FIELD NOTE
"Human Surrender's sword, location photography and multi-engineer."
MANIFESTO SIGNAL
It's not a story, it's not a photographer. It is a manuscript from the floor of the screening room: about how a camera grows hands, feet, names and debts.
A well-trained photographer is often asked to be non-existent.
Don't block the light, don't paint, don't disturb the actors, don't remind the audience: Turns out the world didn't grow up on its own. It was people who lifted up the machine, people who were down, people who were on foot, people who were close and people who were not shouting to stop.
The worst part of Human Surrender is that it does not allow photographers to enjoy such professional invisibility.
In this film, photographers are not the ones standing behind. He'll be turned out of the spin lens, suddenly seen in the first person's name drift, forced to bed in close proximity, called by the Cary through the camera, hit by a public performance, and re-entered into the file at the end of the film.
It's not flowers.
That's the way.
MANIFESTO SIGNAL
Article one of the manuscript
Those who claim to be merely recording themselves should first check whether their soles, sleeves and names have been painted.
EVIDENCE PLATE
After the film was rotated, the camera was turned. It's not the colored egg behind the scenes, it's the first time the whole film has announced that the photographer is in the relationship.
In film history, cameras are often described as an eye. Wiltoff's "film-eye" wants the machine to see the invisible world; Dogme95 wants the movie back in hand, in reality, in natural light, in sync; and the real movie and the movie truth keep asking: Are the cameras watching or getting involved?
These issues are important. But they do not explain Human Surrender.
Because the real question of this film is not whether the camera can see the truth or whether the picture is rough or not. It's more troublesome
When a camera enters a relationship, can someone with a camera pretend to be innocent?
This is where position photography really falls. Positions are not left, right, high, low on the table. The position is: who is forced to speak from this angle, who is exposed from this distance and who is responsible for taking up the machine.
In P4's long practice, "location" is never a static term. Positions generate relationships. Where you stand, you start having sex with others; what you pick up, you start to bear the consequences of that thing. Human Surrender pushed the matter onto the camera: the camera was not a tool to record relationships, and the camera itself was the generator of relationships.
EVIDENCE PLATE
Shoot self with you is not a decorative English title. It's on the film, and it's action: shoot itself and get in with you.
FIELD NOTE
It's not a movie eye. It's a relationship eye.
Wiltoff believes that a machine eye can save the world from the illusion of drama and literature. The camera is faster, closer and more strangely visible. It's like a new organ that opens the world for humanity.
Human Surrender also never used the camera as a transparent glass. But it's not purer than the movie eye.
The camera here is not a higher eye. It's more like an eye that'll be in debt once it's opened. It sees and exposes itself; it approaches and changes; it preserves the scene and pushes the photographers into responsibility.
So it's not as simple as "We saw the photographer."
More precisely, it was the film that pushed the photographer, a commonly hidden place of work, to the audience for the first time. At that moment, the camera was no longer a natural phenomenon. It has hands, a body, a name, a place that will be recalled back and forth.
This position is not a throne of power. On the contrary, it is a dangerous position.
Because from this moment on, the photographer can't say, "I'm just filming."
MANIFESTO SIGNAL
The movie eye says, "Let me see."
And the eye of the eye said: When thou seeest, thou shalt not turn away.
FIELD NOTE
First person says it's not ownership.
The most fascinating place for Human Surrender is that it makes the "first person's perspective" unreliable.
Usually we say POV, it's as if it's simple: now the camera is someone's eye. But Human Surrender does not allow the rule to stand. Camera drifts, closes, pulls out, turns to the empty field, locks the door
Subtitles and the rehearsing of Act Four are back on the scene.
You think it's ugly, and the next second it could be back in the picture. You think the photographer is outside the painting and the next second the sword will be run over by the first person. You think the camera belongs to someone.
And the next second it's like a temporary organ pushed by a relationship.
EVIDENCE PLATE
Backsliding, lights, stools, curtains and ground props appear simultaneously: private words are not cut off, but are interrupted by door locks/systems/aerial devices.
EVIDENCE PLATE
"Fact 4, yeah" takes back the unstable perspective from the rehearsal process. The first person in this ugly place is called the photographer's location.
That's the key.
The first person in Human Surrender claimed that not one person had sovereignty, but rather temporary possession. Anyone can pick up the camera, anyone can hold it.
