忧郁症

Lars von Trier’s Melancholia (2011) stages an interesting reversal of this classic formula of an object-Thing (an asteroid, alien) that serves as the enabling obstacle to the creation of the couple. At the film’s end, the Thing (a planet on a collision course with Earth) does not withdraw, as in Super 8; it hits the Earth, destroying all life, and the film is about the different ways the main characters deal with the impending catastrophe (with responses ranging from suicide to cynical acceptance). The planet is thus the Thing-das Ding at its purest, as Heidegger would have it: the Real Thing which dissolves any symbolic frame – we see it, it is our death, we cannot do anything. The film begins with an introductory sequence, shot in slow motion, involving the main characters and images from space, which introduces the visual motifs. A shot from the vantage point of space shows a giant planet approaching Earth; the two planets collide. The film continues in two parts, each named for one of two sisters, Justine and Claire.

In part one, ‘Justine’, a young couple, Justine and Michael, are at their wedding reception at the mansion of Justine’s sister, Claire, and her husband, John. The lavish reception lasts from dusk to dawn with eating, drinking, dancing and the usual family conflicts (Justine’s bitter mother makes sarcastic and insulting remarks, ultimately resulting in John attempting to throw her off his property; Justine’s boss follows her around, begging her to write a piece of advertising copy for him). Justine drifts away from the party and becomes increasingly distant; she has sex with a stranger on the lawn, and, at the end of the party, Michael leaves her.

In part two, ‘Claire’, the ill, depressed Justine comes to stay with Claire and John and their son, Leo. Although Justine is unable to carry out normal everyday activities like taking a bath or even eating, she gets better over time. During her stay, Melancholia, a massive blue telluric planet that had been hidden behind the sun, becomes visible in the sky as it approaches Earth. John, who is an amateur astronomer, is excited about the planet, and looks forward to the ‘fly-by’ expected by scientists, who have assured the public that Earth and Melancholia will pass each other without colliding. But Claire is getting fearful and believes the end of the world is imminent. On the internet, she finds a site describing the movements of Melancholia around Earth as a ‘dance of death’, in which the apparent passage of Melancholia past Earth initiates a slingshot orbit that will bring the planets into collision soon after. On the night of the fly-by, it seems that Melancholia will not hit Earth; however, after the fly-by, background birdsong abruptly ceases, and the next day Claire realizes that Melancholia is circling back and will collide with Earth after all. John, who also discovers that the end is near, commits suicide through a pill overdose. Claire becomes increasingly agitated, while Justine remains unperturbed by the impending doom: calm and silent, she accepts the coming event, claiming that she knows that life does not exist elsewhere in the universe. She comforts Leo by making a protective ‘magic cave’, a symbolic shelter of wooden sticks, on the mansion’s lawn. Justine, Claire and Leo enter the shelter as the planet approaches. Claire continues to remain agitated and fearful, while Justine and Leo stay calm and hold hands. The three are instantly incinerated as the collision occurs and destroys Earth.

This narrative is interspersed with numerous ingenious details. To calm Claire, John tells her to look at Melancholia through a circle of wire which just encompasses its circular shape in the sky, thus enframing it, and to repeat this 10 minutes later so she will see that the shape has become smaller, leaving gaps within the frame – a proof that Melancholia is moving away from the Earth. She does this, and grows jubilant when she sees a smaller shape. However, when she looks at Melancholia through the frame some hours later, she is terrified to see that the shape of the planet has now expanded well beyond the frame of the wire circle. This circle is the circle of fantasy enframing reality, and the shock arrives when the Thing breaks through and spills over into reality. There are also wonderful details of the disturbances that happen in nature as Melancholia approaches the Earth: insects, worms, roaches and other repellent forms of life usually hidden beneath the green grass come to the surface, rendering visible the dis-gusting crawling of life beneath the idyllic surface – the Real invading reality, ruining its image. (This is similar to David Lynch’s Blue Velvet, in which, in a famous shot after the father’s heart attack, the camera moves extremely close to the grass surface and then penetrates it, rendering visible the crawling of micro-life, the repelling Real beneath the idyllic suburban surface.)

