The Greatest Showman

Remember in one second [End of the God Station] Mobile phone user input address: m.xinwanben.com

.,

Undoubtedly, "The Lobster" is a very special work, and can even be summed up simply and rudely: it is a concept-first "dystopian" attempt, continuing the usual style of Oggs Lanthimos; The memory of the plot is somewhat blurred - whether it is the previous life or this life.

The reason is very simple, the setting of the whole story is still not complete - it is not the plot or the script, but the lack of the screenwriter in the core stage of conceiving the whole idea, which leads to the congenital lack of subsequent work, as if there is a missing link in the gene chain. , the resulting baby looks whole, both physically and psychologically, but is objectively missing a part genetically.

It can be understood that the screenwriter originally decided to create a cold-blooded killer as the male protagonist, but he didn't have a good idea. Whether he was born cold-blooded or "emotionally unresonable" caused by acquired influence, no matter what, this made him a perfect killer. In some scripts, like "No Country for Old Men" or "Shameless/Bastard/Asshole," this has no effect and the audience doesn't cause any confusion; but in some scripts, like "Blade Runner" or " This killer is not too cold", but it will cause the audience to be unable to empathize, and the follow-up reflection cannot be extended, which will affect the effect.

The current "lobster" belongs to the latter.

The entire script of "The Lobster" can be divided into two parts.

The first part is the Singles Hotel, where all singles have to find a mate within forty-five days, and the losers are converted into animals.

The second part is the forest outside the hotel. Those singles who resisted the hotel fled to the forest one after another, and then organized a rebel/rebel/army. The leader was a complete singleist, and the creed was "no love allowed" , if it violates the rules, it will also be converted into an animal.

Whether it is the first part or the second part, this reflects Oggs' thinking on the roles of marriage, love, soulmate, etc. in the social structure. Society, the real metaphor is the rejection of minority groups and aliens by human society. This is undoubtedly a very exciting and very profound social fable, enough to make people start to reflect on themselves.

So, where is the problem? It is the setting of the hero David.

According to Oggs' story line, David failed to be successfully matched in the bachelor's hotel, so he fled to the forest, but accidentally fell in love with another woman here - but the forest is a place where love is forbidden, which makes He was faced with a predicament, and finally he and the woman chose to escape the forest and return to the city.

Because of the deviation of the setting, the contradiction between the first part and the second part cannot be unified in David, and the irony and practical significance of the ending cannot be reflected.

First, why was David sent to the singles hotel, if he couldn't fall in love with anyone at the singles hotel, it can be said that the choice is too narrow, but before arriving at the hotel? He knew that he didn't find a partner, so he would be sent to the hotel, but he still remained single. What was the reason? Choose to be single? Resist love? Social anxiety?

The lack of this setting makes the fall in love in the second part and the return to the city in the ending lack a chemical reaction.

Second, are the rebels in the forest just rejecting love? Or is it resisting the grand worldview of the whole society behind the single hotel? If it's the former, why did they try to attack the hotel and the staff while ignoring those couples all over the city? If it is the latter, why did they convert those "couples" who violated the rules into animals, and are their behaviors fundamentally different from the social worldview?

The vacancy of this setting makes the plot development of the second part lack the source, and naturally, the shudder at the end weakens the power.

Further, the "movie worldview" of the first part and the second part cannot be unified, and the writer's and director's creative intention for the whole film becomes relatively thin. For some films, this is not a problem, but for works like "The Lobster", which has a clear social and realistic refracting intention, it unfortunately becomes a shackle for the further improvement of the work, and affects the viewing experience and effect.

In fact, if these settings can be supplemented to make David's motives complete and the rebels' intentions and strategies real, then the overall core of the film has the opportunity to sublimate to a further level, not just discussing society, At the same time, the discussion of love goes a step further—

Is there a completely unconditional love between two adults? Can the relationship between love and family, love and society, love and culture be part of the framework of a social system, whether for love or against love?

