finally know that a small-cost black and white film can also give a huge proposition, or make people have to Ignore thinking about it.
Rashomon.
I started watching it after seeing the reviews about it on the blooming blog, maybe initially out of curiosity as to which story was right.
There are four stories.
One is the story told by the robber. In the story of the robber, he himself acted very smoothly and bravely: he fell in love with the woman, so he first tried to get her without killing, and he succeeded; then the next It was to face the duel of life and death, and he succeeded; he was finally arrested only because he had drunk his stomach. From the logic of a robber, he drank the water in question, which led to his final arrest. Before, he was invincible, very heroic and scheming (although this kind of robbery can't be called a "scheme" at all), for a notorious robber, such an explanation means a lot to himself. Speaking is the most face-saving, this is the logic and angle of the robber. Of course, there is one more related to this logic that will be mentioned later.
One is a story told by a woman. In the story of a woman, she is a victim (of course, the whole story, no matter which version, admits the premise of the woman being raped, so there is no doubt that she is a victim. righteous), and also a man of integrity - whether it's saying "kill me" to her husband, or finding out that her husband has been killed by throwing himself into the water several times (but failed), but maybe it's a matter of my understanding? People who want to commit suicide throw themselves into water and fail repeatedly? At the same time, practical doubts like the dagger's search for nowhere would give enough reason to doubt the veracity of the woman's story. I suspect that what she said was more to maintain her integrity - although she was raped, it was forced. In such a society, what matters is the reaction of women after being raped, and it will be judged from the reaction. How is her integrity, and integrity is very important to a woman, very important - at that time, it was like that, [here I want to add extra detail to my personal thoughts on another detail, that is, the wife's eyes towards her husband I think it shows that the wife also agrees with (or has to obey, at least admits it from the heart) such a view of ethics, otherwise she would not be so strongly about the eyes of her husband (that is, the samurai of the dead), which makes her Panic eyes, because she also cares about it, and she herself is afraid that her husband will be very intolerable to the fact that she has been raped - of course, this is my personal understanding, that is, the wife will look at her husband after being raped. As the premise of the established fact, no matter which story, this premise is not conflicting, so I will say it here, of course, maybe it is just the wife to explain why she fainted with a dagger], so she needs to maintain her own integrity, so she has to tell that she is being virtuous and innocent, so that she can be sympathetic, understood and forgiven (and not be held accountable for her chastity after being raped). This is a woman's logic in a society where ethics and morals are very strict with women's "virginity".
One is a witch (or a witch? Sorry, I don't know what the exact title should be) by summoning the ghost of a dead samurai and telling a story through the witch's mouth, except for the possibility of the witch's boring improvisation, let's put it for the moment. This is regarded as a story really told by the mouth of a samurai (as the author of this entire novel, this should also be a premise, otherwise it would be meaningless to talk about the witch's own point of view), then the third story It is the story of the samurai. The story of the samurai, from being tied up to the rape of his wife, is the same. However, it is the wife's reaction that is completely different from the first two. In the eyes of the samurai, the wife is the image of fickleness without any affection or loyalty to her husband--to the robber's perseverance (note that the samurai also emphasized her eyes and look, "unprecedented beauty", indicating the wife's infidelity , immoral, in fact, it may only be his own strong dissatisfaction, jealousy, and anger that led to such an interpretation of his wife's expression), and after planning to run away with the robber, he also asked to kill him - both of which are quite acceptable to a certain extent. It is considered to be the worst and most malicious conjecture of a warrior with a certain status in a feudal society where morals imprison men over women. The basis for this conjecture is that when describing these two episodes (that is, scene reproduction), the wife's performance is exaggerated (such as the kind of eyes and demeanor in response to the robber's good manners), which is a bit too in line with the image of an unscrupulous prostitute At the same time, another basis for his strong "male superiority" concept is that his resentment against the robber disappeared simply because the robber also disliked his wife--at this time, we can see that the fact that his wife was raped has disappeared. It is important, when the person who raped his wife also expressed his disdain for his wife, the immoral behavior of rape itself is not important to him! This is the logic of male and female superiority. Even if his wife has a certain social status as a samurai's wife, a robber is nothing more than an ordinary person who lives by doing things like robbery and robbery - but there is a difference in attitude towards the two (the so-called difference, It means to compare according to our current common sense and logic), and his concept can be clearly seen. Having said that, let's go back to the story of the samurai again. In this story, the samurai committed suicide. He watched his unfaithful wife escape after doing something that completely sank his heart into darkness. He was very sad and happy. Desperate, he committed suicide. Of course, this statement provides a key basis for the contradictions and conflicts in the whole film, which is the plot of being pulled out after committing suicide with a dagger. This made the subsequent suspicion of the woodcutter more acceptable and easier to understand.
