《县委大院》剧情进展还是很快的，没想到拆迁这就解决了，一开始各种乱麻的情况结束，梅晓歌带领光明县开始和九原县的曹立新pk，为各自县的发展抢资源（县与县的发展竞争，印象里是头一次在电视剧里看到！）。继续来总结和分析一下：

一、拆迁及其长尾效应

吕青山说服前县委书记

《县委大院》剧情进展还是很快的，没想到拆迁这就解决了，一开始各种乱麻的情况结束，梅晓歌带领光明县开始和九原县的曹立新pk，为各自县的发展抢资源（县与县的发展竞争，印象里是头一次在电视剧里看到！）。继续来总结和分析一下：

一、拆迁及其长尾效应

吕青山说服前县委书记带头拆违建，等于在离任前替梅晓歌搬开一块大拦路石。之前邱利民不管干部们跑多少趟，磨破多少嘴皮，始终不肯搬迁，但看见周书记搬了，他不用别人再来劝说，就主动搬了。可见，不是老百姓觉悟低，而是工作有没有做到点子上。老百姓心里有一杆秤，衡量的是世道公平。他们眼里的特权人物也为了光明县的未来做出牺牲，他们心里的气就顺了。中国的老百姓是最有为国家和社会牺牲的精神的，但要让他们觉得这种付出值，要让他们愿意信任。

拆迁顺利进行，除了土地可以转让开发，另外一点就是，土建工程需要大量的劳动力，这样，原来因为环保而停工的工人们就有新的就业机会。他们除了可以去九原县务工，也可以在自己家附近找到工作。

梅晓歌化缘来的钱解决工人欠薪，而土建工程又给了工人们饭碗，这些人就无需再上访，信访局和县长书记们也不用每天救火，可以腾出手来专注搞发展。

邱利民和工人们的例子，也说明，解决干群矛盾，解决信访问题，不能靠头疼医头脚疼医脚，而是要从真正关切到群体信任、群体利益的地方入手。

二、梅曹pk

化风险初步实现后，梅晓歌和艾鲜枝就开始进入搞活经济的正题。尽管梅晓歌带厅长参观奶牛场异常狼狈，但我认为他已经领先曹立新了，而招商引资上则曹立新恐怕暂时还是技高一筹：

1. 争取获得省农业厅对奶牛场的项目支持；

厅长的车离开后，艾鲜枝骂完李保平后几乎要哭了。大家的情绪都很低落，因为整个参观过程确实既狼狈又尴尬。和曹立新那边的光鲜亮丽、富有人情味简直形成鲜明的对比。但我相信厅长一定会选梅晓歌的光明县，因为：

a. 省的资金扶持应该会以效益、效应最大化为考量标准。

曹立新的美丽的农业园区是挺好，但它仅仅是现在的状态，它未来要怎么发展，上升空间有多大，曹立新恰恰没有说明这点。

而反观梅晓歌的奶牛场，尽管现在外观破破烂烂，但智能粪便清理等等核心技术已经有了，如果取得资金，肉眼可见会有快速成长。它的上升空间不但大，而且非常清晰，可行性很强。梅晓歌后来冒雨送过去的项目文件，又包含交易市场等内容，这样流通环节应该也会解决，让整个项目的收益更显著。另外，奶牛场能做起来，也会对整个这一片区域起到就业和消费的带动作用。这样看来，奶牛场的效益、效应是明确的、可观的，当然优于优于曹立新的项目。

b. 项目的成长需要主官给力，主官的风格也是考量内容。

曹立新请了厅长的亲戚相聚，又贴心安排了宾馆可以休息看球，而且，过往还关心厅长的家事富有人情味，这些说明曹立新很重视与厅长的关系，是个非常细致周到的人，但这些和项目能做成什么样，没有直接关系。

反观梅晓歌和艾鲜枝，他们确实在关系上差远了，但两人带着干部拦车，冒雨踩着泥泞去参观，又冒雨送文件，这里能够看出他们有多恳切、多迫切渴望项目能获得支持，也能看出他们为了县的发展，有多拼。

另外，梅晓歌对奶牛场的技术和数字如数家珍，这既说明他头脑清晰、做了足够的功课，也说明，他务实的能力。

农业项目是实务不是商务交际，当然要把资金交到有能力又务实、又迫切想要推动项目的主官手里，所以，必须选梅晓歌！

2. 招商引资动员会

艾鲜枝主持光明大院的动员会，祭出的是大棒，要给干部们定排名、考核的规矩，施加压力；曹立新主持九原的大会，拿出的是胡萝卜，用条件换时间，给招商引资开出来非常优惠的条件。

