我想结束这一切

查理·考夫曼的剧本构思奇特，充满了无拘无束的幻想和荒诞不羁的人物，情节发展也是令人捉摸不透，自然获得了鬼才编剧的美誉。他早在1999年就凭天马行空的《傀儡人生》而一举成名，进入到千禧年后，更接连创作出《人性》、《改编剧本》、《美好心灵的永恒阳光》等剧本，捧红了斯派克·琼斯和米歇尔·贡德里这两位以拍摄MV起家的文艺片导演。直到2008年考夫曼才执导自己的处女作《纽约提喻法》，没想到的是，等了12年他才再次执导真人电影，那就是今年这部作品《我想结束这一切》。

尽管相隔多年重出江湖，但是考夫曼依旧不按常理出牌，在貌似简单的男女情感故事里编出超级诡异的情节，烧脑程度直逼同期上映诺兰的《信条》。众说纷纭的解读似乎成为了这部奇作的最高待遇，从细节中抓到蛛丝马迹并完整拼凑出剧情成为影迷欣喜若狂的时刻。对于读过原著小说的观众来说，这无异于是一次绝妙的体验，而对于大部分观众而言，毫无准备地看完这部考夫曼的新作，如坠雾中和莫名其妙才是最真实的自然反应。

考夫曼大胆地将主人公的心理投射转化成一对年轻情侣，两人驾车前往男主角家中的路上闲聊，两人所有的对白和内心想法均出自主人公临死前的思绪和意识。这种意识流的叙事令作品呈现出玄幻飘渺的观感，不合逻辑的情节和超现实的画面接踵而来，女主角的名字（甚至面孔）不断变化，而在男朋友家中样貌年龄不断变换的父母这段情节最为瞩目。

▲在男主角家中的情节最为惊艳

然而，在我看来，这种不断变换人称视点的意识流叙事方式似乎更适合文学作品，因为在文学作品中的叙事人称的转换往往轻而易举，毕竟只是文字。而在电影里，这种叙事观点的变换往往要依赖影像，要么是回忆，要么是相似的人物。在这部作品中，这种操作显然未如人意。尽管老校工的线索在影片开始便出现，但是在大部分叙事过程中都隐藏不见，前置的人物是误导观众的男女主角，将实际不存在的人物当作重点角色来进行刻画，这种叙事策略相当冒险。

观众已花去四分之三的时间对男女主角产生了共情，到最后秘密揭露之后，观众要迅速调整已有的感受，并将这种复杂的观感从男女主角移情到这个老头身上，一时间难以让观众找到两者之间的情感共通点是意料之中的事。尽管导演后来用一场发生在校园里的舞蹈场景来努力实现这种情感的过渡，这种舞台剧的表现手法在考夫曼处女作《纽约提喻法》里令人惊艳，那部影片的主人公是戏剧导演，他导演的戏剧与自己的人生逐渐合二为一。然而，这种手法在此却带来生硬突兀的感觉，此前主人公幻想出来的男女主角情节，根本没有融洽地衔接上这场主人公现身参与的舞蹈表演。

▲绝大部分情节是两人在车内的对话

除此之外，考夫曼显然也没能掌握好对白与影像表现两者的分寸。男女主角两人在汽车里大段的对话戏份显得枯燥单调，从物理到诗歌，再到影评人对卡萨维蒂名作《醉酒的女人》的分析等等不一而足。丰富而芜杂的话题有过于炫耀的成分，也许还有导演夹带私货的嫌疑。这部分在车内谈话的处理基本上照搬了文学手法，似乎欠缺了一些影像上的表达。相比之下，女主角在男主角父母家中的段落明显有趣多了，不停变换年龄和容貌的父母，优雅诡异的室内设计等等都将文字中难以实现的部分得到出彩的影像化处理。

尽管这部作品没能如导演12年前的处女作《纽约提喻法》令人惊艳，但是考夫曼执导的作品主人公都不约而同地具有无法摆脱的宿命和悲剧色彩。死亡这个话题一直萦绕着主人公的思绪，无论是纽约的戏剧导演，还是籍籍无名的老校工，他们在人生道路上遇到过不少美好的事物，也曾得到过爱情和亲情的眷顾，但是到最后却落得孑然一身的无依状态。幸福对他们而言要么是转瞬即逝的珍稀体验，要么是在绵绵不绝的回忆/幻想中用来聊以自慰的兴奋剂。死亡和孤独才是他们最终的归宿，这也是考夫曼导演的作品中永恒不变的主题。

——《你无须在时间中继续前行，或许》

本文首发于2020年9月12日公众号【陀螺电影】，此版相较原文略有更新和改动。

前言

美国著名编剧、导演查理·考夫曼（Charlie Kaufman）上周五在网飞上线了他的新片《我想结束这一切》。这部改编自加拿大作家伊安·雷德（Iain Reid）同名小说的作品，被考夫曼认为是他最后一次执导电影。

伊安·雷德同名小说《我想结束这一切》

考夫曼在1999年完成《成为约翰·马尔科维奇》的剧本之后，凭借天马行空，桀骜不驯的想象力在好莱坞一举成名。

《人性》《改编剧本》《暖暖内含光》海报

而后接连创作的《人性》（2001），《改编剧本》（2002），《暖暖内含光》（2004）都继承了他一贯的风格——精巧的设定，繁复的构思，“语不惊人死不休”的脑洞。

2008年亲自执导的电影《纽约提喻法》更是登峰造极，在戏剧和电影中创造了一个同现实一样庞杂的世界。

考夫曼不为常人所预测的剧情走向，和情感厚度，让他二十多年来在剧作趋向保守扁平的好莱坞成为一股持续的清流。

正因如此，我在为他作评前便考虑另辟蹊径，以一种不同于寻常影评，甚至反影评的方式切入考夫曼的内心。他高度戏剧化、碎片化的创作正像剧中人所说，是一场“细节无数…稍纵即逝的盛大演出”。一旦沉迷于对每个细节一一解读，我们将失去考夫曼贯彻故事始终，浑然一体的忧郁；

而如果妄想三言两语就提炼他的精髓的话，则会因为失却了迷人瞬间的点缀，陷入堆砌文字的老生常谈。

这次为考夫曼量身定做的尝试，试着在二者之间找到平衡，首当其冲的不是重构，不是估价，也不是分解，而是以文字重现他的知觉场，用意象的暧昧和宽广，来临摹考夫曼刁钻又狂放的灵魂。

