First, Adjani is so beautiful, it is the beauty of the whole. Then she looks like Depp in the rear window. But Adjani is not the protagonist in this film. Even so, she's the only beautifully colored part of the film, so it's structurally important. "I think it's simpler." She is the only absolutely positive description object in the objective narrative. Because of a kind of perfection and beauty, she is insulated from evil. From the relationship between the character and the world, this is reflected in several Points: 1. For such a weak individual as the male protagonist, the objective narrative line from beginning to end is almost a virgin love, which is almost unbelievable. 2. This kind of love is unconditional and is an encouragement for the male protagonist's goodwill. 3. The transcendental awareness of self-beauty and goodness, in a patriarchal society, can be manifested as a kind of fidelity to self-desire. She knew what she wanted, and then made her own choice without any hesitation, including touching the male protagonist at the cinema; rejecting another passer-by's evil thoughts at the reception, and offered to go home with the male protagonist; taking him back to her own house to get rid of the man trouser belt. But even such a Madonna halo did not pull the Polish chicken back from the process of constant self-alienation. It is very likely that due to the subconscious inferiority of the male protagonist, even if such a nearly perfect and excellent woman takes the initiative to show her love, his motivation has always been passive acceptance.
Second, regarding indifference and suicide, I don’t think it’s just a game of conspiracy theories, minority politics and mainstream society. Yes, maybe in France, all non-French natives are second-class citizens. But at the beginning, no one went to ask too much about the origin and nationality of the male protagonist. The outsider is aimed at the individual, or in terms of the individual's responsibility, it is also the individual's sense of fear of the group. The male protagonist is not a person who takes the initiative to socialize. Even so, he tries his best to have a good relationship with his colleagues and integrate into them. He is actually successful. Now, from the director's point of view, the attitude is clearly expressed: that's not the point, it's not important. In terms of character setting, it is his own weakness that makes his awareness of protecting himself very strong in society: avoiding conflicts, interacting with most people in general, not doing strange things, not disturbing others, and this kind of thinking also Represents the way he wants to be treated: undisturbed. Until the element of alienation exceeds the threshold, his self-protection consciousness is further alienated into delusions of persecution.
Third, this delusion of persecution is not without reason, but it is more complicated in the movie and needs to be further sorted out. Continuing the above first, let’s look at it from the perspective of why we can’t just look at it from the perspective of the minority and the majority, as well as conspiracy theories. Let’s talk about conspiracy theories first, and then we have to go back to the game between evil thoughts and good thoughts in the first paragraph. In essence, he has been being saved. He is not completely helpless, but no one can stop his alienation, so it is he There is a problem with himself, pay attention, not to arbitrarily draw his own weak conclusions. In this way the analysis deviates from caring. Because the light of the world in his eyes is extinguished, goodness is insensitive to him. In his eyes, goodness and salvation have always been alienated. Missionary missions in the church sound like this to him. Harsh, because his situation was linked to malice. So he's disgusted, but notice, it's all because he's in an alienated subjective world. As a reminder, the supreme representative of goodness, Comrade Adjani, is completely unmoved there, she is not an indifferent person who is numb, that must be the gray hint of the interweaving of good and evil in the objective and did not confuse her Pulled into the abyss. You are a devil, and the world you see is also a devil. That's probably the way of thinking. How the male protagonist's devilish side is revealed is the problem, because at the beginning, the movie was only shown in a slightly different environment, a gentle and normal male protagonist. In reality, everyone may have evil thoughts in their hearts, but not everyone can view it as good or bad. I think it is not difficult to understand this principle: human nature is a complex and moving state, especially the closer it is to human beings. The more obvious this state is, the more balanced it is. But here is just one sentence, intended to illustrate the inadvisability of this monistic pessimistic interpretation of conspiracy theory. Because essentially the movie is not all about conspiracy. Although the male protagonist did say something like this is a conspiracy, his words are not credible because of the distortion of the subjective world.
