重復旋轉的渦輪，漫無目的的飛機，一團迷糊的炮火，尖銳而規(guī)律的號角。橫亙歐洲的鐵幕在前，一切工業(yè)符號都有了足夠的理由出現(xiàn)，炮彈在號角聲中飛馳，燃燒，墜落，流彈入海。

畫面一轉，我們看見兩位少女正坐在海邊的沙灘上。

她們沒有色彩，沒有動作，每一個姿勢都伴隨著微妙的吱呀聲，讓人聯(lián)想到捷克的木偶傳統(tǒng)。她們就麻木而天真地坐在那里?，旣惗柎淀懥艘宦曁柦牵f，ani na mi to jde（我才不在乎）,瑪麗一號接話，tak co nám jde（我們能做些什么），瑪麗二號放下號角，nic nám nejde（我們什么也做不了）。

一閃而過的高樓崩塌，瑪麗一號戴上花環(huán)，瑪麗二號遺忘了號角。在彼此商量“要成為壞女人”之后，以瑪麗二號給瑪麗一號的一巴掌為轉場，她們來到了有果子、有色彩的伊甸園，隨之無姿態(tài)地如孩童一般起舞，瑪麗二號咬了一口果子，第三個場景出現(xiàn)在她們的公寓里。

公寓

電影伊始再不能讓人想得更多了。彼時世界被劃分為兩大陣營，冷戰(zhàn)及不信任帶來的軍備競賽，工業(yè)大社會生產之下異化的個人，斯大林主義背后操縱的集體思想。然而作者并未偏頗任何主義，而是站在人的境況當中諦觀一切，且不予以意見。

置身在微塵與宏大的反復之間（具體表現(xiàn)為毫無預備的轉場畫面），縱然Věra Chytilová有意運用feminism的目光，但更多的依舊是普世情感。Věra本人也在采訪中反復表示，她覺得自己不像女權主義者，在她的電影中尋找女權主義信息是最淺薄的解讀方式。

回到最初，汲汲營營的渦輪像一盤吸塵機，毫不留情地抽離我們所謂的一切自我，使我們成為每一顆無足輕重的螺絲釘，甚至生活也要伴隨著號角進行?？煽傆幸惶煳覀儠?，如此這般的工作是為了什么呢？在高樓墜毀之前，我們顯然不能夠知道答案，因為一切對瑪麗而言都是虛無的，直到大廈傾覆，危機才有跡可循。

終于，脫節(jié)的人變成了具體的人（要變得越來越壞），瑪麗們忽然有了大膽放縱的力量（因欲念，從我們什么也做不了到偷吃果子覺得是再正常不過的事情），卻更加自然快樂了，這時世界方有色彩，即便從伊甸園墜落到公寓（人間）。這是瑪麗（女人們）欲念的具象化。不變的是依舊沒有人理解她們，如同沒有任何人能夠理解彼此一樣。

如此這般的工作是為了什么呢？

但是瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號不工作，所以她們想方設法獲取食物。

瑪麗二號頻頻和年長的男人約會，她戴著瑪麗一號為她挑的絲巾，掩飾活潑的天性，裝作恬靜溫柔的樣子與男人談話，而后瑪麗一號現(xiàn)身，稱她是瑪麗二號的姐姐，肆無忌憚地點單，借此機會不顧形象地大吃大喝，而后再一齊送男人去火車站，揚長而去，進行下一個輪回。

她們服裝一黑一白，長相成熟的瑪麗一號戴著花環(huán)，一席白裙，長相幼態(tài)的瑪麗二號環(huán)繞絲巾，一身黑裙，在此后的故事當中，她們頻繁變換服飾，但只有花環(huán)和絲巾貫穿始終。就服裝、長相而言，瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號顯然是男人印象的一體兩面，制作者將其進行了錯位倒置，加劇了電影的荒誕感。

