In terms of narrative structure, the film falsifies a shot, making people think that the story is entering the virtual world from the real world, but in fact, it is a dream from the first picture. After the four-layer game was nested, the real world was edited to the end of the film. When the audience thought it was clear, the security guard said again: Is this reality or a game? This should be a narrative trick.
If the important thing in a movie is not what story it tells, but how to tell it in a cinematic way, then this movie should do it: show the confusion between the virtual and the real. Not only the audience is confused, but the protagonist is also confused. Only at the end can it be understood that the players who were online together were placed at different levels in the game: "reality", "game", "game in game", and this kind of indistinguishable trouble between true and false has become profound. .
I was very impressed with the two lines in the film. First, the male protagonist, as a rookie in the game, said that he found that there was no free will in this game, because he had to act according to the character's setting: estrus, eating disgusting food, murdering murderously, and could not resist. The heroine said: Just watching this real world is exciting enough. I think this film really does not go too deep into the topic of "free will", but focuses on "experience". True to its name: sensory play. There is no need for free will, and the mere experience is enough to create a confusion of truth and falsehood.
Second, the owner of the gas station said that the female protagonist changed his life. The male protagonist asked: You used to open a gas station, but you still operate a gas station now? The boss said: yes, but he opened up another world, so this world became acceptable. The female protagonist thinks the real world is "safe but boring", so she creates games - dirty, disgusting, and perverted games in the eyes of the male protagonist. Seeing this not only makes people reflect on whether human beings are a little bit of a demon. Constantly pursue the satisfaction of desires, and in the era of peace and prosperity, they are more inclined to pursue excitement. We tend to think that the human instinct is to store energy and escape danger, a tendency that seems contradictory, but it is not. Because it's just a "game". Just like the heroine who is the "top game designer" in the title tells everyone: No matter what happens, don't panic. Meaning in the real world you will be fine. It's a disengagement of consciousness, senses, and body—very post-human.
Dewey believes that avoiding danger is human instinct, and the certainty of ideas, principles, and beliefs can bring more security. The 1999 film imagines: what if a game told you that the principles of the game are safe and non-hazardous, and that you could experience a world full of danger? Its answer is: everyone is crazy about it. This has to make people think about another instinct of human beings to avoid danger: curiosity. But curiosity killed the cat, especially in the era when humans have become the creators of technology. Humans may very much need to use a future vision to put the brakes on the current technological frenzy -- when it can still be stopped. Because in the end it's not the technology itself that causes the real problem, it's the humans. It should be said that technology is not neutral. In Heidegger's words, appliances are intentional. They form a whole with the user as a whole, and appliances have value in this whole. Even if our original intention is not to use technology to transform human beings, technology does change and affects human beings, which is determined by the nature of technology. In the film, the real game designer is killed at the end, accused of "distorting human society" and persecuting human beings. This is probably a technical ethics issue. When games and technologies cross the ethical boundaries between real and virtual (or "bottom line" is more appropriate), terrible danger and confusion will arise.
Finally, let’s talk about other viewing experiences. Before the final truth, I have always had two confusions that are close to logic bugs, but it can be explained in the end. First of all, the female protagonist appeared as a top game designer and video game goddess, but when she brought the rookie male protagonist into the pit to play games, she did not show the demeanor of an advanced player. Although she has to answer the male protagonist's silly questions from time to time, danger is coming The male lead is still a little more reliable. Get excited without strategy. Especially when she mistakenly thought that her real drive was poisoned, it was the male protagonist who saw something was wrong and told her that we were still in the game, this is not your real drive, and it was important to run for your life. Of course, the ending tells us that the heroine is not a designer and a game master, but just one of the popular game fans.
In addition, this set of game equipment is really weird: the wiring like a long flesh-colored umbilical cord, the fleshy chrysanthemum-shaped socket (it also hurts to look at it), the deformed amphibian driver, disinfected with saliva to prevent infection... damp, sticky, as if stepping into the mud Ba's dubbing is also excellent... Not to mention how vividly Cronenberg's taste is presented in the film, I am curious that the dissected bloody drive presented by the camera is like a dissected strange animal, With nerves, DNA, etc., how can such an animal upload and download a game? Maybe this is the future technology that is hard to imagine (cover your face). But it is worth mentioning that such futuristic technology has changed the usual mechanical artificial intelligence and embarked on a completely different biochemical style. Cyborgs are generally biomechanized, but here it is a complete biomechanicalization of machinery. These whimsy can stop at the end: because there are no umbilical cords, biological drives, just the more familiar mechanical headsets and hand connections. Perhaps the film also feels that this is more imaginable.
Another feeling is that the final reversal seems to be a bit hasty: the male protagonist said, I didn’t expect it, in fact, I am also a realist, so I have no socket, now I have it, it is a sacrifice for the revolution, and now I want to annihilated you. The heroine said, you didn't expect it. I knew from the beginning that you were a spy. I just put explosives in your mouth, goodbye. One sentence, one action constitutes a reversal, and the previous plot lacks a foreshadowing worth pondering. In contrast, the previous rhythm is relatively protracted and the plot is not strong. Maybe because it's a "sensory" game.
View more about eXistenZ reviews