When analysing the movie's visual anchor track, I'm actually following the film to learn the rule: do not allow lines and subjectivity to determine who's there, go back to body, space, motion, camera interruption. That is to say, the truth of the photo is not "who I feel is watching", but "how this place was created step by step".
This is more rigorous and disturbing than the usual perspective analysis.
Because once you look at it, it's no longer aesthetic, it's an evidence method.
MANIFESTO SIGNAL
Article II of the manuscript
The first person claimed not to be a title certificate. It is only a permit that a camera temporarily lends to a body and may be withdrawn at any time.
FIELD NOTE
Photographers are not eyes. They're hands, feet, breathing.
Later, in the intimate part of the bed, the word "photography" was pulled back from the theory.
Amon and Koko are close. The lens is also very close, and almost all that is left is the face, lips, nose, skin and bedside edge. We can see a sharper detail in later footage: the sword's foot is right on it.
Shoot them together on the bed of Ammon, yes.
Bed, including his feet.
Photography is not a weightless eye.
Photography has feet.
EVIDENCE PLATE
01:07:42. The closeness of the intimacy of the bed already indicates that the camera distance is pressed inside the body."
Once you say the camera has feet, a lot of pretty things go off.
It's too light to gaze. The audio-visual language is too light. The expression of "intimate relationships" is too light. What really happened was that a person with a camera had to find a place on the bedside or bed, had to bear the weight of the body, had to breathe close to others, and had to continue to work in close proximity where they were most vulnerable to aggression.
Dogme95 says that handheld, realistic, natural light can drag films back from industrial hallucinations. But Human Surrender does not prove it by hand. It is more like saying: handheld is not automatic, handheld only makes responsibility harder to hide.
Hands shake. Foot step in. Respiration exposes distance. The shoulder is heavy. Keep the camera on.
A close close-up is not a "photo selection", it is a body that places itself in an uncomfortable position.
That's the photography body process.
FIELD NOTE
One word, "Thank you."
Part IV contains a very small but very lethal sentence.
Garrett, Amon, Kodak are playing a three-word game. All of a sudden, Garrett said to the camera
Thank you, Sword Fai.
EVIDENCE PLATE
"Thank you, Yun Jianhui"
That's not polite.
It's a roll call.
Normal movies cut this stuff off. The cameraman is the tech, the tail list, the hand behind the camera that should not have been noticed. But Human Surrender chose to retain it. So the guy behind the camera suddenly had a name, and the camera suddenly had a recipient.
The best part of "Thank you, Sword Fai" is that it did not turn Sword Fai into a warm and grateful hero. It takes place at the scene where public performances, games, body signs, viewers, plastics, paints, rules and failures are mixed.
So this "thank you" is more like a call
You're here too.
You can't just be a technical position.
You're named by this public observation machine.
The movie truthists have long acknowledged that the opportunities for photography change the people they film. Human Surrender goes even further: the person who was shot would in turn change the location of the photographer. The role is not just captured by the camera; it speaks to the person behind the camera and pulls him into the relationship.
At this point, the photographer is no longer a question of who's doing well.
He became the third witness in the relationship.
MANIFESTO SIGNAL
Article 3 of the manuscript
When the character speaks to the person behind the camera, the film is no longer just inside and outside. It's an extra battlefield named.
FIELD NOTE
It's not transparent to be shot in paint.
EVIDENCE PLATE
Garrett threw the paint on him and suddenly the left arm of the sword was painted, caught in the air and taken back.
I think this detail is even more indicative of the film's photography than the whole scene.
Because not only was the photographer called by words, he was hit by material.
Painting is not just left on the body of the actor, but is a form, symbol, performance mark. It'll be thrown on the man who took the camera. The person with the camera will reflect, stretch out, scratch, pull back his hand. Once that arm is painted, the camera's transparency is completely broken.
You can't say there's a clean observer here.
The observers also have paint on them.
This is where Human Surrender is more radical than many real movies. It does not create a sense of truth through rough images, it does not create a sense of honesty through low cost. It turns reality into something that contaminates photographers.
True is not an objective camera.
It is true that the photographers also claimed on site.
FIELD NOTE
Last camera, subtitled.
At the end of the page, things went up again.
The film folds scattered images, numbers, lists, characters, p4logo and the remnants of the scene. It's not just a staff list. It's more like the last camera. Optical photography of the body, action, failure; tail subtitles of names, sequencing, archiving.
EVIDENCE PLATE
Film last. Photography of the Sword Fai into the tail text system. The photographer was not only named at the scene, but was also rewritten in the archives.