由于男女關系的故事浮現(xiàn)，人們往往傾向于聯(lián)系父權社會下的女性處境，不過這似乎也是一種刻板印象，并恰恰也是Věra所嘲弄的符號標簽，是她電影最表層的部分。她以此為武器，嘲弄了觀看她電影并試圖從刻板印象出發(fā)的所有解釋。盡管暗示著女性的自主思想，電影提出女性應該離開家庭和社會角色的約制，尋找自身在父權社會被弱化的獨立意志，但瑪麗們作為想象中的女性角色，她們的伊甸園中并無亞當，因此不存在作為男人肋骨而被創(chuàng)建出來的前提，故而也不依附于任何一個男人。盡管用著男人的錢財貪饗不已，但這只是出于世俗的交易——男人欲念的具象化。比起劃分陣營，Věra把男女雙方的印象都極致標簽化，那些故事是如此真實又是如此不真實，仿佛流動的話語和口號，她要針對的只有那個掌握話語權的人選。

瑪麗一號也進行了約會。這次是在一個收集蝴蝶標本的男人公寓。他一再向她表白，她以蝴蝶標本為挾，反復脫離掌控，只問身邊有沒有食物。蝴蝶標本、報紙上漂亮女性的圖片拼貼皆暗含男性對女性的情欲，女性應符合男性所渴望的模樣，即純潔的樣貌、處女、服從男性、漂亮的身材等。嗓音高亢，舉止幼稚，是男人們生活中“期待的”，因為他們沒有意識到兩個女人的故意行為。

而伊甸園的禁果、花等除了具象化為貪食之外，亦隱喻著女性對自我情欲的追求。同樣的，瑪麗二號在與老男人約會之時，老男人雖克制，但也在進食，男女的欲望本質上是一致的，飲食男女，貪食色相。瑪麗一號用蝴蝶標本遮掩三點，男人低聲求她取走，正暗合這一點。而這一幕的精彩之處則在于模糊結局的后續(xù)，瑪麗一號與瑪麗二號繼續(xù)玩樂，聽著打來電話男人所說的情話，把掛在墻上的紙帶和香腸燒掉，一一剪掉烤好的香腸、雞蛋（男人的情欲象征）——她們都對男人沒有欲望。也許她們是愛著對方的。

一同泡澡

后來，瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號準備泡澡，“這就是我不明白的，為什么會有人說我愛你，你明白嗎？”“為什么你會這么說而不是用雞蛋來替代呢？”，她們將雞蛋打碎，在浴缸里倒?jié)M牛奶，把報紙上剪下的男人紙像壓入牛奶當中，瑪麗一號看著沉下去的男人紙像，“就像是，有人不在了?！薄澳愕囊馑际撬懒藛幔俊?，她們一邊泡澡一邊進食，同時對生與死、存在與不存在進行哲學思考。“是的，拿你舉例?！薄拔遥克矚g你。”“現(xiàn)在我們坐在這里，想象一下，這不是我們。這太愚蠢了?！薄罢l告訴你這是我們？誰告訴你，你真的存在呢？”“你?！薄笆堑?，這是真的?！?/p>

再后來她們去了鄉(xiāng)下，農民沒有注意到瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號，一群騎自行車的工人從她們身邊同樣不在意地經過，瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號開始懷疑自己是否已經消失了。不過她們去偷玉米并且搗亂至一地雞毛時，她們又確信了自己的存在?；氐焦ⅲ齻冇帽蛔泳砥饘Ψ?，用剪刀把彼此剪開，同時竊竊私語，“真高興我們回家了?！薄叭ニ?，去死，去死?！薄澳阍谌紵?，我在燃燒，我們在燃燒?！薄澳阌X得過得如何？”“不要這樣對待我，你知道我愛你?！薄拔覀儠l(fā)生什么事，我們會發(fā)生什么事，我們會發(fā)生什么事?！薄拔覀內狈θ魏巫C據(jù)?！薄拔覀儾灰吒嗟穆妨?，好嗎？”，從而成就電影的另一幕波普平面主義高潮。

似有若無的話語邏輯，分解的肢體與紙片，極具視覺與話語的沖擊。作為討論的命題，欲念和虛無都被明顯地提了出來。“愛（欲）”與“雞蛋”的價值觀沖突，“存在”與“虛無”的證明方法，最后，用棉被包裹自己，用剪刀撕碎彼此。為什么要說我愛你而不是用雞蛋來替代呢？他們只想消費她們罷了。