The idea for Melancholia originated in a therapy session von Trier attended during treatment for depression: the psychiatrist told him that depressive people tend to act more calmly than others under extreme pressure or the threat of catastrophe – they already expect bad things to happen. This fact offers yet another example of the split between reality – the social universe of established customs and opinions in which we dwell – and the traumatic, meaningless brutality of the Real: in the film, John is a ‘realist’, fully immersed in ordinary reality, so when the co-ordinates of this reality dissolve, his entire world breaks down; Claire is an hysteric who starts to question everything in a panic, but nonetheless avoids complete psychotic breakdown; and the depressed Justine goes on as usual because she is already living in a melancholic withdrawal from reality.

The film deploys four subjective attitudes to-wards this ultimate Event (the planet-Thing hitting the Earth) as Lacan would understand them. John, the husband, is the embodiment of university knowledge, which falls apart in its en-counter with the Real; Leo, the son, is the cherubinic object-cause of desire for the other three; Claire is the hysterical woman, the only full subject in the film (insofar as subjectivity means doubts, questioning, inconsistency); and this, surprisingly, leaves to Justine the position of a Master, the one who stabilizes a situation of panic and chaos by introducing a new Master-Signifier, which brings order into a confused situation, conferring on it the stability of meaning. Her Master-Signifier is the ‘magic cave’ that she builds to establish a protected space when the Thing approaches. One should be very careful here: Justine is not a protective Master who offers a beautiful lie – in other words, she is not the Roberto Benigni character in Life Is Beautiful. What she provides is a symbolic fiction which, of course, has no magic efficacy, but which works at its proper level of preventing panic. Justine’s point is not to blind us from the impending catastrophe: the ‘magic cave’ enables us to joyously accept the End. There is nothing morbid in it; such an acceptance is, on the contrary, the necessary background of concrete social engagement.

Justine is thus the only one who is able to propose an appropriate answer to the impending catastrophe, and to the total obliteration of every symbolic frame.

……………………..

Alan Weisman’s book The World Without Us, a vision of what would have happened if humanity (and only humanity) were suddenly to disappear from the earth – natural diversity blooming again, nature gradually overgrowing human arte-facts. In imagining the world without us, we, humans, are reduced to a pure disembodied gaze observing our own absence, and, as Lacan pointed out, this is the fundamental subjective position of fantasy: to observe the world in the condition of the subject’s non-existence (the fantasy of witnessing the act of one’s own conception, the parental copulation, or of witnessing one’s own burial, like Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn). The World Without Us is thus fantasy at its purest: witnessing the Earth itself retaining its pre-castrated state of innocence, before we hu-mans spoiled it with our hubris. So while The Tree of Life escapes into a similar cosmic fantasy of a world without us, Melancholia does not do the same. It does not imagine the end of the world in order to escape from family deadlock: Justine really is melancholic, deprived of the fantasmatic gaze. That is to say, melancholy is, at its most radical, not the failure of the work of mourning, the persisting attachment to the lost object, but their very opposite: ‘melancholy offers the paradox of an intention to mourn that precedes and anticipates the loss of the object’.

Therein resides the melancholic’s stratagem: the only way to possess an object that we never had, which was from the very outset lost, is to treat an object that we still fully possess as if this object is already lost. This is what provides a unique flavour to a melancholic love relationship, such as the one between Newland and Countess Olenska in Wharton’s The Age of Innocence: although the partners are still together, immensely in love, enjoying each other’s presence, the shadow of the future separation already colours their relationship, so that they perceive their current pleasures under the aegis of the catastrophe (separation) to come. In this precise sense, melancholy effectively is the beginning of philosophy – and, in this precise sense, Justine from Melancholia is not melancholic: her loss is the absolute loss, the end of the world, and what Justine mourns in advance is this absolute loss – she is literally living in the end time. When catastrophe was just a threat of catastrophe, she was merely a depressed melancholic; once the threat is here, she finds herself in her element.

And here we reach the limit of event as re-framing: in Melancholia, the event is no longer a mere change of frame, it is the destruction of frame as such, i.e., the disappearance of humanity, the material support of every frame. But is such a total destruction the only way to acquire a distance from the frame that regulates our access to reality? The psychoanalytic name for this frame is fantasy, so the question can also be put in the terms of fantasy: can we acquire a distance towards our fundamental fantasy, or, as Lacan put it, can we traverse our fantasy?