The last story came out, which I didn't expect (because the reviews seemed to say only three), and it was the story told by the woodcutter who was an eyewitness. As an audience, the story of the woodcutter should be the final ending, telling the audience that the conflict is over, and the truth is here. But as mentioned above, the key "pimple" of the dagger made the minds of the audience who were already very dizzy and hoped for an absolute truth to come out again stuck here. When I started listening to the woodcutter telling his own story, first of all I just thought of the dagger problem, and the strange eyes of passers-by after the third story made me think that maybe the woodcutter has something to do with it. Later, after the very little human-like passer-by said something to the woodcutter, it made me even more Can't believe the woodcutter's story is the real truth anymore. And in the story he tells, it seems to be different from the first three - robbers and samurai are both morally unstable - or we can take the brand of the era and criticize the morality of that era by the way. Reliable and unreasonable (referring to chastity and the superiority of men and women) - that's why it is so vulnerable. So, when the wife cried weakly and then turned her hoarse voice to ridicule the two men, they started to fight because of the woman's words so easily... How easy to be influenced, this is what I think the set of values and social ethics is not enough Reasons for perfection and humanity (of course, this may be far, but not far enough). Of course, having said that, the whole story can only take place in that era, because summoning the soul is possible in that era (meaning it can be believed as a basis), otherwise the perspective of the samurai cannot be presented at all - the dead are Unable to speak, uh, really far, let's go back to the woodcutter's story. In the woodcutter's story, it's the robber who kills the samurai, and when the robber tries to take the samurai's wife, the wife has what I think is the best way to respond, and she doesn't want to. In fact, neither of these two men can gain the real trust and support of their wives in such an incident. The reaction before the duel has fully surfaced this point, and an ordinary audience should also understand this point. In the woodcutter's statement, the people in this story are embarrassed. From this point of view, I think the woodcutter's description should be unbiased. Whether he took the dagger or not, whether he wanted to cover up the dagger or not, these are all Will not affect his basic statement. And speaking of embarrassment, the most obvious thing is that the duel between two people is not heroic, full of exhaustion and the fear and struggle of death-but this should be very suitable for the situation. The robber had already spent a lot of effort to lure the samurai couple, not to mention the rape of the wife.
So in my opinion, the woodcutter's story should be the closest to the truth. However, what people cannot fully believe is that in the story of the woodcutter, the samurai was stabbed to death by the robber's sword, but in the samurai's own description, he inserted a dagger into his chest, which made the story of the woodcutter appear again. bug. Of course, we can also understand that the samurai is a dagger in order to complete himself. However, compared to the issue of the weapon, there is no need for the wife to lie, so this makes a conflict that cannot be ignored on the weapon - the samurai and the wife say it is a dagger, while the robber and the woodcutter say it is the robber. sword. It seems that there is no conclusion that can be drawn with certainty because of logic. No matter who's story is, the issue of attribution of the final murder weapon (I mean, the question of which weapon is the murder weapon) has no flaws in their respective stories. So, they all carefully tell a story that has no logical errors without comparison. But the problem is that their stories all come together, so it's a matter of who is believed to be the audience's choice.