虛虛實實，真真假假，無一不愚嘲著表面之下虛偽，被濫用的自由話語，以及這個撒謊的世界。用天真的破壞欲來擊穿現(xiàn)實的邏輯話語，她們此刻猶如化身戰(zhàn)爭，坦克碾碎引以為豪的人文主義，原子彈炸沉那些公共道德，不計其數(shù)的尸體走路，說話，只有玫瑰會唱歌，但艷麗的玫瑰本真也是刺。她們打碎雞蛋進行沐浴，喝浴缸里的牛奶，超出美味享受的范圍亦或者說是生理需求的界限（尤在下一幕體現(xiàn)最甚），食物成為墮落本源的象征，是七宗罪之一，是對權力與話語的渴望，是人心虛無的體現(xiàn)。

在世俗的伊甸園故事當中，禁果是情欲的體現(xiàn)，愛是存在的證明，她們就深情而嚴肅地說，“你知道我愛你”，與前文“誰告訴你這是我們？誰告訴你，你真的存在呢？”“你?！薄笆堑模@是真的。”相印證，很難不去猜測，這是為了對抗虛無而說出的借口，因前方農民與工人的漠視，她們除了撒落一地玉米穗，用客觀世界反證自身之外，只能與同一維度的瑪麗相愛（沒有人關心她們，愛她們，證明其存在），又或許這是一對不為世俗所容的同性戀，在父權異性戀的世界里掙扎，無論如何，“我們不要走更多的路了，好嗎？”，已然預示了一個終點，隨后她們把彼此剪碎，在存在與虛無中來回翻覆，Věra使用了大量彩色濾鏡、波普手法、蒙太奇手段，不乏讓呂克戈達爾的痕跡，但她在某種程度上的確在與她們共舞。被撕碎的不僅是自我，也是一切，國家，社會，被重新縫補的也是這些，極盡絢爛當中我們看見的卻只有虛無，兩個少女仿佛伊甸園之果喂養(yǎng)而出的惡之花，在思想和行動上，惡劣地破壞一切看得見的規(guī)則游戲，既包括她們自己和故事邏輯，也包括觀影者的思維。

她們沒有走更多的路了，瑪麗一號和瑪麗二號乘坐機器來到一個奢華的大廳，當中有一大桌豐盛的食物，或許是某場共產主義領導高層行將舉行的聚會。她們用手嘗著不同的食物，不停更換座位以便得到美食，貪食在這一部分當中得到淋漓盡致的體現(xiàn)，不僅如此，她們脫光衣服，無意識地肆意揮霍食物，用高跟鞋踩踏佳肴，踢飛盤子，將蛋糕當做雪球扔來扔去，鏡面視覺效果一度呈現(xiàn)出萬花筒的形態(tài)。

當她們爬上吊燈蕩秋千之時，兩人掉入河中，接著電影出現(xiàn)了恍如審判者的字幕：這是她們唯一的結束方式，有任何方式可以拯救這些惡毒的行為嗎，瑪麗們回答我們快淹死了，我們在呼救，因為我們完全墮落了，我們再也不想墮落了，于是審判者說，我們會給她們第二次機會，接下來會發(fā)生什么事情。

瑪麗們穿著用廢棄報紙做成的衣服將餐桌收拾干凈。她們回到餐廳。把打破的碎片放在桌子上，把食物倒回盤子里，說著我們要善良，我們要勤奮，那么，一切都會干凈而美麗。清理完成之后，她們躺在桌子中央，說著我們很高興。瑪麗二號讓瑪麗一號重復這句話，瑪麗一號問我們是否在偽裝。瑪麗二號說我們不是，隨即吊燈落在了她們身上，電影切換到戰(zhàn)爭鏡頭，上面出現(xiàn)電影聲明：“獻給那些精神生活一片混亂的人”。

這是無聊的、不被世界理解、和世界一起變壞的瑪麗們所做的最后一件事情。她們果然沒有克制自己的欲念，盡情享用著大廳里的一切，秉持著誰發(fā)現(xiàn)誰掌握誰進食的原則，與那些濫用霸權的人們不同的是，她們不加以遮掩，甚至破壞到底，娛樂到底。貪食癥在現(xiàn)代社會被看作精神病征之一，在瑪麗們瘋狂不加節(jié)制進食的背后，反映的恰恰是精神世界的崩潰，她們的行徑看似沒有什么意義，甚至滑稽可笑，但各種過火行為映射出內心的虛無；面對現(xiàn)實世界的混沌，這些荒誕大概是她們消除不安的鎮(zhèn)靜劑。自電影起始，她們幾次回歸伊甸園，再下沉到人間，而在這一幕過后落進水里。

