First published on the rouwanxiaomian public account
I have always felt that gratitude should be said first, because I feel that no matter what happens in the end, if someone wants to help you in this bad world, this matter itself should be thanked. So, regardless of whether you have gained something, please put the thank you in front, after all, sometimes you and I may not see the end .
So, before the article starts, I want to thank some good-looking brother for recommending such a great movie to me. Although he didn't recommend me to watch it at first, and felt that this film was too depressing, but he didn't know that Tao Jie was burning his own Aries chariot at any time. I'm not even afraid to live, I'm afraid of depression. After reading it, I felt that the little brother was right, and it was really depressing.
The story is about a little girl who loves her kindergarten teacher too much and kisses him. At the same time, she also gave him a heart of love that she made with her own hands. Out of protection for the little girl, the protagonist (sorry never remembered the name when watching the movie) returned the little girl's caution and told her very seriously that such an intimate act of kissing could only be done to his parents.
The little girl felt that she had fed the dog with all her heart, and she was immediately furious, and lied to the kindergarten principal when school was over. She used her only reserve of knowledge about the ugliness of men to tell a big lie. Not only did she fabricate that she saw the male protagonist’s sexual organs, but also when the kindergarten principal asked someone to investigate, implying that their male protagonist had done something wrong to him. Describe things.
Sexual assault of young children is considered a conscience in any country, so this incident has not only had a devastating impact in the kindergarten, but even spread to the entire town like a virus. Everyone attacked the male protagonist who molested the young boy, not only prevented him from seeing his own son, but also ruined his budding love, and even thugs killed his dog by himself. For a time, the male protagonist was unable to live in the small town. Faced with these unfair treatments, the male protagonist did not choose to tolerate but argued for reasons, and bravely and strongly resisted back, because he knew he was innocent and he had not done anything. .
My little brother told me that he thinks the film is called "Hunting" because hunting is the same everywhere. The hunter stands at the top and the prey is chased. The neighbors and friends in the film are hunters chasing the male lead. They think that they are chasing justice and destroying darkness, but they are actually destroying reason and feelings. When he watched it, he just felt very depressed. In retrospect, it was a prototype of the current Internet and public opinion violence, chasing the moral high ground and self-righteous justice, and then continued to kill people. We have always thought that the childish speech has created the view of "How can he do this if he is such a young child". But who knows that seemingly unintentional fouls often have potentially unlimited effects, especially when they have the sweetness and consciousness, they will become intentional.
Therefore, the younger brother thinks that human nature is evil, and growth is a process of self-reflection, correction of mistakes, and self-control.
I think my little brother’s point of view is great, but as a person who likes to wonder, I think the deeper level is the loss of focus on moral facts and laws. Morality is similar to law, focusing on the unification of the truth and its corresponding laws. To put it simply, we should deal with it this way when it happens. In terms of law, what is emphasized is evidence; in terms of morality, what is emphasized is consensus. Although this consensus lacks empirical support, it can unite all those who have such a consensus. This is why, when people in the film suspect that the male protagonist has indescribable behavior, everyone unanimously believes that the male protagonist molested the little girl without a real basis. The frightening thing is that this kind of unfounded consensus can gather great power in a short period of time.
Those who molest young children are not worthy of living in the world. This is their morality.
What is the morality of the male protagonist? Quite simply, his morality is a gentleman magnanimous. When encountering unfair treatment, he must stop resisting and resolutely defend his rights.
Therefore, the two parties who stand in their respective camps each use their own actions to defend their own moral codes. This moral defense is so strong that both sides ignore the truth. And what is the truth? Only the audience can see the truth of the whole thing through the movie, this all-powerful perspective.
But if we are all a member of the film, will we see the truth? In the absence of other video or audio materials, can we make a rational judgment on this matter? My answer is that it should not be possible. Because the truth disappears at the moment when the truth happens. Any restoration of the truth is to describe the truth from the side of the truth, not the truth itself.
Besides, the truth of this matter is a lie in itself.
The truth is not true. This seems like a false proposition, but it is often the case.
