我很在乎

开始的剧情倒还是很不错的，女主的可恶让人恨得牙痒痒，然后就特别希望黑帮儿子能好好惩罚这个女主，结果呢？看到黑帮杀不死女主和女主女朋友，然后反杀黑帮老大，我就直接不看了！太特么的浪费时间，太特么的搞笑了，跟个喜剧片一样，关键还不是那种真的喜剧片，看得窝火，烂片烂片烂片！谁特么看谁后悔！

【首发于公众号 写作疑难杂症诊疗室】

I Care A Lot 一句话影评： The storytelling is so good, acting so good, until you realize the story is so … 三观不正 😤

If you are intrigued by Rosamond Pike’s unfeeling, first-rate psychopathic smart bitch in Gone Girl, then you will watch I Care a Lot as soon as you have the chance. Well, that’s what I did. And it was the first movie I watched in 2023 — by Jove, how it angered me.

Two minutes into the movie, it is living up to the poster’s promise of badass-ness. Pike plays Marla Grayson, who does the voice-over in the opening monologue synopsizing her worldview: this is a world of either winners or losers, predators or prey, lions or lambs. Black or white, no middle ground. An all too familiar worldview to the point of hackneyed, but Pike’s delivery, her cadence, is top-notch. In this strictly dichotomous world, Marla declares:

“I am not a lamb. I am a fucking lioness.”

Suspense is a foundational trick to hold the audience’s attention. The opening scene does this by the discord between what you see on the screen and what you hear. You hear Marla briefing you on her Ayn Randian philosophy (which has a lot of avid supporters in the far right, something to keep in mind when thinking about why the movie is terrible), but you see images of an orderly care facility where the staff seem attentive to the elderly, and then a disheveled, chubby man trying to break into the facility, only to be quickly seized by some brawny guards.

If you are minimally familiar with the science of storytelling, you know that suspense helps to release dopamine, the so-called happiness hormone. When you anticipate a reward, in the case of storytelling, when you expect that everything will be accounted for by the end of the movie, your brain produces dopamine. This opening scene is your first shot of dopamine.

The next scene quickly explains what is going on. We are now in a courtroom. Turns out, the mother of the disheveled man, Feldstrom, is in the care facility, to which he is denied access. The court appoints Marla as his mother’s guardian, giving her license to deny Feldstrom visits to his own mother. Marla is also entitled to sell the mother’s house, car, valuable belongings and then use the money to pay herself for her service as the court-appointed guardian.

If this sounds crooked, it is. Feldstrom adds that Marla is a total stranger both to him and his mother, and his mother has explicitly said that she doesn’t want to be put in a care facility.

Just when you think Marla is the bad guy in the story, here comes the twist.

Marla defends herself, first by portraying the son as irresponsible: “Your mother couldn’t cope on her own. A doctor diagnosed her with dementia, Mr Feldstrom, and wrote an affidavit recommending immediate action be take for her safety. You have amply opportunity to move your mother into a care facility or into your home. You did neither.” When parents abuse or for whatever reason can’t take proper care of their children, we think it reasonable for the government and the judicial system to step in. The same goes to elderly who aren’t properly cared for. So far so good, Marla seems reasonable.

When Feldstrom objects to Marla’s accusation by saying that her mother begged not to be taken to a care facility, Marla makes a clever distinction: “You can’t care for her by doing what she wants. You have to do what she needs. And that is why I can care better than a family member because I have no skin in the game. … yes, I oversaw the sale of some of her assets to finance [her bills in the care facility], and yes, I pay myself, too, because caring, sir, is my job. … All-day, every day, I care.”

You have to admire the concision in her speech, her dazzling use of differentiation, addressing counterargument, and appealing to ethos. And it makes sense. Kids surely want all the sugar they can get and more. But that’s not what they need. The same logic applies to those with dementia. Marla becomes less the greedy predator preying on the vulnerable, and more the strong-willed businesswoman who does what might seem ruthless but necessary.

She continues: “I care for those who are in need of protection. Protection from apathy, protection from their own pride, and quite often, protection from their own children. … offspring, who are willing to let their parents starve in squalor and struggle with pain rather than dip into what they see as their inheritance to pay for the necessary care.” By this point, we begin to suspect that Feldstrom is actually the greedy one.

