Dong Haoji recently targeted [Your name? ] can be seen as basically a critique of the romantic mechanism (not a critique of the world system, or rather, the world system, a revelation of the romantic mechanism)—according to his old recent In other words, the story of my encounter with her is actually something constructed by a retrograde fantasy in order to shape the uniqueness (uniqueness) of my relationship with her after I fell in love with her. Taki and Mitsuha [didn't] exchange bodies, because the world where [a meteorite fell and destroyed the people of a village] did not happen. It can be said that she and I are basically [unknown]. That is to say, the [forgetting] that maintains the relationship between me and the other appears as something delayed. It is not that we are forgetting, but the idea that we need to gain some kind of experience that we have acquired before, which makes us logically have to forget. what. The crisis is not in the meteorite, but in the fact that I don't know each other at all, so the title is indeed the meaningful "Your Name?" This is the fundamental disaster of romanticism: I don't know the other's name at all (I don't know the other's uniqueness as the other), and I don't know how to relate to the other. I must have had experience with you, knew you before I didn't know you, and didn't know your name. Memories are impossible - in fact, the only thing that really happened was the moment two people saw on that staircase, and couldn't help but accosted "your name?"
Of course, the mechanism for this film to get tears is obvious, making people think that there are regrets, but the regrets here are double, one is that the hero and heroine [forgot] their experiences; the second is that we modern people have no chance of forgetting. It's pathetic that we don't even have a chance to meet, and we know from this work that we don't even have a chance to forget -- even though the chance to forget is the chance to meet. It turns this experience upside down, as if I and the other should have known each other in the first place, and I should have known the other in the first place, not that it should have been, but that modern people hope that "the other person and I should have known each other." This is why this work must introduce the setting of parallel worlds, because parallel worlds are not parallel to the audience, but have a classic comprehensive perspective. It can be said that the audience is the parallel plural men and women of the story. The protagonist provides an identity. The viewer himself thus has an illusion of causal determination, as if real activities in [world a] can lead to consequences in [world b]. It can be said that the story can only continue with the help of the audience's synthesis of the illusion of identity. The last two protagonists in [your name] have "forgotten" the previous story, and what unifies the whole narrative is actually just that on a symbol The universality of: "What's your name?" The concept of forgetting is the most important. Because only the audience can understand it as forgetting. This perspective of identity makes forgetting to mean "some trace of the past". The emotional manipulation of the work takes place in [the world where the disaster occurs], while real people can only live in [the world where two people who don't know each other strike up a conversation], if it's just a story about two people who don't know each other strike up a conversation, Almost immediately, it was something like a polytechnic pig, so he had to become known from the beginning, but unfortunately forgotten. This means that the basic contradictions of the love narrative are stripped bare, and love becomes the same repeated affirmation: If I was in love with you, then I should have been in love with you.
It is impossible for love to appear as a [historical development] narrative. This is even reflected in Second Five. I even think that compared with Second Five, the basic orientation of the work has not changed. For example, quagmire netizens, or It's amazing what you like to say in the second dimension of the age of the country, the second five male and female protagonists are staggered, it's be, in your name, you finally spoke up, so it's sugary. The two are actually exactly the same, because in this work, the conversation is not [finishing] unfinished things, but [starting] things that never started. This kind of discussion can only be boring things similar to Bai Xue and Miquan Chun Xue.
View more about Your Name. reviews