Of course, I believe in the woodcutter's story. In fact, from the beginning to the end of the film, the three rain shelters may represent different people in reality (although the characteristics of passers-by and monks are exaggerated for ordinary people), especially the role of the woodcutter, perhaps closest to us. He also had moments of selfishness. Later, when passers-by questioned him on the dagger issue, it almost revealed the whereabouts of the dagger. There were also moments when he emphasized morality, and he lectured passers-by on the issue of dealing with abandoned babies. How real it seems to be intermittent and a little lacking in confidence; but after all, he is still a good commoner, he is poor, as can be seen from his clothes, and "already have six children" can better guess how bad his family is. Optimistic, but he still adopted the baby, so his heart is still a happy land of goodness. Maybe he covets that dagger just because his family is too poor. That pearl-encrusted dagger will solve the family food problem for many days... He After all, the selfishness of the baby is the selfishness of the small, the selfishness for the sake of survival-of course, according to this standard, it seems that passers-by take the baby's kimono for survival, but of course that is different, I believe I don't need to explain it. Because in the end, we see the woodcutter's choice, the cost of taking care of the baby should be much higher than a dagger, although he may have kept the baby because of his conscience (not telling the truth and taking the dagger), but After all, this is an admission of his own selfish mistakes, and he still chooses to lean towards the good - although his swing was so uncertain before. In addition, the constant "lie" and "lie" about the first three stories also shows to a certain extent that he wants to tell the real truth, and this hope should not be mixed with the selfishness of taking the dagger-because he is old. You can hide the truth. Therefore, the kindness of the woodcutter is always greater than selfishness, although he completely lost in the debate to the passers-by who took away the kimono. It doesn't matter, eloquence and goodness of heart are irrelevant.
The passers-by undoubtedly represent people who are not good at reality or who are very adaptable to reality. He listens to stories for fun and to pass the time. Of course, he took the kimono because he wanted it. He speculated about the woodcutter on the one hand. True, but the condemnation of the woodcutter speaks volumes about his attitude toward life, of good and evil. Of course, this image is rare in reality, but if the degree is reduced a little, there are still many such people in real life.
What about monks? The premise of their survival logic is the reincarnation of good and evil and the determination of the goodness of human nature. For the first half of the story (or before the woodcutter adopted the child), he was constantly confronted with the elusiveness of human nature and strongly influenced by the idea that human nature is selfish. We can see that he was confused from the beginning, and then a little bit Disappointment, despair, and distrust of human nature, his foundation for establishing the world will be destroyed, and he also doubts human nature - this is inevitable, we will also be confused and doubt human nature when we watch it, but monks The character exaggerates this aspect (because what his character believes in is in danger of collapsing), but in the end he is convinced - because the woodcutter's choice gives people another hope. Perhaps his psychology in the play is most in line with the psychology of most audiences-human nature is still good, which can make people still have hope in human nature even after encountering such confusing and doubtful things. After the rain in Rashomon, the monk watching the woodcutter and the child drifting away may be an image symbol of the re-emergence of hope.
In this sense, according to my understanding, "Rashomon" is a revolving door. At first, I thought I could go through it. When I entered the door, I found that I was very dizzy and couldn't find the exit. I thought it was a dead end. However, In the end, I finally found that the exit was there, so I walked out of the revolving door.
Well, let's talk about some of the unexplained details above.
In the robber's point of view, the wife's reaction is strong, and this narrative is not accounted for (either in agreement or in contradiction) in the subsequent stories. Of course, a robber might exaggerate his wife's revolt in order to show his sense of accomplishment (taming his samurai wife), or because any degree of revolt might be magnified for those who don't want revolt, but it must be To some extent there is resistance. So when we look at the response of the samurai with this premise, it will be even more chilling... Of course, maybe it is because I am also a woman.