Zizek, S. (2014) Event: Philosophy in Transit. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

有图的版本（没图还介绍个毛）... ...

http://www.douban.com/note/218806198/

首先是片头第二个镜头出现的画作《雪中猎手》

The Hunters in the Snow 雪中猎手 Artist ：Pieter Brueghel the Elder Year ：1565

这幅是老布鲁盖尔的画作，关于老布鲁盖尔的一些情况可以参见由另外一部《磨坊与十字架》引申出来的介绍：

http://www.douban.com/note/212570175/

这幅画作于1565年，也另名为猎手归来。是老布鲁盖尔广为称道的一副板上油画，亦被认为是北方文艺复兴运动的代表作之一。

画面表现了在猎狗陪伴下的猎手打猎归来的场景。但显而易见的是这次围猎并不太成功，猎人们拖着沉重疲倦的步伐，狗儿们看起来都悲惨而垂头丧气，只有一名猎人扛着他瘦弱不堪的狐狸尸体，显现出他们窘迫的处境。整幅画面处理得十分冷静，笼罩在一片冰凉而阴霾的天气之下。色调灰白，树木几乎片叶不存。在山脚下的山谷中，一个轮子结冰的水车被冻住了，冰封的山尖看起来十分遥远。在冻住的湖面上还有一些像剪影一般的人。

1560年正处在荷兰宗教改革的时代，布鲁盖尔（以及他老板）或许试图描绘一种他们希冀的，想要的农村景象。

这幅画并不是第一次在电影中出现，俄罗斯导演安德烈.塔可夫斯基就在他的影片飞向太空/索拉斯星/Solaris(1972) 和镜子/The Mirror(1974)中也用到过这幅画。

然后Justin在房间里的场景，她看到书架上摊开的都是现代主义画作，几乎全是冰冷的几何抽象以及构成主义。于是重新翻开几本书盖了上去，第一幅画仍然是布鲁盖尔的雪中猎手。之后几幅能够看清的有下面这两幅，出自同一位英国画家约翰.埃弗雷特.米雷斯爵士：

非常熟悉的奥菲利娅/Ophelia, 作于1851年左右的板上油画，画的是哈姆雷特的情人坠亡在水中的场景。这幅画现藏于英国泰特美术馆，市值估计在3千万英镑... ...

这幅画后来广泛地影响了很多其他艺术，电影和摄影。Laurence Olivier的电影哈姆雷特/Hamlet(1948)中奥菲利娅之死场景便基于此画。本片片首Kirsten Dunst漂浮在水上的画面也毫无疑问来源于此。

据说John Everett Millais都是习惯先画场景，再把人物画上去。当时房间的取暖条件大概不太好，他让模特儿在冰冷的浴缸里泡了若干小时使得可怜的姑娘几乎得肺炎死掉，姑娘的父亲差点和他打官司...

另外一副：守护林人的女儿 The Woodman's Daughter 1851

显然这本画册这一页介绍的是英国的前拉斐尔派（The Pre-Raphaelite）。

那么之后是大名鼎鼎地卡拉瓦乔绘制的手提歌利亚头的大卫。关于这幅画评议很多，说的是旧约中讲述的犹太人的王大卫用石子击杀巨人歌利亚的故事。米开朗基罗的雕塑大卫表现的也是这位王在击杀前的瞬间。

据说这幅画中的头颅就是卡拉瓦乔画家本人，我好懒，有时间再慢慢写。有兴趣的人可以去找BBC的纪录片《艺术的故事》中关于卡拉瓦乔的那一集，有比较有趣和详细的解释。

剩下的几幅都一闪而过看不清楚，最后姐姐Claire走进同一间房找药片的时候，似乎还扫到了克里姆特的吻。这幅是维也纳分离派时期的作品，金光闪闪，华丽异常，十分受广大人民喜爱。

画基本上就是这些。此外询问朋友后得知，片中没完没了我痛苦啊我痛苦世界上我最痛苦用到的曲子是瓦格纳的歌剧《特里斯坦与伊索尔德》序曲。看个欧洲导演的失心疯片儿容易么，需要全面复习西方艺术音乐史，太有文化有时候往往反而是种残障，思考过多生命力衰竭，你不抑郁谁抑郁呢。