At the same time, Marla’s argumentation is so tactical, the intonation so calculated, that it just lacks authenticity. You can’t be entirely sure: is Marla a good guy, or a bad guy? There, uncertainty over the main character — you have your second shot of dopamine. With questions like this, we keep watching.

Mind you, this is only less than seven minutes into the movie, and Feldstrom has gone from being the bad guy to the not so bad guy and then again the bad (in the sense of incompetent) guy, and the ruthless Marla with her problematic worldview becomes a respectable professional.

这么紧凑的人物翻转制造了「爽剧」的效果。不得不佩服好莱坞故事产业的成熟。

The next scene, we see Marla Grayson walking down the stairs outside the courthouse, with full-on badassery. Feldstrom comes after her. He is wearing a red cap again. Looks like he can be a Trump supporter. And he’s calling her “bitch.” He’s in a rage. Words are flushing out of his mouth: “I hope you get raped, and I hope you get murdered, and I hope you get killed!” And he spits on her face. His vulgarity is complete. But his anger also makes you think that he’s truly the victim. Feldstrom is surely an uncivilized, undereducated person for losing his cool like that, but … it could be you — you may have said something similar on social media, in response to some monster doing something flagrantly dehumanizing… Again, you are not sure whether Marla is the good guy or bad guy, and therefore you are not sure if Feldstrom’s outburst is justified.

And here comes the problematic part. Marla takes off her sunglasses and looks ferociously into Feldstrom’s eyes: “Does it sting more because I’m a woman? That you got so soundly beaten in there by someone with a vagina? Having a penis doesn’t automatically make you more scary to me, just the opposite. You may be a man, but if you ever threaten, touch or spit on me again… I will grab your dick and balls and I will rip them clean off, you understand? I’ll tell your mom you send your best.”

This is a calculated move to make the female audience feel so good, no? You had been belittled at least once, so indelibly, just because you are a girl/woman, and this is exactly what you wanted to say to the offender had you had the guts (which you didn’t). So hearing Marla say that so collectedly just makes you feel wonderful. If you feel that way, that’s due to something called mirror neurons, “brain cells that fire not only when we perform an action but when we observe someone else perform the same action.” 看节目主持人在享受美食的时候，自己也馋了，即使你的理性告诉你那不是真正的食物，而是像素构成的幻影。

But how are men reacting to the scene? Could be something totally different. It could frighten the male audience. When you feel threatened and stressed out, you also become more focused. Scientists have long discovered that even when we don’t face a direct physical threat, as long as we begin to imagine those threats, we get stressed out, and thus more focused. You can identify with Feldstrom and feel intimidated by Marla. Or you can feel frightened for Marla in anticipation of Feldstrom’s fightback.

Or, it can be that the masculine part of you feels threatened, and the feminine part of you feels elated. If you can simultaneously feel these two things, oh boy, you are getting the optimal experience. Cortisol is the attention hormone, and oxytocin the bonding hormone. Cortisol combined with oxytocin can give you the experience of transportation (“transport” in the sense of being overwhelmed “with a strong emotion, especially joy”).

The second time watching this scene, though, I just rolled my eyes at Marla, because in the next eighteen minutes, the good-guy-bad-guy suspense is completely resolved. The next eighteen minutes show you how Marla capitalizes on the loopholes in the medical and legal system, how she takes advantage of the human weakness of automatically following orders and trusting authority figures, how she preys on those with insufficient legal resources, and what she claims as “care” is actually just grift.

As in Gone Girl, Pike once again plays the female villain character in I Care A Lot. Only this time, her character Marla is a lesbian, which frees her from the obligation of playing along with the modern, enlightened men’s fantasy about modern, enlightened women. Marla can express her contempt for men explicitly, whereas in Gone Girl the Cool Girl Amy has to convey her contempt through elaborate schemes.