伊甸園和水域總是交叉出現(xiàn)，從Věra的天主教家庭背景出發(fā)，我們不妨把這幾次伊甸園看作地獄抑或天堂的層級，把水域理解為滅世紀的洪水，經歷一次次欲念“罪責”之后，被“上帝”問罪，因此瑪麗們不斷墜落，直至虛無主義的水域（內心的道德底層），她們才開始求饒和反思。這也暗合甚至反諷了捷克民族形象，“Pábitelé”式的言行舉止，這種天真的、甚至是愚蠢的幻想似乎又是一種高超的生存技巧。正是這樣一種生存姿態(tài)使得捷克民族得以在血雨腥風的歷史變遷中生存下來。

因此，似乎很難去判定哪一種是好的，哪一種是壞的，沒有永恒的真理，只有無所不在的悖論。

她們穿著廢棄報紙拼接包裹的衣服回來打掃，正如瑪麗們曾遇見的清潔工一樣，與此前不同的是，如今她們沾滿了標簽，口號和他人的話語，不再是發(fā)誓所成為的自由的壞女人了，她們的愿望（欲念）只有好好工作，然后幸福。我們可以看到，大廳里狼藉的場景漸漸干凈而整潔起來，但破碎的盤子仍然無法復原，掉在地上的食物再也沒辦法進食，臟污的窗簾依舊臟污，被戰(zhàn)爭破壞的家園亦復如是，Věra用物質構建的客觀世界映射人們戰(zhàn)后創(chuàng)傷的心靈還是那么空虛無措，像是用生命做出的一場達達主義實驗，盡管瑪麗們沒有溺斃在道德的彼岸，吊燈還是擊中了彼時凌駕于社會體制之上的她們，被世俗規(guī)范馴化的，最終也將為世俗規(guī)范所摧毀。瑪麗們僅僅只代表女性嗎？僅僅只代表個人嗎？我看不盡然。

Destruction and Reflection in Objectification: Feminist Allegory in Daisies/ Sedmirkrásky [1] and The Girls/ Flickorna [2]In the male-dominated film industry, it is rare to see films made from the perspective of women. Thornburg complains that traditionally most media have provided limited role models for women and that most films objectify women and define them in terms of their relationship to men.[3] With the onset of second-wave feminism in the early 1960s in the west, more women got involved in the film industry as filmmakers and more films were produced from a feminist point of view. Examples of such films include Daisies and The Girls, which are both directed by and use women as protagonists. These films successfully broke down stereotypical portrayals of women in film and have presented women’s reflection on their condition under patriarchal society. Daisies is directed by Věra Chytilová, a preeminent member of the Czech New Wave film movement. This film can be interpreted in a number of ways and can also be considered as a feminist allegory which reconstructs the doll metaphor as the celebration of the female recalcitrance rather than the apparent condemnation of its heroines.[4] The Girls, which is more recognisable of its director - Mai Zetterling’s political commitment, inserts an ancient Greek comedy - Lysistrata as a feminist allegory to reveal the heroines’ reflection on their own lives. Focusing on the central notion in feminism - objectification, this study will explore the feminist values presented to the viewer in Daisies and The Girls. This will be achieved by carefully comparing and analysing filmic elements and techniques used in both of these films. Before we begin to analyse their respective film works, it is valuable to look at these female filmmakers’ authorship approaches first. Although Chytilová and Zetterling are both from Europe, they came from opposing parts of Europe divided by the so called “Iron Curtain” for much of the 20th century, leading to distinct cultural differences in their work. As one of the most innovative filmmakers in 1960s, Chytilová’s work is characterised by surrealism, grotesque satire and absurdism. She is very creative in her methods through which she utilises avant-garde and experimental techniques to establish her own unique film style. For a brief period the work she produced was critical of communism, due to the de-Stalinization policy of the Czech government in the early 1960s, a short-lived period of artistic freedom in the country. Her early career as a fashion model may also have influenced Daisies. Zetterling is perhaps better known in the west for her acting than for her directing, yet she has created a new image of women in film which has embodied the potential of filmmaking by women[5]. Her filmmaking style is deeply influenced by the Swedish Ingmar Bergman, who has achieved worldwide notoriety as a director. He has directed several films and TV series that focus on women and marriage such as Persona[6] and Scenes from a Marriage/Scener ur ett ?ktenskap [7] which are in the same vein as The Girls. Some of the actors from The Girls also star in some Bergman’s other films. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the influence of Bergman when analysing The Girls by Zetterling.Differences in film elements and techniques set apart the contrasting styles of Daisies and The Girls. When analysing the respective films’ cinematography, it is apparent that the change of colour in Daisies and The Girls sets essential differences in their film’s tone. The differences are not just confined to the fact that Daisies is cine-colour and The Girls is in black and white. Daisies has manifest colour change from filters change and colour effect. The heavy use of colour effect in this film does not follow any specific rules, setting a tone that resembles a disordered game. Hames remarks that Daisies does not take itself seriously as most experimental films do.[8] This is contrast to The Girls, which follows a clear rule of the change of colour contrast. To some extent, The Girls is a combination of acting, reality, imagination and reminiscence. However, it is notable that only the reality and acting on the timeline are presented in a normal contrast, whereas imagination and flashback are both in high black and white contrast. This indicates a strong tendency of gender opposition. A clear and firm tone has been stated from the manifest colour change.

