So they abandoned the main plot with the footage, in favour for shallow political guilt tripping. Yawn. Tell me again how harbouring those from a sunken, corrupt government is Le Big Bad. Blood may run deep in the history of nations. But we fought for ours, and you fled from yours. What part would you wish to see validated? Ripe trife.
After finally finishing the movie, I can honestly say that I don't quite understand where your interpretation is coming from. Majit does not attack Georges directly out of revenge or a will to liberate himself, instead his actions are very indirect and very mysterious, as is the actions of whoever is sending the tapes (which might still be Majit). And their shared history included Georges actively ruining Majit's life, not passively tolerating his suffering. I still like the movie, I still think it's interesting to think about and I still agree with a lot of the values you reflect in this video, I just don't see the connection.
I see what you mean. I’d have to get back to my own analysis and the movie to give a comprehensive answer (it’s been a few years). However, the underlying motive, in my reading at least, is that the incomprehensible nature of the actions done unto us in the present are seen as an unjustified ominous revenge for something equally incomprehensible done in the past. Thank you for taking the time to write out your thoughts. I will think about this next time I watch the movie. There is always a new reading of text :)
Just finished watching this film, and your breakdown of it makes me realize just how many countless layers are bubbling below the surface. Thank you for this wonderful analysis video, definitely got a new subscriber! :)
I also think that building a perfect house is what jack truely wanted but like steven pressfield says resistance is so strong that an artist would rather do anything to distract themselves, create mental disorders and all but they would not work on their art.
Because he absorbs the feelings all around him, he feels responsible to help, overthinking about people's problem while he can't speak or rest about it. The whole things weighed him, and he can't find his 'shade'. So he feels like there's no way out, he choose to end himself. Well, that's my opinion about it.
Too much pressure from the relationship in his family. His brother's in jail, his father hates his brother and basically disowned him, telling everyone he only has one son. Being the younger brother, of course he has some respect for his brother, but he probably hates that his father does that because maybe he still sees redemption from his brother. He's also heavily pressured to do well academically, which is shown in the film. With all the stuff with his brother going on, he can't focus in school, which he knows will likely disappoint his parents. But perhaps, his suicide is more about just giving up, but to bring his father and brother closer together. Without the suicide, the older brother may not have tried to come back to the family and attempt to be a decent person, and the father would continue to hate everything about him. Through losing something precious, you're left to cherish little of what you have left
I just watched the movie and I think the relationships between the characters were portayed excellently in the movie too, your analysis is great. Keep up the good work
You should not interfere if we have clean water or not. We have not asked you for help. We will figure it out. The way of cleaning water is killing millions of innocents and creating famine?
'The colonised and the colonisers are binary opposites.' Sure, but only for as long as the colonising is still directly occuring and the coloniser directly involved in the colonisation. Otherwise, attributable blame is merely manufactured for the purpose of insufficiently discriminate revenge, not emancipation. Whilst indifference is the focus of critique, second-hand guilt and paranoia generated by the actions of manipulative governments is worthy of dicussion, too.
Agree. I think the movie does a good job, like every good piece of art, to stimulate a conversation about the exact thing you described: should we merely accept the colonised’s “need for revenge” as an indisputable right born out of generational trauma (what many revenge-fantasy movies surficially do); or is the deeper understanding of the current situation everybody is in tied more so to the contemporary discourse of those traumas. Love conversations like this that go beyond the simple analysis of narrative structures of Marvel-esque plots.
What led to the divide between the west and the rest: the age of enlightenment. Otherwise known as, the rise of individual rights and freedoms, which included a free market. Once the shackles of the individual was removed, the momentum was unstoppable. Were there (arguably) unintended, collateral ugly consequences? Of course. This is the human race we're talking about, after all.
its funny... the 1st world countries blame all their problems on 3rd world countries..... its not our fault your governments suck... get over it. the usa is one of the youngest countries... and look what we achieved. in such a small amount of time.. i was just lucky to be born here man. life sucks sometimes.. thats just the way it is. but its noones fault... those other countries where poor before the usa.. and they will be after if they dont change their ways.. we donate enough.. put ourselves in a dam hole
Good analysis. Gave me a deeper idea of what this movie is about. Some important things are missing though. The relationship of the child with his mom (or father also), the abstraction in the ending, what truly happened with the records since it's not the main character imagination or consciousness, etc. I'm still looking for more clarification.
Yeah, great movies give you a lot to work with long after you finished watching them. The things you’ve listed here made me think about “Cache” again from different points of interest. Much appreciated
Just watched this movie, thought that it's just a simple horror movie, didn't know it relates to post-colonialism in a hidden manner. Thanks for the analysis, very good quality. But actually, who is the one set up the hidden camera? I still have no idea.
I guess this question isn't to be answered in a literal way, since the post-colonial symbolism most likely overrides a logical narrative in the movie. But if you would want to try so, you could suspect Majid, Majid's (and maybe in cooperation with Georges') son or if you trust everybody saying the truth, somebody unknown. However, the knowlegde of the video creator hints to somebody who knows all those details of Georges' past (even Majid's residence).
Well made video. Though I would argue that radish isnt completely evil. He has showed sign of wanting to be a good citizen (like for example he kept his promise of not smoking in the bentley). I think he is an example of a troubled child who was not given any help. He is very poor and only had his grandmother. He denied the money because he did not need it anymore. He hoped that ho's family would help his grandmother but they didnt. It was later explain why radish cut the guy's hand off. Ho was bullied and radish couldnt take it. Ho then put all the blame on radish as he said. Radish thinks that ho is his friend, but as the film progresses ho just thinks of radish as a guy that just brings trouble. I believe that given the right circumstances, he would have been good
Every analysis is always there to expand the conversation about the topic (hopefully in a way that ignites interest to think about it from new perspectives). Your take based on behaviourism is extremely valid and something I hadn’t touched on in the vid because… well… time. I appreciate the input and I am glad that such thoughtful people like you watched the video. Thank you
imo it's super telling when you see the first shot of radish and ho in the courtroom. despite ho not necessarily having the best relationship with his family, his side of the table is filled with people, while radish is surrounded by empty chairs.
