文|Linghu Boguang
Hayao Miyazaki's new film "What kind of life do you want to live " was released in China during the Qingming Festival, and the box office performance was not bad. It is predicted that the final domestic box office will be about 760 million, which is already a good box office for animated movies. However, the word-of-mouth aspect is different from other Miyazaki Hayao animations. It is quite controversial, probably because many people say they don’t understand it.
In my opinion, this film is quite similar to last year's domestic movie " The Mistake by the River ", no matter what interpretation it is. As long as you think of the era in which directors Hayao Miyazaki and Yu Hua lived, they do have expressions that are limited by the background of their own times. As long as you can get this expression, it doesn't matter if you can't get it.
The biggest problem is that many directors nowadays don't speak human words, and are blindly abstract and open to interpretation. This is quite fun for fans and movie fans. Anyway, they have a lot of fun playing with various metaphors. The subsequent interpretation may not even occur to the director. So much, but for ordinary people, it probably doesn’t feel good.
It is not as full of fairy tales and dreams as Miyazaki's previous works, so it is destined to be disliked by most people.
can’t understand it, but it’s actually very easy to understand? How do you evaluate Hayao Miyazaki's new film
Personally, I still feel that there are many current interpretations, and some of them are really misleading. After all, the creator is inseparable from the environment of the times, and the movie takes place before and after the hero appears in World War II. In fact, it is about Japan before and after World War II, that is, Miyazaki Hayao's generation.
’s last work feels like he let himself go a little bit. There are a lot of humorous and difficult-to-understand morals in the movie that are not suitable for all viewers. Like the dying pelican saying to the protagonist, in fact, they don’t want to prey on those blah blah blahs, but It's that they don't have enough food and have to eat those blah blah blahs.
The pelican here refers to the Japanese who were brainwashed by militarism. Due to the lack of resources in Japan at that time and the strict hierarchy of the official class, these lower-class Japanese people who had no food were forced to embark on the path of militarism to expand and invade territories, and Those cute blah blah blahs refer to the children who were deeply poisoned by Japanese militarism.
This is very obviously shown by making an airplane shell with the protagonist's father. These children were eaten before they were reincarnated.
In fact, it shows that Mr. Miyazaki uses these metaphors to express his position. The behavior of the parrot king in it completely alludes to the militaristic fascist force, and the protagonist's uncle should refer to the force of the Japanese royal class, because they cannot Determine the development and balance of the world.
The building blocks given to the protagonist by the great-uncle refers to placing hope on the next generation to reshape this beautiful world. When the Parrot King heard that he took away the building blocks and forcibly built them, he saw that they were about to collapse and chopped them with a sword, which led to the collapse of this fantasy world. Collapse, what the old man expressed is that fascism cannot create this new world, it will only bring the world to collapse and lead it into the abyss.
The last bunch of parrots fled like birds and beasts from this collapsed fantasy world, which also refers to the fact that these fascists were not completely liquidated after the end of World War II. They still live in various ways and lurk in our society.
The most important character in this is the image of Heron. Although he has a slightly benign image in the film, he is actually a cunning and lying drunkard. The male protagonist thinks that he loves lying very much. And at the end, the white wooden block that the male protagonist brought back from that other world was the wooden block that he and Huomei stepped on together. I personally think that this wooden block should refer to the fragments of history or civilization. My uncle has also been trying to make it The block stabilizes, but the parrot king who transformed fascism destabilizes it.
The male protagonist returned to the reality where he was still experiencing the war. Holding this piece of real history in his hand, the cunning Heron said: Did you bring it back? But it's okay, you'll forget about it soon.
This should be a metaphor for the cunning and treacherous Japanese authorities who are covering up history with lies. After the male protagonist recovered the historical fragments, he said nonchalantly, it doesn't matter, you will forget it sooner or later. This left a very deep impression on me.
This may be Hayao Miyazaki’s last struggle and confusion as Japan’s previous generation of left-wing animation master. The tower he built is about to collapse, but who can replace him and build a new tower? The young man's purpose is to take the person back, but the tower is about to collapse and there is no time. It is best to bring back a contaminated and powerless building block.
However, you will gradually forget it anyway.
There are countless metaphors that can be interpreted from various angles? Hayao Miyazaki's new film is indeed not good to watch.
And the whole film is full of so-called Indian parts that are open to interpretation. For example, the thirteen building blocks refer to the thirteen periods in Japanese history. In the end, his uncle asked him to choose another one, which was the Showa era, the fourteenth era. And his uncle had three building blocks to choose from, which should be Mei, Su ,Europe.
However, the building block tower that could have been built well, as shown in the movie, was built hastily and haphazardly by the imperialists regardless of the consequences, which led to rapid collapse, and finally everything was chopped into pieces with one knife, eventually leading to the world At the same time, the protagonist also said that these building blocks contain malice. I think it refers to some bad qualities in Japanese culture, which is destined to fail to achieve a true ideal world.