In ordinary movies, the tail is finished. Not the end of Human Surrender. It's still shooting.
It's written.
It gives names to relationships that are too messy, too close, too dirty and too difficult to classify.
Photography.
It is not a simple signature, but a re-emergence of the photographer ' s position in the archives. At the same time, the fixed position was recorded with four actors. And it's because we're not closed that we can see more about the evidence discipline that the film forces: photographers are not a fixed role, and anyone can be that role.
There's a bigger problem here.
When we're reviewing Human Surrender with images, unexpected leaks, subtitles and actors' watches, we're not actually filling it out outside the movie. We're following our own way down.
The film was not convinced that a single look would complete the truth. It allows relationships to occur first, failures to remain, people to be mistaken, silent bodies to be missed first, tails to be renamed, and reviews to continue questioning.
So the subtitle camera is not a metaphor. It's really doing the photography thing: assign who can see, who's named, who's archived and who's re-recovered.
FIELD NOTE
The more important it is, the less important it is to write a film into a person's picture.
Speaking of which, once again, the borders must be made clear.
The Sword Fai is important, but Human Surrender is not "The Sword Fai" film.
On the contrary, the more important the sword is, the more the film cannot go back to a single photographer. Because his role is not to monopolize photography, but to highlight what is normally hidden from the "location of photographers".
There's more than one person in the whole picture. He Fa can shoot, he can shoot, he can shoot. And there's a fixed space, and there's a tailing, and there's a follow-up screen, an actor's chart, a role line and a log file. The right to view is transferred between different bodies, different devices, different systems of evidence.
EVIDENCE PLATE
We saw more names at the end. Let's go.
It's not to erase the photographer.
This is what makes the photographer really specific.
If you say "this is a distributive device," it's easy to abstract real photography as if the camera itself would drift, the plane itself would fall, the long shot itself would insist, and the intimate scene itself would be filmed as a very close feature.
If only to say "this is a picture of the sword", it would re-establish the entire complex ownership, first-person drift, role grabs, fixed slots and subtitles into one person's signature.
Human Surrender is thinking here
It shows us both the body of the individual photographer and the fact that the right to film is never private.
Sword Fai is the anchor, not the end.
FIELD NOTE
Position photography. Six moves.
So, "location photography" can no longer be a beautiful concept. It's got at least six moves
METHOD LEDGER
Visibility: Photographers, operators, viewers are shown from transparency.
Change of hands: camera, perspective, right to view between bodies.
Seizure: Long lenses do not repair the site for failure, silence, embarrassment and mislocation.
Lifting: bed, subduction, white light, projection pushing closeness to a searchable position.
Decreasing: low altitude, ground, plastic, reflection to drag body into material layers.
Archive: Subtitles, names, roles and review take over the final viewing rights.
In these six actions, photography is not "what's taken," but "where to put relationships." And even worse: every placement changes the person who takes the camera.
That's why the photographer in "Human Surrender" had to surrender.
He didn't surrender to someone.
He surrendered to the relationship, surrendered to the scene, surrendered to the evidence and surrendered to the fact that he could not stand outside.
At the end of the day, the film was actually filmed not only by Ammon, Ugly, Garrett, Ricky, O, but also by acting, intimacy, failure and tailing lists.
It filmed something harder
When a person picks up a camera, he can't stand behind him any more.
Author: Ivan Tolf
The movie's on the sidelines, the relationship forensics.
Fraudster.
In '29, by mistake, entered a 46-year-old tavern. He's not himself.
A beggar at best.
I used to brag, "The machine will see the world."
I'm Ivan Tolf. Machines are not just blind, they are blacked out by the world, they collect debts, and they even charge traffic fees.
Related articles
Closeness doesn't belong to two people.
"Human Surrender" as "the oracular work"
How words betray people - the original language structure of Human Surrender
No longer loyal to integrity - the final edition of Human Surrender Long Commentary
Theatre and Psychoanalysis
From symbols to events: academic thinking and influence on Erica Fisher-Lishit
The Grammar of Events: Actor-Generated Topology (AGT) and the birth of a postmodern subject (up)
p4 Third subject of theoretical analysis: a comprehensive exploration of Thomas Ogden's "third presence" theory
Group theory development from a psychoanalytic perspective: Theoretical practice and history of Deleuze and Gathari
P4 Theater, 10-year archive (partial)
I want to see Human Surrender on board. Long