My Ten Commandments Series: One of the Ten Commandments

Luciano 2022-08-08 17:07:41

Chekhov said: The first act of the gun hung on the wall must start in the third act. His words are equally appropriate to evaluate Kieslovsky’s films, but the object of evaluation is his lens. The shots of Kei’s movies are not like Mizoguchi Kenji and Hou Xiaoxian who are paranoid about long shots, nor are they cut out to the horrible picture like the Soviet montage school. His technique is smooth, but the effect is amazing. At least it can do it. His films do not have a redundant lens. The composition and light of each lens have their specific spiritual meanings related to the film. The question is whether you can understand it.
The "Ten Commandments" are exactly TV movies, but the rough picture itself cannot conceal the exquisite composition. Although I can't understand many of the pictures, the shots I have understood are already shocking.
For example, when shooting people, it is difficult to see the whole body of the person in the film. Usually, the face of the person is placed in the center of the picture in a close-up manner, emphasizing the position of the person and the independence of the person, but it also implies that people will be As the protagonist of this world, I think I can control everything and master everything. Once the director casts the lens on the human body, a sense of loneliness will inevitably arise. Whether it’s the close-up scene in the dark and cold tones, the person’s face is covered by a shadow (usually half of it), or in the snow, the person runs farther and farther toward the empty distance, the former is brought by the tone of the space. Depressed, the latter is the loneliness of emptiness. But the people in the former are cold, even if they are hot, while in the latter, people feel a little bit of compassion in the feeling of helplessness.
As for the lens, I am a layman, and I still cut to the subject. This is the first part of the Ten Commandments. My opinion is about human reason and God's decision. Regarding gods, no matter the father who is absolutely sensible, or we who have been educated in atheism since childhood, we have always had a rebellious attitude towards this concept, but I think this god is not a mud puppet or wooden figure in the temple, but-- More precisely, it is destiny itself. The computer in the film symbolizes the so-called supreme rationality of mankind. Human beings tried to be in the midst of the irrational world and regulated by their own limited rationality, but in the end they were abandoned by the irrational world. Just like the father at the end of the film, it is not so much hatred for the fate of killing the child, the action of dropping the candle is more disarming in the face of his fragile rational fate. In fact, the word brittle is not the same as weak. What is easy to be brittle, and hard things are easy. Otherwise, Chinese martial arts stories will tirelessly use silk to make ancient bulletproof vests, because rationality is in the built world. It continues to show its strength and wins in the development of new continents one after another, and it becomes hard, hard to the point of brittleness. If he could be like that woman with a lot of sustenance, I am afraid that father would not regret so much later. As for his consent to his son's participation in a religious training institution, it might as well be a confident expression of reason.
From this absolute reason, Hitler was thought of. I used to think it was the irrationality of this bohemian corporal that caused the chaos in the world. Later I learned that it was not irrational, but absolute pure reason, trying to standardize the originally irrational world according to its own absolute rationality, and build the city of Germania in my heart. Pure reason, at the end, is irrational.
What I don’t understand the most in the film is the person who looks after the campfire with a compassionate look. Is he a cold-eyed God, or the painful director himself?

View more about Dekalog reviews