At the beginning, as an oriental, Ang Lee shot the "Sense and Emotion" adapted from Jane Austen's classic masterpiece. His speculation on the emotions of the characters and the restoration of the scenes of the times shocked the Western world. To be precise, the frequency with which these classic literary masterpieces are adapted and filmed in the West is definitely no less than that of Chinese adaptations of Jin Yong's martial arts. For example, Emily Bronte’s "Wuthering Heights" has been adapted at least twenty or thirty times throughout the 20th century. It really takes some effort to stand out. Today, Andrea Arnold challenges this task again. Her approach is to continue the style of her previous works, in four words: simple and rude. Used in other places, it may be derogatory, but for Arnold, this is her way of fame. The sword goes slant, unlike those female directors who are overly indulged in personal emotions. On the surface, Arnold just adopted some eye-catching methods, such as turning Cliff into a black guy. However, the biggest feature of "Wuthering Heights" is the use of modern shooting techniques throughout the story, such as long hand-held photography, close-ups that are almost applied to the face, obsessive performance with strong winds and heavy rain, repeated empty shots... The passage where the two fell in love on horseback is really astonishingly delicate. In addition to the smell of hair and body, it seems to be mixed with the dampness of the wilderness and the smell of grass. If it is the traditional approach, then the film must be based on positive and negative dialogue, fixed lens and moving track, with a soothing soundtrack, appropriately sentimental and clichéd. In contrast to the current vigorous audiovisual methods, Arnold has almost constructed a whole new world, a world of costumes that has been separated from the 19th century but has not completely separated from the text-not watching the protagonist in the film, although they are taciturn, they still speak Wen crepe. For viewers who have never read the original novel of "Wuthering Heights", watching this movie is indeed a disaster. The director deliberately reduces the dialogue and highlights the emotions. They can't figure out the relationship between the characters, and even more can't understand how two people are so in love. They even lie on their backs on the ground from time to time, feeling the painful baptism of love wind and rain, really scratching their heads. To the original party who has read "Wuthering Heights", they will find it novel, the camera shakes, like an inner shock. Even the rustic and rustic flavor that the movie exudes is unprecedented. The first half of the movie is all kinds of bad weather, bad physical conflicts, character emotions, frantic and hard to stop. When Cliff smeared Catherine's face, he showed love in a non-gentle way, and the tone of "Wuthering Heights" was settled. Arnold intensified the paranoid color of the characters, they recognized the truth and held on to it. Recall Arnold’s short films "Dog" and "Wasp", and then to the feature film "The Red Road" "And "Fish Bowl", she is so partial to this type of female protagonist, more like to maintain their paranoia. No matter how difficult the environment they are in, in the director's opinion, as long as they can uphold their nature, they are worthy of affirmation and performance. At the same time, Arnold also likes to refer to animals as metaphors. Apart from "Dog" and "Wasp", the old white horse in "Fish Tank" and the birds and humming butterflies in "Wuthering Heights" all have obvious meanings. Perhaps in animals, Arnold can discover primitive desires and wild impulses, break free from restraints, and seek freedom. That is the emotional trait she hopes to see in the female protagonist. Once the animals encounter unexpected events, it also indicates that the protagonist's fate is worrying. If you look at "Wuthering Heights" in terms of authorship, then Catherine is another typical protagonist of Arnold's works. In the first half of the girl's generation story, she is uncut and grumpy, and looks unattractive. The film was made cold, and her life became rougher and rougher. In other words, in Arnold's personal world, the harshness of the surrounding world can only make the protagonist more tenacious and tougher to survive. In the second half, the story of being exiled was suddenly interrupted, and the characters suddenly became normal, presenting a brand new world that seemed to be embellished and beautified. At this time, the lens with large aperture and shallow depth of field began to produce another effect. We were pleasantly surprised to find that Catherine is not only beautiful and beautiful, she also wears a halo from time to time. Both Catherine and Cliff have changed for the better, but the ending has been written from the beginning. Differences in identities, family tragedies, and mutual suspicion have all hindered their love. In the end, it may be the original tragic factor. It may be that Arnold is unwilling to give the audience an overly easy ending. It is like the girl in "Fish Tank" looking at the aging white horse, and youth has to pass the cold river. Regardless of the past or the present, it is difficult for lovers to get married. People are reading the same book, and the ending has not been changed. For this reason, from the perspective of the image style, Wuthering Heights is really up and down, but from the perspective of the character's fate and ending setting, its core is still faithful to the original and never shifted. In the eyes of the film festival judges and critics, no matter how Arnold plays, "Wuthering Heights" is just her experiment-a technical experiment based on a masterpiece. She loves these movie scenes filled with wild energy so much-that she is unwilling to cut the second half a bit, which is more suitable for the audience to watch. In any case, this fierce British female director is still worth looking forward to. ["Famous Brand" May issue]
View more about Wuthering Heights reviews
