雏菊1966

#二刷 #01032023 #BFI #Sight and Sound Greatest Films of All Time 2022 长评 - 女人的内心世界。 距离一刷已经过了一年，与最近看的《赛琳和朱莉出航记》和同场的《午后的迷惘》对应着看效果是非常不错，还是坚持两个女孩是一个女人的两个意识体。开场与结尾的更多的是对于男性引发战争的批判，这次改变食物是欲望的表达的想法，感觉不光是欲望，更像是一种权力的表达，不论是戏耍老男人，暴饮暴食，还有最后的破坏，像是在展现身体权力一样，于此对照的则是男性创造的战争，剥夺他人的生命。视觉上还是感叹实验性较强的几次展现，剪纸身体，颜色切换，加速五彩多曝的火车，还有绚丽的角色多曝处理都太过惊人。也是头几天跟友邻线下聊起才得知里维特承认他的《赛琳和朱莉出航记》受到了《雏菊》的影响。

#一刷 #10032022 #BFIPlayer 女性主义超现实题材，摒弃了叙事的连贯性，重点放在视听上。开场就是共产主义齿轮、战斗机射击、爆炸等超现实画面剪辑，配乐则带有强烈的军事行动感。影片的几次转场都非常的有创意，黑白和彩色影像转场，利用机位的动作转场。还有几场非常先锋的声音视觉化表达，钢琴课上那伴随着钢琴曲音符的快速剪辑、电话铃和门铃响起的数字号码快速剪辑和剪刀那部分的画面碎片化处理可真强。片中桃子、苹果、香蕉都是带有强烈象征的水果。

我认为黑白少女似乎象征着一个女人的两个意识体。生活区域内的彩色画面更像是独自一人时女性的一种放松的状态（当向窗外扔桃核时响起了阅兵感觉的音乐，父权的外部环境？）。而黑白化妆间更像是意识输出前（包装）的缓冲地点。两种意识在后期着装出现了改变，从纯黑白变成了白底黑斑和黑底白斑。再在亲吻男子后，斑点瞬间变大，也是两个意识体有方向变化的一种表现。后期又回归纯“黑白”（我此时陷入了一种模糊的状态），但最后当玻璃杯被碰碎，画面“褪去”黑白变成彩色，并伴随着大量抽帧画面，展现现实二女的衣服颜色却是水泥色和深红色（完整意义的转变），像胜利者宣言般的配乐响起，二人开始一场饕餮盛宴（这一幕让我仿佛穿越到了《发条橙》的三人行的那段儿，配乐可以对照罗西尼的《威廉退尔序曲》，食物可对照Alex，果真是食色性也。这么一看，这段儿也能解读成一个女性在自慰）。当然…结尾被报纸包裹的二人，就比较明显了。感觉电影更像是讲述一个被"压抑"的女人的内心世界。

歌是《继续堕落》

歌词如下：

一起墮落囉!

加把勁吧 妳說 妳說 往前衝吧 妳說 妳說 沒有問題 妳說 妳說 沒有藉口 妳說 妳說 勇敢追求 妳說 妳說 愛情是幸福 妳說 忘了從前 妳說 妳說 邁向未來 妳說 妳說

妳是妳 我是我 沒有對 沒有錯 白天夜晚 各有一半的天空 繼續墮落

忘不掉吧 我說 我說 揮不去吧 我說 我說 沒有絕對 我說 我說 沒有永遠 我說 我說 拒絕承受 我說 我說 愛情是痛苦 我說 討厭從前 我說 我說 害怕未來 我說 我說

妳是妳 我是我 沒有對 沒有錯 白天夜晚 各有一半的天空 繼續墮落

中場休息!!!

我 我 我 我

ㄞˋ ㄞˋ ㄞˋ ㄞˋ

妳 妳 妳 妳

多麼輕易就說出口 怎麼知道不是胡說 愛情那只是傳說 算了過去 不用再說 算了未來 不用再說

妳是妳 我是我 沒有對 沒有錯 白天夜晚 各有一半的天空 愛與被愛 通通都不屬於我

繼續墮落

快完啦!!!!!!!

ㄠ ((((((((( THE END

这个世界上的一切都堕落了

你说的一切是什么

就是一切

我们堕落了不是吗

而且我有工作，做个傻瓜哈哈哈哈哈哈哈

有五秒转的时光列车太酷炫太惊喜了！

鬼马的太有趣了（两个人一黑一白，一个墨绿一个薄荷绿，一个格纹一个波点，一个短发花环一个双马尾，一起烧房子，泡牛奶浴，在草地上打滚儿，剪衣服，互相丢蛋糕）把蝴蝶标本与女性身体的私密敏感部位相结合

你不属于这个世纪

我一定是爱上你了

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 äktenskap [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 äktenskap, 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 äktenskap, 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.

