Ask for the name of an English movie about dogs.

Friends I met online recommended this movie to me. That friend likes Latin American movies very much and recommended Lucia's lover. After reading Love is a Son of a bitch, I made up my mind to watch Lucia's Lover, a work recommended by one person at the same time, with little difference in level.

The original name of this film is Amores Perros, which is Spanish. Translation into English means that love is a bitch, and Chinese names are literally translated from English. Before I finished watching the movie, I suspected that there was something wrong with the English translation of this Spanish name. Because Amores Perros has only two words, either noun juxtaposition or verb-object relationship, and the English name Love Is a Bitch suddenly becomes a complete subject-predicate-object structure, which is definitely not a literal translation. After watching the movie, I am basically sure that this English translation is over-expressed.

Some movies, after watching it once, don't want to watch it again for a long time-of course, it's not that the movie is too bad, but that I don't want to move that kind of feeling again. But some movies always force you to review it again at once. This kind of film shows the narrative skills of the lens language and the exquisite structure of the script. Like a carefully built nuclear ship, it is worth your repeated scrutiny with a magnifying glass. I've seen movies like Crash, with a net-like interwoven structure; There is also Pulp Fiction, a three-segment body connected in series with paper clips; There are elephants, and many lines develop in parallel and finally converge at one point. At the Cannes Film Festival in 2002, many critics compared Love Story to Pulp Fiction. But I think it is more like an elephant from a purely structural point of view: many lines develop in parallel and are connected by intersections. It's just that the story of The Elephant crosses at the end, while the story of Amos Peros crosses in the middle.

This plot consists of three stories. In the first story, the hero A falls in love with his brother's wife and wants to run away with her. In order to save money, I took my dog to take part in dog fighting gambling. The second story, the magazine owner has an extramarital affair with a popular female model B. Later, in order to be with B, he broke up with his wife and bought a house to live with B. In the third story, C, the hero who abandoned his career and family to join the revolutionary party and was imprisoned for many years, missed his long-lost daughter. After he got out of prison, his occupation was a tramp who took a group of dogs to pick up garbage and a royal killer who was the police chief.

The fate of the protagonists in these three stories was changed by a car accident.

I tried to tell the story of 150 minutes in less space, but failed. This may not make much sense.

At the beginning of the film, parallel cuts are made very frequently, and the backgrounds of the three protagonists are clearly explained. After the car accident, the story of A has come to an end, and the main pen and ink are spent on the story of female model B, which is no longer so frequent, while the story of female model B is more about emotion and less about action, and the original dynamic rhythm suddenly falls into dullness. Finally, the story of tramp C restored the feeling at the beginning again: violence plus gentleness. The general feeling is that the story of female model B is not well mixed, which disrupts the original rhythm and makes the middle part of the story a bit lengthy. I think it would be better if we could cut it into a version in two hours.

The fate of every hero in the movie is linked to the dog. Dogs are the sustenance of their love. A's dog gave him the hope of flying away with his brother and wife. Female model b's pet dog is her spiritual support after her love career is threatened; Tramp C's dog is his replacement for his dead wife and long-lost daughter. They love dogs because they love humans. However, all the characters in the film lost their dogs. A's dog was injured and was picked up by C after the accident; B's dog ran under the broken floor and didn't come out; The dog that C picked up killed all his other dogs. Correspondingly, A finally didn't wait for the woman he loved at the station; B lost a leg, and life and love showed an unhealed wound. And C, the soul figure in this film, only brings us hope in the dark. When he saw his dog killed, he pulled out his pistol, but he didn't kill the dog in the end. Dogs are innocent and far less cruel than humans. When he loses all his dogs, he may feel a causal cycle. The dog that caused the accident made him start thinking again. So he gave up the assassination mission and made a little joke. He shaved off his beard and hair and put on new clothes. When he finished the sign of turning over a new leaf, he sneaked into his daughter's house, returned the family photo he stole last time, and left her the money he earned. He sat on his daughter's bed and kept playing her voice on the answering machine. He left his thoughts and love for his daughter on the answering machine, and then he sold his car and took the dog into the boundless world. The last scene of the movie means that he will find his own life. He may get married and have children, and there will be people who love him. This is the greatest comfort and salvation for the soul after losing everything-keep walking, and your dog.

So back to the name of the movie. According to the English translation, Amores Perros should mean love and dog respectively. Of course, the possibility that the dog acts as a verb in front is not ruled out. But the theme of the film is not to curse love and love as expressed in the English name, that is, the film does not involve any connotation of the word bitch. So I made this judgment: amores perros is the juxtaposition of love and dogs, amores is love, because it is very similar to admiration, and perros is a dog, because it is very similar to puppies. Later, I went to the internet to translate, which strengthened my mind.

Of course, Chinese names have made mistakes in meaning on the basis of over-expression in English translation. Love in love is a bitch, not only refers to love, but also includes a wider range of family ties. So I think the most appropriate translation is to love dogs. It is not meaningless for me to think so. Many comments on this film are devoted to bitches, which I think is a translated image and inappropriate.

Perhaps Amoros Peros's grasp of the plot structure and rhythm is not perfect, but his grasp of the details and the wonderful performances of the actors completely make up for these shortcomings. The head of tramp C was pasted on the stolen family photo by himself. When he turned over a new leaf, he took another good photo, replaced the original big photo, and then put the family photo back in his daughter's room. The performance was touching. That actor won the best actor award in many film festivals because of this film. The actor of the leading role A also performed brilliantly. With a unique temperament and a handsome face like a virtual character, he is definitely a potential actor. All the performances in the film are basically impeccable, and even the performance of beautiful model B is remarkable (figure, face, acting skills and talent), which is very rare in a film with many characters. In contrast, as a film with the same multi-line narrative and many characters, its performance in Crash can only be regarded as the golden mean. Crash's success lies in well-crafted scripts, but the traces of American patterning are still very heavy. If I had to choose between two movies, I would definitely choose Amores Perros.

In 2002, Amos Peros lost to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for best foreign language film. If Amores Perros is regarded as an American film, it is possible to nominate best actor, best supporting actor, best photography, best editing, best sound editing and so on, and it is entirely possible to take one or two. In that case, this excellent film will attract more people's attention. What am I trying to say? I want to say that the spotlight of Oscar is too bright to cover up the attention that many movies should have received, so it is a pity to take the initiative to care about movies in Latin America or other small languages.