从两个会场的气氛就已经知道谁输谁赢了，艾的会气氛沉闷压抑，干部们个个低着头，都知道肯定完不成会被罚站；曹的会精神焕发，干部们摩拳擦掌，准备一出门就开抡。

要吸引商人们的眼光，利益必不可少，光靠给干部们压力是没用的，所以，曹暂时会赢。艾艾也是实心干事的，还需要等梅梅腾出手的时候多带带。

暂时这么多~评论欢迎批评指正！

【详细】

148192353

很多人看牛首村电影的关系很乱，尤其是绫子的剧情很多人搞不懂，我简单梳理一下。

牛首村有诞下双胞胎必献一子给牛头神的传统，妙子和绫子就是这样一对双胞胎，7岁时妙子经过仪式被选定为牛头神的祭品。在仪式举行当晚，妙子被戴上牛头，成为神的贡品，而睡在她旁边的绫子却不知道姐姐已经被选为贡品，在半夜悄悄摘下姐姐所戴的牛头，按到了自己头上

这个导演比较不走寻常路，通常这种悬疑性质很大的电影，导演都会回避特别清楚地回答观众疑问，他反而在各种访问、活动一一回答了大部分问题。

以下两个链接说得很清楚了：

这个导演比较不走寻常路，通常这种悬疑性质很大的电影，导演都会回避特别清楚地回答观众疑问，他反而在各种访问、活动一一回答了大部分问题。

以下两个链接说得很清楚了：

https://variety.com/2018/film/awards/hereditary-ari-aster-answers-burning-questions-1202841448/

And the fact the family is completely unaware adds to the terror.One way that I pitched the film when I was first taking it out was “it’s a story about a long-lived possession ritual told from the perspective of the sacrificial lamb.” Ultimately we are with the family in their ignorance of what’s really happening. But I also wanted to imbue the film with this sinister, more knowing perspective. Even though we are with the family in their ignorance, the movie itself knows exactly where the story is going. And everything is inevitable. Throughout the film, things are just sort of clicking into place and all those things are driving this family towards one end.

In an early scene, the subject of free will is discussed. Are you saying this family has no free will?Yeah, absolutely. I see the film as being very Greek in that sense. This is absolutely inevitable, the family has absolutely no agency.

There is nothing Annie can do to stop this from happening?No, I don’t think so. That’s where the dollhouses came in. Annie creates these miniature figures and dollhouses and they served as a perfect metaphor for the situation; they’re dolls in a dollhouse being manipulated by outside forces. Any control they try to seize is hopeless.

Is that why she thinks she can stop it by burning the Charlie’s sketchbook – the first time she tries, she catches fire — but the second time, her husband Steve catches fire?Exactly. Even that scene is meant to play as Annie’s big redemptive moment, she’s going to sacrifice herself for her son. It’s a beautiful gesture but part of the cruel logic of the film is it’s an empty gesture. Ultimately, it’s not her choice to make. She thinks there’s a design here and she can end things if she sacrifices herself. But there’s no design and there are no rules. There is a malicious logic at play.

Could it have been prevented if she hadn’t been tricked into casting the spell given to her by Joan?The thing is, that scene is ultimately a red herring, and it’s a piece of misdirection. It plays as a séance scene but really it’s a much darker conjuring and they need Annie to take part in it in order to bring it in the house and in order to further this ritual along. When she invites it in, she escalates things. But it would’ve happened anyway, we’re just seeing how it happened. We’re seeing one of the ways it could play out.

There’s a lot of talk about what a bad mother Annie’s mother was. Did she just have kids for the purpose of this ritual?That’s pretty much what is suggested. If you listen to Annie’s speech at the group therapy, there are a lot of keys in her monologue as to what came before this and how far back this goes.

Early on, Charlie cuts the head off a pigeon and makes a strange figurine out of it. Can you elaborate on that?I don’t want to be too obvious but we find later that Charlie has been building these figurines to populate a diorama she’s been building that serves as a shrine to Paimon. It also functions as a metaphor for what Paimon is doing to this family. If you look at the diorama you’ll see they’re headless figurines bowing to a pigeon-headed creature with a crown on its head, which is not far away from what we’re left with in the last scene of the film.

Annie talks about how her mother got “her hooks” into Charlie at an early age. Are we meant to think Charlie is in on it?Charlie is the first successful host for Paimon. It’s transferred from Charlie to Peter at the end.