And the parrot refers to the intellectual class who received Western education at that time, the king parrot is militaristic, because the pre-war Japanese cultural class is extremely xenophobic, and those floating spirits are the real proletariat, and the pelican refers to the emerging Japanese capital class , Pelican also said that he cannot survive without food, which corresponds to Japan's emerging capitalist class, which cannot obtain the primitive accumulation of capitalism from the outside world, and can only crazily oppress its own bottom citizens inwards.
The common people in Japan at that time were like floating spirits, they could only eat water offal to satisfy their hunger. Eventually, when they grew up, they had to become the rations of capital. However, my uncle was an idealist, and it happened that these classes were the possible future of the protagonist. It depends on what kind of person the protagonist wants to be.
The blank space at the end leaves the question of the new generation of post-war Japan, what kind of person do you want to be.
In addition, I think the tomb at the beginning should be the shogunate, and the phantom of the sailing ships on the sea should be the prosperous maritime trade at that time, but these maritime trade had nothing to do with Japan at that time, so they were just phantoms, so it was "Those who learn from me will die".
When the tower was about to collapse, I thought Mr. Miyazaki would let all those parrots and pelicans be buried under the rubble, but in the end they all escaped. Hayao Miyazaki did not let them stay in the world after death, and Let them return to the living world with the protagonist, and it also constitutes such a beautiful picture.
The controversial part is that one moment parrots are a symbol of militarism, and the next moment they fly out of the tower. Natsuko also praised the parrots for being so beautiful, and the parrot king also survived, which gave me a very awkward feeling. It's like saying that militarists can return to normal life without paying any price.
I think letting the parrots fly out does not affect any of the lines. It just creates a good-looking picture. On the contrary, it has a negative effect on the expression of the anti-war point of view. If you only let the pelicans fly out, it can barely be said. It's more reasonable. After all, parrots actually actively want to eat people, while pelicans theoretically do not intend to eat people.
Although I think it’s best not to release it, I can only say that this movie is mainly aimed at Japanese audiences rather than us.
There are many such interpretations. This work is really very serious, as if it is giving the audience, especially the younger generation who are about to enter society, the final serious critical education through the screen. The future is really in the hands of In the hands of such people. However, Miyazaki is facing the Japanese. It is normal for the Chinese not to understand because of their different histories. Secondly, this group of people are the most intolerable to preaching and are full of absurdity.
There are many metaphors, but you really don’t like it? Hayao Miyazaki really released
If you are not prepared for this movie, don't watch it easily, because it will "disappoint" you.If you have watched movies such as "Spirited Away", "Howl's Moving Castle" and "Princess Mononoke" and want to watch similar movies again, this movie may not meet your expectations.
Because it is not just a fairy tale with a clear main line, it is an unconventional and unconstrained stream of consciousness movie. If you are not able to calm down and devote yourself to it, or even be prepared to watch it for the second, third or fourth time, you I would be confused throughout the whole process, thinking "Why did it suddenly come here?"
"Why did she do this?" "What does this mean?"
Specifically, after an hour of the movie, none of the six of us could understand what it was about. express something.
But is it bad? I personally feel that it is more like a work that the author dedicated to himself. As the poster said, this is Hayao Miyazaki's "farewell work" and a life gift he gave to himself. There are countless projections in this movie. , full of various metaphors.
I personally don’t like it, but I think it’s okay, because there are more and more such works now, and it feels a bit like domestic comedy works, but in the end they have to be “valuable”. Although I was mentally prepared before going to see it, it was still a bit hard to describe after I actually went to see it. To be honest, this one is too abstract.
In the past, Hayao Miyazaki's works, no matter how artistic they are, will retain the most basic "story"
In "Spirited Away", Chien strayed into a tunnel and became invisible. In order to rescue her parents and return to the real world, she And leave no stone unturned.
"Princess Mononoke" Humans destroy nature, and nature fights back against the contradictions caused by humans, thus expressing the contradiction between humans and nature in the form of a story.
"Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind", " My Neighbor Totoro ", "Howl's Moving Castle" and other animations are the same. In Hayao Miyazaki's previous works, no matter how artistic he is, he will find ways to ensure that the movie itself is a coherent and complete story. But this one should be hard for ordinary people to watch.
From the beginning when the male protagonist entered the tower, everything was confused. What is a tower? What is the tower owner? Why does the tower exist? What is the sea that the hero entered? Why did the tower fall from the sky? Why must the male protagonist save the world? Why does the Parrot King say he wants to save the world? Why does fire beauty drive flames? Why does Natsuko have to go to that unknown world to give birth?
Although it can be seen that there is a metaphor behind it, and some settings are briefly introduced in the later stage, the only intuitive experience that many people feel after watching it is abstraction. It's like nothing is explained to you, except that this movie doesn't just know it and doesn't explain it.
Audiences will definitely not like this kind of movie because it is full of intellectual murmurs. There is nothing wrong with
, but compared with the previous works that everyone liked, it is no longer a fairy tale, and it is no longer cute.
