When I was an undergraduate, I began to be madly infatuated with Woolf. I read her "To the Lighthouse", "Mrs. Dalloway", "The Wave" and other works, and the last one read "Orlando". Yiming's translation can be said to be just right, so that at the time he thought the text was so amazing that he wanted to copy the entire book.
After watching the movie, I want to give it four stars. After all, Woolf's writing power is beyond the reach of film language. The whole film creates a dreamy and classical atmosphere, which hides the game of sensibility and rationality, lingering with the atmosphere of freedom and rebellion. Looking at the world for 400 years from an androgynous perspective, searching for life and death, sex, politics, poetry, etc., and finally riding a motorcycle to the "future", which is beautiful and beautiful.
But it has to be said that the film's interpretation of the original work interferes or hinders the audience's thinking about the original work to a certain extent. It is understandable that the expression method of weakening the stream of consciousness may bring better movie viewing effect, and some details cannot be conveyed by the movie picture, so I always feel that this movie is missing after the magnificent picture, causing the hesitant to speak. (not unfinished) situation.
Likewise, the superb staring shots in the film are where the text falls short. And Orlando's labyrinthine run in the garden after becoming a woman also takes the viewer into her subjective world: is this the new captivity? Or free exile? Are there new pursuits?
Read Orlando again, Orlando under the Oak.
View more about Orlando reviews