《我想结束这一切》

I'm Thinking of Ending Things

导演: 查理·考夫曼

编剧: 查理·考夫曼 / 伊恩·里德

主演: 杰西·普莱蒙 / 杰西·巴克利 / 托妮·科莱特 / 大卫·休里斯 / 盖伊·博伊德

类型: 剧情

制片国家/地区: 美国

语言: 英语

上映日期: 2020-08-28(美国点映) / 2020-09-04(美国)

片长: 134分钟 编辑/冷狗

排版/小浣熊

荧幕回到那一片纯澈的雪地时，端坐其上的是疏朗的天空，和一尊汽车形状的静默。早晨的日光是如此的详和与寂寥，明朗中现出一丝死神雁过留痕的阴影。

《我想结束这一切》海报

群鸟的啼啭从瑟缩寒枝上回荡到乡野的空气间。

落雪的黄昏如果像人之将死一般黯淡，雪后初晴就仿佛定格了音容笑貌的逝者，一扇开向永恒阳光的眼睛。

这是考夫曼新作《我想结束这一切》的最后一个画面。也是我在很长一段时间以来，第一次在一部电影结束后，依旧愿意心无杂念地凝视、静坐、噤声、屏息。

希望自己的生命交融在这幅清朗的雪景中，随着死亡一般邈远的风景在思绪里伸展，不顾尽头。

疲倦感，我们最熟悉的老朋友，从《筋疲力尽》开始，影史就似乎同它形影不离，在考夫曼的手中它再一次显出日久弥新的况味。

这次，它附着在车窗上，猪圈里，满载的语音信箱，又或者哭笑之间的沉寂时分：好像被裹挟在风雪中，一夜之间为世界的每个角落铺上了奇形怪状的孤独。

故事开始在一个冬之将至的傍晚，杰克带着女友回家和父母见面。

在一路白莹莹的原野上，他们谈论消逝的记忆，女友颓唐的诗行，和失去了存活欲的生命。

走进杰克儿时的农庄，女友却好像踏入了时间和身份的迷宫。她丢失了名字，丢失了历史和未来，在餐桌上被尴尬地追问。她在房间里见到罹患阿尔茨海默病的杰克父亲，阴阳怪气的母亲，装满同一件黑色制服的洗衣机，神出鬼没的狗。

好不容易驶上回家的路，大雪依旧肆虐，杰克变得焦躁易怒，沉默寡言。他们在决定从陶西甜品店买了两杯冰淇淋之后，走上一条通向杰克中学的小路。在这个空空如也的偌大校园里，女友发现一个垂垂老矣的清道夫，才意识到整个自己和杰克的故事——只是这个老人临终前孤独的回忆。

如果我们还记得起上一个冬天时世界发生了什么，我们又都是怎么熬过的，这个故事便不再像听上去地那样自言自语，遥不可及。疫情和寒流一同在窗外肆虐的时分，我们蜷居在公寓里，捂着温热又残缺的肢体，操着陌生的乡音和邦人试探奄奄一息的未来。

天色白中透病，好像每个人的枕上也按捺着一场经年的大雪。教堂和舞厅一起空了，我们关上门扉，收起裙摆，小小的房间就是一条举步维艰的雪路，霜冻结满了双手，通向地球停转时分。

同样的寒冷证明着故事和我们发生在和同一个时空。还有多少温热的心脏，或者萌芽的未来让我们自发地攥紧手中的热情？

邻里日复一日地维持相爱和劳作的表象，几分是出于真情，几分是出于惯性，又要彼此相瞒到几时？

如果生命只是童年的延续，习惯的照旧，或者信息过载的容器，那我们和一句名人名言，一具被谎言寄生的行尸走肉，一只被预先设定好生命程序的昆虫又有何不同？这些行走的陈词滥调在剧作家的心中被不厌其烦地重复，正因生活中它们是周而复始的鸡肋。

言语和肢体并不相通，情人在某些瞬间只觉得彼此吵闹。

杰克为下车喝一杯咖啡，“墨索里尼的火车”和女友打岔，在荒唐的反覆里消磨感情的韧性。

我们这才认清，尴尬和琐碎已经像蚂蚁一样，爬满了生活的脚踝，甩不干净，一旦放任不管又瘙痒难耐。

女友在车上望着杰克的嘴唇，他似乎在提出某种邀约，但他的声音如同隔着树洞一般模糊，神情像陌生人一样焦虑又冷淡。

这样的瞬间稍纵即逝，但却像透过了坚实的伪装，瞥见了每段亲密关系的真相：

肌肤，甚至血缘相亲的我们，平日委曲求全，下意识却仍然是彼此的刺猬。

在农庄惬意的火炉旁，桌上的烤火腿来自农场被蛆虫啃掉了下半截的猪；老派落后的父母在女友面前吹嘘儿子的“事迹”，回到厨房之后大声拌嘴，杰克为他们不加节制的唐突感到羞耻；

女友一会儿被唤作露西，再一阵子叫做路易莎·露西亚，在看似无尽的芳名间迁徙；无独有偶，她的身份也跟着场景的变换，在神经学，绘画，量子物理，老年学和电影赏析之间游弋。

一夜里，她在时间的长河里出没无常，看见杰克的双亲过去，未来和死后的模样：她交横跋扈，他游手好闲，她强颜欢笑，他神智昏沉，她苟延残喘，他孑然一身。

女友在杰克的房间看见一本陌生的诗集，上面赫然印着自己的诗，一架子量子物理的专著，一本保琳凯尔的电影评论，又在地下室发现为自己的风景画实际上全是布莱克洛克（Ralph Albert Blakelock）所作：她从前认为亲口说出的“话语”始终只是对他人的移植。

屋外的雪下得更紧了，似乎没有寒冷会因为一个家庭的湮灭而稍作叹息。女友指着杰克墙上的一张照片，他们同时发现画框中的孩子都是自己。

电光火石的刹那，我们参透了之前每一步踉跄，每一次错岔，每一只松动的螺丝，每一个偏移的印象，都源自于一位被遗落的老人日益疏松的记忆。他不知道该将女友放在时间线的何处，赐予她什么身份，因为她实际上从未存在，只是他从读过的书，看过的电影和回忆中拼凑出来的假面。

他在冬天重新光临尘世的这天，傍晚起身，换上清道夫的制服，望向家中的一切，舞台上青春水银泻地的姑娘，眼中满是回忆的尸体。

在他临终前的幻象里，世界幻化成了一对恋情正浓的男女，和他们眼中一幅幅流动的奇观。他看见生命中所剩的每一个角色，被安插在各不相识的四处，随时被忧虑和恐惧牵动，掉进时间的冰窟。

