotion.
Although the decryption of the metaphors in the play is also very interesting, including the suggestion that the director interacts with the bird indoors, and the bird is Twitter. Small pets that want bloggers' attention. Maybe, maybe not, even the director himself doesn't know if he's really inspired by social media. But as the director said, "This scene is for "seeing", not for "reading"... There is no signifier, no metaphor, until the purest poetry, what the audience can get is to watch Joy." This scene really made me smile.
In the end, the director mentioned John Berger in the film's acknowledgment. Out of curiosity, he went to the Internet to find out and found that he was an art critic in England. I followed the clues and found a four-episode short series hosted by him and produced by the BBC, "Ways of Seeing". Each episode is 30 minutes long, and I finished watching it before I knew it. Although it has nothing to do with this film, people who feel like this film should also like it, so let me briefly introduce it here.
The official synopsis reads: "Ways of Seeing is a 1972 BBC four-part television series of 30-minute films created chiefly by writer John Berger and producer Mike Dibb. Berger's scripts were adapted into a book of the same name. The series and book criticize traditional Western cultural aesthetics by raising questions about hidden ideologies in visual images. 」
In the play, John Berger takes Western oil painting art as the entry point, and talks about the subversion and continuation of traditional image art by film and television art; using oil painting as a historical material and a social research tool, he discusses "objectification of women", "consumerism", etc. Social phenomenon. For example, I especially like his comparison of Nude and Naked in the second episode, the original words are as follows, "Being naked is being oneself, to be nude is to bo seen naked by others and yet not recognized for oneself..." Compared with Kenneth Clark's claim, "Being naked is simpley being without clothes...is a form of art...", there is less morality in it. In addition, the last episode extended from oil painting to the concepts of "private ownership", "colonialism", and "consumerism" in the West, which is also very exciting. highly recommended.
From the first episode, John Berger added at the end of each episode, "The above is my opinion, but you have to look at what I say critically with your own eyes." Presumably our directors are not "meaning tyrants" and are obsessed with providing a democratic viewing experience. More or less, they are also influenced by this John Berger, who was put in the final thanks by him.
View more about It Must Be Heaven reviews