我之前一直怕看这部片子来着。就因为我有个忧郁症老妈。
深夜我阴差阳错点开这部在硬盘里躺了两个月的电影。
料想到这种缓慢节奏的电影会被当文艺靶子射得体无完肤。比如“不懂欣赏这个真是太没水平了”，比如”以不懂欣赏这个为标杆真是太装逼了“这两种奇怪的相悖又相映成趣的影评。
但是我想说那些细节真的让我这个忧郁症患者家属感到除了平时当当影迷以外会有的别种人生共鸣。与怎么拍什么角度无关，我谈不来那个，我只谈谈我在无数个小情节小画面发生时脱口而出的。

<第一部分>
在人多的场合中镜头流转。摇镜很像进行中。还要是婚礼。还要是主角。我很怀疑为毛有这病的人的家属还有勇气给她办婚礼。但是即使是忧郁症病人，也偶尔可以hold住的吧。让我想起我家那些忌讳——不能去人多嘈杂的场合，不然她撑不了多久要panic。但是如果先打定招呼，像clair和她老公一样提前对其循循善诱，她们有时会behaviour得很好。很懂礼仪。很照顾人。
在众人已经很忙乱的时候justin会看星星看马儿，正如急着出门她反而不紧不慢地要搞搞别的东西，直叫你气得大吼她还是不紧不慢。在需要justin出现的时候她在泡澡，在打盹，在高尔夫球场，在不知道干嘛。这个，也很写实。你与她们的世界不在一个时空。
clair心领神会地拿过酒瓶，给justin灌的一幕，我想起她的酗酒。遇到心烦走投无路，她是真会这样拿着酒咕嘟咕嘟的。不管是洋酒还是白的。在justin站在两人高的二层发呆时，她等得不耐烦前来帮忙抛花。一个迅速的拨开那束美好的象征下一个有机会嫁的花。可怜的花如同可怜的数豆子礼品一样被因耗尽耐心而轻视。clair的心领神会手脚麻利，显示她处理这样的场面不是第一次，娴熟得甚至可以出一本《如何照顾忧郁患者技巧指南》。谁想要这样的技艺娴熟？于是她“有时我真的很恨你，justin”。我也说过这样的话。只不过连”有时“都去掉。
另一个习以为常的，就是那个把姐夫丢下的行李又兢兢业业捡回去的管家了吧。
会在有别人在的场合羞辱她真心看不惯的人。就像那个可怜却不无辜的老板。要羞辱一个大块头需要拳头么？说真话的人的拳头最重了。人情场面话都略过，她们像孩子一样说出皇帝的新衣是裸体，然后等后面的路人和大臣擦屁股收拾败局。
老公（准确说是前夫？未婚夫？）的温暖小照片，在justin手里存活时间不超过三分钟，旋即被遗落在沙发上。你作出努力却又被不置可否，有时她们就是会给你这般无情无意。不是无义。她们只是无意。
但是对小孩子却又保留了最真诚的喜欢。（也有例外，当他们的屎尿出现时，或者他们说脏话时。）
姐夫拿钱砸出来的婚礼，全家人就为了她”喜欢“。为搏忧郁患者一笑，得拿出点烽火台一样的财力和魄力来。但是即使好事做尽，她们还是会皱皱眉，不高兴。但下一次，姐夫还是会掏荷包给长途的士钱。就像我爸说，就当拿钱买开心。隔了一层的亲属，会用旁观的眼光来看“你们这个家庭”。unbelievable！这是姐夫的结论。他们会尽尽义务，但只是看在他们的爱人份上。
一个斩钉截铁保护自己还会锻炼身体的老妈。痛恨婚姻。来了婚礼又忍不住坑爹。被女儿寻求帮助却依旧满嘴堂皇，用硬梆梆的说教叫她回去。这个，我忍不住又因为“有相似情节”而笑了。忧郁患者的病因，的的确确和家庭、甚至早到童年有关。上一代不幸的婚姻，甚至可能留给他们的结晶一辈子的阴影。
一个玩儿勺子把戏的“无耻”老爹。“你能我帮狠狠删你老爹一耳光吗？”父母间的憎恶不应该直接对孩子表现吧，都别提是不是在婚礼上了。他们这样做的习以为常，却让justin对婚姻恐惧。她想获得的谈话，在她想认真对待也想被认真对待的时候，她老爹轻飘飘跑了。她的世界又一次微塌。
性爱部分我没现实世界搭配解读。但把老公弄high了再丢下一句goodbye，却又无厘头地fuck一个刚认识的小愣头青——于她们也并不奇怪吧。随心所欲的境界，正常人并不能到达。
发作的场面其实没有大书特书，这也是我怕看此片的原因。怕看到一个又一个外人看这种病人会有的“症状”。但是微小的表现，甚至她家人的表现，原来才是最一刀刺进来的。唯一可算“场面”的就是justin换书。还有下一部分中的鞭打马儿。前者是不可理喻的发泄行为，后者是有理由却过度，于他们都是有坚定解释的。你也甭管具体原因。因为懂了那样的内心世界你也就疯了。
最让我惊悚的一幕出现在她从房间出来，练习一下笑容可掬，又一瞬间回复那股恶狠狠的表情的时候。我觉得全剧在此刻最为戳到血。其他的故事情节，都是写实，都是描述，唯有这里的那种眼神，我见过无数遍。以至于那一刻，我以为dunst是我妈= =