Then again, in the woodcutter's tale, the wife's reaction to crying and laughing instead. In fact, we know very little about the Japanese, but it is very clear that the social hierarchy is strict, and the male superiority is serious. So his wife's sarcasm really makes people feel relieved and enjoyable. And in such a situation, the wife's reaction just shows that she is actually a woman with ideas. Maybe what she said was true, that is—she lived the life of a dull samurai wife and longed for a change in her life. But the reaction of the two men was extremely disappointing (as modern people, the same way), of course, the reaction of the men may be because of their disdain for women and their belief in the concept of fidelity and chastity in society. However, as I've already said, such notions are inhuman and illogical to pursue, and that's why they're talked about by a woman (the word is a bit inaccurate), and in this context, two men They are not as good as this woman, their own logic is easily disrupted, and they are affected by a woman's words in a decisive battle, and the process of the decisive battle is so embarrassing...
Of course, these are my personal views, because Rashomon So the classic is that different people will have different or even completely opposite understandings, so they want to watch it. :)
Also say something else.
The most bizarre (referring to making people feel uneasy) - the woodcutter is constantly walking (that is, the scene where the corpse is found in the film), which makes me feel extremely weird. Although I knew before I saw that he would find the corpse, this dense feeling comes from the constant Repeat his walking (the same thing from different angles, indicating that there must be a big event as the end point) and the feeling of the background sound (and this picture is black and white, so it can better express this feeling and atmosphere, change If the work is in color, the effect may not be so good). However, the ingenious thing is that there is no direct shot of the corpse, but an exaggerated and terrifying corpse action (two hands) and the woodcutter's strong and frightening expression and reaction, which makes people feel even more terrified... In fact, maybe the real It doesn't look terrible.
The most terrifying - the wife's eyes in the story told by the woodcutter. It's the look of the two men who mocked the two men separately after despair, and then hid behind the tree stump and watched the development of the situation... I have to say that the look in the eyes of a woman with big eyes when she widens her eyes to express fear and anxiety is very scary... Imagine... At least for a girl, it's terrifying to see such a pair of hairy eyes while watching such a weird and dark film at midnight... Speaking of which, let's go further, In fact, the most terrifying film is not how bloody or disgusting, but the more you think about it, the less you can see the light. The darkness of human nature is more frightening and fearful than the brutality of devils or zombies. In the end, I can't see the light (especially the light of human nature), which is the greatest abuse of a movie to the audience's soul... At least I will be depressed for a long time when I see such a movie. But at least "Rashomon" is given, so I can sprinkle a few thousand words here. By the way, let me mention the eyebrows... The samurai's wife's eyebrows are a little better, and the witch's eyebrows are really shocking... Of course, this is a social fashion issue, and it has nothing to do with the makeup artist.
In addition, the characteristics of narrative structure. I can't say how clever it is for several people to tell the story separately, because it looks very natural, one by one, and it is full of suspense. Until now, no low-cost black and white film can surpass it. After watching "Rashomon", I realized that Zhang Yimou's "Hero" just imitated this narrative method. Of course, the hero is not so exciting, because it clearly tells us that one is made up, the other is guessed, and the other is real. Maybe "Heroes" is trying to express the spirit of the world, so it does not want to use more in the way of narrative. The way of cohesion (and the difference in the colors of the three stories also shows that the director is afraid that the audience will be confused and unclear, which also shows that the three stories in the narrative and the connection between them are not clear enough, not clever enough...)
Another advantage of black and white movies is that some so-called critics will not be asked to talk about costumes and makeup props - and these details are not important for a true classic movie. Bandit in blue? red box? who cares. It's definitely not the props and costumes that make a movie truly classic. Having said that, a movie with few scenes and a simple (or even rudimentary) setting that makes people continue to watch it is the real skill. (Why do I suddenly think of the beautiful lake and the vast desert in "Heroes"? Ahem, let's take them as negative teaching materials for the time being, and think of a few Jin Yong films by Zhang Jizhong. Khan, Zhang The director of the family loves this set?)
View more about Rashomon reviews