他用一顿黄灯红火下的农场晚餐和自己的房屋告别，走上风霜交加的再下一程。停顿，见自己艳羡的美好躯体最后一面。她们是演出音乐剧的少女，只懂得对他指指点点地讪笑。直到另一个长着疹子，脸圆嘟嘟的女孩子向他伸出了手，她是学校里被排斥的学生。

她对老人说：“你没有必要继续在时间中前行，你可以在这里留下。” 咽下的言外之意好像在说“早已被时间风干的躯体，丢了也罢。是时候闭上眼睛了，和我们一样化作回忆吧”。

这个掌握了每一项杰克曾经尝试学习，渴望的技能的女友，其实是清洁工梦里被理想化的对象，而杰克也是他在这个妄想里投射（美化）的自己。女友在妄想里对他父母的乖僻，他的出身，他的掉书袋和不近人情，他“腐烂的脚趾”百依百顺，毫无怨言，正是对他在现实中孤独终老命运的补偿。

可以想象，现实中好吃甜食的他大腹便便，眼高手低，一肚半吊子的知识却干着门房的活计，父亲缺乏教养，母亲唐突莽撞，无脑吹捧儿子，双亲还时常吵架（餐后渗入客厅的背景音，老人在车厢内的闪回）。老人无休止地做着美好恋情的梦，所以冰淇淋杯一个接一个地堆满了垃圾箱。

究竟什么时候，什么时候这一切可以结束？一段没有意义，没有终点的爱情？以及被这段感情所提喻的，带着“深刻的，难以言说的，无可修复的错误”的人生？

而不是在永恒濒死的循环里重复着买冰桶-吃不下-成杯丢掉的无能怪圈？或许这便是那个一直在电话里萦绕的声音想问的唯一一个问题。

文艺复兴的人类带着新鲜的猛劲，从中世纪的集体蒙昧中款步走来，他带血的喉咙里也只有一个问题，然而却是另一个：

“生存还是毁灭？”

四百年后的人类失去了全部的朝气，全部和死神搏命的激情，一口黑色的静脉血只希望生命放开他的衣领的时刻早一些，更早一些。

我们可以把这个古怪，晦涩，褪色和尴尬的世界当做空巢老人颓丧的发明——轻松的结论既合乎考夫曼苦心铺排的伏笔，也方便我们像看完一本志怪小说一样，在电影结束之后将这个细思恐极的故事抛之脑后。

可是…或许还有另一种可能？我们为什么不可以把这一整个拥有自己“物理”定律的世界，看做考夫曼对真实生活的又一个提喻？或许不是老年人记忆消退，事物之间才失去了分野，而是主宰这个世界的健全人太标榜清醒，太喜好在各自间划清莫须有的界限？

即使在我们身上，“记忆”也喜欢猝不及防地开起玩笑，我们想起《一一》中的NJ，他回到家，绕了一大圈，却一时忘记了自己是来找什么的。或许“记忆”本就是一个布满讹误和空隙的马蜂窝？

考夫曼恰恰在采访中透露，他希望赐予这个被幻想出的世界具有真实和独立性。与其把这层叙事看作彻底的虚构，莫如看作蛛丝马迹勾连的平行宇宙。正因如此，女友才一路想着“我想结束这一切”，杰克也在和谐的表象下显出消极的老态：现实中清洁工的自卑在无形挤压着梦境的边缘，直到女友和真实的清洁工在走廊中碰面，他们拥抱，洒泪，离别。这象征着他接受了这一幻象的不可能性，于是随后“杰克”的形象在音乐剧中被“清道夫”亲手消灭。

佐杜罗夫斯基在谈及未完成的《沙丘》说，“人之所以活下去，是为了给自己创造灵魂。” 在没有灵魂的人类身上，姓名可以无规则地滑动（女主从始至终没有确切的名字），身份可以被无时限地复制，“我”和任何人都成了双向互通的角色。我们看似满载各自的怨言，但又都是大同小异的空心人。

大段尴尬又言不由衷的对话正是对这些被“文本化”的空心人直接的描画，他们口中的话语显然不值得我们相信，从他们下摆的嘴唇，面肌不自觉的抽动和阴郁的眼神中，我们读出甚至连他们自己都不再相信“话语”是出自自己之口。正像我们不可以相信《改编剧本》中后一半的类型叙事是真实一样，电影中被剧场化，功能化的人物首先是一种对真实生活的理念折射，沾染讽喻色彩的行为艺术。

对于考夫曼，客体即是主体自证存在的幻觉，而主体又是从客体反弹回来的另一重幻觉，像《纽约提喻法》中以导演为模型原尺寸复制的城市，其终极目的便是图解自我、他人和时间之间边界的虚无。

“凑近了看，世间万物都一个样，你，我，所有想法，满是蛆虫的猪，都一个样。”清洁工被孤独压垮了，但也终于和自己衰老的现实妥协。他脱光了衣服，追着幻想中的猪走出了车门。世界上是上亿个同样疲倦和自私的生命，同样地被不合时宜的他人刺痛，同样地没有灵魂却仍然不能彼此拥抱，同样地成为他人的燃料和自我的废墟，同样地身为自己，却远在自身之外。电影的表层文本关于一个因为自卑陷入妄想的老人，而内层机制则是老人的普世性。

因此，考夫曼的迷宫并不是用来“烧脑”的（即便理清楚也无助于观众接近情节发生的根本动因），而是一种基于普世性的悲观和自察，产生的人格模糊体验。只有在对这种体验的认同下，我们才会意识到荒谬的事件群不仅是等待解释的噱头，而更是横亘在生活深处，人际暗面的真实肌理。

考夫曼使生活恢复这种肌理的方式，是赐予他的角色“自为的时间性”，即他的人物不再“静止于时间中，如风拂过树叶”，而是掌握且超脱了“时间”本身，因此“女友”看见人们过去，未来，死后的模样，也看见了所有生物相同的基因，相同的困境。

考夫曼贡献了后新冠时代第一部浓缩了这个日渐寒冷的世界，和身在其中，每个心灵日渐紧缩的人类的电影。我们的心中是一场大雪，窗外又何尝不是呢？2020年向我们展示了世界停滞的可能，这或许只是一次更大危机的冰山一角，国际关系重新紧绷，消费市场一再萎缩，全球化为稳固内循环做好了后手，预备关上家门的不只是恐惧病毒的我们。

