Modernity and the Will of Director
When I want to comment on the Jewish Holocaust in the Second World War, Adorno’s famous saying is destined to be inevitable. His judgment is undoubtedly complicated, and he will comment on the romantic forms of the Holocaust for all “vailing attempts”. The works are labeled as immoral. Even if we do not discuss it at the level of identity and difference for the time being, this assertion is also an invasion of the understanding of the Holocaust after the Holocaust. When you want to comment on the movie "Son of Sol", or to comment on any movie, you need to draw a certain distance from the work itself, but this is exactly what is missing between the form of "Son of Sol" and the story. Distance can be analyzed only in terms of the most intuitive methodologies of film formation.
Aesthetically, the most prominent visual motif of the film is the small scene with the combination of telephoto and virtual focus and shallow depth of field follow-up. Within the scope of the eyesight, only the person in the focal point can be accurately identified. In the massacre factory, the dead Jews and most of the Nazi officers obviously did not need to be clearly photographed in this form. The camera closely followed the protagonist Sol in the Jewish contingent, and the shadow moved with him. The first chapter is the opening. The curtain also emphasized this point. Thor, who came from the depth of field, didn't stop until the focal point, and then the camera began to follow the movement. Such a small scene is inseparable from the camera. The underlying concept can of course be understood as the viewer viewing the story world from Thor’s internal point of view, that is, the unity of the viewer and Thor’s point of view, that is, the internal focus narrative or Narrative with its attributes. After the story unfolds, Thor is the viewer’s "I" that breathes and shares the same destiny with the development of the plot. The viewer empathizes to Thor, and then deeply empathizes. Thor’s experience is the viewer’s experience, that is, omniscience. , There shouldn’t be anything unknown to Thor, the viewer, or any of them, otherwise it will impact the closedness that internal focus relies on.
And the first paradox of form arises here. Because as the story unfolds, it is not difficult to find that what Sol sees is to a large extent not the same as what the viewer sees, because the camera closely follows the shooting, only Sol’s reaction to various events in the plot. Regardless of what happens in the field or in the painting, the camera is facing the character, side-to-side, or following the film. It is limited by the scene and depth of the visual motif, and the space in the physical form is compressed so that the viewer cannot kiss him. See what Sol sees, and only see Sol. This kind of very strict control of the narration to the external words and deeds of the characters, without revealing any external evaluations, and almost emotionless only narrating the scenes composed of Saul's actions and words is a typical external focus. As a result, the closedness of internal focus is impacted here, and there must be something in the story that Sol knows but the viewer does not know, that is, the inconsistency of mental space. The two forcibly formed a difference in perspective because of the form. Poor information and the viewer is smaller than the character, which directly contributes to the formation of the mysterious tension, which boils down to the character, that is, the motivation for a series of behaviors such as Saul's insistence on "burying the child".
As a dramatic narrative, the external focus has another division with the overall form. Under the visual motif of "Son of Sol", the inevitable existence of Sol at the focal point is absolutely unshakable, because as long as Sol Any accidents that occur during the course of the story, whether internal focus (subjectivization) or external focus (objectification), will immediately lose the legitimacy of the overall visual motif (experience constructed by follow-up shots) due to loss of focus, leading to the collapse of the form. The narrative and the story face a complete loss of position and are completely finished. Therefore, in this case, the viewer's natural empathy and empathy for Saul at the beginning will gradually diminish as the story unfolds. In short, with the opening scene of the poisonous killing of another group of Jews, the inevitability that Sol will survive until the end of his destiny finally appears above the image (this is the same as the malpractice of "1917"). Dramaticism does not exist in the formation process of the characters' fate, but instead turns to the point of fate; on the other hand, because of the reduction of empathy, the viewer and Saul are gradually separated, forming a separate objective examination effect and no longer dramatizing. In these two trends, the final point of fate further directly exposed the improper manifestation and manipulation of the hidden author, and the disengagement effect of objective examination formed ironic tension. Together, the two also pointed to the motivation of Sol’s series of behaviors. .
