Interestingly, the director himself wasn't too fond of this title. He initially planned to name the film "End," but it was deemed unsuitable for mass distribution.
I believe the director may have had a completely different title in mind, but that's not so important. The title itself has little connection to the core of the film, or only a tangential one. It's like how "kind of" or "like" is used in English - filler words that don't add much meaning but set a certain tone. Similarly, the film's title serves as a way to set the viewer's rhythm for the story.
The key idea of the film, as I see it, is the cycle of abuse, which is incredibly hard to break. The characters in the film seem to find satisfaction in being abused, while the abusers take pleasure in controlling others. All three stories presented show us that breaking this vicious cycle is nearly impossible. The victims return to their aggressors, and the abusers are more than happy to take them back. In the end, despite the obvious violence, whether physical or emotional, everyone seems to be content with the relationships as they are.
These relationships are portrayed as a form of dominance, a sort of game with pain, where abuse manifests through extreme forms of control - from physical violence to psychological manipulation. The film raises the question of why people remain in such cycles, though unfortunately, I didn't have the chance to watch the film multiple times to analyze the plot and details more deeply.
Nevertheless, the artist's role is not to provide a final answer but rather to raise the topic and make the audience think.
Personally, it seems to me that the director is starting to sexually abuse Emma Stone a bit too much, but we enjoy that, don't we? 😉
No comments:
Post a Comment