考夫曼是否有意指涉这个时代？可能电影的无力感与2020年的相遇只是一语成谶，但不可否认的是，从踏上公路的出行，到埋没在雪中的车，这是一个“寒冷日渐逼近”的过程，及至海报上穿着拖鞋，坐在家中的木椅上，却浑身被雪掩埋僵直的女主，更是对“窗外-屋中”这层心理分野的僭越。不再有一层防线来区别窗外和屋中，即便我们不认同自己是紧缩的个体，私人的安全地带也终将被时代的寒冰所侵蚀，又或许，我们中的每一份消极和不安，最终都集聚成预示灾劫降临的风雨云？

在双面圆满的痛楚中，考夫曼徘徊在语言的边界上，词语像松动的螺丝，被返还了无限的自由，趋近于诗歌，意识和梦境的滑动。

从这层意义上，考夫曼或许是《八部半》永恒的临摹者，他的每一部剧本都有着费里尼式千变万化的底色。而如果《八部半》结束在一场对“我”的庆典的话，《我想结束这一切》则是终结于一次颠覆，一场自我的葬礼。

葬礼上有数不清和“我”一样老去的观众，正像费里尼的舞台上有每一个“我”熟悉的面孔，“我”徒劳地宣扬“爱”，感激他们构成了今天的我，但“我”苦涩的笑瞒不过内心：就是这段颁奖词本身，都是从《美丽心灵》照搬来的，它的DVD正像包含《骨狗》的诗集一样躺在“我”的书房里。紧接着的音乐剧来自《俄克拉荷马》，延续我毫无新意的一生。“我”希望台下鼓掌的群众陪同我一样老去，可是他们的老态只是倍显虚假的妆容。他们看似众多，却只是一个个分裂的自己。

“我始终是自己的赝品。” 活着是如此，然而可能连选择去死，都仍然是对许多自杀的传奇故事们拙劣的模仿？我在被人类曾经无数次踏过，如今已然泥泞不堪的大路上兜兜转转，连死亡都等不到第一次原创。

而考夫曼的电影，又何尝不相似呢？讲述一个精神分裂症患者和自身幻觉搏斗，它像《美丽心灵》；两场苍茫雪海中的行车，像电影中提到的小说《冰》；一个因找寻不到自身所爱而苦恼的屌丝，又像音乐剧《俄克拉荷马》。

荧幕回到那一片纯澈的雪地时，端坐其上的是疏朗的天空，和一尊汽车形状的静默。我埋葬了自己，接下来是如天空般永恒的缄默。

看了一篇对导演Charlie Kaufman关于这部电影的专访，想转一下文章里关于电影情节的Q&A部分。原文9月4日发表于IndieWire.com, 作者Eric Kohn, @erickohn。以下问答涉及剧透。

Why does it seem like Jake can hear Lucy’s thoughts?

In the opening sequence of the movie, Jake and Lucy endure an interminable drive up to his parents’ house, while Lucy continues to contemplate leaving him. On several occasions, Jake glances over to Lucy during her voiceover, sometimes interrupting it. Is he telepathic? The answer is actually quite simple. At the end of Reid’s novel, it’s revealed that Jake and his unnamed girlfriend are the same person — the lonely high school janitor, who invented her as his fantasy. Think “Psycho” meets “Fight Club.”

It doesn’t take long for “I’m Thinking of Ending Things” to imply as much. When Lucy, an aspiring poet, shares one of her verses at the dinner table, it’s actually a sampling from “Rotten Perfect Mouth,” a collection of writings by real-life poet Eva H.D. Later in the movie, it’s not even clear if Lucy’s name is Lucy. (He calls her “Ames.” Amy?) Jake has built her out of the books, movies, and passing encounters that have shaped his isolated worldview.

So Lucy’s the main character and she also doesn’t exist?

Well…yes and no. The most sophisticated gamble of the movie is that Kaufman has taken this device and turned it into an open question: Can a fantasy exist on its own terms?

“She is a device, but I wanted her to be able to separate herself from that,” Kaufman said. “I didn’t want it to be a twist. I felt like that would not work in a movie at this point in history. When you make a movie, everything that’s sort of ambiguous becomes concrete. You’ve got people playing these things. You can see them.”

Needless to say, Buckley turns in a rich, haunting performance as a woman grappling with the uncertainty surrounding her. “To my mind, it would have been a misuse of any actress not to give them something to play that was real,” Kaufman said. “Because of the device that the book uses, it wasn’t required, and I needed it to be there.”

Fine, but that still doesn’t mean she’s a real person.

Right. But she has a definite representative power as Jake comes to terms with the impossibility of his delusion. At one point, he asks Lucy if she’s read Anna Kavan’s 1967 novel “Ice,” which takes place in a post-apocalyptic wasteland (not unlike the dreary outdoors that surround the movie’s two big car rides). The protagonist of “Ice” spends most of the book pursuing an unnamed woman while wrestling with the complicated nature of his attraction.

In “I’m Thinking of Ending Things,” the character endures that same struggle when the fantasy fights back. It’s a storytelling gamble unique to the art of cinema: Within the “world” of “I’m Thinking of Ending Things” — one controlled by Kaufman as well as his protagonist — Lucy exists. “I needed her to have agency for it to work as a dramatic piece,” Kaufman said. “I really liked the idea that even within his fantasy, he cannot have what he wants. He’s going to imagine this thing, but then he’s going to also imagine how it won’t work, how she’s going to bored with him, how she’s going to not think he’s smart enough or interesting enough.”

Eventually, Jake stops trying to solve his problems by inventing new people, and instead focuses on himself. “In keeping with the idea of giving her some agency, I didn’t want her to be responsible for his ending,” Kaufman said.

At one point, the janitor watches the final scene of a cheesy romance that’s directed by Robert Zemeckis. The abrupt end credit is hilarious. But why Zemeckis?

The janitor is often a passive character in the high school, absorbing faces and circumstances from the sidelines. However, one scene finds him sitting in an empty room, eating lunch and watching a movie on television. It’s the final minutes of a cheesy romance set in a diner, and the credits come up just long enough for one name to appear: “Directed By Robert Zemeckis.”

Why did Kaufman decide to toss in a reference to the director of “The Polar Express”? Kaufman has been telling interviewers that it happened at random, when his assistant director suggested it after perusing a list of director names online. Zemeckis wasn’t even in Kaufman’s original version of the script.