Fig. 1 The dynamic colour effect of rail in Daisies.

As evidenced by the soundtrack differences in Daisies and The Girls, the feminist allegory is told in a subtle way and a direct way respectively in each film. Much like its visual style, Daisies’ soundtrack is an experimental mixture of dialogue, sound effects and music. The soundtrack is more independent in Daisies, it includes pop music and mechanical sounds such as the tik tok of a clock and creaking sounds. The creative use of contrapuntal sound effectively defines the attributes of the two heroines from the opening scene of Daisies: the movement of the two Maries’ bodies makes a mechanical sound. From the beginning of the film Chytilová has made it clear that two heroines are puppet-like, as evidenced from their stiff and unnatural movements. In contrast, the sound source used in The Girls is diegetic for the most part. The movie uses dialogue directly copied from the play Lysistrata for dramatic effect. The memories and imagination aroused by the theatre that three heroines perform in are juxtaposed with lines from Lysistrata, to show their understanding of the drama and reflection of their real lives. The psychological description of an old couple who Liz has treated like friends is shown as monologues which reveal the status quo of women under the male gaze. Compared to Daisies, the dialogue in The Girls is more revealing in terms of its political overtones. This is in contrast to the dialogue of Daisies, which is far more banal and mundane, therefore its subtext as a feminist allegory is presented in a far more subtle way. Another element that differentiates the style of Daisies and The Girls is the performance style. The performance in Daisies is mostly acted out by the two women, and they are both amateur actors. Their performance style is unique and unnatural, and is in keeping with the style of the film. Their body language and speech are also stilted, and these traits combined with their negative and selfish behaviour are superficially attractive. [9] This performance style helps to establish the image of the girls as being doll like, Hames argues that they ‘act out a puppet-like spectacle.’[10] In The Girls, the acting performances are more natural and professional. The characters’ behaviour noticeably diverges under different conditions. In the real world and in memory sequences, the heroines are obedient and weak. However in the scenes from the theatre and from their imagination, they are radical and strong. These inconsistencies in their behaviour show their strong desire to have these traits in the real world. For instance, Liz gives three speeches which are after the show, in the real world in front of the journalists and in her imagination. Her confidence level varies in each of her speeches, at the start of her after-show speech she is reasonably self-assured, but in her real world speech she is irresolute, lastly in her imagination she is fearless and intrepid, reflecting her ‘desire for power’.[11]

Fig.2 Liz’s three speeches in The Girls: after the play, in front of the journalists and in her fantasy.

