The owner, Kevin (Michael Keaton), once became a sensation for starring in the Hollywood movie superhero image Birdman, which is no different from any play that creates a superhero. Without losing the "Gao Da Daquan", more importantly, the rendering of bloody and violent scenes makes the audience more fond of this superhero drama. To put it bluntly, Birdman, a Hollywood movie, caters to the audience by kneeling and licking kitsch. taste. However, in order to realize a dream in his youth: to put Raymond Carver's novel into a play, Reagan, who has become a thing of the past, went bankrupt. His youthful dream did not come out of thin air, but because when Reagan was performing a play at school, Raymond Carver wrote him a word of encouragement at best on a wine napkin. Inspired by this, Reagan started his acting career. For the middle-aged Reagan, this kind of "repayment of gratitude" in the literary and artistic tone of adolescents was the beginning of a life-chasing dream. If the Mexican director of "Birdman" believes that the opposite of Hollywood is Broadway, and the opposite of superheroes is Raymond Carver, then, as a play director and actor, Ronald Reagan really began to idealism in his middle age. style of artistic creation - trying to adapt Raymond Carver's "When We Talk About Love, What We Talk About" and put it on the stage of the play. However, this is the starting point of the joke. The role of achieving great achievements and fame is not Reagan's real pursuit. However, he pursued the presentation of artistic dramas hard, and for it went bankrupt and separated from his wife and children (Zi San was shown as a daughter's rebellion, The generation gap that cannot be reconciled with his father), but he has never been successful. This success is, on the one hand, Reagan's self-request, and on the other hand, the market response. Under this internal and external anxiety, Reagan's inner "Birdman" was revived. It ignored the irreconcilable contradiction between self-requirement and market response, and instilled in him "the way to success" more bluntly with another voice: bloody, Violence, pornography...use all the worldly winks and throw them at the audience.
Reagan was constantly wrestling with his inner "Birdman", and this psychological state was expressed in the director's technical formal construction: most of the scenes were filmed in the narrow and dark backstage space of St. James's Theater on 44th Street on Broadway, with different scenes. The transition between them is completed by splicing long shots, and the changes of shots and camera positions are constantly switched in the space between the stage and the backstage, so as to promote a stage atmosphere with the same tension as the backstage atmosphere. In the switching of the stage play, a sense of division or incoherence is revealed. This also makes the Reagan in the play and the Reagan in the backstage have a kind of isomorphism to a certain extent - the real pursuit of self-introduction and interpretation and the truth of self-torn interpretation. In the play, Reagan pursued artistic authenticity, requiring actors to truly express natural emotions, and actors also demanded realistic props to achieve results, but the most "ulterior motive" scene revealed the hypocrisy of this real pursuit itself: please On the stage, Mike (Edward Norton), a popular Hollywood star who came to the rescue, wanted to have "real" sex with the heroine in the play on a whim, but was rejected by the actress. Mike, who is impotent and impotent, erected a "big bird" on the stage, and got the audience's response. This scene strikes me as "unfamiliar", where the stage characters that Raymond Carver wrote about in the novel actually have sex on stage, and the two get caught up in it, ignoring others, until the director stops the two People are also "indistinguishable". However, in the adaptation directed by Reagan, in order to deliberately avoid kitsch, the real sex was changed to fake, and a fake scene was created with a real pursuit. This paradox exposes the inevitability of Reagan tragedy. The more he ignores the admonition of the "Birdman" in his heart, the more he pursues the true expression of art, and the less he wants to win the market in a kitsch way, which just proves that he attaches great importance to the "Birdman" and uses a super-real way. Approaching art is imprisoned in the eyes of kitsch.
The tearing of the self is inevitably wrapped in the above three "incomparable", the result is that the more Reagan wants to kill the "bird-man" in his heart, the more he is swallowed by the "bird-man". The climax of the big picture, I think, was Reagan's confrontation in the cantina with the botched female critic who pompously told him that no matter what his play was, she wouldn't go and would. For the worst evaluation, the art market is like a big Taobao, any insignificant negative evaluation is enough to affect the future career development for a long time, let alone a pivotal "customer". Seeing her own hard work being trampled on like this, Reagan grabbed the comments that the female drama critic was writing with his wine, and pointedly pointed out that she would only put some disgusting labels on others, and any label could only show her ignorance. and stupid, and nothing else. The female drama critic was "unmoved" and insisted on giving him a bad review. He left the bar in anger and loss, leaving behind the long-cherished Carver's "wine towel" - this is not a declaration, declaring that The ideals and ideals are separated from this.
Reagan who walked out of the bar was no longer the one who walked into the bar, and "Birdman" won a big victory. In drunkenness, he accepted the "bird-man" characteristics that he had rejected and rejected before, and began to spread his wings in soothing and pleasant music. He enjoyed the freedom of this moment, a kind of freedom from self-tear and confrontation. . So everything becomes solvable. He shot and broke his nose in the official performance. The hesitation and hesitation before will be misunderstood as his inability to compromise with reality and the urge to end his own life. Coupled with the use of real guns in the play, stupid humans will He was given the image of a hero in the name of holding on to his idealistic beliefs. But what I want to debunk is the fact that he ended up compromising blood and violence, kitsch. When he splattered the stage and fell down, the audience gave long and warm applause. He was crushed by the applause. In the failure of idealism, he finally succeeded.
Such a revelation that explains "why did he just hit his nose" as a stupid human question, you've all been fooled. The female drama critic finally came to see his performance, and the drama comment was published in the newspaper: "This is a super-real drama..." It seems that no praise can clear the joke of the three words "super-real". This is utter irony.
Finally, the bird man came back, he "flyed out" from the window, when we looked for him along his daughter's eyes, we might be able to find from the smile on the corner of his daughter's mouth and the upward gaze that the bird man flying in the sky , really, very happy.
He may also shout heartily in the sky: I'm so kitsch, it's none of your business!
It was a complete tragedy, without a single hymn, from start to finish.
[If you need to reprint, please indicate the source]
View more about Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) reviews
