love is soul

Rebeca 2022-03-27 09:01:09

At the end of the film, the wife reappears in the kitchen, washes and rinses as usual, and then leaves hand in hand with her husband. All this perfectly echoes the body lying on the bed at the beginning: what the world sees is her dead, decaying body, and her spirit is still with him.

This also perfectly explains the whole film from beginning to end: when her partner is no longer youthful and ill, her husband never leaves her, taking care of her with the focus and patience that makes the concierge "hats off". According to the way she wanted, in the home that gradually filled with the smell of the grave, she tried every means to accompany her slowly through the final journey. Of course it's because of love.

But this love is not love. Because what love depends on cannot be separated from the body: beauty and beauty, charming bones and delicate body, all are the beginning of the growth of love; even if the hearts and minds are like-minded, the most straightforward and reliable performance is of course the love of the bed - just like in the film The daughter said that when she was young, she heard her parents' sexual intercourse, and she was sure that they still loved each other. That is the proof that love can show. Now that aging has caused them to lose physical communication, the mind becomes the only emotional fulcrum. So when the wife lost her senses in the kitchen for the first time, the husband immediately panicked: this situation of speechlessness to him was a crisis that had the potential to completely cut off the vein of love.

Yeats's "When You're Old" has already been composed into a street comedy, but in countries without religious traditions, few people realize that the premise of loving gray hair and loving aging and wrinkles is because they identify the one who is loved. Man has "the soul of a pilgrim". Haneke, who was born in a Catholic country, can easily wield this kind of "detachment", because in that context, the dualism of human spirit and flesh has a long history: the body of the body will eventually decay and perish. Only the soul is immortal. Nor does life mean more than the continuation of physical existence. As long as a person leaves the imprint of his soul in this world, then he can have eternal life—in the hearts of those he loves, in the hearts of those who love him.

It is precisely because he loves her arrogant and sensitive soul, and her self-respecting and obsessive soul, that he obeys all her wishes, does not send her to the hospital, does not expose her embarrassment of aging and powerlessness to outsiders, and does not let her unwilling to see. Goff walks into her ward (by contrast, the students she's proud of come to visit and help her with a facelift), quit the nurse who's making her sad, read the newspaper for her, teach her how to speak after she's lost her speech ...she said that he was "a monster, but gentle" at heart. Now he is really as stubborn as a monster, doing everything possible to keep her for one more day, one more day, but in the end, the painful moan still aroused his tenderness, first used the story to calm her down, then , let go and send her away.

At this moment, love inspires a person's greatest courage, making him dare to cross the forbidden line of law, bear moral criticism, and even bear the blame of the world behind him, and make the choice of not being at the mercy of creation-he can no longer let She continued to suffer, and liberation was already her own intention.

In Haneke's rational to ruthless world, love can only happen and function so "logically". Perhaps in his eyes, aging, disease and death are just a "fun game" imposed by nature? Although medicine has progressed, and the husband has faithfully realized that "love is enduring and kind," but in the end, in the face of nature's ruthless and unreasonable destruction of physical life, the most effective way to resist is violence.

Inheritance is the end of the knife: the daughter walks into the room where the physical life of the parents has disappeared, but cannot meet their spirits. This is the Haneke view used to show the indifferent family: blood is not the cause of love. Or even, in some ugly souls, blood provides an opportunity to extract and inherit evil from each other (such as the priest who beats his children in the name of discipline in "White Ribbon" and the mother who imprisoned his daughter's spirit in "Piano Teacher"). Because blood is nothing but a connection between bodies. If there is blood in the flesh, but without the compatibility of the soul, there will still be no love. Those distortions and pinching each other in the name of love are in fact the product of estrangement and self-interest.

Therefore, Haneke chose this moment of separation of the soul and flesh to verify whether the lover is obsessed with the interdependence of the body or the co-preservation of the soul. In the eyes of reason, taking this step is transcendental love. With it, people can end their "limitation" and step into the eternal unknown.

View more about Amour reviews

Extended Reading
  • Sammy 2022-03-28 09:01:04

    After re-reading it, I have to admit that I lost sight of it. What the film really wants to express is the respect for the personality of the intellectuals and their pursuit of the integrity of personal dignity and love that transcends the physical existence. However, the catching pigeon scene at the end highlights the intentional instillation of meaning, which can be removed.

  • Betsy 2022-03-31 09:01:03

    A half-hour movie made into 90 minutes is a failure

Amour quotes

  • Georges: [telling a childhood memory] ... some banal romance or other about a nobleman and a lower middle-class girl who couldn't have each other and who then, out of sheer magnanimity, decide to renounce their love - in fact, I don't quite remember it any more. In any case, afterwards I was thoroughly distraught, and it took me a bit of time to calm down. In the courtyard of the house where grandma lived, there was a young guy at the window who asked me where I'd been. He was a couple of years older than me, a braggart who really impressed me. "To the movies," I said, because I was proud that my grandma had given me the money to go all alone to the cinema. "What did you see?" I started to tell him the story of the movie, and as I did, all the emotion came back. I didn't want to cry in front of the boy, but it was impossible; there I was, crying out loud in the courtyard, and I told him the whole drama to the bitter end.

    Anne: So? How did he react?

    Georges: No idea. He probably found it amusing. I don't remember. I don't remember the film either. But I remember the feeling. That I was ashamed of crying, but that telling him the story made all my feelings and tears come back, almost more powerfully than when I was actually watching the film, and that I just couldn't stop.

  • Anne: It's beautiful.

    Georges: What?

    Anne: Life. So long.