To some extent, Daisies is about the consequences of poor decision making whereas The Girls is a reflection on the feminist allegory. Daisies and The Girls both criticise consumerism with food but in differing ways. In The Girls, Gunila has an unpleasant flashback where she goes shopping and buys a cake. She is treated disrespectfully by a male clerk in shop and then children start to chase her, leaving her feeling helpless. She drops the cake she bought and runs away. Gunila does not push back against the clerk’s behaviour and fears the kids even as a mother of four children herself. In Daisies, the two girls eat, cut and spoil food, and burn things with joy. There behaviours show the girls’ liberation from consumerism using hyperbolic imagery. Lim describes them as being ‘awaken to revolt’[12]against the worn out cliche that women are powerless and flimsy.The relationship between the heroines and men in these two films are portrayed using different techniques. In Daisies, the two Maries belong to no-one, and they enjoy the game of manipulating men because of their inability to love. In other words, they also belong to everyone. They are portrayed as both consumers and destroyers of food, but in reality they represent the typical woman who has been objectified to the point where they are no different to a product that is consumed in the patriarchal society. Chytilová further highlights this from other details in the film such as when the two Maries soak themselves in the milk bath and when they get into the food elevator. In Daisies, the two Maries use destruction to justify their existence. Nobody cares them so they decide to destroy. The Girls is for the most part about the struggle of three heroines against the men in their lives. They are deeply bothered by the reality that people are indifferent towards them even though they are successful actresses. The girls in Daisies parallel the mistresses of Liz’s husband in her fantasy scene in The Girls. Liz’s husband takes his mistresses out from his case and undresses them on the bed as though they are dolls, whilst persuading Liz to sacrifice her career to support him. Thornburg points out that Liz’s husband wants to objectify Liz in the same manner as his mistresses: to achieve an ‘expansion of his own ego’.[13]Clouzot states that the dominant trait of Daisies is its objective vision[14], which explains why Chytilová and Zetterling present the two Maries and the mistresses of Liz’s husband in a similar manner.

Fig. 3 Analogous characters in The Girls and Daisies: The mistresses of Liz’s husband and the two Maries are all like dolls.

The difference can also be seen from different character settings. In The Girls, the heroines’ conflict with the men in their lives is partly due to their successful jobs. However, in Daisies, the two girls never work but exist under an ‘economical parasitism’ [15]. The three heroines in The Girls are middle-class white women who can be related to by the audience from their different conditions: Mariamne is a mistress, Liz has a cheating husband and Gunila is a mother who has a boring and irresponsible husband. In Daisies, the young and beautiful Maries are an extreme representation of every woman who has been objectified in their life. Daisies and The Girls both operate within a double world structure but it presented to the viewer in different ways. The two worlds in Daisies, which are the realistic orderly world and the world of the two Maries’ abnormal behaviours, exist independently. The majority of Daisies is dominated by the second world. There are several parts of the film in which the two Maries encounter the real world. For example, in the nightclub scene, a female dancer becomes frozen with surprise upon viewing the two Maries’ farcical behaviour. One can assume that her reaction shows how she has become enlightened by the two Maries’ defiance against docility. In the countryside scene, the two Maries are passed by a group of workers who totally ignore them, which sparks Maries’ self-criticism about their decision to engage in this behaviour. Moreover, the dual protagonists are symbolic of the double world. The repeated use of symmetrical composition from the beginning correlates with the concept of double world. Daisies starts with the dual protagonists sitting on the ground and ends with them lying on the table after their punishment. Their rebellion is destined to fail because they are still stuck in the cage of patriarchal society. At the end of the film, their behaviour reverts to that of the stereotypical female, happy to be subservient in society. Their destruction can be interpreted as Chytilová’s criticism on objectifying women.

Fig. 4 The double world in Daisies: the female dancer is closely awakened by the two Maries’ unruly behaviour which shows an intrusion of th

In The Girls, the double world becomes mixed up together as the three heroines’ theatre acting, real life and fantasy combine. The nightclub scene in The Girls is a fantasy in which Liz leads the women to use their initiative to put themselves under the male gaze by taking off their clothes in front of male onlookers. Only in the imaginary scenes do the women rebel bravely, which is similar to the behaviour of the girls in Daisies. Apart from this, the heroines are passive and oppressed in the real world. Their fantasies are more like daydreams, compared to the practical revolt that occurs in Daisies. The Girls ends in an ambiguous manner. Liz’s decision to get divorced is not shown explicitly but is replaced by the imagery of distorted figures dancing in the mirror, which may indicate an acknowledgement by Zitterling that the challenges faced by women in the real world are still difficult to conquer. As Zitterling admits that ‘a woman is emotionally formed by men and never quite breaks free from them, even if she would like to.’[16]

Fig. 5 The colour contrast change in the last scene of The Girls when Liz declares she is getting a divorce, which calls into question wheth

