We are unfortunate lovers in wrong times

Arielle 2022-11-03 19:01:11

I secretly thought that this was a philosophical film, a kind of talkative film. Revolutionary version of Love at the Break of Dawn. It's a dream, because a dream is close to reality.

"Is there really a socialism?" "I don't know, I'm still groping." Yes, that is a kind of doctrine, a beautiful assumption, because of the existence of human nature, it is probably difficult to do it, unless human invents something A drug that homogeneous human nature, but is it just that people are still human? Is it still interesting to live? Everyone is the same, probably no different from the machine.

"Be concerned about the working class", "try to listen to everyone's opinions"... The movies are often filled with such sentences, if you think about them carefully, these are chicken soup for the soul. Don't XXX and religion use these deceptive and beautiful words to attract the audience of believers?

"Youth has nothing to hide", "Wrong thinking is the Great Leap Forward"...

This movie should be regarded as a theoretical browsing, a retrospective reflection on what you have learned in your youth. Many people came here like this. They were once fanatical and brainwashed. With the growth of experience, their views will change. Maybe even those who sacrificed for the truth will be lost in today's life, and even be swallowed up by their desires? Idealists are often just utopians, ideals are full, and reality is an irony. Ma En's doctrine is also more like a castle in the sky, drawing cakes to satisfy one's hunger, and it is just an ideal. A sigh.

The heroine (the director's later wife) is very pure, and she looks so good even when she smokes. Of course, her stunning dew point scene at the end is even better. There are many girls in France who are so pure. I feel that Sophie Marceau was a hundred times brighter than milk tea Chen Douling when she was young.

View more about La Chinoise reviews

Extended Reading

La Chinoise quotes

  • Kirilov: 'Art does not reproduce the visible but makes visible.'

    Veronique: Yes, as imaginary aesthetics.

    Kirilov: Yes, but this imaginary does not reflect reality. It is the reality of surreflexion. One can hear statements like 'use only the three colours, the three primary colours, blue, yellow and red, which are perfectly pure and thus perfectly balanced' on the pretext that all other colours can be found in them.

  • Francis: But your idea?

    Veronique: To close universities.

    Francis: But how?

    Veronique: With bombs.

    Francis: With bombs? Are you going to... Are you going to throw bombs?

    Veronique: Listen, when one starts killing students and teachers, they won't show up, and so the universities will close.

    Francis: But tell me are you doing it alone?

    Veronique: Well, there are two or three of us.

    Francis: Two or three, but...

    Veronique: But for example you during the Algerian War when Djamila Bouhired blew up cafes, you were there, you defended her when Marshal Juin and then those L'Express guys were against her.

    Francis: Uh-huh.

    Veronique: All of France was against her except for you.

    Francis: Yes, that's right. But there is a difference, and tell me if I'm wrong.

    Veronique: What difference? Please explain?

    Francis: Because there was a whole people behind Djamila. There were men and women who had already entered the struggle...

    Veronique: But it was for...

    Francis: Pardon?

    Veronique: It was for indipendence, and me too, I want my independence.

    Francis: You want your independence, but how many of you want it that way? I asked you, and you said two or three.

    Veronique: Precisely. There are many who don't think about it yet. So we think for them now. It's for them.

    Francis: Do you think you can make a revolution for others?

    Veronique: But Francis, you agree that work is struggle?

    Francis: Of course it's struggle, but what is the struggle?

    Veronique: Look, if I want to know the theory and methods of revolution, I'm obliged to participate practically in a revolution.

    Francis: You can participate in a revolution but not invent one.

    Veronique: Look, if I want to gain knowledge, you have to go through practice, right?

    Francis: Yes.

    Veronique: Do you agree?

    Francis: Yes, I agree, but revolutionary practice nevertheless presumes knowledge of the situation. Do you know?

    Veronique: Yes, I know the situation. Everything is wrong.

    Francis: You know it, but do you know...

    Veronique: And it makes itself known to... to...

    Francis: Do you know what can be done to remedy it?

    Veronique: But you do agree that all genuine knowledge originates in direct experience?

    Francis: When you believe in direct experience, does it tell you what content to give to your action next? Because terrorism, it's only the beginning of action. It's terrorism, isn't it?

    Veronique: Yes, it's terrorism.