“Sometimes things are funny because they’re funny, and I feel like it’s possible that Zemeckis could have made this movie, even if it’s unlikely,” Kaufman said. At the same time, there’s a touch of irony to the choice. “I don’t think Zemeckis ever has or ever would make a movie like this,” Kaufman said. “It’s more like a Nancy Meyers movie. He wasn’t a model for it. His stuff is generally more high-concept, but it’s possible, so the joke resonates somehow.” He asked the director for permission to include the reference, and Zemeckis is thanked in the credits.

So it was just a random choice?

Yeah, that story sounds almost too neat for its own good, doesn’t it? After all, Zemeckis is one of the biggest commercial directors of the past 30 years, and Kaufman’s work is defiantly non-commercial. On top of that, Kaufman did at one point almost work with Zemeckis while adapting the young adult novel “Chaos Walking” way back in 2012. The project has gone through many writers since then, though Kaufman still has a credit on the Doug Liman-directed version set for release from Lionsgate next year. But Zemeckis was initially interested in taking it on.

“What happened with Robert Zemeckis was that I wrote a first draft of ‘Chaos Walking,’ and then I guess he read it and was interested in directing it,” Kaufman said. Lionsgate set them up. “It was a really nice meeting,” Kaufman said. “I had never met him before, but we had a really nice chat and came up with some solutions to some issues and that was the end of it. Then I didn’t end up moving forward with it, and neither did he.”

Alright, back to that cringe-inducing dinner. Why do the parents keep changing?

Over the course of a very creepy evening, Jake’s parents undergo a series of dramatic physical changes, from young to old and back again. Jake is basically living through the many stages of his parents’ lives, a process that has complicated the idea of bringing his new girlfriend home. Where does he place her in that timeline? He can’t find the perfect moment, because it doesn’t exist. As much as he wants to stay in the house with her, they eventually leave, at her insistence.

So begins another long car ride. And…was that a Pauline Kael impersonation?

While at Jake’s house, Lucy wanders into his childhood bedroom. It’s strewn with piles of movies, books, and other material. One volume stands out: “For Keeps: 30 Years at the Movies,” a 1996 selection of former New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael’s reviews (the book, now out of print, draws from several earlier collections). Once back on the road, Lucy and Jake engage in a loooooong, meandering discussion that bursts with highbrow references, from Guy Debord’s “Society as Spectacle” to Goethe’s theory of color and a David Foster Wallace essay from the collection “A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again.”

All of these fragments point to complicated ideas related to Jake’s obsessions, but none receive more screen time than a Pauline Kael review — her 1974 takedown of John Cassavetes’ “Woman Under the Influence.” (Strangely, that review is not included in “For Keeps.”)

Debating the film and its Gena Rowlands performance, Lucy basically transforms into Kael, repeating the review verbatim with a spot-on impersonation. “I’ve always liked her, and grew up with her and reading her, and thinking that she was smarter than I am,” said Kaufman, echoing the sentiment of many readers over the years. Jake seems to be one of them: After Lucy finishes her monologue about the movie, which he liked, he’s left speechless.

“That goes toward the idea of Jake not being able to have anything that he wants,” Kaufman said. “He had this opinion about that movie, and then failed. It’s an experience I’ve had — the idea that you like something, and then you read something by somebody that you really admire, and you feel like an idiot for liking that thing.” (Also notable: Kaufman’s recent novel, “Antkind,” is about the plight of a film critic.)

What’s up with Tulsey Town Ice Cream?

Eventually, the car ride is interrupted by a stop at Tusley Town Ice Cream, an invented small-town ice cream chain inexplicably open in the middle of a debilitating snowstorm. On the way over, Jesse and Lucy recall the jingle for the ice cream shop commercials. The pair stop there briefly and Lucy has a cryptic interaction with three women behind the takeout counter. Two of them are giggly and flirtatious, while a third seems terrified.

According to Kaufman, they’re all references to women that Jake has seen before. “Then there was this idea that there were many generations of high-school kids who worked there that he had interacted with over the years and had his problems with,” Kaufman said. “It’s a dreamy stop into his psyche, into his past.”

In the book, the couple actually stop at a Dairy Queen. “We weren’t able to get the rights to use that, so I changed it,” Kaufman said. “But I think it worked out better, because it’s more mysterious, and because it’s more local.”

Let’s talk about that dance sequence.

After they park at the high school, Jake runs inside, angry that the janitor is watching from afar. When Lucy goes after him, she has a warm encounter with the janitor in which he sends her on his way — suggesting that the character has finally accepted that he must part ways with his fantasy. Elaborating on this idea, Lucy and Jake then spot each other in a hallway, where they’re replaced by a pair of ballet dancers wearing the same clothes. Over the next several minutes, they engage in a lively piece of choreography patterned after a similar moment in the musical “Oklahoma!”

Earlier in the movie, the janitor passes a school recital of the play, which includes an extensive “dream ballet” sequence that finds the farm girl Laurey at the center of a brawl between two suitors, Curly McLain and Jud Fry. That sequence ends with Curly’s death; here, it’s the Jake stand-in who goes down, suggesting that Jake has accepted the impossibility of his love.

“There’s a few things in ‘Oklahoma!’ that felt like they were really kind of thematically parallel to the story that we were telling,” Kaufman said. As for the dream sequence: “I was always intrigued by it, because it’s so creepy, and I liked the idea of the doppelgänger aspect in it.” In other words, Jake has been pretending he’s someone else, and uses the narrative framework of “Oklahoma!” to eliminate that delusion.

And then there’s the talking animated pig.

Actually, that’s another pretty straightforward one. In his car, the janitor seems to have an attack of some sort, and possibly dies. Like Charles Foster Kane whispering “Rosebud” from his bed, janitor-Jake sees tidbits from his youth in the windshield, including the animated “Tulsey Town Ice Cream” ad referenced earlier. These give way to an animated pig with maggots on its stomach — a grim encounter that Jake recounts to Lucy earlier in the movie, while giving her a tour of the farm. The affable animal walks Jake back to his final moment of introspection.

Something about the innocence of the pig and its horrific underbelly traumatized Jake early in life. In his old age, he has come to terms with this fundamental imbalance in his universe.

In the last scene, everyone’s old. But it looks kind of…fake.

Onstage to accept an award in the movie’s final scene, Jake stands against a backdrop of the “Oklahoma!” set, wearing obvious stage makeup to look like an old man. But he’s not alone. It’s a packed house, and everyone in the room — including his parents and Lucy — are wearing the same makeup. Originally, Kaufman included a tidbit to explain this inclusion.