Both the mysterious tension and the ironic tension point to the motivation of Sol's entire series of actions, that is, the little boy among the Jews who were poisoned in the first act, who was lucky not to die immediately. He reminded Sol of the past, but it is unknown, but Holding a Jewish funeral for the little boy, but after the little boy was strangled to death by a German military doctor, became Sol’s first goal, and its priority was even higher than the rebellion plan in the concentration camp that was conspiring to escape. One for the ritual of death, one for the effort of living, we certainly know that the ending of the story is that the little boy who is not Sol’s real child sank to the bottom of the lake. Although Sol escaped the concentration camp, they were also chased by the German army. All the killings are in the barn. No matter what, it is hard to escape or escape. It is like the fate that people are doomed to death even if they don’t enter a concentration camp. This shows the essence of the massacre, which is actually a doomed death. journey of.
Sol in the story is undoubtedly rational, because he clearly realized that the people who entered the concentration camp were already dead. Among a group of "dead people", Sol chose to be a child who truly symbolized the future. It is undoubtedly his free will to hold a Jewish funeral. If Hungary, as a civilian Jew who was invaded by the Nazis during World War II, had to enter the concentration camps as a destiny, then choosing how to die and witnessing how to die is before this destined destiny, and that person stands tall in the dark. In an efficient killing factory, the little boy who was lucky enough to die late is like a prophet ordained by God to tell Saul not to rush to the final destination for the time being, he still has the freedom of choice that has not yet completed his mission. In the plot, Sol’s actions hinder the companion plan, and even delay the delivery of important ammunition, and other extraordinary behaviors that cannot be understood by normal logic are everywhere highlighting this concept of succession. In this sense, how "Son of Sol" faced the choice of life and death became the interpretation of the story. In a perilous and surreptitious environment, free will is the gleam of the story of Sol’s rationality and persistence. In this regard, the viewers may be able to accuse Sol from the perspective of today’s collectivist goals (survival) as the highest purposefulness, but they may also silently accept Sol’s work from the bottom of their hearts. All the efforts made in this also indirectly prove that practical rationality only exists based on free will as the transcendental principle. Therefore, the overall theme of the film is ready to emerge here, and the innocence of the story is also reflected here.
However, it must be pointed out that the very stylized audiovisual language of "Sor’s Son" directly forms two types of focus that cannot be smoothly transformed-internal focus (subjectivization) and external focus (objectification). The foundation of both points to the "burial" behavior caused by the little boy in the story as the source. It can be assumed that if the story continues here mainly with mysterious tension, the viewer does not know the cause of Thor’s behavior, and his empathy foundation is therefore not reliable, and will continue to be degraded due to his perverse behavior, and finally fully deconstructed and reduced to objectiveness. The pure irony of transformation is closer to the direct pungent irony of the character’s stupid behavior; and if the story is delayed with ironic tension as the main reason, the reason for Saul’s behavior is still unknown, but the viewer will objectively examine the reason and gradually realize To the embarrassment of a series of artificially obstructed dramatic deliberate play, and the stronger the irony tension, the weaker the mysterious tension. The direct consequence is that the free will of the film's expression becomes an imbalanced theme that hides the direct manipulation of the author, and the mysterious tension collapses. As a result The pure irony reduced to subjectivity destroys the whole story. Therefore, the form of "Son of Sol" will always unconsciously deconstruct itself, and although under deconstruction, the expression can reveal the natural shock of the story itself, but it is also quite unexpected. In contrast to the current "Son of Sol", the blond German boy appeared at the end of the film, which brought Sol great comfort. The camera followed the miraculous little boy to leave Sol and enter the end. The soul and the forest that can take on life, in the ceremony of death, gave Sol and Sol the honor of not being witnessed by death itself, and in the efforts of life, the little boy continued the salvation that life can continue. This is of course the romanticism that the form and deconstruction itself can best maximize the story. Although it is difficult for us to label the work as immoral under Adorno's judgment, it is not difficult to imagine the same story assuming the most plain. Audiovisual language narratives will not diminish their appeal and reflection in the slightest, and they will even add a sense of reality because of plainness, and block the trace of death as a footnote of forcible association like redemption, facing the core of rationality. Death is nothing but nothingness. Life is reality, and there should be the same distance from death to life, and there should be more fundamental differences in existentialism. From this perspective, the closer the story and the form of "Son of Sol" are combined, the tighter the tightness. Without distance, the more it proves the strength of the story and the shortness of its form.
View more about Son of Saul reviews