Thanks to the efforts of generations of feminists, women have made great progress in the pursuit of gender equality in the west. However, today’s world is still dominated by men, and women in developing countries are still facing similar problems to what were experienced by women in the developed world in the 1960s. Winkler describes the three main actresses in The Girls as having a real ‘sense of frustration with balancing or combining work and family’ in 1995[17]. Women in the movie industry are still facing these same problems today. Chytilová has become renowned for her talent, skills and unique style. However, Zetterling cannot avoid being overshadowed by the more acclaimed Bergman as a director. Therefore, films like Daisies and The Girls are still hugely relevant as feminist allegories, not only because they show how women have awakened to reflect on their condition, but also to act as a benchmark when it comes to the representation of women in film today. Daisies and The Girls both have distinctive styles in presenting colours, sound and performance on screen. Chytilová tells the story of how women can be destroyed by objectification through an experimental comedy. Zetterling contrasts the reality and the political appeal of women who have become inspired by the play Lysistrata. They both reflect on the manner in which women have become objectified and go on to explore the real world demands of women. Although the five heroines in two films all fail in practicing, the double world in Daisies already interacts with each other and the three actresses in The Girls are awaken on the ideological level. These proclaimed feminist films will always inspire people to reflect and behave just as the female filmmakers had wished. Winkler highlights that Liz’s speech after her performance likely serves as Zetterling’s own views in regard to her film[18]. These films shot from the woman’s perspective in 1960s deserve more notoriety as they are invaluable in showing the potential of women as independent human beings. As Winkler argues that ‘in spite of Bergman’s influence, The Girls is Zetterling’s own.’[19]

Filmography

Bergman, Ingmar, Persona, 1966. Film. Swe: AB Svensk Filmindustri

Bergman, Ingmar, Scene from a Marriage/ Scener ur ett ?ktenskap, 1973. TV series. Swe: Sveriges Radio

Chytilová, Věra, Daisies/Sedmirkrásky. 1966. Film.

Zetterling, Mai. The Girls/Flickorna. 1968. Film. Swe: Sandrew Film & Teater

Bibliography

Anděl, Jaroslav, Alexandr Hackenschmied (Prague: Torst, 2000)Clouzot, Claire, ‘Daisies by Věra Chytilová’ Film Quartly, Vol.21, No.3, 1968, pp. 35-37.

Hames, Peter, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema) (Edinburgh University Press, 2010)

Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’ Camera Obscura, Vol.16, No.2, 2001, pp. 1-77.

Sloan, Jane, ‘Making the Scene Together: Mai Zetterling’s Flikorna/The Girls(1968) and Aristophanes’s Lysistrata’, Quarterly Review of Film and Video, Vol.25, No.2, 2008, pp. 97-106

Thornburg, Linda, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’ Journal of the University Film Association, Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1974, pp. 13-15.

Winkler, Martin M, Classical Literature on Screen: Affinities of Imagination (Cambridge Press, 2017)

[1] Chytilová, Věra, Daisies/Sedmirkrásky. 1966. Film. [2] Zetterling, Mai. The Girls/Flickorna. 1968. Film. Swe: Sandrew Film & Teater [3] Thornburg, Linda, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’ Journal of the University Film Association, Vol. 26, No. 1/2, 1974, p. 13. [4] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’ Camera Obscura, Vol.16, No.2, 2001, p. 38. [5] Thornburg, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 13. [6] Bergman, Ingmar, Persona, 1966. Film. Swe: AB Svensk Filmindustri [7] Bergman, Ingmar, Scene from a Marriage/ Scener ur ett ?ktenskap, 1973. TV series. Swe: Sveriges Radio [8] Hames, Peter, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema) (Edinburgh University Press, 2010), p. 152. [9] Anděl, Jaroslav, Alexandr Hackenschmied (Prague: Torst, 2000), p. 8. [10] Hames, Czech and Slovak Cinema: Theme and Tradition (Traditions in World Cinema), p. 154. [11] Sloan, Jane, ‘Making the Scene Together: Mai Zetterling’s Flikorna/The Girls(1968) and Aristophanes’s Lysistrata’, Quarterly Review of Film and Video, 25:2, 2008, p. 102. [12] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’, p. 60. [13] Thornburg, ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 15. [14] Clouzot, Claire, ‘Daisies by Věra Chytilová’ Film Quartly, Vol.21, No.3, 1968, p. 35. [15] Lim, Bliss Cua, ‘Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory’, p. 57. [16] Thornburg, quoted in Rosen, Marjorie, ‘Women, Their films and Their Festival’ Saturday Review (ed) ‘Mai Zetterling: The Creation of a New Mythology’, p. 15. [17] Winkler, Martin M, Classical Literature on Screen:Affinities of Imagination ( Cambridge Press, 2017), p.149. [18] Ibid. p.144. [19] Ibid. p.148.