“There was a scene where the janitor found a makeup book in the bathroom as he was cleaning up, because somebody had clearly been putting their makeup on in this boys or girls room,” Kaufman said. The device allows Jake to bring everyone in his head to age along with him, while reminding us of the artifice in play. “All of the people who were in the audience, with the exception of the characters from the movie, are the extras who played high school kids in the rest of the movie,” Kaufman said. “So they’re all young people wearing old-age makeup.”

Is that…the closing speech from “A Beautiful Mind”?

Yup. When Jake accepts his prize, he recites the sentimental Nobel Prize speech delivered by economist John Nash (Russell Crowe) at the end of Ron Howard’s Oscar winner. In fact, the entire sequence has been built to resemble the conclusion of the 2001 movie.

Earlier in “I’m Thinking of Ending Things,” a DVD of “A Beautiful Mind” is glimpsed in Jake’s room, so it stands to reason that Jake found much relatable about the story of a brilliant man who struggles with paranoid schizophrenia and has trouble sorting out the reality surrounding him. Kaufman was wary of spelling that out, though.

“That’s one that I’m not as comfortable talking about because it does get to the meat of what the movie I made is about,” he said, but then elaborated anyway. “This movie is dealing with somebody’s experience of absorbing things that they see and how they become part of his psyche,” he said. “So this was in some ways how this person might have fantasized it out.”

Of course, there may be more to this: End credits claim that the speech was lifted with permission of the studio, but Kaufman played no role in that. Unlike Zemeckis, he didn’t ask for Howard’s blessing. “I have certainly never spoken to Ron Howard in my life,” Kaufman said. “I’m assuming they got permission.”

Considering that “A Beautiful Mind” was one of the cheesier Oscar winners of the previous decade (and it won the same year that “Adaptation” came out), it’s no huge leap to see the inclusion as a huge cinematic eyeroll about the misleading nature of storytelling that clouds the true nature of solipsistic struggles, something Kaufman has explored throughout his filmography. “A Beautiful Mind” puts a happy ending on that subject; in “I’m Thinking of Ending of Things,” the struggle never ends.

And then Jake sings…

Yep, more of “Oklahoma!” Sitting down on a set that looks like a reproduction of his childhood bedroom, he delivers a melancholic rendition of “Lonely Room,” in which Jud declares his intention of marrying Laurey. The song includes the telling line, “Get me a woman to call my own.” Dream on, Jud — and Jake, it seems. “The character of Jud seemed to be comparable in some ways to Jake,” Kaufman said. Sitting on a set built from the fragments that define his life, Jake has become the star of his own story and simultaneously confined by it.

And that’s it! Right?

Not quite. That final image of the janitor’s snow-encrusted car essentially suggests that janitor-Jake died there in the dead of night. It’s a beautiful, tragic capper to a story about one man confronting the failures of his life as it leaves his body. Kaufman hopes that people keep watching through the credits, which list many of the references throughout the movie. “There’s actually a lot of stuff in the end credits that’s important to me,” Kaufman said. “It’s an intentional thing, the way it plays out.”

Exhausted? Fine, but the riddles of the movie all serve a purpose. Ultimately, Kaufman doesn’t think that “I’m Thinking of Ending Things” hides much from its audience. “The way I was presenting it was that you would probably figure it out,” he said. “This is what the character is going through. You either get it or you don’t.”

全文链接：//www.indiewire.com/2020/09/charlie-kaufman-explains-im-thinking-of-ending-things-1234584492/

初见的趣味

电影一开始我便被女主碎碎念的台词吸引了，因为那是我一直最爱的标准的意识流文本，我总能在这样的语气中找到某种平静。我的喜欢总源自他们的真诚的矛盾，正如她嘴里所说的那些“假不了的想法”。三分钟后，我便做出了自信的判断——这肯定是一部适合自己的电影。

电影抛出了第一个让人眼前一亮的设定。心中涌出一份诡笑的狂喜。我迷上了女主不由自主的内心独白。导演继续“说明”着他的趣味设定。我开始耐心的端倪起女主的男友这一角色，回忆着他给我的第一印象，想起了他是自己17年看过的英剧《奥丽芙·基特里奇》里的一个重要角色，不由地，那个暴发户的形象就和眼前这个角色产生了一些重合。这使我更好地跟随了女主的厌倦和担忧……她不断的神游，不断的被打断。慢慢地我适应了这对情侣的感情所呈现出的形状。看他们聊路边的秋千也十分有趣。直到我注意到偶尔出现的老头画面、窥探的镜头、女主变色的上衣……电影就朝着兴奋但云里雾里的方向展开了……

我很喜欢这首叫做《骨狗》的散文。这与我喜爱文学的理由统一，那绚丽深刻的文字也正是我梦寐以求想要写出的！这又一次点燃了我对这部电影的热情。女主平静的背读着它，不同机位的镜头不断切换着。我第一次感受到了电影的寒冷……

严重剧透警告——————————

回首的趣味

完全看完电影后，我陷入了一种陌生却格外清醒的绝望，脑中感叹着“原来失败与失败之间也存在着天壤之别”“这恐怕是世上对父母最残忍的责备了”一股前所未有的孤寂感彻底包裹了我。“孤独只是一种缺乏耐力的挣扎……”自己是不是也是那头从内部被缓慢啃食的猪呢？我和电影里描述的那头猪存在区别吗？我陷入了自己惧怕的悲伤泥沼之中……

当我从这份内心挣扎中摆脱后，我无所事事的去试着了解导演的意图，电影的主旨，我发现了另一份“趣味”。

原来，电影中的所有角色、对白、歇斯底里、诡异的狂笑、不断切换的时间都只是老年杰克一人分饰多人，在临死之前在脑中排练的一场戏而已。而这一场戏在他残余的生命里却不知重复过了多少遍……他“扮演”着所有人：他的父母来自他的记忆；歇斯底里的年轻自我；他的女友也只是自己分裂出来的一个旁观者……

他用自己来嘲讽自己，赞美自己，认同自己，给予着自己一份亲密，反复阻止着自己走向生命的终结。

父母在我眼中的刻板印象

我们心怀不甘或怨恨只因无法独自一人去完成那份释怀。当一段感同身受的文字出现在我面前，仿佛自己也得到了某种关怀，她轻声地在你胸口吐露着，你并不是世上唯一承受这份剧痛的人。