When Oggs and his royal screenwriter, efthymis-fillippou, were writing the script, they failed to give a clear and definite position to the image of David, which also made the first series linked by David. One part, the second part and the ending were separated to some extent, which limited the possibility of the audience resonating, and naturally the current result appeared——

In terms of script creation and characterization, this is a complete story, and the creative intentions of Ogus and Ephsimis can also be reflected; but in terms of viewing experience and reflection effects, this is an incomplete story. The story of , obviously the main creators have more ideas hidden in the story, but unfortunately not able to show it to the audience, or in other words, show it to the audience in pieces, lacking some sense of fluency.

Renly is now serious

Recalling the work "Lobster", his memory is relatively vague. He can't remember the specific image and setting of David. Even the ending has become blurred, not to mention the sublimation and shock. I always feel I seem to have forgotten something important.

Nonetheless, Renly must admit that "The Lobster" is a very, very interesting script. Leaving aside "singleism", this is indeed a reflection on future family, marriage, and love.

But here is the problem. Renly is immersed in his own thinking. It is a set of sets. It really allows him to propose script revision suggestions based on the core of his thinking. The filming plan - the director and screenwriter's job is definitely not that easy, he doesn't even know where to start.

Every line is like a mountain. This sentence may not be 100% accurate, but it is true many times. This is what Renly has always insisted on. Even as a producer, he rarely interferes with the director's work; even as a producer An actor has countless ideas about the script, and he will not point fingers at the screenwriter.

For "Lobster", the best way is to tell Oggs what you think and see what changes he and the screenwriter can make.

That's all. Renly himself had better not interfere indiscriminately, to avoid creating unnecessary confusion.

But there's one thing Renly can do on his own - acting.

Curled up on the couch, Renly began to construct an image of David in his mind, but honestly, the last Colin Farrell's performance was blurred.

It's not that Colin's performance is bad, it's just that the role limits the presentation. Vaguely, Renly remembered Colin's bushy moustache—or was it the mustache? He plays a middle-aged man, who looks round and blunt, but inadvertently reveals a little bit of cleverness. Such an image does give the dark temperament of the whole film more clever humor.

Throughout the film "The Lobster", all the actors have maintained a cool-toned performance style, presenting their characters as calm and even slightly rigid as possible. This is also a typical style in Oggs' movies. The almost walking corpse-style facial paralysis performance in "Dog Teeth" has produced a chilling curling aftertaste——

The so-called facial paralysis is actually just a lack of expression changes. The direct comparison is the "rubber man" Jim Carrey; but the lack of rich expressions does not mean that there is no emotion and emotion. Eyes, movements, postures, etc. can be released from the inside out. interest.

Renly has tried similar performances in "Transcendence" and "Drunken Country Ballads", but they have presented a different performance.

What interested Renly even more was the original idea for the role of David.

Whether it's Jason Clarke or Colin Farrell, they are all traditional men: handsome, tall, strong, and masculine at the same time; while Colin's David is slightly restrained, dull, and shy, With a little naive temperament, there should be no problem with Jason playing the role.

The most intuitive rendering effect is: David should be a very popular traditional partner image, and the image of a silent and indifferent man is still very popular in the central region of the United States; especially in the world background set by Oggs, he should be more welcome.

So, why didn't David have a partner in the original city? How exactly is Ogus set up?

David was not able to find a partner because of his otaku character? Or did David receive a lot of "invites" and all of them were rejected? Or is it that David still sincerely believes in the magic of "love", waiting for his own love to arrive, and is unwilling to accept the arrangement? Or give up trying?

This is a focal point. If Oggs is setting up that David can't find a partner, then he may not be willing to use Renly to play the role - not because Renly is charming, it is everyone's aesthetic problem; But because Renly's fan base is too strong, it is difficult to convince the audience that in a social environment where everyone needs to find a partner or it is illegal, Renly's role is still single.

But if Oggs set up that David refused to find a partner and still believed in love "naively", then the story would be smoother, and at the same time, it would be very interesting to play Renly; and changing the setting again If so, there are bound to be more surprises.

Support (end this site) and share this site with those who need it! Can't find the book, please leave a message!