However, when the mother watches the son eats the fish that she mixes with the burnt paper, the music in the television can’t make her happy (Tsai, 1992). Likewise, when Hsiao Kang and his father eat in the hotel, the background music, which is heard both by the audience and the characters, does not make them look animated (Tsai, 1997). While the removal of the background music from the third film may appear daring, it does not necessarily differentiate “The River” as nonconformist. It only demonstrates that the author chooses to question the normality of the third film and draws the attention away from the first …show more content…
The author characterizes the music as an accompaniment of liveliness, and music heightens the moods of each character and collectively unites the mood of the audience. However, the author also acknowledges that the music from the television in Hsiao family does not help them escape their solitude. In the first movie when there is a happy tune from the television, the mother sits alone in front of the television while the son turns his back against her picking his food (Tsai, 1992). It is clear that the music from the television can’t make them collectively share the same feelings. This is also true in the third movie because Hsiao Kang and his father also sits separately and turns their faces into different ways (Tsai, 1997). As the happy tunes in the television can’t pull them out of isolation, the background music in “Rebels of the Neon God” should not be able to guide film watchers to mutually feel the same atmosphere. Because Hsiao family members have already been lonely before the absence of the music, the presence of music can’t justify liveliness. Likewise, the lack of music which only coincidentally happens along with persisting loneliness can’t justify being the cause. This binary of the presence and absence of music is not sufficient to explain the meaning of the two films about