"May Storm" originally referred to the earth-shattering student movement in June 1968, The naive students first infected the working class, then leftist intellectuals, and finally politicians joined in, only to let that imaginative revolution fail. The film "May Storm" (Taiwan translation) written and directed by Assayas focuses on the rippling aftermath of the May storm in 1971, an era when various ideological trends collided.
Jill, a high school student, loves painting, attending school during the day and playing sports at night. He and his group of friends who are full of ideals and passions carry out various rebel movements and ideological agitation. An accident made them decide to go their separate ways and stay out of the limelight. This group of young people went to different countries, met different friends, experienced different lives, experienced different levels of self-consciousness awakening in various aspects, and developed their own different destiny.
"Storm in May" shows the atmosphere and aspects of the 1970s through cultural symbols such as music, books, and movies. Big-character posters, street publications, graffiti, petrol bombs, Syd Barrett's vinyl, John Ashbery's poetry, Jean-Luc Godard's films, all of a sudden pull you back to that vibrant and furious age. Of course, revolutionaries cannot lack love, which is also a product of romance and passion. But in the end, some people lose themselves, some die, and most people are forced or voluntarily disciplined into the system and return to the so-called right track. Revolution and youth are like a dream, and in the end only memories remain.
The May storm may be the one many people have experienced in their hearts, an inner revolution. Is it to change the life of the ideal of youth? Or revolutionized the life of the capital system? You may end up killing yourself! This is like a "turning adult" ceremony. If this is a semi-autobiographical film of Assayas, it must be his farewell ceremony and tour of his youth and ideals, which is a kind of nostalgia.
The film has a rich debate. The French leftist documentary crew came to Italy to show the workers their films documenting the truth about the lives of Asian peasants and workers. After the broadcast, some people questioned why the revolutionary film did not use the revolutionary new film language. The crew thought that what they were shooting was about the revolution, but only the language of the bourgeoisie could be understood by the public. Indeed, it was a battle of aesthetic forms, should the idea be presented in avant-garde language, and then be reconciled? Or should we use the enemy's language well and then join forces?
When Gill entered the set of commercial entertainment films, does it mean that his firm stance on the revolutionary new language has been lost? Or did he decide to enter the business system and do revolutionary subversion? Is he still the young man who believed that "art can change the world"?
Maybe when we look back on all of Assayas' works one day, it will gradually become clear whether it is a revolution or a moan?
View more about Something in the Air reviews