Because Paimon wants a male body?Exactly.

Is there ever a Charlie or is she Paimon from the moment she’s born?From the moment she’s born. I mean, there’s a girl that was displaced, but she was displaced from the very beginning.

In an odd way, that makes me feel better.(Laughs) That’s nice. See, it’s a happy ending. But obviously, there’s a boy who’s horribly displaced by the end.

http://www.vulture.com/2018/06/explaining-the-end-of-hereditary.html

Is Paimon a real thing?He is! Well, real in the sense that if you believe in hell and the Devil, Paimon is an actual entity that people do worship. Across various sources, he is designated as “a great King,” “one of the chief demons,” and “one of the most significant Angelick Rulers.” He pledges intense fealty to Lucifer, and is often rendered riding atop a camel (as we see in the movie).

There are conflicting points of view on whether or not Paimon and the demon Azazel are the same. According to the Black Witch Coven, “He is one of the demonic princes overseeing the four cardinal directions, West being his domain,” which is why Joan (Ann Dowd) and her minions “looked to the Northwest” to summon him in the movie. According to the Joy of Satan Ministries, “Paimon gives the power to influence and control others,” and that seems to scan with how he operates in Hereditary. However, the Ministries also describe the hell king as “full of energy. Loud noises and bright lights tend to make him more active. He is very colorful and very friendly.” Maybe the “party naked” side of him just got left on the cutting-room floor, because that guy seems like a downer.

Related Stories

Toni Collette Gets the Worst Inheritance Ever in HereditaryLet’s Talk About the Scene With the Car in Hereditary

What are the “rewards” Annie’s mom wrote to her about in that note?In the Invocations book that Annie pulls out of her mom’s box of things, a photo opposite the image of Paimon shows a person sitting atop a mound of treasure that says “Riches to the conjurer” in a caption beneath. When Joan speaks to Peter/Charlie at the end and crowns him, she asks Paimon to give her and the other followers “knowledge of all secret things, honor, wealth, and good familiars.” She also asks that he bind all men to them, as the worshippers have bound themselves to Paimon.

Those sound like “riches,” and what with a king of hell being resurrected, being recognized as one of his privileged followers will probably be a lot safer than, well, not. In a description of his abilities, Satan Ministries says Paimon “teaches the arts and sciences” in addition to providing “good familiars and gives one position and honor. He can reveal anything about the Earth and one’s mind.” At least some rulers recognize the necessity of science education!

So is Peter Charlie? Or is Peter Paimon?It’s likely that Charlie never knew she was imbued with the spirit of a king of hell, but as Annie says in her grief-counseling group, her mother got “her hooks” in the young girl from the time she was a baby. (Annie’s mom, Ellen, even insisted on feeding baby Charlie — and one of the miniatures depicts grandma offering the infant her exposed breast — which is probably the most unremarked upon insane thing that happens in Hereditary!) As we learn in the opening eulogy, Annie’s mom had “private rituals” and “private friends,” a lot of which probably revolved around putting Paimon into Charlie.

Clearly, though, the long game was to get Paimon into Peter, since Paimon desires a male host, and Charlie sure didn’t seem like she knew she was a preferred underling of the Morning Star! So Paimon was bound to Charlie, and when that little light flash dissolves into Peter’s limp body after he pitches himself out of the attic window at the end, that’s the spirit entering him. With the transfer complete, Joan seems like she’s ready to let Charlie (in Peter’s body) know about everything that’s been going on, and who she really is.

Remember, too, that Annie’s brother hung himself at the age of 16, leaving a note behind saying that his mother had been trying put people inside of him. Ellen failed to secure her son as a host, and she missed her first shot with Peter since Annie had excommunicated her, so she used Charlie as a temporary vessel until the ritual was able to be completed later on. As Aster told Vulture, “The film is about a long-lived possession ritual that is seen from the perspective of the sacrificial lambs.”