于是你选择“丑化”了脑中有关父母的记忆，他们对你的不屑就像一种恶疾般无法从身体里取出，他们无知、愚蠢、缺乏边界感、生活作风邋遢至极，牙齿的黄垢让他们失去了全部的味觉……你总幻想着当他们了解到真实自我时无法掩饰的尴尬与羞愧。你无数次痛恨着他们重复着有关自己的“烂梗”。连同他们的脆弱也一同被你放大了。

一想到一个几十年都没有对象的儿子带回来了那个父母心念的女朋友的画面就令人痛苦。你俯瞰着与父母之间无法修正的鸿沟，一切让你抓狂的细节，它们正无情地疯狂地暴露着父母对儿子的失望心情。

一想到即使父母早已不在，但脑中的神经却依然会闪现出他们来讥笑自己50岁生日的落寞画面。似乎自己灵魂的一部分将永生与他们粘连在一起。以至于我只能用父亲的身份去表达对母亲的思念……

孤独是永恒的自我认同

可能孤独的人心里，都会出现一个无限认同自我的角色，他会慷慨的赞赏你的爱好和品味，切身的关怀那些无人知晓的付出与委屈。她是相较于自己更为平静的存在，她对你的寂寞怀有世界上最大的包容。她只会安静的注视着你的孤单，但她不能与你一同悲伤。因为她是你最后的一丝理智。因为她同样面临着另一份挑战。她同样无人认同。她无处可藏。

悲剧的意义

可能悲剧的意义是，它能更早的告知你世界的本来面目，让你看清人类存在的缺陷，看清人生与生命的终点；让你带着这份不允许模糊的思辨活下去；让你尽快做出选择，笃定自己的生活方式，让你选择尊重艺术，躲避极端的世俗化和极端的厌世，用审美的眼光来看待本无意义的世界，如尼采所说“真正的悲剧都在用一种形而上的慰藉来解脱我们。”“只有把生命作为一种审美现象来对待，人生和世界才是令人信服的。”

我的人生只有唯一的辩护者，那就是自我。

Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation. ———— 《De Profundis》 by Oscar Wilde

大多数人都是从众的，他们的思想是其他人的意见，他们的生活是一场模仿，他们热衷于引旁人所述。——《深渊书简》奥斯卡·王尔德

这句话是Lucy在电影中引用的，我觉得它很好地诠释了这部电影，电影中的人和看这部电影的人。

直切正题，本文为考据索引，对音乐剧《俄克拉荷马》有剧透。

1. 旅途开始之时，引用了《以赛亚书》1:18的部分，全段如下：

耶和华说： 你们来， 我们彼此辩论。 你们的罪虽像朱红， 必变成雪白； 虽红如丹颜， 必白如羊毛。

暗示了后段的大雪天气。

2. 回家路上，Jake为了和Lucy挑起话题，讲到英国浪漫主义诗人威廉·华兹华斯的作品《颂诗·忆童年而悟永生》( Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood )，他本来想念出头几句，却被Lucy打断。这首诗的头几句如下：

There was a time when meadow, grove, and stream, The earth, and every common sight, To me did seem Apparelled in celestial light, The glory and the freshness of a dream. It is not now as it hath been of yore;— Turn wheresoe'er I may, By night or day, The things which I have seen I now can see no more.

而且两人还谈到威廉·华兹华斯写过一系列关于Lucy的诗，这个系列一共有五首 ("Strange fits of passion have I known", "She dwelt among the untrodden ways", "I travelled among unknown men", "Three years she grew in sun and shower", and "A slumber did my spirit seal")，其中的Lucy并非一个确定的人物，原型难以推断，而更像作者的一个灵感投射，这与电影中的Lucy身份暗合。

3. 在车里打开广播之后，广播里的歌声出自音乐剧《俄克拉荷马》，同时Jake报菜名一般列举了一堆他看的音乐剧，这里关注两个，一个是他最喜欢的《俄克拉荷马》，这个后面再说；另一个是《窈窕淑女》，后来的餐桌戏中，Jake的爸爸也cue到了《窈窕淑女》

窈窕淑女

8.2

类型: 音乐剧 导演: Moss Hart / Jerry Adler / Patrick Garland / Howard Davies / Robin Midgley / Bartlett Sher 编剧: Alan Jay Lerner 主演: Julie Andrews / Rex Harrison / Stanley Holloway / Robert Coote / Cathleen

4. Lucy在车上念了一首她最近读的诗，就是《骨狗》，全文见友邻总结：

//movie.douban.com/review/12849535/

5. Jake的家在Tulsey town，这个地名也就是Tulsa，“巧合”的是，Tulsa位于俄克拉荷马州（哦！），看过HBO美剧《守望者》的朋友对这个地方应该不会陌生。

守望者 (2019)

8.4

2019 / 美国 / 剧情 动作 奇幻 / 斯戴芙·格林 妮可·卡索 安德里杰·帕瑞克 斯蒂芬·威廉姆斯 大卫·塞梅尔 弗雷德·托耶 / 雷吉娜·金 蒂姆·布雷克·尼尔森

6. 晚餐期间，聊到Lucy画画得很好，Jake的妈妈想到一幅女孩独自坐在草地上看房子的画，说的是美国画家Andrew Wyeth 的作品《克里斯蒂娜的世界》（Christina's world），现存于MoMA。

Christina's world

（看，像不像Jake他家。。。

7. Jake的妈妈想问两个人怎么认识的（八卦哦），提到了一部电影，是Billy Crystal自导自演的作品《忘情巴黎》。

忘情巴黎 (1995)

7.7

1995 / 美国 / 喜剧 爱情 / 比利·克里斯托 / Billy Crystal Debra Winger

8. Lucy在Jake的房间里看到很多书，其中有威廉·华兹华斯的诗集，还有一本 Pauline Kael 的《The Current Cinema》，然后她拿起了一本书，叫《Rotten Perfect Mouth》，在里面看到了《骨狗》，我不确定《骨狗》是不是其中的一篇，但这本书确实存在。

Rotten Perfect Mouth

目前无人评价

Eva H. D

9. Lucy下到地下室，看到Jake的模仿学习画作，他临摹的对象是美国调性主义画家 Ralph Albert Blakelock，电影中也展示了Blakelock的几幅著名作品，包括《Moonlight》。

Moonlight

10. 从Jake家出来之后，两人在车中聊到了约翰·卡萨维蒂的著名电影作品《醉酒的女人》，Lucy还对其中女主玛贝尔有一段模仿，以及贡献了一段非常棒的影评。

醉酒的女人 (1974)