始終覺得一部大師級的電影少不了各種看不懂，於是你就做功課，直到你恍然大悟。當然有人要個人主義，愛誰誰去，我都不懂了還看看看且不是自虐！但是不同的是，一部沒B裝B的電影和有B可裝的電影是不一樣的，所謂大師，就是有B了。既然有了B，咱就謙虛一點好了^_^ 今天看的是捷克的新浪潮幹將齊蒂諾娃之《雛菊》，講述的是兩個空虛放縱的年輕女子和她們怪異舉止的片段式的、令人眼花繚亂的的超現實主義描寫。73分鐘的先鋒實驗片，開啟了捷克新浪潮的大門，但是影片完成后據說因為“浪費食物”的緣由被社會主義當局禁映直到第二年解禁并在世界範圍內獲得好評。 電影是沒有常識思維的，一堆亂七八糟的炫麗圖片，沒有劇情，穿著除了領口哪兒都一樣衣服的兩個吃貨，各種驚世駭俗。哪怕是拿到四十多年后的今天來看，依舊不失其先鋒性。 我看到了波普。色彩，底片被染上多種顏色，隨意的剪切拼圖。藍裙子倚著綠大門或者綠裙子倚上藍大門。蝴蝶三點比基尼，自創抹胸，廢棄的鋼絲卷放到頭上就是一頂帽子，鏽跡斑斑的鐵絲網穿到了身上，還有舊報紙做成的衣服。那時候andy·warhol的《瑪麗蓮·夢露》還沒出世呢。 還有女權。男人在電話里傾訴衷腸，門外敲門說愛，兩個女傻丫卻在房間里剪香腸、雞蛋、香蕉吃。車站餐廳里各種各樣瞄準她們下半身的中年男子，卻只落得一個為兩個吃貨買單換來車站一惜別待遇。 蒙太奇。新浪潮也不是只有長盡頭。恰到好處的蒙太奇（當然是你所意想不到的）依然是叫人折服的。神作的火車軌道，伴隨始終的機械動作，各種畫外音，滴滴答滴的時鐘聲。 當然，整個片子，其實是達達。兩隻性感的怪仔妹發表宣言“既然世界已經如此糟糕，我們何不讓它變得更壞”！於是搞破壞、戲弄別人、糟蹋食物、肆無忌憚，笑的卻跟邪惡的小綿羊似地。適時的插入炮彈爆裂，飛機轟炸的場景，一切規矩都打破，所有的存在都要顛覆去？毀滅，被毀滅，荒誕和虛無。怪不得布拉格之春被老大哥鎮壓后，導演被禁拍好幾年電影。 影片結尾，導演說“這部電影先給精神生活完全混亂的人。” 哈，精神上的快樂才是永久快樂的唯一保障。 笑死了。然後，好餓~~

存于【菲斯克尼的嘲弄】公众号

在发动的齿轮与轰鸣的战火的画面重复交替之后，两个肢体像木偶一样的比基尼少女正坐在木制背景墙下，她们的动作伴随着木门开合的“咯吱”声——这正呼应了金发少女说的话：“我想要做一个处女/洋娃娃。”她们对话中的“panna”在捷克语中有歧义，既意味着处女，也意味着洋娃娃。（Cheryl Stephenson, 2018）黑发少女说：“世界上的一切都堕落了。”于是在令人眼花缭乱的滤镜快速转换下，属于堕落世界中的她们达成了要一起堕落的共识。她们在餐厅约会年老的男人，忽视餐厅礼仪、狼吞虎咽，最后一次次地把约会过的不同男人送上火车。她们在舞厅用更夸张的肢体行动与舞者“比赛”，在顾客头上吐着泡泡。黑发少女认为必须想点更好玩的事。金发少女褪去衣物用蝴蝶标本遮挡胸部和下体，引诱着男人，然而她却只想询问果酱的下落。她忽视着男人的求爱电话，在唱诗般的背景音乐下，两人烧着房间里垂落的纸条，像默剧演员一样，浮夸地在床上表演着吃。她问：“我不知道为什么会有人说爱，而不是用鸡蛋代替。”