It is really worth the while to revisit the famed Cool Girl passage in Gone Girl, for those too young to have watched or heard of the film:

That night at the Brooklyn party, I was playing the girl who was in style, the girl a man like Nick wants: the Cool Girl. Men always say that as the defining compliment, don’t they? She’s a cool girl. Being the Cool Girl means I am a hot, brilliant, funny woman who adores football, poker, dirty jokes, and burping, who plays video games, drinks cheap beer, loves threesomes and anal sex, and jams hot dogs and hamburgers into her mouth like she’s hosting the world’s biggest culinary gang bang while somehow maintaining a size 2, because Cool Girls are above all hot. Hot and understanding. Cool Girls never get angry; they only smile in a chagrined, loving manner and let their men do whatever they want. Go ahead, shit on me, I don’t mind, I’m the Cool Girl. Men actually think this girl exists. Maybe they’re fooled because so many women are willing to pretend to be this girl...Oh, and if you’re not a Cool Girl, I beg you not to believe that your man doesn’t want the Cool Girl. It may be a slightly different version—maybe he’s vegetarian, so Cool Girl loves seitan and is great with dogs; or maybe he’s a hipster artist, so Cool Girl is a tattooed, bespectacled nerd who loves comics. There are variations to the window dressing, but believe me, he wants Cool Girl, who is basically the girl who likes every f***ing thing he likes and doesn’t ever complain. (How do you know you’re not Cool Girl? Because he says things like “I like strong women.” If he says that to you, he will at some point f*** someone else. Because “I like strong women” is code for “I hate strong women.”

Gone Girl is invested in the plight of contemporary women, while I Care A Lot is not — the pseudo-feminist things Marla says only bring cheap gratification. Cool Girl Amy’s transgression consists of framing men for stalking, rape, and murder, of putting men to social death and behind bars. But Marla’s seeming transgression of heteronormative sexuality is only a masquerade for her real transgression: her subscription to a macho capitalist logic.

Let me quickly sum up the rest of I Care A Lot. Marla collides with a doctor to induce signs of dementia in a rich old lady. Then Marla becomes the legal guardian of that rich old lady, Jennifer Peterson. But Jennifer turns out to be the mother of a super rich and powerful Russian man, Roman, whose business includes human trafficking. Roman kills the doctor and makes it look like suicide, in an attempt to frighten Marla into forfeiting her guardianship on his mother. Marla remains undaunted. So Roman tries to kill Marla, and fails; he tries to kill Marla’s girlfriend Fran, and also fails. The two failed attempts are irritating, I know, because they just make the story implausible. And it gets more irritating. Set on go big or go home, Marla gets back at Roman, and succeeds: she miraculously becomes Roman’s legal guardian, and puts a $10 million price tag on Roman’s freedom.

Here comes another twist. Roman proposes an alternative to the $10 million: “Instead of me giving you $10 million… we become partners, go into business together. … I hate you… but, oh, the money we could make. You’re a rare person, Marla. Your determination is… Frankly, it’s scary. But this guardianship grift, it’s ripe, but right now it’s small potatoes. I propose we create a monster… a countrywide guardianship corporation, with you as CEO and co-owner. Use my money, use your… skills. Destroy the competition. Take control of the entire market.”

Yes, the two persons that for the most part of the movie try to kill each other become business partners at the end! Two absolutely depraved capitalists joining forces! 没有永远的敌人，不要跟钱过不去 — 这是整部电影的底层逻辑。The director/scriptwriter must have this twist, which veers the theme of the movie toward the triumph of capitalism, to sustain audience engagement and achieve its own capitalist, commercial success. Obscene!

And brace yourself for the most f**ked-up part of the movie. Marla accepts the partnership and achieves CEO of a publicly traded company level of success at the age of 39. She just finishes a TV interview and she’s walking to her car. Feldstrom walks up to her and fires gunshot at her heart. Feldstrom never gets to see his mom and his mom just died alone in the care facility. So he shoots Marla in the heart. This time, Marla completely fails to fire back with words. It is implied that she is killed on the spot.

I was screaming (in my head) at this point. A f**king greedy, immoral capitalist, empowered by another wealthy, immoral capitalist, unstopped by the court and the government, or rather, aided by the incompetent people in the legal system and corrupted doctors, only to be killed by an incel kind of guy? The only effective solution to ending injustice and capitalist avarice is pure gun violence in the most American style? As the closing credits music begins, I was yelling in my head: NO! That CAN’T be how the story ends! Movies are supposed to satisfy viewers’ deepest fantasies, and this one does not satisfy my fantasy that justice can be restored through nonviolent, rational means, through legal measures, and through investigative journalism. After all that shit that happened in 2022, after all those people that disappeared, this is the last movie I needed. I wanted movies to represent messy reality, not this kind of bullshit fairytale. I was so angry that I even began to suspect the director/scriptwriter is some sort of closeted Republican incel funded by far-right groups. I realized I needed Spotlight kind of movies.