我猜每一個有暴食傾向的人看到此片都會打心底拍手稱好，因為這兩姐妹簡直神復原了我們這些人的日常狀態(tài)：瘋狂貪婪食物，而后又在墮落后感到無限的懊悔和空虛，接著下定決心好好做人，勤奮工作，周而復始地在這個過程中一遍遍循環(huán)……

有暴食傾向，很大程度上來源于正常的心理需求未得到滿足，而內心巨大空虛又需要填補，這時食物就成了填補者。正如影片中這兩個混亂姐妹，她們不斷詢問自己是否存在，一切是否存在，當肯定世界已經走向墮落時，她們也選擇以墮落回答墮落，她們戲弄男人們的感情，偷別人錢包，大毀宴席，在舞會上搞破壞，每一件事與每一件事之間你找不到任何邏輯和理性，而食物在這里，本質上已經超出生理需求或者美味享受的需求了，食物成為墮落本源的象征，是人內心虛無的體現(xiàn)。

同時，配合著導演的各種濾鏡和蒙太奇、超現(xiàn)實鏡頭，更將這種混亂推到一種令人稱嘆的地步，我們跟著兩姐妹一會兒在泳池，一會兒在臥室，一會兒在餐廳，一會兒在草地，一個多小時的片，完全不知道她們在干什么，只看到她們不停地吃，在吃的空隙間來幾句摸不著頭腦的對白。整部影片如同夜間做的夢，超現(xiàn)實的畫面卻實實在在表達了我們所處現(xiàn)實的空洞和荒謬，盡管此片是60年代的片字，但放在當下看依舊能引起共鳴，互聯(lián)網讓世界互聯(lián)，卻讓個體和社會越來越原子化，價值觀看似包容卻實際越發(fā)單一，各種綜藝網劇段子八卦持續(xù)轟炸我們的眼鏡和耳朵。我們對信息暴食，對娛樂暴食，對資本暴食，但依舊無法解決自我的存在問題和虛無感受。

回到影片結尾，瘋狂姐妹躺在收拾完殘局的長桌上，一遍一遍地說著“我們很高興”，似乎將一切打掃清理完畢后，明天就是新的開始，她們真的可以勤奮工作并感到快樂嗎？真是這樣嗎？

整個電影像一場夢。

敘事如夢一般，場景忽近忽出，沒有明顯邏輯，顏色時而黑白時而彩色。主人公完全是由直覺來引領行動，思考和邏輯是被直接跳過的。腦中涌出的想法會直接變成行動。

兩個女主的行動像兩個不愿被束縛，瘋狂的兩個意識，在物質世界的顯化。也像是兩個內心中小我的自娛自樂和討論，想象和意識即現(xiàn)實。

夢，直覺和邏輯，一直是兩個吸引我且讓我好奇的的課題，人為什么推崇理智和邏輯？為什么要壓抑感性呢？人為什么要符合條條框框的社會標準？在世界存在的意義是什么？我的行動會帶來什么？看雛菊的時候好像又體會了做夢的感覺。

隨意的一個想法，用直覺和第六感行動異常迷人。不得不說，我也很想靠直覺生活。以上原因讓這部電影給我留下了深刻的印象，也讓我更偏愛。

此電影已列入我的favorite，對我影響很大。見識到了電影還可以這么拍，藝術的表達形式多種多樣。Vera Chytilova導演的名字很好的背下來了，實在很欣賞。

這個世界上的一切都墮落了

你說的一切是什么

就是一切

我們墮落了不是嗎

而且我有工作，做個傻瓜哈哈哈哈哈哈哈

有五秒轉的時光列車太酷炫太驚喜了！

鬼馬的太有趣了（兩個人一黑一白，一個墨綠一個薄荷綠，一個格紋一個波點，一個短發(fā)花環(huán)一個雙馬尾，一起燒房子，泡牛奶浴，在草地上打滾兒，剪衣服，互相丟蛋糕）把蝴蝶標本與女性身體的私密敏感部位相結合

你不屬于這個世紀

我一定是愛上你了