然而，当少女们落到郊外时，再多的恶作剧也无法使得勤劳的园丁与自行车上的工人们注意到她们。金发少女说着：“我觉得我们会消失在稀薄的空气里。”于是她们回到房间里，（在剪辑师的帮助下）用剪刀剪碎身体。她们潜入无人的盛宴，恣意浪费与破坏一切。当吊灯上的她们被画面投入河里，在她们呼救的同时，伴随着生硬的打字机的声音，屏幕弹出了：“这是他们唯一的结束方式”，“有任何方式可以拯救这些恶毒的行为吗”。于是，不再“堕落”的女孩们呢喃着“如果我们听话，如果我们工作，我们会很高兴”，清扫了盛宴的“废墟”。吊灯朝她们的身体落下，画面复归于电影开端的战争影像。

电影的故事起始于少女们的对话“世界上的一切都堕落了”。面对如此强大的“虚无”，她们选择以一种共同变坏的方式来对抗虚无。她们的行为在某种程度上，映射出欧洲战后最为流行的哲学思潮——存在主义。这一思潮专注于研究人的境况、情感、责任与自由，被认为源于德国哲学家克尔凯郭尔的作品《畏惧与战栗》（1943）。第二次世界大战后，存在主义研究的中心便由法国存在主义学者让-保罗·萨特从德国转移到了法国。根据萨特存在主义的观点：世界是荒谬的，生活是痛苦的。当人们来到这个世界，面对外界的混乱与荒诞时，他们感到无助和拘束。在这个瞬息万变的世界里，似乎人类根本无法控制自己的命运。他们只能对自己和外界感到恶心与呕吐，却并不能改变这种痛苦的结局。

在影片中，少女们破坏社会礼仪、欺骗并且玩弄感情、不停地浪费与吞咽食物。在《存在主义就是一种人道主义》（2012）中，萨特认为人类有自己的权利，也就是说，人们可以用独立的意志做出绝对自由的决定和行动，并用这些来界定自己的本质。混乱、粗俗、冷漠，她们用自己的方式蔑视虚伪、挣脱规则、以实现所谓的对虚无的反抗。然而，一系列令人匪夷所思的恶作剧在她们的自由选择下，构成了当下的她们本身。正如《存在与虚无》（2014）一书中，萨特强调了拒绝所产生的虚无。当人们拒绝自己时，他不再拥有自己的感觉。也就是说，否定剥夺了人们的存在感。自我本质在女孩们拒绝外界的过程中被消解了，她们开始怀疑自己的存在，因此金发少女说道：“我想知道为什么园丁没有理会我们，至少他可以赶我们走的……你知道我害怕什么吗？他根本看不到我们。”

存在的焦虑引起一场更为盛大的狂欢，于是电影在一场无人的盛宴中达到高潮，她们的双手蹂躏珍馐、双脚在佳肴上起舞。然而否认虚无便是否认自己存在本身。

这种反抗容易让人想到弗洛伊德的俄狄浦斯情结。在对人类文明进行阐述的过程中，与存在主义的个体自由选择所不同的是，弗洛伊德从宏观角度出发，消解了个体，认为个体自主的人格不过是人类一般压抑的僵硬表现，而人格是漫长的历史过程的最终产物。史前冲动与行为记忆随着人类种群的繁衍萦绕在人类的文明之中。而俄狄浦斯情结正是人类文明的遗传基因之一。不满的儿子通过杀死创立秩序的父亲/暴君，却变为新一代的父亲/暴君。在《雏菊》中，两个少女出于对堕落社会不认同，选择通过否认的方式抛弃这样的社会。不过，一系列愈演愈烈的恶作剧显示，这些局外人，在对现有秩序的蔑视和拒绝的过程中，破坏了现有秩序，起先作为反抗主体的少女们对社会客体的否认，使得少女成为了她们一开始要反抗的客体，自己成为了自己原先反抗的理由，即“堕落”。

希蒂洛娃在评论这部影片时，曾给出过她的观点，她并不认同两个女孩的“极具美感”的破坏行为：“这是关于人类毁灭事物的能力，同时这能力的背面是创造力。”《雏菊》中的年轻女孩在决定变得和世界一样堕落，但她们犯下的“破坏性行为”时相当天真的、幼稚的。他们的说话和举止像木偶一样。（Jan Čulík, 2018）戏谑的过程反而反映出生活的严肃性。她们疯癫一般的行为为理性、道德的生活提供了一个反面例子。面对真实生活的枯燥、礼仪的繁杂、爱情的虚伪，雏菊们的评价是：这样糟糕的生活。电影预想了一个新的可能性——放纵虚无、无规则、无道德的可能性。然而在结尾，河中付出代价的两个少女求救着：“我们再也不想堕落了”，伴随着打字机冷漠又有力的声音，字幕升起“这是他们唯一的结束方式”，“有任何方式可以拯救这些恶毒的行为吗”，“我们会给他们第二次机会，接下来会发生什么事情”，于是她们听话地收拾残局，打扫宴会。不过，清扫完毕时：

