Portuguese Saramago was the Nobel Prize winner.
He is famous for worrying about the world, worrying that the poorness or fragility of human nature will not stand the test of the world, and human beings will eventually be destroyed because of this. This worry has nurtured "Blindness".
The scene unfolds under an imaginary background. A certain strange disease quickly spreads across the city. The infected person quickly loses his eyesight, and the route of infection is unknown. Humans caught off guard reacted in a state of crisis. People of all colors appeared on the scene. The government put the infected in prison for isolation, where the old hooligans still wanted to take advantage of the women, and the tramps and prostitutes fell in love (anyone, anyway). Can't see who), the weak soul of a well-trained doctor needs to find a woman other than his wife to comfort, some patients decide to organize to use force to control others in order to obtain limited food, a war between the blind is inevitable. In the end, the whole city was blind. The blind men who escaped and the blind men in the street collided with each other. On the streets full of smudges and corpses, human beings searched for food for survival. In the dark apartment they hugged and waited for the time. Flowing away in a second.
Does this story evoke your memories? Not long after SARS left, the news of Beijing’s lockdown was looming. The fugitives brought the virus to Shanghai and Tianjin, and the Beijing-Tianjin highway was dug up with a bulldozer by anonymous persons. The difference between SARS and SARS is that the author let Blindness sufferers are seriously ill, but still maintain good ability to act and think, and the entire city cannot escape the disease. This scenario is even more extreme and irreversible.
People with depression are worried about the dangers that may come, and Saramago is just like a depression patient. Maybe he is right, human beings are not so safe?
And he is unwilling to do so, he is a person who wants to make a new world, and struggle is his way of survival. Whether it can be earned or not is difficult for us to judge. If you want to know how exciting his struggles are, I suggest reading this book directly.
－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－ The
following fragment is recorded in 2009.1.26
I was very excited to see the film adapted from this book being released. I complain that I don't care about the dynamics of the film industry, and I missed the news of the premiere. I just discovered its existence today. The good or bad is the opening film of the Cana Film Festival in 2008, and the treatment is good.
However, I doubt whether the film can capture the true taste of the original. The author also said that he dare not shoot this film casually. I didn't dare to ask anyone to take pictures, why did I authorize it again? I think there is a possibility that the author has an old bone and wants to see the effect of the movie before he enters the land for security, and can't help but sign the authorization.
To be honest, anyone who understands the content of this book, who doesn't want to see the "real image version" of it? Even with a little uneasiness.
I recorded a section of the book into an electronic version before. Replaying old stickers is like reuniting old lovers, welcoming the arrival of the movie version.
Let me vulgar Sahua welcome ??????
----------------------------
The following fragment to remember 2009.1.27
Finished watching the movie Blindness. Unsurprisingly, this is a movie full of metaphors. Unexpectedly, the film has strengthened the metaphorical color more than the original. The atmosphere is suppressed throughout the story, and there are only a handful of highlights. It is clearly too lazy to please the audience. This is definitely a huge blow to Hollywood audiences who like the plot.
The adaptation of the original work was too difficult for two reasons.
Saramago's strong point is telling stories, telling stories that are both short and splendid. Readers are excited about it, and by the way he falls into his metaphorical trap. This "by the way" method is hard to find elsewhere. It seems that Marquez has this technique, but Marquez is more concerned about the tragedy of the nation, which is different from Lao Sa's test point. Lao Sa likes to talk about humanity. The "Monastery Chronicle" tells the story of the Portuguese Middle Ages, which cannot yet reflect the broad spectrum of Lao Sa's work. "Blindness" is independent of the background of the era and the country, and it can be applied everywhere.
This feature alone is not challenging enough. While pushing the dark side of human nature to the limit, Lao Sa also tapped the limit of the good side of human nature. In Lao Sa’s writings, morality and conscience are not Mount Everest that humans need to look up to, but are interdependent with the dark human nature. For the baby, lying in ambush is interdependent in an environment full of feces and rubbish. Just like a pair of vortexes with gossip patterns, they contradict and echo each other, one after another, and there is no difference between them at the end of the book.
Compared with the free and ethereal words, the film has to implement the story to the real place, which is technically very different. Therefore, it is unrealistic to expect the film to reflect the two "by the way" mentioned above. What I expect to see is the director telling about his own Blindness. A good story must withstand the telling of different people, just like the murder in Rashomon.
Picture: black and white tone. Cold, desolate and chaotic. A restrained body curve. It's pretty good.
Soundtrack: Many different forms of music expression are used. Specifically, I don't understand. I can only barely distinguish the musical elements of several countries and times, mixed with modern style music. Because the story of the darkness of human nature in the film is very extreme, this kind of soundtrack is chosen quite appropriately.
The ending subtitles opened with a long, sharp, high-pitched bell, and continued with the clarinet of Bach. I can't remember which work was the subject of Bach. The clarinet music at the end of the movie lasts for six minutes, which is absolutely unexpected, and it is definitely my heart. Hit high scores.
Plot: almost the same as the original. Nothing to talk about. The difference is that the characters in this story come from different races and countries, perhaps in order to better reflect the broad spectrum of the theme.
Some people expressed dissatisfaction with the ending: humans regained their eyesight, and the heroine said: "I'm going blind". Some people say that this is a bit of reunion, and the heroine is blinded inexplicably.
In fact, the original book ends like this.
For humans, "visible" is the most important thing. For the wise, learning to be "invisible" is the most important thing.
Characters: The protagonist and heroine can't play well. In particular, the heroine Julian Moore has a good sense of distance. It looks like a queen who saves the world, with a cold appearance, but the warmth inside does not show until the end of the movie. Too late.
In a desperate dark and cold world, women retain light. Excellent women have an innate sense of warm water. They are neither hot nor cold. They can’t dissolve the ice in eagerness, but they are enough to maintain the fluidity of the world and the minimum temperature. In the most difficult moments, male hands When neither power nor science can overcome disease and dark human nature, the warm water qualities of women will help mankind through the most difficult moments. If we have to give a definition to this excellent quality, we can say that it is wisdom, kindness and dignity.
Obviously this kind of quality cannot be expressed by a single role, it needs a group to tell. The film's portrayal of this has a successful side (scrubbing the corpse section), but most of the time it is superficial and reluctant.
The ophthalmologist has sex with a prostitute. After being seen by his wife, the communication between the three people is the essence of the original book. The relationship between the three people is almost the sum of the intimacy of human society, and there are many metaphors in it. The explanations in this section of the movie are just plain real, and they are very blunt. Taking out this detail in the movie alone, I would think that Julian Moore was the greatest nun in history, and she said that she was teaching endlessly. Her doctor husband and nun are two lost lambs, who are almost crucified to death without guidance.
I once suspected that the director's interpretation of the character's character deviated from reality, and his motivation was to give the audience the opportunity to think about the subject from a slightly further angle, in order to strengthen the effect of metaphor. In other words, using this technique to strengthen one part of Lao Sa's work, and weaken the original depiction of each individual's true face. But in the last fifth of the film, the director clearly set out to erase the sense of distance, more express the inner feelings of the heroine, and soften the heroine's face. Why? Perhaps Julian Moore did not grasp the role, or the director was not competent enough, or the director did this deliberately, but we still don't know the reason. After all, the director has had face-to-face communication with the author, and I haven't.
Overall, it is a good four-star movie.
View more about Blindness reviews
