Chapter 2115

There is no doubt that "lobster" is a very special work, which can even be summed up roughly: it is a concept first "anti Utopian" attempt, which continues the consistent style of oglesland moss; But lanli's memory of the story is a little blurred - whether in the previous life or in this life.

The reason is very simple. The setting of the whole story is still not complete - not the plot or script, but the lack of the screenwriter in the whole core stage of conception leads to the congenital lack of follow-up work, just like the lack of a link in the gene chain. The baby's appearance is complete, both physically and psychologically, But at the genetic level, there is an objective part missing.

It can be understood that the screenwriter originally decided to create a cold-blooded killer as the hero, but he didn't have a good idea. Whether he was born cold-blooded or the "emotion can't resonate" caused by the acquired influence, no matter what, it made him a perfect killer. In some plays, such as "no country for the old" or "shameless bastard", this has no influence, and the audience will not cause any confusion; However, in some scripts, such as "blade killer" or "this killer is not too cold", the audience will not be able to empathize, and the subsequent reflection will not be extended, which will affect the effect.

Today's "lobster" belongs to the latter.

The whole play of lobster can be divided into two parts.

The first part is the bachelor hotel. All singles must find a partner within 45 days, and the loser will be converted into an animal.

The second part is the forest outside the hotel. Those single people who rebel against the hotel flee to the forest one after another, and then form a rebel army by themselves. The leader is an out and out bachelor. The creed is "no love". If they break the rules, they will also be converted into animals.

Whether in the first part or the second part, it reflects the thinking of the roles of marriage, love, soul mate and so on in the social structure. In the final analysis, it is still contemplating the relationship between people and connecting society with symbols. The real metaphor is the exclusion of minorities and other kinds by human society, This is undoubtedly a very wonderful and profound social fable, which is enough for people to start to reflect on themselves.

So what's the problem? It's the setting of the hero David.

According to the story of oggs, David failed to make a successful match in the bachelor Hotel, so he fled to the forest, but unexpectedly fell in love with another woman here - but the forest is a place where love is forbidden, which made him face a dilemma. Finally, he and his daughter chose to escape from the forest and return to the city.

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

First, why is David sent to the bachelor hotel? If he can't fall in love with anyone in the bachelor Hotel, it can be said that his choice is too narrow, but before he arrives at the hotel? He knows that if he doesn't find a partner, he will be sent to a hotel, but he is still single. Why? Single? Resist love? Social phobia?

This vacancy makes the second part of falling in love and the ending of returning to the city lack a chemical reaction.

Second, do the rebels in the forest just refuse love? Or is it resisting the grand world view of the whole society behind the bachelor hotel? If it is the former, why do they try to attack hotels and staff, but ignore the couples in the whole city? If it is the latter, why do they turn those "lovers" who violate the rules into animals? Is there any essential difference between their behavior and social world outlook?

This vacancy makes the plot development of the second part lack the root. Naturally, the shivering of the ending weakens the strength.

Furthermore, the first part and the second part of the "film world view" can not be unified, and the writers and directors' creative intention for the whole film has become relatively thin. For some films, this is not any problem, but for "lobster", a work with distinct social and realistic significance and refraction intention, it has unfortunately become a shackle for the further improvement of the work, and has affected the viewing experience and effect.

In fact, if these settings can be supplemented to make David's motivation complete and the rebel's intention and strategy real, then the whole core of the film has a chance to go further, not only to discuss society, but also to discuss love——

Is there any unconditional love between two adults? Can the relationship between love and family, between love and society, between love and culture become an integral part of the social system framework, whether supporting love or opposing love?

When Eugene and his royal screenwriter efthmis filippou wrote the script, they failed to give a clear positioning to the image of David, which made the first part, the second part and the ending connected by David split to a certain extent, limiting the possibility of audience resonance, Naturally, the present result will appear——

From the perspective of script creation and characterization, this is a complete story, and the creative intention of oggs and evsimis can also be reflected; However, from the perspective of viewing experience and reflection effect, this is an incomplete story. It is obvious that the creators have more ideas hidden in the story, but unfortunately they have not been able to show them to the audience, or show them to the audience fragmentary, lacking some sense of fluency.

Lanli now seriously recalls the work "lobster". His memory is relatively vague. He can't remember David's specific image and setting. Even the ending has become blurred, let alone sublimation or shock. He always feels as if he has forgotten something important.

Nevertheless, Langley must admit that "lobster" is a very interesting play. Apart from "singleness", it is really a reflection on future family, marriage and love.

But the problem is that Lan Li himself is immersed in thinking, which is set by set. He can't give a clear and effective implementation plan, let alone a brand new shooting plan. The work of director and screenwriter is absolutely not so easy, and he doesn't even know where to start.

Every line is like a mountain. This sentence is not 100% accurate, but it is true many times. This is what lanli has always insisted on. Even as a producer, he seldom interferes in the work of the director; Even as an actor, he has countless ideas about the script, he will not tell the writer what to do.

For lobster, the best way is to tell him what he thinks and see what changes he and the screenwriter can make.

That's all. Lanli himself or don't interfere, avoid creating unnecessary confusion.

But there's one thing lanli can do by himself - performing.

Langley curled up on the sofa and began to construct the image of David in his mind, but to be honest, Colin Farrell's performance of the last generation has been blurred.

It's not that Colin's performance is bad, it's just that the role limits the effect. Vaguely, Langley remembered that Colin had a thick moustache - or a moustache? He plays a middle-aged man, looks round and blunt, but inadvertently reveals a little smart, so the image really gives the whole film Black temperament, more clever humor.

In the whole movie "lobster", all the actors maintain a cool performance style, presenting the characters in a calm and even slightly stiff way as far as possible. This is also the typical style in the film of oggs. The facial paralysis performance of "dog teeth" is almost walking dead, but it makes people shudder——

The so-called facial paralysis, in fact, is just a lack of expression changes, direct contrast is "rubber man" Kim Carrey; But no rich expression does not mean no emotion and emotion, eyes, movements, posture, etc. can be released from the inside out of interest.

Lanli has tried a similar performance state in "detached" and "drunken folk songs", but showed a different performance content.

What interests him more is the original idea of David's role.

No matter Jason Clark or Colin Farrell, they are all traditional male images: handsome, tall, strong and masculine; Colin's David, on the other hand, is a little introverted, dull and shy, with a little bit of simple temperament. It should be no problem for Jason to play.

The most intuitive effect is: David should be a very popular traditional partner image, and the silent and dull man image is still very popular in Central America; Especially in the context of the world set by Angus, he should be more popular.

So, why didn't David have a partner in the original city? How exactly did he set it?

David couldn't find a partner because of the homeboy's personality? Or did David get a lot of "offers" and get rejected? Or is David still sincerely believing in the magic of love, waiting for his own love to come, and unwilling to accept the arrangement? Or give up trying?

This is a focus problem. If what Eugene sets is that David can't find a partner, then he doesn't want to play the role of Langley - it's not because Langley has infinite charm, it's everyone's aesthetic problem; It's because the audience base of lanli's fans is too strong to convince the audience that in the social environment where everyone needs to find a partner, otherwise it is illegal, lanli's role is still single.

But if Eugene set that David refused to find a partner and still believed in love "naively", then the story would be more smooth. At the same time, it would be very interesting to be starred by blue Lilly; If you change the settings again, there will be more surprises.