正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

This man went camping alone deep in the woods, like no cellphone reception deep. Being by himself, he wasn’t armed, he didn’t have a dog with him or any other means of defending himself. In the middle of the pitch black night all of a sudden his tent collapses,...

2,195,019 次观看 • 5 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Andrei Tarkovsky on Ingmar Bergman's Shame (1968): "Let us look at Bergman's Shame. The film doesn't contain a single 'actor's piece' for the performer to 'give away' the director's purpose, to play the conception of the persona, his attitude to it, to assess it in relation to the overall idea; and the latter is entirely hidden within the dynamic of the characters' lives, at one with it. The people in the film are crushed by circumstances; they act only in accordance with their situation, to which they themselves are subordinate; they make no attempt to proffer us any idea, any perspective on what is happening, or to draw any conclusion. All of that is left to the film as a whole, to the director's vision. And how superbly it is accomplished! You cannot say in simple terms who amongst them is good or bad. I could never say that von Sydow is a bad man. They are all partly good and partly bad, each in his own way. No judgements are passed, because there is no hint of tendentiousness in any of the actors, and the circumstances of the film are used by the director to explore the human possibilities which they test, and not for a moment in order to illustrate a thesis. Max von Sydow's character is developed with masterly power. He is a very good man; a musician; kind and sensitive. It turns out that he is a coward. But by no means every bold man is a good human being, and cowards are not always scoundrels. Of course, he is weak and irresolute. His wife is far stronger than he, so much so that she can overcome her fear. The hero lacks that strength. He is tormented by his own weakness, vulnerability, lack of resilience; he tries to hide, to cower in a corner, not to see and not to hear; and he does this like a child, naively and with complete sincerity. But when circumstances nevertheless force him to defend himself, he instantly turns into a scoundrel. He loses all that was best in him; but the drama and absurdity of his situation is that as he is now he becomes necessary to his wife, who, in her turn, looks to him for protection and succour instead of despising him as she always had. When he beats her about the face and says 'Get out!' she goes crawling after him. There is something here of the age-old idea of passive good and active evil; but its expression is immensely complex. At the beginning of the film the hero cannot even kill a chicken, but as soon as he has found a way of defending himself he becomes a cruel cynic. He has something of Hamlet: my view is that the Prince of Denmark perishes not as a result of the duel, when he dies physically, but immediately after the 'rat' scene, when he understands how irreversible are those laws of life which have forced him, a man of humanity and intellect, to act like the inferior people who inhabit Elsinore. Von Sydow is now a sinister character, afraid of nothing: he kills; will not raise a finger to save his fellows; pursues only his own interests. The point is that you have to be a person of great integrity to feel fear in the face of the foul necessity to kill and humiliate. And by shedding that fear and apparently acquiring courage, a person in fact loses his spiritual strength and intellectual honesty and parts from his innocence. War is the obvious catalyst for the cruel, anti-human elements in people. Bergman uses the war in this film exactly as he uses the heroine's illness in Through a Glass Darkly: to explore his view of man." — "Sculpting in Time" by Andrei Tarkovsky (translated by Kitty Hunter-Blair, 1987)

RadiantFilm

27,723 次观看 • 5 个月前

Jared Kushner's best advice: "Constant refinement of association" Surround yourself with high-quality people in everything you do. Once you see what true excellence looks like, you become intolerant of mediocrity. When you have a friend group that consists of elite people, growth, discipline, & continuous improvement become the default. David Senra, of David Senra & David Senra . . . "The best piece of advice that I was ever given came from—one of the best pieces of advice I was ever given came from—Jared Kushner, who’s a good friend. I actually talked to him a few hours ago. And this is also what I’ve told you one of the first times we talked. That’s Ivanka’s husband, right? That is correct. It’s constant refinement of association. And Jared is one of these people where it’s like, he will tell you the truth if he likes you. Well, first of all, he wouldn’t spend time with you if he didn’t like you. But he says stuff to me that, if people heard it, they’d be like, “Damn.” Like, “That might even be rude.” It’s like, no, no, no—he’s a very direct person, but he’s saying that because I know he wants my best interest, and he wants me to do well. And he said—he’s like, “I benefited hugely from your podcast.” So his whole thing is like, he’s seen me in environments where he’s like, “These people are not good enough for you.” He’s just like—like, “You have built one of—” This is what he told me. He’s like, “I know all the elite people in the world. They all listen to your podcast.” And he’s pushed me on a lot of different things, in a very direct but truthful manner. And I think it’s really, really important."

Molly O’Shea

20,938 次观看 • 6 个月前