Recently, I heard some fans sigh that since the movie "Space Exploration Editorial Department" has such a good reputation, why is the box office far less than expected? Of course, none of us have the answer, after all, every movie has its own life. But I often wonder, after three years of the epidemic, everyone doesn't love movies so much?
But that's not always the case. Thinking back to last year, there were actually special cases such as "Hidden in the Dust". Although the initial theatrical performance of "Hidden in the Dust" was also tepid, through the follow-up efforts of the video platform, the final box office successfully exceeded 100 million. It is indeed unexpected that a low-cost domestic literary film can obtain such box office results.
The topic we want to talk about today is actually not about the box office, but about "donkeys". Recently, some fans have a whim and summarized the movies that have been infested with "donkeys" in the past two years, and the most typical are the following four: "Hidden in the Dust" and "Space Exploration Editorial Department" in China, and "Inisherin's Banshee" and "Donkey Cry" abroad.
Director Li Ruijun hand-painted: Looking at the swallow, looking upside down at the donkey
In "Hidden in the Dust" directed by Li Ruijun, the donkey that "can't be driven away" is, in a sense, the incarnation of the male protagonist Ma Youtie. Ma Youtie finally said to the donkey: "Let you go, you won't go, let people call for a lifetime, haven't you been summoned enough?" You really are a! "He seems to be scolding the donkey, but in fact, he is scolding himself. And this donkey is like the epitome of the laborers who are destined to suffer in this land.
The donkey that "Hidden in the Dust" can't drive away
The donkey in Kong Dashan's "Space Exploration Editorial Department" has a more abstract metaphorical color. For the scene of "the donkey chasing the carrot in front of him" in the film, director Kong Dashan said that this is a setting of "borrowing a donkey as a metaphor for people", in front of each of us, in fact, there are more or less carrots or cabbage, which can be understood as our respective meaning systems or reward mechanisms.
"Space Exploration Editorial Office" chases the donkey of the carrot
But there is a scene at the end of the film where the donkey breaks free from all its chains, no longer chasing carrots, but in a pure land with abundant water and grass. According to Buddhism, it has completely detached itself and reached Elysium. Corresponding to Sun Yitong, who "jumped out of the cosmic dimension" in the film, both are enlightened in the true sense, both belong to "jumping out of the three realms, not in the five elements", no longer bothered by the cruel reality.
"Space Exploration Editorial Office" breaks free from the shackles
Look at the donkey in Martin MacDonald's "Inisherin's Banshee", the donkey named Jenny, who eventually choked to death due to accidental ingestion of a broken finger. This extremely dramatic and vicious setting is also the last straw that crushed the friendship between the two male protagonists. In the film, the banshee who travels through the island like a wandering spirit foresees two deaths, but unexpectedly, one of the deaths is this donkey.
"The Banshee of Anisherin" chokes to death by eating a broken finger
The last thing to talk about is naturally the movie "Donkey Call" with the highest amount of "donkey", which was written by the then 85-year-old Polish film master Jez Skolimowski. The film won the Jury Prize in the main competition section of last year's Cannes Film Festival. Although the score on Douban is only 6.8 points, I have a soft spot for it.
2022 "Donkey Call"
Director Jez Skolimowski was one of the screenwriters of Roman Polanski's debut film "Knife in Water". He lived in Los Angeles for more than twenty years before returning to Poland. In recent years, his 1970 movie "Early Spring" has been turned over by many fans to worship, firstly because of the large-scale and the beauty of the male protagonist John Melder-Brown, and secondly, because of the fame of the heroine Jane Esher, and she is also the ex-girlfriend of former Beatles member Paul McCartney.
Director Jez Skolimovsky
1970 "Early Spring"
Of course, what really made director Jez Skolimovsky famous in the international film world were his other masterpieces, including the Berlin Golden Bear Award "Departure", the Cannes Jury Prize "The Call of Death", the Cannes Best Screenplay "Moonlight", the Tokyo Jury Prize "Four Nights with Anna", the Venice Jury Prize "Necessary Killing" and so on. And "Donkey Cries" also rushed into the final list of Oscars for Best International Film.
My understanding of the film "Donkey Call" is: although Donkey EO is the only protagonist and the tandem of the narrative line, the whole story is mainly about people, to be precise, the world of people - society (mainly refers to today's European society).
Some fans believe that this film is a tribute to the classic masterpiece "Batsa the Donkey" by French film master Robert Bresson. So, I will talk about my understanding and opinion of "Donkey Call" by making some comparisons with the film "Donkey Batsa".
Robert Bresson, "Batsa the Donkey"
There are three main differences between the film "Donkey Call" and "Donkey Batsa":
First, in the film "Donkey Batsa", the donkey may not be the only protagonist in the entire story, at least from the scene point of view, the heroine Mary played by Anne Vyazemsky, and the male and male two who have emotional entanglements with her, are also extremely important roles.
