This short film about love doesn't seem to tell us how love happens. The male protagonist suddenly steals a telescope and peeks at the woman opposite. I don't know if I fell in love with voyeurism, or peeped for love. The reason why the heroine fell in love with the hero later is also unknown - when she was frustrated, a boy suddenly told her: you cried last night. What's even more amazing is that the boy peeped at her for a whole year, and he actually admitted it frankly. After some teasing, the boy was injured and committed suicide, and the heroine began to peep into the boy's room - love happened.
In terms of character settings, the active lover is a young boy, the loved one is a mature woman, and there is an old woman (friend's mother) who silently loves the hero. In my opinion, the best love is to consider the difference of age and gender. Men don't understand sex, women don't understand love. In this age of feminism, my prejudice may be worth criticizing. Ordinary people think that men are slaves of sexual desire, and they love a woman in order to have sex with her, while women are much purer, and sex and love are combined. This may be in line with most realities of life, the problem is, none of what we see and hear is the reality of love. I mean, there are very few men who really know how to love, compared to fewer women who know how to love.
Is the hero in the movie in love? Many comments are stereotyped characters, often citing the famous dialogue "don't want...don't want...don't want anything" to prove that the male protagonist is not a superficial man who only thinks about sex. The heroines are considered to have experienced too much, despair of love, and think that men's love is only sexual. Just imagine, how similar are our modern thoughts to the heroine? It seems that there are no longer men who know how to love in this generation. My opinion is the opposite. The male protagonist does not know how to love. When the male protagonist says "I love you", the female protagonist's subconscious reaction is right: "That's not the case."
Writing here, I have to take a responsibility: to explain what true love is. All I can say is that love is nothing. For example, if the male lead really loves the female lead, why would he let her know he's spying? Why play pranks? If he really loves pure, he should be content with contactless prying from a distance. He really didn't want to kiss her? Don't want to date her? Don't want to sleep with her? His series of "don't wants" were out of cowardice, not honesty. When he peeps, he usually doesn't watch her having sex with other men. Isn't this implying his jealousy and jealousy? At first he also masturbated, showing that he is not pure. The heroine asked him: Do you have any other friends? Besides loving me and peeping, what do you usually do? Why is the male protagonist's almost autistic life linked to pureness? Indeed, he simply fell in love with language, and that was only because he had a good memory.
As for the heroine falling in love with the injured hero later, the motive is even more suspicious. When the heroine who was injured in the love scene heard that the other party knew that she was crying, she must have been surprised at first, and she would also feel the happiness of being cared for. Of course, this happiness is repressed, and it doesn't begin to manifest until revenge for the male lead's peeps. The best play on the male protagonist's voyeur is to make him understand that the goddess who has been peeping for a year turns out to be so vulgar - a pussy within reach, teasing love with sex. This kind of malicious revenge is also the treatment and catharsis of the heroine herself - women understand sex better than men, and they know how to use sex to seduce and retaliate men. What the sensitive male protagonist cannot tolerate is the cruelty of distance. When a woman of your dreams is now naked in front of you, your fantasies have nowhere to run. Fantasy is shattered by reality, or, in other words, reality is just a bigger fantasy.
Does the heroine turn to peep at the hero out of guilt? How much is that. From this point of view, a woman is always the loved one, and she is unlikely to love actively. Love is impossible without male initiative. Like sex, it is impossible without a woman's will. The question is, how much of a man's initiative is related to sexual desire? If we get rid of vulgar sexual desire, then we might as well think: What beautiful qualities do women have that are worthy of men's fanatical pursuit? Is a thing loved because it is beautiful, or is it beautiful because it is loved? This is the key question that plagues philosophy (love-wisdom).
The tragedy of modern man lies in his own poverty. Women know they have nothing but sex, so don't believe in love and accuse men of being superficial - if only they were more confident! Men are not aggressive. Except for sex (and money and power), they do not pursue anything beautiful and excellent, so they are not loyal to love. I think that Kielovsky's keenness of reality is reflected in the coldness of his eyes. However, this vision of reality is too low, and can not give hope and guidance. The depth and the superficial of realism are one.
Therefore, what constitutes the theme of this love short film is precisely ironic non-love. In contrast, it is Rohmer's masterpiece "Love Oath". The latter's unrealistic and unmodern plot dialogue is obviously more capable of revealing the mystery of love than "Love Short Film".
View more about A Short Film About Love reviews
