After watching "The Man on the Moon", I remembered two lines. "Who should you entertain? You or the audience?" "Who should you entertain? Entertain yourself or the audience?" "This is also the pinnacle of behavioral research." "The Man on the Moon" is a breakthrough. It broke—or conservatively, at least it tried to break the boundaries between screen space and cinema space, and drag the audience in the cinema—to put it politely, it was to invite in the movie. He made it clear from the beginning that he wanted to please, no, deceive, no, play with the audience in reality. The audience on the screen is turned around by Andy, and the audience outside the screen is the same. In reality, the audience watched the audience on the screen being teased, and couldn't laugh at all. When they entered the scene, they would be as confused or angry as the audience on the screen; when they were not in the scene, they would nervously guard against the next abrupt plot. reverse. Whether or not they enter the play, the real audience can't escape the fate of being molested. Because there are screens and theaters in the silver screen, the spatial structure of this movie has become extremely complicated. We watched the audience watching Andy act. The audience didn't know Andy was acting. We know that the audience doesn't know Andy is acting. The audience thought Andy was acting. We don't know that the audience thought Andy was acting. We thought the audience didn't know Andy was acting. We thought the audience thought Andy was playing. We don’t know that the audience doesn’t know Andy is acting. Even if we think the audience thinks that Andy is acting is a fact-it will always be a fact, we still die and cannot escape the ambiguous suspicion, because we don’t know when Andy will reveal the truth about what he is acting, every small ups and downs. We all follow the audience on the screen and can't help but wonder, are we wrong? Is it true that Andy is acting this time? The role of Andy broke the boundaries of the audience in the film, turning all the people in the play into possible audiences. For the audience in reality, we don't even know who is the audience in the play, or even when they see themselves as the audience and when they are not. In the play, the serious ABC boss suddenly changed his mind and declared that the assault that happened on the stage just now was a performance. As a result, Andy told the audience that it was not a performance. Andy exposed the boss’s clever disguise and his ruthlessness. Together it became a show. Those of us in the real world do not know whether the assault accident was pre-arranged at first, and at the end, it is not clear whether the whole set of assault and then cover up and then debunk was pre-arranged. Smart viewers will definitely feel that they are being played around. Confused audiences just need to be the same as the audience in the play. They really feel angry and contempt when they are deceived. After being deceived, they laugh and applaud happily. Our protagonist Andy Kaufman, isn't it related to Owen Goffman? "The Man on the Moon" explores a sociological proposition, or it’s a play A sociological game, a sociological simulation experiment was done on the text. Its theme, compared with the multi-layer nesting of the film space, the multi-layer nesting of authenticity logic is naked and simple: if there is a person, his front desk and backstage are completely mixed, what will be the result? "The Man on the Moon" jokingly proposed a hypothesis. But in fact, the hypothesis of subverting Goffman simply cannot happen in the real world. The Andy in the film can't really exist, people can't bear the uncertainty of identity, and the audience/public can't actually be as stupid as in the film. The film was carried out after assuming that there was such a completely self-man and a group of completely stupid audiences. In this sense, the film takes the deception of real audiences to a higher level, and the behavior and reactions of audiences on the screen are actually just botched social performances. The audience on the screen and Andy on the screen combined to deceive us. How can there be such a one-sided audience in reality, just like a third-rate novel. Those who can realize this are not those on the screen. The other half of the theme of "The Man on the Moon" is the same as "The World of Truman". It is not as straightforward as the latter, because the director’s style is different, it buryes the irony in the overall structure. The audience in the film was originally angry at the rudeness, discrimination, and violence in front of them, but when someone told them that this was a performance, they could laugh, as if after the performance, all the rudeness, discrimination, Violence is eliminated, and the forms of rudeness, discrimination, and violence are no longer rude, discrimination, and violence, but symbols used for entertainment. And "Men on the Moon" emphasizes that these symbols used for entertainment are played on the small screen all the time. The small screen flattens the performance for the second time, and those shit ethical elements can't penetrate the screen. And don't forget, at the end, all images have to pass through the screen between reality and story before they reach our eyes. This is three flattening. In this sense, the cinema screen and us are small screens and TV audiences. The film also drags in the real cinema space. What we are doing is likely to be invisible self-mockery and self-criticism. In many cases, we are no different from the audience in the film, not only in behavior, but also in nature. Andy's deception is getting bigger and bigger, the plot advances layer by layer, and the ending of death seems to be doomed from the beginning. At the end of the comedy, I suddenly felt sad and sighed with emotion. Think about it, it's enough. Who knows that the magic of the screen surpasses even death, and even death is a scene. Only entertainment lasts forever. By the way, I still remember a line. The half-time audience waited dubiously until the performance At the end of the staff list, the music ends. Just wait for this sentence: "Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for tonight!" Whether it’s true or not, it doesn’t matter. It’s on the screen, in the newspaper, in the picture, on the stage. , Whether it is true or false, just believe it. Anyway, it won't be in the book, it won't be in The Great Gatsby. This is the postmodern situation we are facing. (By the way, there is a scene of picking up soap in the film, which is a real show of picking up soap. And as a reminder, this film is only suitable for seeing the end in the cinema...)
View more about Man on the Moon reviews