After watching the movie, I spent an hour watching videos about Elizabeth Holmes.

8.6分

我tm，就是要给高分。槽多无口，这绝不是个完美的电影，但是有时候我们也需要这种不可思议，极富戏剧张力，并不完全符合逻辑甚至不现实的情节，它们精彩，无比精彩。而沉浸在文艺的世界，沉浸在韦斯安德森绚丽的布景，斯皮尔伯格精妙的镜头调度和诺兰炫技般的结构设计中的我们，好像已经忽视了精彩才是电影的必修课。而《我很在乎》，这样一部小众的，荒诞的的电影，却忽然点醒了过去追求逼格的我。这2个小时给了我前所未有的观影体验。

女主的形象非常非常丰满，你可以说她不讨喜，但是你不能说她没立住。裴淳华实力圈粉，当初看《消失的爱人》，她的熠熠光彩被更牛逼的剧本遮掩了，只能说是锦上添花；而这一次是她力挽狂澜了这个逻辑混乱，“三观崩坏”的剧情。无数的特写镜头，怼脸炫演技，不管多扯多炸裂的剧情都能完美hold住，从眼神到举止，都无可挑剔的精准演绎。目前的20年最佳女主角没有之一。看了一些差评的评论说“不够爽”，说“恶人受得惩戒太少了”，说“导演抓错了爽点，应该多给女主一些教训”，我重新审视了一下自己的三观，发现我确实挺变态的。首先我严重同情弱势群体，严重到甚至有些滥情。所以片头看到这样一个一辈子独立，坚强，成功的老太太无缘无故被marla盯上，又被迫送到“监护院”，断绝和外界的一切交流，被掠夺财产，余生一片荒芜时，我对marla产生了强烈的反感，和大多数观众同样等待着她报复的到来。然而当剧情一步步推进，marla变成了浮萍一般的弱势群体，老太太背后有强大的黑帮靠山，他们可以随时闯入监护院，随时对marla和她的同僚进行攻击，这个时候我的阵营便开始动摇了，即使她做了无数伤天害理的事情，即使她是个自私的人渣，还是不可避免地希望她无恙。就怀着这样矛盾的情绪，电影来到高潮，医生被杀，marla和她的漂亮女朋友人心惶惶，准备逃离时，却被黑帮抓住。该怎么说呢，此前的剧情中规中矩，难说有多精彩，但是仍在掌控之下。此后的剧情是彻底的放飞自我，各种雷点纷涌而至。marla被小矮子绑在椅子上，用塑料袋勒住脑袋时，我好像也感到一阵窒息，代入感强到可怕。此刻裴淳华的演技爆表，瞬间让我对女主的感情产生了巨大变化。我个人非常崇拜目标明确，用尽一切手段达成自己目的的人，为此我可以接受一定道德感的丧失。女主和小矮子表达自己对死亡的态度，毫不避讳自己对金钱的渴望，毫不遮掩自己巨大的野心。就连小矮子也为之震颤了一瞬。而我则彻底被她征服了。也许换一个人，但凡换成裴淳华之外任意一个演员，也许都做不到她这样澎湃的魅力表达。她可恨，虚伪，但是她无比坚定，冷酷而强大的灵魂成为了她最犀利的武器。什么叫无脑爽？marla死里偷生，从水中逃命，随后一系列并不理智但成功完成的复仇计划叫无脑爽，这一段不评价，其实编剧的处理很低级，但是怎么办，我喜欢。一颗永远不迷失的内心，即使是丑恶的，在我的眼里也是动人的。

还没看就被剧透了结尾有巨大转折，我大致猜到了是女主阴沟翻船，在片子最后十分钟还有些抗拒这一刻的到来，也许结束在她成功的一刻变圆满了。但是我万万没有想到居然会是片头的那个“怂货”终结了marla传奇的一生，那一刻，我感觉她受到了应得的报应，死得其所。换言之，也许只有这个人杀了她我才会觉得她是死得其所。不得不让人惊叹于设计之巧妙。尽管如此，这并不代表我不敬畏marla的一部分品质。带着一点震撼，一点释然，一点感慨和无数惊喜，影片结束了。

这个题材选的太牛逼了，牛逼到即使它其实立不住，还是能让我投入其中。我突然想到，如果要是找中国一些导演来拍这个题材，拍的不这么极端，添加更多的喜剧元素，也许它会大受欢迎，但是不复这样的震撼。我喜欢这部电影就像现在所存在的样子。I love《i care a lot》a lot.