Further, this is not about the harm of the group to the individual, because there are not too many obvious hints. Everyone wants the male protagonist to die. In fact, objectively speaking, this is a modern story background, and people are indifferent and alienated. The movie also shows something, but it also shows that people try to approach and care for each other. Although this kind of care is not what everyone wants, civilized society also has mutual superficial care out of politeness, and it is relatively smooth from the male lead It's not hard to see this as you integrate into the office coterie. Most nodding acquaintances are in such a passable state that they don't drive people crazy. This is also a concern for individual integrity in modern low-viscosity relationships. Although the male protagonist does not have too much social fear, it still evolves into a serious delusion of persecution. Trying to understand this, in the sociological sense, you need to go back to who the male protagonist is, in order to figure out what he wants. And then can infer the reasons for the alienation. This questioning should start with the mirrors that fill the room at the beginning of the movie.
The mirror shows its own image, including other people's surveillance-like eyes (sometimes they are in a daze and don't stare at the room, so don't say this is a conspiracy.) All reminding and asking the male protagonist a huge question: Who am I? What am I?
He is Polish, brothers and sisters, he has said many times, he is Polish, but he is a French citizen! Jealous of him being a French citizen. But the background of this film should be after the Cold War, so his alienation, fear, and alienation have found a reasonable explanation in history. Because he is not a simple outsider, he is an exile. He is not as interested in becoming a French citizen as I am. I'm really a businesswoman who doesn't know the hatred of subjugation of the country. Is it good to sing French socialism across the river? The landlord said at the beginning, I think you are a good guy, although you are from abroad, but I am optimistic about you. The French rent a house for you to see your mood. You are doing well. Because "there are not many houses recently", the male protagonist agrees: let it be cheaper~, and then the landlord said seriously, the big brother is looking at you, and the male protagonist hides in the room in fright.
From this re-constructed scene, I got two important reminders. The landlord did not ask him to take the bait, but whether you like it or not. During this period of time, the housing rental market is very good, and the housing rental market is very good. You can roughly infer the number of migrants big Packer into. Combined with historical clues such as Poland and the Cold War, it can be drawn that many people should have taken refuge and exiled here. France has never been a mainstream immigrant country, and the French are notoriously xenophobic. Even today? I haven't checked it carefully, but you can get a glimpse of it by looking at the policies of the authorities. However, France has always been a factor of social instability because it has accepted a large number of refugees. Some people want to express interest from this perspective, but I just want to explain why the male protagonist's perspective is almost insulated from goodwill, because he knows himself. Yes, I'm a refugee with almost no place to live. Therefore, in an unfamiliar environment and constant questioning of his identity, his sensitivity and skepticism were further magnified into delusions of persecution and gender dislocation. Before the film started, he had already experienced vicissitudes of life. The death of the guest has developed a strong interest. He is infatuated with a dead opposite sex. As an alternative to resolve conflicts, he wants to become her, which also means that he completes her final performance - jumping off the building. So in the beginning he was contradictory and the chicken thief understood that the former tenant, maybe also an outsider, in the end, he didn't want the other party to die, but he wanted to find his own room, but the mummy woman soon after roaring. Dead, he and Adjani start dating because they both need to deal with this grief. But the suggestion of death has always made him feel that this is a huge problem for him to face, and that it ends with self-destruction. He belongs to nowhere, then enters a room full of mirrors and begins his alienation performance.
Fourth, why did the former tenant die (after careful research, it may also impact the above conclusion)
Fifth, Adjani is so beautiful, so her role is useless, please play yourself a hundred times. Then is Adjani real, and who is real? Well, interesting question, but I think it's a philosophical question, like does movies exist? The problem that exists just isn't going to extend that far. During the film, there are always questions about existence, teeth, ego, hallucinations, group portraits, but that is not a narrative, but the director's private goods, so this analysis is left to others to discuss in detail, and at the end, Looking at the two from the perspective of a dying person lying down is also a question: Who is dead? Whose perspective witnessed everything, and what did that roar mean. I suddenly thought of a possibility, could it be that Adjani died. Then I realized that this question has a very silly side. Adjani is so pure and beautiful, the director and screenwriter will not let her die and become a ghost.
View more about The Tenant reviews