<第二部分>
平常日子的生活，镜头却不再针对病人，而是家属。家属真的都会脾气暴躁吗？我不知道，反正我是。或者我曾是。也会在病人月蚀般的影响下有些执拗的害怕吗？我不知道，反正我也是。我一直盼望这一部直到最后是个温暖人心的好结局，却原来导演要给人们”忧郁对于忧郁者如同末日毁灭“这样的信息，还真生生把一颗蓝色星球给撞上来了。高速旋走又折返的”毁灭“，像生活给人的一次又一次的幻象。你以为今年祝酒词说了”会好的“，明年就真好了；你以为这段时间没什么事了，就代表以后都没什么事了。那全部都是以为忧郁星飞走了的短暂高兴。
我从来就没有扮演clair的“照顾”这一part角色。但我听朋友说过她母亲如何安顿像婴儿一样每两小时起夜却又拼老命不肯蹲下屙的老人痴呆症母亲。在justin光着身子就是不肯进澡盆的时候。做好的饭菜她不吃倒掉，倒厕所，或者顺手一点，倒地上；抑或盼着她状态好一点要下厨，又风云突变等到晚上7点半还是冷锅冷灶；甚至大年夜饭忽然又吃不成，这个，倒是一点也不出奇。
不肯给予姐姐安慰的justin，却肯蹲下来安慰孩子别害怕。
最终坐进一个虚构的没有实质作用的“魔法洞穴”里，就像我们总会做的一样，骗骗自己，寻得短暂的安全与安慰，迎来最后的灭亡。
但是关于这部分我却没什么好说。也许忧郁患者的忧郁都是相似的，忧郁患者的家属各有各的不幸。
闾丘露薇的《走读大中华》也讲过一次忧郁症，半小时浅尝辄止，呼吁人们来关心弱势群体，却不足够让人们不再有认为“忧郁患者的孩子也会有遗传的吧？”这样的concern，不足够让人们在席间不以某个奇怪的同辈作为谈资，不足够让影迷看完觉得入木三分而不是”这什么呀什么狗屁呀“因为他们又用不着入木。当然，已足够让被侵犯的无辜路人凭一句浅浅的解释便摆摆手原谅肇事者。
为什么借助这部来吐了那么多我一点都不愿回忆的槽。其实有点感谢它给我一个回顾的机会。人文关怀什么的，不是说笑。我想掀开新的一页，不想迎来最终的世界末日。不过，正常人不该也不需要看这部的，也不是说笑。
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dunst来演这部我觉得很对头哇，那种隐忍的下一秒就要面具裂开这一秒还在放空的表情。要美能美要丑得吓人也能有。

首先。我是想给’较差‘的

但考虑到万一这只是因为比较小众，不是因为不好，那就很对不住喜欢它的朋友了
=============================
后来回头看，发现这个评论有这么多人跟，就觉得还是要负责任一点，嗯，这个片是给忧郁症病友看的，没有这类心里障碍的朋友会觉得这片难以理解，不过如果你看出了蛋疼的感觉，那就证明你看懂了忧郁症的不爽。
=============================
以前遇到满屏好评，出现一个差评后，大多数人都会无情拍砖差评者，认为他们是自己理解不了而满口喷粪。。。所以我先澄清，我只是想写贴给观影经验不甚丰富的童鞋，如果想看片消遣，不要对这片有太大期望