The little girl's lie lies at the core of the contradiction between the two sides, and the contradiction is either intensified or resolved. Just like the truth that is destined to disappear, people will always believe in the part they are willing to believe because of their natural cognitive defects, and think that this is the truth itself. This is why the power of religion has been controlling the lives of some people.
Why is it depressed?
To put it simply, the law represented by the action is not opposed. If it is opposed, the audience's emotions should be stimulated. The explanation is that if what the little girl said was the truth at the beginning, then this sense of depression surrounding the film would no longer exist, but would be replaced by a sense of pleasure that justice can speak out. Because this has become a narrative mode of the dispute between good and evil that the public loves to see.
It is this kind of non-contradiction, or "non-contradiction", which is internally concealed by the "opposite appearance", which leads to the suppression of the audience's emotions. Because the almighty audience can see the nature of the behavior of both sides but cannot correct it.
To put it simply, put yourself in a position to think that what the two people are doing is right, but it is wrong to put them together. Once such a narrative structure appears, the audience will feel bored. Because this does not conform to the narrative method preset in the audience's mind, it is also feasible to use this logic to analyze the depression in "I am not the god of medicine".
Let's talk about Gema 95.
Dogme 95 is a performance by Danish director Lars von Trier, and his alumni Thomas Vinterberg at the Danish National Film School, Christine The film movement initiated by Kristian Levring and Soren Kragh-Jacobsen in 1995. This movement is sometimes referred to as the Dougma 95 Community. The goal of this community is to instill a sense of simplicity in filmmaking, as well as freedom of post-production modification and other aspects. Emphasize the purity of film composition and focus on the true story and the performance of the actors themselves. (Source Baidu Encyclopedia)
Things in the world, divided for a long time must be united, and together for a long time must be divided.
Although movies have grown up in the cultural background of each country since their inception, it seems that they all have a common rival—Hollywood movies. Throughout a century of film history, the "new waves", "new movies", and "new sports" that have appeared everywhere are fighting against Hollywood's large studio model and rigorous commercial narrative model at all levels.
The Dougma 95 movement is more or less because of this. It opposes the technological tendency of film creation led by Hollywood, and emphasizes that the film should return to the creative method of paying attention to real life issues, keeping the plot objective and the actors "real performance". Hope to save the Danish film market by restoring the artistry of the film.
It's a pity that this movie movement didn't play a big role. Because of the harsh conditions of "The Oath of Purity" and the temptation from the market, most directors only made a Dougma-certified film that turned into a commercial film. But under the influence of Dougma, this group of directors still more or less added Dougma's style to their films.
At the end of the film, the bullet fired at the male protagonist in the forest has a typical Dogma flavor.
Time passed, the truth of the matter was found out, and the people in the small town got together again. The male protagonist took his son to the forest to hunt, but a gunshot suddenly sounded behind him, and a bullet was shot at him. The film ended.
This is a resounding slap in the face of audiences who are accustomed to Hollywood's classic narrative mode.
Do you think everyone will laugh out of their grudges? wrong! After the war, malice persists forever.
The shortcomings of life have created life itself, and Hollywood's rigorous story logic and the standardization of plots have obliterated the appearance of life itself. This brings us back to the first classic question in film studies, what exactly is a film? Is the movie a mummy that records and restores life? Or is it a dream machine that transfers time and space through lens switching?
Thomas Winterberg gave the answer with his own work.
It's been a long time since I finished writing a film review late at night, and now it looks like I'm cramped. This is the reason why I don’t like to write serious film reviews, because people who study theory are always easy to say something very boring. If I analyze movies with this mentality every day, then I really can’t watch it. Up.
Easter eggs: Recently I watched Ras Von Trier's Dogtown. Although I am a person who is particularly prone to crying when watching movies, in fact "Hunting" did not make me cry. Maybe I was thinking of giving a good-looking brother an explanation, so I watched the movie more or less with rational thinking. Although I escaped "Hunting", I fell into the pit of "Dogtown" in a big stride. This film made me cry alive and half of the tissues. If you want to watch, you can ask me for the original film.
View more about The Hunt reviews