Related Stories

How Scary Is Hereditary, This Year’s Horror Hit at Sundance?Hereditary Director Ari Aster Answers His ‘Upsetting’ Film’s Burning Questions

With that in mind, you can think of the movie’s sinister events as being carried out by an invisible hand, of sorts. That sigil painted above grandma’s headless body in the attic? It’s the actual symbol of Paimon, and it was also carved in the utility pole that tore Charlie’s head off. The leafy bit that Annie brushed off her lip when she was drinking tea at Joan’s apartment? Probably a witches brew of some kind (or another red herring, because by now you’re paranoid!). Peter feeling his throat close up and taking the posture of Charlie’s decapitated body before ramming his head into a desk? His body was being primed for a spiritual takeover. Those scrapbook photos of Ellen wearing a white dress and a veil as she’s being showered with gold coins? That sure looks like a wedding ritual, once you see her framed portrait in the satanic tree house, which has a placard with “Queen Leigh” fixed to the top. Does that mean grandma was spiritually married to her granddaughter and therefore breastfed her husband-grandchild when she was an infant? It seems like it!

Did Annie do any of those weird things — decapitating her dead mom’s body, spying on Peter outside his window — or was it the Paimon cult?Aster told Vulture that, “The audience is supposed to suspect that it might be Annie (Toni Collette), but it is the cult of which Ann Dowd is a very significant part. But you are supposed to feel through the film that there are people on the periphery that are watching this family and are hovering just outside.” Therefore, Annie’s sleepwalking was not resulting in her exhuming bodies and cutting their heads off. It was a red herring! Aster laid a sort of bread crumb trail throughout the whole movie, tipping the audience off that the Grahams were always being watched by associates of Ellen and Joan: the man who smiled at Charlie at Ellen’s funeral, all those “new faces” who mourned her death, the woman waving at Charlie across the street from her school, the person breathing in the dark outside of Peter’s window — all of whom we probably saw naked in the tree house during the finale.

What was with that book setting people on fire?It seems like a safe bet that the book was bound to protect itself. The cult did demonstrate they had a pretty long reach when it came to influencing events, and they even stashed a whole headless body in the Graham’s attic when no one was looking. When Annie tried to destroy the book, it protected itself, but Annie was also essential to completing the possession ritual, so she couldn’t just burst into flames and die. We’ll call that a warning shot by the book.

But Steve (Gabriel Byrne)? He had to get out of the way, and the moment he died, Annie stopped being Annie and started being an agent of Paimon, much like when she channeled Charlie into her own body during the previous seance. When that ring of light flashes over her, that’s Paimon beaming into a new host, as Collette explained to Vulture, “Ari was standing to the side, and he let me watch this person be on fire for a while [laughs] and then he said, ‘Okay. Now, Paimon, the light, is going to enter you.’ We never talked about what that would ever look like or be like. I just did one take and that was it.” And that, ladies and gentlemen, is called acting.

Related Stories

Toni Collette on Hereditary, the Wildest Movie of Her CareerNo Kids Were (Permanently) Hurt While Filming Hereditary

What about Annie’s sleepwalking, then?Go with us on this one. What if the sleepwalking was Annie’s subconscious way of fighting her mother and the ritual? She tried to set Peter and Charlie on fire once before, but snapped out of it, right? And then in the dream we see where she admits she wanted to abort Peter but her mom wouldn’t allow it — and so she tried to force a miscarriage — she screams at him, “I wasn’t trying to kill you! I was trying to protect you!” Somewhere in Annie’s subconscious, she must have known her children were in danger, and just as her brother had to kill himself to escape Ellen’s clutches when he was a teenager, Annie must have known deep down that as long as the kids were alive they were existentially threatened.

As Collette told Vulture, in that moment Annie is surfacing what’s in her subconscious, which “allows the audience to know that this is a kind of murky, not entirely understood, gray area about the safety of her children and the intention behind the creation of them — and how her mother was involved, right? So it’s still not entirely clear, but there is an indication of some concern there.” Annie realizes after it’s too late, though, that she part of that threat, and must die if she wants to protect her kids. But by that point the toothpaste is out of the tube, and it just isn’t going back in.

Are the decapitations part of Paimon-related lore?Not really. Aster added that element himself, and he’s not into explaining why. As he told Vulture, “I think it would be disingenuous for me to give any sort of intellectual answer. I feel like there are a lot of really good reasons and I like all of them, but uttering them kind of robs them of something. But I do like all the things that they might provoke in somebody.” As for Collette, she has formed her own theory about all the rolling heads. “We’re so attached to our bodies, we’re so attached to the brain and the mind. They’re like the control center, and that once you lose that metaphorically, you become nothing, and therefore you are able to give yourself over to this greater force?” Speculate away!

So why did he use Paimon?No special reason, really. Aster said to Vulture that he just didn’t want to deploy Lucifer again, and hey, that’s fair. If you need a more substantial explanation than that — just let it go. Sometimes creepy is enough.