我一直自觉属于观影经验较为丰富的看客了，大多数种类的电影我都还是能接受的，但这片让我对自己的观影能力产生了疑问

片子全长2个小时，前5分钟的开场是相当惊艳的，各种nb的镜头和画面，讲了一个蓝星球浪漫地撞烂了地球的故事

然后就是1个小时的。一个蛋疼的婚礼

讲了一个女的，在婚礼上莫名其妙的崩溃，然后自我折磨然后折磨别人。不晓得是怕结婚还是讨厌世俗，还是讨厌父母的不和谐，还是讨厌拜金主义。。。。这一个小时看得我相当无语，无语是因为不理解，不理解为什么一个什么都看不惯的人还装模作样的结婚，还各种想让自己开心，然后立刻干出相当崩溃的事情让自己重新不开心。

这时候我已经忘了电影名字了（因为当时看这片完全是随机看到的）

然后我就果断回顾了一下，发现这女的原来是忧郁症。好吧一切都说得通了，这货的精神是个悲剧，所以会这么蛋疼

理解了这个人的行为，我就不理解导演了，这果断是一个专门拍给忧郁症人士找共鸣的片吧。。。我一直以为，电影看的是种共鸣，导演的任务是把某些自己想表达的，震撼的东西用某种更易懂，更有力度的方式展现出来，以和观众思想中的某处达成共鸣，让观众体会到那种想法和震撼。

但这么一种小众的情感，是想要我等世俗生活中的“现实主义粗鄙观众”找哪样的共鸣呢？完全理解不了，就开始觉得片子拖沓冗长了，不由得开始寻找镜头，影片细节方面有无亮点。

不得不说亮点还是相当多的，比如主角婚礼，一开始我还以为他们办婚礼的地方是个酒店什么的，后来发现原来是主角姐姐的家，不得不说老美真tm会享受啊，住这样的地方。。。主角你还忧郁症啊 啊 啊。。住在天朝的穷b不理解啊

好吧，根据经验。。一个片要是前期这样拍，一般都是因为导演实际上是在做细腻的铺垫，为了使后面某种惊人的事的发生更自然点，于是我就带着这样的期待，去看后面那一个小时了


后一个小时的主要任务是将这一帮人丢到世纪末日的大背景下。
现实主义世俗们无法接受世界覆灭这样的事情。好不容易整了那么nb的大房子，说完就完，那哪成啊。。。他们一开始极力否认世界会毁灭。。但当那大蓝星星真的越来越近以后，所有正常人都不淡定了，以主角姐夫（自杀）和主角姐姐（不知所错，忧郁了）为代表。而我们的主角淡定得一塌糊涂。

要我说。。这不废话吗，以我对忧郁症的理解，他们每时每刻都处于所有人都不能理解的压抑之中，每日面临的都是世界毁灭般的绝望无助，早都习惯了，他们最大的痛苦是周遭人完全无法理解他们，就如同我看这片的情感一样。

但当世界毁灭的那一刻，全世界正常人都体会到了忧郁症患者平日的那种感觉了。全世界都抑郁了。于是抑郁症患者说，你们总算能体会到我有多tm不爽了吧，突然觉得自己特有优越感。

我觉得这可以类比肚子疼。我每每肚子疼到想拉X却没厕所的时候，就浑身出冷汗。那时候，我就特不能理解为什么别人那么开开心心蹦蹦跳跳，觉得全世界都应该和自己一样肚子疼，然后满脸纠结啊。

咳，说远了

莫非这就是导演想要表达的？忧郁症患者，平时那么苦B，只是因为他们呆错了环境，因而不适应了。就好像把鱼拿到陆地上一样。
但如果把他们放到正确的环境（世界末日）里面，他们就能用表现的比正常人要好多了？

如果真是这样。。我真是服了。。。。。

后5分钟就是全篇前5分钟继续演下去。。好吧画面不错。。。

综上。。我的评论就是，够矫情，够矫情，够矫情

矫情的慢速镜头切换，矫情的叙事节奏，矫情的主角

以我对电影的适应能力来说。。适应不了

但片子的章法技巧都无可挑剔，演员演技也很好，所以绝不是那种imdb 5分一下的烂片。只是实在无法体会导演想表达什么

另外吐槽一下豆瓣影评。和imdb评分。。。不知是大家看到不懂的片就不敢打低分，还是我的理解力已经跟不上前沿思潮，竟然都这么高分诶。。。还看不到负面评论诶。。。


非常希望看这片感到震撼的人。。能帮我翻译翻译这片。。顺便帮我这愚笨的大脑开开窍