带有资本主义成分的社会，始终是以强者的利益为终极目标的。而所谓的公平和法制，看上去为弱者提供了保障，但实际上它并不带来绝对意义上的好处。它们只是工具而已，效果的好与坏取决于公平的制造集团和法律的操纵集团。只要是被人创造出来的事物，就有被人利用操控的空间，尤其是在这个事实容易被捏造，而规则的执行者越来越依赖于条文和被捏造的事实的社会上。大多数人都喜欢做一个追随者，他们只需要根据社会公认的规则做出判断和行动就可以获得应有的报酬，但倘若打破砂锅问到底，焉知祸福？因为在资本的社会中，没人有会因你的善良、勇敢、正义本身让你衣食无忧。

捕食者和猎物的角色也会动态变化，没有人可以成为注定的、绝对的捕食者，剧中的被监护的老人们，在年轻时大多属于成功人士，但在失去力量后，也难免成为猎物。终其一生在这个弱肉强食的社会中苦心经营，即使运用不公的手段，但还是难逃被系统吞噬的悲剧命运。

和资本一样可怕的是擅于应用制度者，他甚至可以让资本都束手无策。最可怕的是资本和制度的联合，后果就是用资本的力量将制度的漏洞指数级放大。试问，现实生活中多少莽夫可以不顾法律地去杀人呢？所以电影的结局看似喜剧，其实还是悲剧。

观影体验有惊悚、痛恨女主、三观不正、不舒服不痛快，但是仔细想想，就是赤裸裸的现实。

中国已快速进入老年社会，大量的独生子女让我们没办法把养老寄托在孩子身上。以房养老、资产托管养老，已经是现实。养老产业将是中国未来最大的朝阳产业，无数资本大鳄和机构已经开始全面布局。

即使在法治环境下，让那些大鳄和狮子有点善心，基本不可能。例如股市，无数大佬闪耀上市，两茬韭菜一割，然后暴雷开始。当然，这丝毫不影响盆满钵满的狮子们继续到处宣传：只要努力，你一定能和我一样！

坚信公平竞争的我们当了一辈子绵羊，幸运的话，也许可以体面退休，有两套房，有一份退休金。退休前十年，幸运的话，可能还有诗和远方，然后，逐渐痴呆和不能自理一定会拥抱我们。为了和谐社会和我们的平安幸福，如果不能麻烦子女，我们的晚年也只能托付给养老机构，资产和退休金只能托付给养老机构打理。绵羊老了，还是绵羊，我们也不可能有一个黑帮大佬儿子。

很多年轻人对这个片子可能无感，甚至觉得这个故事太可笑。但是中老年观众一定会被惊悚到，而且即使你知道养老院门口站着腹黑女主，你也无法逃避，因为这就是无奈现实。

在影片中，痛恨女主虐待母亲的小恶魔选择了与女主和解，共创伟业。现实中难道不是这样？金钱的诱惑谁能拒绝？

有些观众纠结腹黑女主最后是不是必须死，为了过审才安排意外被枪击死亡。现实生活中，女主这样的人一定是光彩动人的成功人士，站在人生巅峰，他们多数都活得特别好。

在中国，养老问题才开始出现。本片导演对现实的关注和思考让人赞赏，其实更需要ZF机构关注养老问题。

每个观众可以脑补自己进了一个风景如画的养老机构中的情景，被喂饭被喂药被翻身被放风，你清楚一切但是没办法跟偶尔来一趟的子女讲清楚，何况你的子女也不是小恶魔。非亲非故，别人愿意照顾你的唯一理由不就是你的退休金和房子嘛！

所以，本片是黑色惊悚现实主义的好作品！

首先，很可怕的世界，居然在受害人未到场的情况下，法庭可以宣判剥夺一个人的自由，以及它拥有的一切都随着被抢占。

类似于“被神经病”。

如果我们经历这样的世界，该如何？但是想想好可怕。

我在想，如果世界到最后，可能真的会如同所有的电影一样，器官买卖，器官被强制切割，财产被强制剥夺，人身自由被限制被神经病 。。。。 妈呀。。。。 不敢想象。