The theme of the film, consumption. The film adopts the style of musicals, with a seemingly gorgeous form of expression, as well as excessive movement and movement, to package several phenomena under the concept of modern consumerism, but in fact the content is extremely lacking.
The director breaks down the fourth wall of the play, engages the audience in the play, and constructs a miniature version of the social stage. Build a closed chain of art_media_audience, and then feedback from the audience to the media and art. On this stage, everyone sings their own voices, and spreads out all the links and processes in a simple and rude way, everyone's point of view. In short, it is an inner world without lies.
The protagonist's line is to reveal his heart, and the audience's reaction represents the voice of the public. In the relationship between the subject and the guest, we can see the actor's attitude towards the public, ridicule, and disgust, but for fame and fortune, he has to "scratch the soles of his feet". ' way to make these idiots laugh. Audiences and media are no longer consuming stars, consuming their entire lives all the time. As a result, a closed loop has been formed. The public and the media consume stars, and stars work hard to obtain consumption capital.
Although the director has a certain criticism and irony of the consumption concept in modern society, this expression is an extremely lazy way. This is equivalent to dragging a story outline directly on the audience's face, allowing the audience to make up the details of the story by themselves. The outline is then very "flattering" bound in a refined "beautiful" package.
The story is extremely simple. It is a star couple from love to murder, the emergence of a third party, and the use of children. For a 130-minute movie, there is no more empty story than this.
Perhaps this may also be deliberately done by the director, just like the actor of the film complained in the talk show, I let you laugh and you laugh, no matter what crap I say, no matter how much I scold you, you will laugh, because I am famous. So he used this vulgar but recognized by stupid Americans to package such an empty rotten story, just like the emperor's new clothes, satirizing the public aesthetics, after all, the song and dance form is the best director in the Oscars. The only choice. As a result, the chairman of the jury in the United States still ate this, and really gave him the best director. Hollywood's aesthetics also largely represent the public's aesthetics, with form as the foundation of art, because they cannot understand the content. The director may be saying: I call you stupid, you smile, and even praise me for scolding me well.
If this is the director's true intention, then the award of this film will signify that he slapped one after another in the face of this jury, and then the jury is swollen and happy and awarded an award to others, Of course the same goes for those who give the film high marks. This group of high scorers are those who succumb to authority and have no independent aesthetic ability.
While the director's point of view is commendable, this disgusting kitsch form is disgusting. Typical consumer mass and ignorance.
If the director is based on the concept of performance art and needs to combine the feedback of the audience to improve the entire process of art appreciation, and together constitute the meaning of the art work, then he is successful, it can be said to be a successful performance art. But just for the movie itself, it has two stars.
Sure enough, as soon as an American becomes the chairman of the jury, these international film festivals stink for a year.
View more about Annette reviews