But in "Donkey Call", except for Donkey Eo, there are almost no roles that can be called "important", even Eo's hostess Kassandra during the circus, at most, can only be regarded as emotionally important, but there are very few scenes.
"Donkey Call"
Second, Bresson's "Donkey Batsa" has a relatively clear story line, while "Donkey Cry" does not, and the whole appears more fragmented and pictorial (a display of today's European society). As the plot progresses, the people Eo meets, the things he experiences... All these connections, I think, can at best be called a narrative line, not a "story".
"Donkey Call"
Third, it is also a clear difference in the main theme of the two films. The film "Donkey Batsa" has a very strong religious crucifixion, we can see from the soundtrack of the film and the name of the character "Mary", and even the character setting of Donkey Batsa is somewhat symbolic of Jesus Christ. In "Donkey Call", we don't feel this, but more like a contemporary European picture full of chaos, disorder, and absurdity.
"Batsa the Donkey"
The film "Batsa the Donkey" is a 1966 film. As far as I know, that era was facing a rapid secularization of European society and a sharp decline in religious adherents. The donkey is an animal that is Jesus' mount in the New Testament Gospels of the Bible. It is probably no accident that Bresson, with his deep religious complex, would make a movie featuring "donkey" - otherwise why not a horse, an elephant or any other animal?
Bresson on the set of "Donkey Batsa"
At the same time, the donkey also symbolizes ignorance and uncivilization. However, Batsa the Donkey had eaten the "salt of wisdom" and was baptized with holy water. It can be said that this is already a highly "personalized" donkey. In "Donkey Call" more than half a century later, these settings are gone, and the donkey as the protagonist has been reduced to a complete animal, and its initial identity is a donkey in the circus for performance tasks.
"Donkey Call"
The night show at the beginning of the film "Donkey Call" is Eo's last farewell performance, which is also his last night in this circus. The next day, the circus declared bankruptcy and EO was recovered by relevant organizations. Following Eo's travels, the film shows us in great detail the chaotic scene of the European land after the religious (God) exit.
First up were the economic downturn (the circus went bankrupt), followed by self-talking animal protection groups, the spread of far-right sentiment (football matches and subsequent disputes), animal trafficking (still selling donkeys posing as horses), immigration (more and more blacks in Europe), and so on – and finally, religion belatedly appeared (young Italian priests).
Today, however, religion seems to be useless and doesn't solve anything (Eo dies in the end), because the religion has collapsed internally—worship has become a ritual, and the pastor not only participates in gambling, but also has an affair with his stepmother (there is some allusion to the real church).
This is how the director sees Europe today by following Eo's travels. Therefore, although Eo is the storyline stringer, a large part of the film is still about human society - the director does not want us to completely substitute Eo's perspective, but wants us to use Eo's gaze (with a certain sense of alienation) to see the world we live in. So, what exactly is the positioning of Donkey (Eo) in this film?
In my opinion, the director's positioning of the donkey is rather subtle and vague, and it may be intentional. A short comment on Douban asks the question: "Is the animal (donkey) in the image anthropomorphic (perceived) or purely heterogeneous (unknowable)?" "I think it's definitely not the former, if it is, it's equivalent to remaking a contemporary version of "Donkey Batsa", so it's not interesting, it's better not to make it; But it is not exactly the latter, if it is treated according to the latter, it should be completely the subjective perspective of the donkey, so that the whole film will seem too experimental.
Moreover, this experiment may be completely failed and meaningless. Because we humans can photograph the subjective perspective of animals (donkeys), but we can't capture their emotions and thoughts - I don't know if cutting-edge scientific research can clearly capture the spiritual world of certain animals (if they have them). But even so, logically we can only interpret and describe the world as we see it from a human perspective and a mind/emotional framework.
Overall, the treatment of the film "Donkey Call" is closer to the latter, but not quite. We can see that Eo, the donkey, seems to have feelings (Eo tears when he leaves the circus and says goodbye to Kassandra), and recalls the happy times with Kassandra in the past as he wanders. More importantly, it has a name—and to have a name is to be given subjectivity, at least partially.
But we can also see that the film gives Eo close-ups many times, but we can't see any of its "expressions". The camera often shoots from Eo's point of view, but for everything it has encountered/seen/experienced, Eo seems to be more at a loss (dumb, woody, confused). Does all this make sense to it?
Finally, there is another point at the end of the film that I don't quite understand. When Eo "heard" Kassandra's call to it, he left the countess's house. Does it want to go back and find Kassandra? But it was not found, but instead entered the slaughterhouse.
Can this be interpreted as a failure of the animal (donkey) leap to the realm of consciousness (man)? ——Although I am not in favor of using the idea of "all refined animals want to become people" in mainland literary and artistic works.
Author| Cao Lin; Public number| Watch movies and see death
Edit| Riding a rooftop teenager; Please indicate the source of reproduction