Discussing films is inseparable from the so-called "audio-visual language", the so-called "audio-visual language", and the part that expresses "visual" is nothing more than color, composition, scene, and light. In simple terms, there are "red, orange, yellow, green, blue, blue and purple" colors. In complex terms, 16,777,216 colors can be obtained by calculating the combination of RGB alone.
Since the birth of color images to the present, the groups who have opposed the use of black and white are nothing more than:
1. Use the color-to-black-and-white technology to pursue the ultimate black-and-white-gray retro style, for example: Agnes Varda's "Cleo at 5 to 7 o'clock", which was shot in color in the early stage. Use the green filter to enhance the green lawns and trees, so that when the black and white is converted later, the black-white-gray relationship of the picture reaches the coordination expected by the director (or DP) (for now, I only think of this example).
2. Opportunistic business school, in the face of chaotic, vulgar, and difficult to deal with scenes, shooting in black and white, and dubbing it "art". Or low-level use of black and white pictures to "symbolize" nostalgia, sadness, loneliness, etc.
3. Deliberately give up color so that the audience's attention will not be distracted by too much color.
It is obvious that this film belongs to "3", giving up rich colors, and the only remaining means are black, white and gray three-tone (the use of light), composition, and scene distinction. If you don't use these three to the extreme, how can you attract people's attention? Does the film take these three elements to the extreme? I think after watching this film, everyone's answer will be yes.
I saw some film critics say that "the director's talent cannot support such an ambitious script", is this really true? Here are some examples of the director's "talent".
(As an aside, when I watched the beginning, I almost thought I was watching the end of "400 Strikes", and my mood was instantly surging.)
1. In the [Mzrta] chapter at the beginning, the boy watched the house that was burned by the fire gradually retreat and gradually disappeared into darkness. In the next plot, the boy was in the "darkness" of life. Is this a A visual metaphor throughout the film? ,
2. Looking at this deliberately extreme "clip light", do the characters created make you feel disgusted, sinister, and unknown? What happened next? Boys are sodomized. For me personally, war, Judaism, these topics are too big, and the level of disgust for sodomy can indeed be ranked first. So the use of this "clip light" is well deserved.
3. This gesture is too obvious. To put it vulgarly, this is masturbation! What happened next? Immediately let the boy kneel and lick.
In addition, there is a very interesting point in this paragraph, which has a deep discussion on "sex". It has to be combined with the whole film. This section clearly has the taste of sexual awakening. We can first recall the cute little animals before the boy's sexual awakening: ① Think of the boy's pity for the burned bird at the beginning of the chapter; ② When the grandmother chops the chicken The boy couldn't look directly; ③The bird that was painted by the man who kept the bird and let it fly, and was finally surrounded and beaten by a group of birds, the boy was distressed and held his hands to the palm of his hand, sobbing endlessly. What about after sexual awakening? The boy was jealous of the sheep, so he was angry with the killer, cut off the sheep's head and smashed it into his sexual enlightenment teacher's house.
Sex is beautiful yet insane.
4. The yin and yang face before the boy shoots the vendor is not mainly used for light, but the composition and the occlusion effect caused by the foreground (wall).
Various details are dealt with, and there are many more examples, and I believe that there will be serious audiences to discover more essence.
Next, I want to make a personal complaint: I just finished reading the book "J" not long before I watched this film, which undoubtedly complements this film, and I also remembered the sentence "The things in the world will always make you doubt God's intentions. "Is it true that the Jews offended Hitler? Or offend God? I also remembered Shi Tiesheng's "Reporting on Pastor Zhan", which summed up the beauty of the "black humor school": everything written is absurd and terrifying, as absurd and terrifying, but it is very realistic. No one has ever seen anything like this. Does this film have such a "black silk humor" taste?
At the end of the writing, I still want to make a fool of myself. I happened to watch "Siro, the Hardest Boy" recently (it seems to be renamed "Siro the Immortal"), and in this comparison, "Siro the Hardest" should be a different name. Yes, the film "The Smeared Bird" can also be followed by a dash, and the second book is "Life Hard Boy Joska".
This boy Joska, life is too hard.
View more about The Painted Bird reviews