8.2

1974 / 美国 / 剧情 爱情 / 约翰·卡萨维蒂 / 彼得·法尔克 吉娜·罗兰兹

11. 买完暴风雪，却吃不下去，Lucy说I'll never do it again，Jake马上跳到一本书，美国作家David Foster Wallace的作品《所谓好玩的事，我再也不做了》（A supposedly fun thing, I will never do again），并且提到作者自杀的事情，这点暗示了影片结局。

所谓好玩的事，我再也不做了

7.8

[美] 大卫·福斯特·华莱士 / 2017 / 湖南文艺出版社

12. 作为回应，Lucy问Jake你有没有读过居伊·德波，并且引用了他的著作《景观社会》，这里似乎点到了主旨，我们都是我们的所见所闻。

景观社会

8.2

[法] 居伊·德波 / 2017 / 南京大学出版社

13. 回到《俄克拉荷马》

俄克拉荷马

7.9

类型: 音乐剧 又名: 奥克拉荷马 导演: Rouben Mamoulian / William Hammerstein / Trevor Nunn / 中村一徳 / Gemze de Lappe / 正塚晴彦 / Daniel Fish / 范卫华，Dewayne Barrett 编剧: Oscar Hammerstein II 主演: Betty Garde / Al...

电影中多次致敬了这部音乐剧，最后一段舞蹈的剧情，几乎就是复刻了音乐剧《俄克拉荷马》的剧情，在音乐剧中，女主劳瑞的梦境有一段舞蹈场景，而且音乐剧的最后也是这段梦境的真实再现，追求劳瑞的两位男士克里和查德扭打，查德死于刀刃。

影片的最后，Jake在获奖后有一段唱段，这个唱段来自音乐剧《俄克拉荷马》中查德的唱段《Lonely Room》。暗含了Jake与查德命运的对应。

14. 最后彩蛋，Jake获诺贝尔奖一幕是致敬了朗·霍华德的奥斯卡经典《美丽心灵》，这个在导演的访谈中也得到确认。链接：//movie.douban.com/review/12854297/（我一上来真没看出来）

美丽心灵

好的没了。

It's called “Bonedog”.

闯入他人精神世界的标志，除了叙事的癫狂、回溯与迷乱（时间如同湍流穿行过每一个质点），还有屡次出现的顾盼与察觉，观看人作为闯入者被发现并被驱使，甚至被示众，被屠戮，这里的惊悚的意味与《仲夏夜惊魂》中最有味道的part相似；影片中多次出现的这种目光在召唤观看者的选择，是经受诱惑成为那

Bonedog 髒

Coming home is terrible 回家是可怕的

whether the dogs lick your face or not 不论狗是否舔舐你的脸颊

whether you have a wife 不论在家中等待你的是一个妻子

or just a wife-shaped loneliness waiting for you 或仅是一个瘦削成妻子形状的孤独

Coming home is terrible lonely 回家孤独得可怕

so that you think of the oppressive barometric pressure 以至于你回想起自己刚离开那个死气沉沉的地方时

back with you have just come from with fondness 竟也带着一丝欢欣

because everything's worse once you're home 因为一旦回家后，一切都会更加糟糕

You think of the vermin clingling to the grass stalks 你满怀渴望地去想附着在稻草秸秆上的害虫

long hours on the road，roadside assistance and ice creams 漫漫无彻的长途，道路救援和冰激凌

and the peculiar shapes of certain clouds 和某些形状特别的云

and silence with longing，because you did not want to return 还有寂静，因为那时的你不想归返

Coming home is 回家就只是

just awful 糟糕透顶

And the home-style silence and clouds 家常的沉寂与乌云

contribute to nothing but the general malaise 仅仅只会徒增全身的不适感

Clouds,such as they are,are in fud suspect 这样的云带着一如既往的不定与怀疑

and made from a different material than those you left behind 它们不同于你所抛下的那些物质

You youself were cut from a different cloudy cloth 你自身则是从另一块云布中裁剪而出

returned,remaindered 被退回，被剩下

ill-met by moonlight 被月光不安地邂逅

unhappy to be back,slack in all the wrong spots 怏怏回返，在所有最不恰当的地方松垮

seamy suit of clothes,dishrag-ratty,worn 满是线头的衣服，抹布般邋遢，磨损得破烂

You return home 你回了家

moon-landed,foreign 就像在月球着陆的外星人

The Earth's gravitation pull 地心引力拉扯

an effort now redoubled 此时有了双倍的效果

dragging your shoelaces loose 将你的鞋带拉松

and your shoulders 卸下你的肩膀

etching deeper the stanza of worry on your forehead 把忧愁的诗节在你的前额上刻得更深

You return home deepened 你心情沉重地回到家里

a parched well linked to tomorrow 一口通往明日的枯井

by a frail strand of 连结着一缕脆弱的空无

anyway 即便如此

You sigh into the onslaught of identical days 你哀叹完全相同的每天构成日复一日的冲击

one might as well,at a time 人有时也会这样

Well 好吧

anyway，you’re back 总之，你回来了

The sun goes up and down like a tired whore 太阳像是疲惫的妓女一样起了又落

The weather immobile like a broken limb 气候犹如折断的肢体一般毫无起伏

while you just keep getting older 只有你不断地变老了

Nothing moves,but the shifting tides of salt in your body 一切都是静止的，除了你体内如潮水般涨落的盐分

Your vision blears 你的所见逐渐模糊

You carry your weather with you 你和你的气候形影不离

the big,blue whale 巨大的蓝鲸

a skeletal darkness 骸骨般的阴影

You come back 你回来了

with X-ray vision 带着X光般的透视

your eyes have become a hunger 你的双眼已然成为一种饥饿

You come home with your mutant gifts 你带着变种的天赋来到家里

to a house of bone 来到一座骨头之家

Everything you see now 此时你所看见的一切

All of it 目之所及

bone 皆为骸骨

当读到“with X-ray vision”时，女主的双眼已然成为一种穿越荧屏的X光，带着犀利的透视感，无怪乎男主说“你是擅长朗诵的”；这首诗与影片中大部分情节和气氛都可以呼应——狗、冰激凌、长途行车、你和你的气候形影不离、回家——实在是绝佳的点缀与主轴

从后面的影片部分可以知道这首诗是来自于《Rootten Perfect Mouth》署名是EVA H.D.

很喜欢她的诗作，这里仅指《Bonedog》一首

影片中出现许多次语词和画面的游戏，这里的terrible和背后伸来的手无疑是绝佳的呼应，这让我想起《What Remains of Edith Finch》