黑发女孩：“这是一个游戏吗？”

金发女孩：“不是。”

黑发女孩露出难过的神情。

金发女孩：“我们很高兴。”

黑发女孩：“但这并不重要。”

摇摇欲坠的吊灯即将落在她们的身上，而故事到这就停了。不再堕落也无法弥补过去，把弥补当作一个新的游戏，便也不算新的结局。捷克意识形态部曾评价《雏菊》说：“隐喻式的语言和寓言为模糊的解释留下了空间。”在尝试阐释的过程中，少女们表现出固有的破坏本能，而战争则正是人类最高级的暴力形式。以此隐喻：恶作剧行为是战争意识在个体身上的微观征兆。显而易见的是，不论是影像中所展现出的恶作剧行为，还是这种出现在片头片尾中被隐喻的战争，它们并无弥补的可能，即“第二次机会”。

捷克的木偶手工艺发达，许多捷克电影人会将木偶戏剧元素融入电影。《雏菊》的主角和木偶剧院之间在电影的开场就已建立起了牢固的联系。幕布在一个粗糙的舞台上打开，两个人物坐在一个木制的背景下，没有完整的着装，只穿着比基尼。（Cheryl Stephenson, 2018）电影开场时，角色机械僵硬的肢体动作伴随着木门开合的“咯吱”声，这一行为模式配上金发少女的话：“我想做一个洋娃娃”，明显地表现出了她们的木偶身份，她们在公共场所（餐厅，舞厅）表演，在后台（化妆间）挑选衣裳、化妆。此外，电影开场时黑发少女给金发少女一个耳光，让其进入“现实”世界（舞台）。然而这种不可思议的行为与不协调的情节，正如注重观众反应的木偶戏剧一般，在审美体验上拉开了观众/主体与角色/客体之间的距离，由此不至于让观众因为厌恶少女们的行为而批判这部电影。“不真实”的处理，相当于过滤去了观众的情感代入，从而去除了观影过程中常见的主角认同。缺失了某种现存的标准（自身的真实世界），并且拉长了评价的过程使得观众无法联系、回忆自己的亲身经历，在这种陌生体验的过程中，只得凝神关注着客体的行为动作。这些对木偶和木偶戏的视觉暗示不仅为电影建立了一种美学，而且还建立了一个散漫的领域，在那里主角不仅为电影的观众表演，而且为电影中的观众表演。（Cheryl Stephenson, 2018）

电影的先锋不仅体现在角色的木偶化上。从整体结构来看，频繁的跳切打碎了故事的空间结构，整部电影变成了拼贴影像。在这里，时间好像超现实绘画中融化的时钟一样，消失了。只有当少女们用手去拨墙上的挂钟和背景中时不时的“滴答”声，才能确定时间的存在。与传统的叙事不同的是，破碎的时间与空间还原了梦境与幻想的非理性秩序结构，它重构了一个新的“现实”。在《世俗神话：电影的野性思维》中，伊芙特·皮洛认为：“电影思维求助于自由的思维和遗觉形象的重现，把图像性和非图像性的表现方式、动作性和情感性的表现方式结合在一起。不遵循那种形成抽象判断和掌握概念真值的思维法则，按照自己的扩散性体系创造出支配思想展现过程的法则。”影片场景中的抽象拼接形式，复现了混乱、原始的图像思维，创造了诗性语言。她与编辑们合作，专门创作复杂的拼贴画，专注于图案和个别镜头的意义之间隐藏的相互关系。（Jan Čulík, 2018）从影片细节来看，希蒂洛娃安置了植物、蝴蝶标本、墙壁上的联系方式涂鸦、门锁的万花筒式快速特写帧，揭示场景位置、连接转换下一场景、暗示人物心理。当她们在郊外（远离了观众的舞台空间）疑惑为什么没有人意识到她们的存在时，闪现着一系列快速的门锁镜头，这一镜头正暗示了少女在拒绝外界从而被世界拒绝的现况。

“尽管地下电影在不断努力着，但我们还不习惯速度、加速的节奏、突然的突变、跳跃剪辑和所有与特技摄影有关的一切。我们仍然缺乏光学技巧的训练。”（Claire Clouzot, 1968）结合了波普艺术的《雏菊》，极具先锋性与前卫性，这使得影片又“拼贴”上了波普艺术的内涵。大量复制的特写镜头、光学技巧下变换着的彩色滤镜，放大了时间转瞬即逝与享乐主义气息。而这正呼应了影片内容对现代社会中存在与虚无、破坏与文明的讨论。