The division of the war collective

Rating: 8/10 (1 May 2020)

I was afraid to watch Russian or Soviet literature and art, and afraid to watch war movies, "see it yourself" is both, but under the influence of ni ke can not hold back to see it. Still saw, from yesterday afternoon to the evening, the film also more than two hours of length, but felt under too much pressure, in the interval for several hours to continue to see the end.
It's a film I hope humans won't be able to make (because there's no reference), although it's undeniably a stunning masterpiece.
The film is set in white Russia in 1943, two years after the Nazi invasion of the Soviet union, during which it is self-evident that many brutal battles took place, but the camera avoids the battlefield where the two sides are directly depicted, and follows closely a boy who joins the army.
Young floriola with partners in the ruins of the war in the gun, with a gun, he can join the guerrillas. He got his wish, bid farewell to his mother and a pair of naive and lovely twin sisters, was disguised as the German guerrillas away.
In the froyola home, the mother received the two soldiers who had come to take her son with a mixture of fear, anxiety, and a vague hatred. When one of them, a large, jargon-prone, stiff-faced soldier, tried to amuse his two younger sisters, the children were terrified and on the verge of tears. This is in stark contrast to the scene when the mother angrily thrust the axe into her brother's hand, threatening to have him chop them to death before leaving the house. Despite attempts to be kind and reassuring, even the casual children felt strange and nervous in the two adults who had gone to war, an aura that was hard to blend with their daily lives.
The film quietly reinforces this sense of separation again and again, arouses emotions with the stimulation of subjective feelings, and gradually immerses the viewer's mental state into the historical scene it is to shape. Although it's realistic, it's actually full and subtle in its use of techniques to create a presence of "body," as the title suggests, "see for yourself."
I noticed the following:
By visual drop. Such as the conversion of normal and dull tones. The first hint of this change comes at the beginning of the film, when froglia digs into a gun against a backdrop of green grass and blue sky, but then the fighter jets streak across a gray sky, and from a bird 's-eye view, the grass and trees become a gray blur.
Through the auditory drop. Such as high and low roar, from machinery (planes, motorcycles, etc.), from animals (flies, etc.) or disturbed radio waves, even physical tinnitus. The monotonous repetition of the sound made people anxious and depressed; There was the interlacing of the true and the disguised intonations -- the children who had come before froriola, speaking in a disconcerting, aged and fierce voice. Then we heard the truth of his voice again, and above all the childish words of concern to his companion: "what's the matter? Peeing your pants?" This seemed to confirm his real age. But even as I felt compassion for the child, I was still terrified: for the voice of the old man was beyond the range of what I could understand a child to disguise, and there was an inescapable truth in it.
As the film progresses, the signs of aging that end up on fryola's face again echo those of the well-spoken child, who is a shape-shifting sensor, spokesman and victim of the powerful violence.
Then there is the expression, the behavior, the emotional reaction, let me feel the most creepy is this. Laugh, laugh desperately, twist a cry face and still smile! Floriola and graca meet, sadness, fear, despair... There is a lot of unbearably negative emotion hidden in the neurotic dialogue, and yet they tacitly communicate with laughter and bantering. Floriola home in the emotional description of the repression to the extreme, but people can not use the word of pity or compassion to isolate themselves, to comment on it. I can only pause, pull away, and let myself think of something else. It turned out that the psychological interpretation of froriola's actions was a profound portrayal of the grief response:
1. The denial. When fryola entered the village, he felt something was wrong, but he did not want to face up to his prediction. He entered the house, ignored the whizzing of flies from the rotten food (his voice was deliberately exaggerated), and brought out the milk that had gone bad for too long to feed graca. "It's still warm," he insisted. This assumes that mom and sister have been away for a short time and that everything is fine;
2. The suspect. Graca found the village head was massacred and hysterical, but froriola did not look, excitedly dragged graca into the swamp. He assumes that his family has survived their hiding on the island, but as he struggles through the mud, his flustered steps reveal the question he asks himself -- is it really all the same? Whether misfortune has befallen;
3. The anger. Arriving on the island, graca shouted the fact that his family had been massacred, and floriola attacked, strangling her and pushing her into the swamp. Still, he does not accept the reality of death, but the irrationality of this moment allows him to vent his anger towards death on his closest companions (in fact, the self-attack is directed at graca, who becomes the self-embodiment of froriola's acceptance of the reality of death).
4. Guilt. In the refuge of the island, the severely burned uncle deliriously blames fryola for digging up the guns. Although we know this is not true, fryola is also immersed in such remorse, which is mixed with the guilt of abandoning his family to join the army. He burrowed his head into the mud. When he followed the adults in search of food, the women asked him, "don't leave us, child." A mother with a baby in her arms consoled him: "you never knew it would turn out like this. You never knew." "No, it's all my fault."
The rough fate of floriola did not end there, foraging on the road with four people, finally left him. Rescued by an old man, he is hidden away in the village in his new identity, and the old man's rambling introduction to his family seems to ease the atmosphere, even with a touch of fantasy -- will froriola fit in with his new family? But then came the Nazi massacre.
In one detail, fryola is left behind by the army, crushing a nest of birds' eggs as he runs. This is probably the dividing line, and since then, the teenager's face has often developed the expression that trauma sufferers have. Two more photographs, one with the guerrillas, when he was a normal boy; The second time, he was photographed with a pistol held to his head by the nazis.
In the pull off state, we can say in theory that the child needs psychological intervention. But the truth is, we're watching, we're watching, we're not doing anything about it. As for myself, I can only chills and pray that I shall never be in such an environment as long as I live.
The unity and separation of emotions is an important criterion for judging schizophrenia, so we see it as abnormal when an individual's behavior and emotional response to a specific situation does not conform to our expectations. But what if the environment itself is abnormal? Every moment in the face of deprivation, the loss of loved ones, the threat of life, bad luck hovering over the head but do not know whether the next second will come... So what can we rely on? There is no such thing as normal order, that is, the collective schizophrenia, no one is immune.
The germans drove and beat the villagers to cheerful music and playful propaganda and burned them in wooden houses. Throw a baby back to the window of death like an inanimate muppet, or like a young pioneer doing a good deed, carry an old granny to her bed out of the burning place... The grotesque behavior reveals that the victorious side is also seized by fear, though not until after the exile.
I didn't like the silence of the guerrillas and the villagers at the end, watching scornfully the spectacle of the defeated side, the last volley of fire ending them, the fire thrown into the water. It seems to emphasize the moral nobility of the just side. It would be better if they acted impulsively, or even violently in return. Nico thought it was a good deal. She thought it was not that they didn't want revenge, but that they had a deep fear of the violence. Also, the maker of fear will eventually be swallowed up by fear. But why is it that humans are endlessly involved?
This film makes me strongly feel the power of art, which can not only be used to satisfy aesthetic pleasure, or passively become some kind of desire object; When it is full of energy and tends to perfect, it has a breathtaking attraction, can actively grab and capture the viewer, accurately and impressively instill its idea. It is, so to speak, both a danger and the best warning of it