Thus, according to Foucault's classicism: "The reason why the irrational becomes the rational becomes the rational - because the rational can only 'have' the mode to recognize the irrational... Wisdom and truth always have an infinitely backward relation to reason, whereas madness is always just The things that reason can have spontaneously... Reason is alienated in the process of possessing irrationality."
Occam's razor can obviously solve this problem easily - in the channel presupposed by Odysseus, always You can tie yourself to the mast, and the siren's singing is no longer a temptation, but at best a late-night show on the Entertainment Channel.
But there are still people who want to board the ship of fools and go to the depths of the ocean to find more secrets. The psychological analysis of the mainland can always find a reason to expel them, and they are happy to expel all the harbors in the mainland. Even so, there are always beacons pleading and waiting for their return.
In the hands of Cormac McCarthy (author of No Country For Old Men), the Ship of Fools becomes the Sunset Train. The confrontation between the ocean and the lighthouse turned into a black-and-white chatter.
Not every tough guy on the screen will keep his image as majestic as Clint Eastwood after he takes the lead. Old geeks like Al Pacino and Tommy Lee Jones seem to be more inclined to express their personal tastes. Personally, I feel that the latter's depraved and neurotic old nihilist image in "The Sunset Train" goes further than the former's image of a down-and-out literary old man drinking "Chinese Coffee". Samuel L. Jackson is still acting in his true colors, and he is always in control of the dialogue between the two for most of the film. Like all the so-called rational people who sympathized with the irrational in the classical era, they always want to save the "wrong" others. Of course, when it is mapped to the current mainstream culture of the West, it seems to be a pious irrational person trying to save the nihilistic rational person.
Is there any essential difference between the two? Contrary to psychoanalysis, the story dispels the logic of character behavior in the general sense as much as possible, making the dialogue more symbolic and pure. After getting rid of the sensory illusion, firmly believe in the meaning of existence, or firmly believe in the meaninglessness of existence - To Be or Not To Be, it is more like the reality trouble caused by the displacement of a certain equivalent meaning in the humanistic concept. Wouldn't the discussion be more general and stable if there was one more figure representing natural science in the film? ……Ok? "Stalker" seems to play like that...
No matter what the depth is, for this kind of drama-like movie, watching the actors perform is definitely a kind of enjoyment. However, the speculative confrontation between the two tough guys seems to be more pure than Uncle Stallone's death squads. This film may be a little torture to the audience for women with perceptual thinking and vision?
For outsiders like me, who are working hard every day to play a normal social role without much pursuit, whenever I see the arguing voice in my head appearing somewhere in the world, it is always very gratifying and makes people feel Maybe not so lonely.
PS: Al Pacino's "Chinese Coffee" is also a good movie, and it feels quite similar to this one. I thought it was too literary at the time, but compared to this film, it was actually quite approachable.
View more about The Sunset Limited reviews
