Life as a Paradox: “The man from the sea” metaphors interpretation

Abstract This research analyzes the metaphors in Fukada Koji’s The Man from The Sea (2018). This film is a collaborative work between Japan and Indonesia, set in the city of Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Fukada sets the Aceh tsunami disaster in 2004 as the background of the story while focusing on the story of the “sea” and the main character named “Laut” which is an Indonesian word for “sea”. What’s interesting is the narrative surrounding Laut appears to be dominated by surreal scenes, which indicates that this film is full of metaphorical expressions called metaphoricity. Thus, this paper intends to get the meaning of the film through the interpretation of metaphorical expressions. To achieve this goal, the method used is the combination of the theory of cinematic expressive movements and the concept of redescription. These two concepts are key references for interpreting living metaphors in films. The findings show that there are six metaphoricities in the film that are found through observing expressive movements in the narrative. Furthermore, a review of extralinguistic reference by conducting a review of the socio-cultural-historical phenomena of the existence of the sea for humans, the Acehnese Freedom Movement, and the Japan-Indonesia diplomatic relationship, shows a redescription that “life as a paradox”.


Introduction
The Man from The Sea or Umi o Kakeru in Japanese is a fantasy drama film directed by Japanese director Fukada Koji, released in 2018 both in Japan and Indonesia.Koji is an internationally renowned Japanese director as seen through his international joint film production that comprises three film companies, Nikkatsu, Comme Des Cinémas, and Kaninga Pictures, under the flags of three countries of Japan, Indonesia, and France.Fukada Koji's international identity can be seen in his works, Hospitalite (2010), and Au Revoir l'Ete (2013), which show the influence of French cinema.In Sayonara (2015), Fukada appointed an American actress, Bryerly Long, as the main character.His Harmonium (2016) won the Un Certain Regards Jury Prize at the Cannes film festival.The Man from The Sea is another example of Fukada's international identity through the cast and place that represent Indonesia.
The Man from The Sea is set in the city of Banda Aceh, the capital of Aceh province, which is located at the tip of Sumatra island, the westernmost region of Indonesia.Even though the main character is played by a Japanese actor, Fujioka Dean, out of the five major characters, two of them are played by Indonesian actors and actresses, and all minor and marginal characters are played by Indonesian actors and residents.The film dialogues use Japanese, Indonesian, and Acehnese regional languages.Therefore, this film can be said to be a cross-cultural product that expresses Japanese culture and Indonesian culture represented by the regional culture of Aceh.The film's narrative focuses on six characters, Laut (sea) as the main character, and five other major characters, Takashi, Sachiko, Kris, Ilma, and Takako.The characters Laut, Takashi, Sachiko, and Takako are played by Japanese artists, while the characters Kris and Ilma are played by Indonesian artists.Even though Laut is mentioned as the main character, the five other major characters dominate the narrative.Within this dynamic relationship between the four major characters, the presence of Laut appears more as an insertion that has no direct connection with the conflict between them.The film narration will be further elaborated in the discussion session.
Regarding the main character Laut, Fukada explains that he adopts the "sea" as a translation of relations between Japan and Indonesia, "Both Japan and Indonesia share one sea.In fact, the world is connected by one sea" ("Indonesia, Japan Collaborate in Fantasy Drama Film Set in Banda Aceh," 2017).Through the main character named Laut, Fukada expresses the friendly relations between the two countries of Japan and Indonesia."Laut" is an Indonesian expression that corresponds to the word "sea" in English.The character of Laut appears mysteriously from the sea, he has difficulties in communicating with others and he has magical powers that give him the image of being more than a human.Schilling (2018) emphasizes the mystique of Laut by stating that the relationship between him and the other characters is never clearly explained, and even ends unexpectedly.As explained in the previous paragraph, the five other major characters are the ones that drive the narrative, and Laut's existence appears to be metaphorical.The film's background is the 2004 tsunami that hit Aceh although the overall film narrative does not focus on the tsunami.Christanto (2019) explains that the choice of Aceh and the tsunami as the background of the story was most likely due to Fukada's visit to Aceh in 2011 which arouses his interest in exploring Aceh as a form of empathy for fellow tsunami-affected areas.Fukada's statement emphasizes that the focus of attention is not the tsunami but the various perspectives of people on life, "During those times, I sensed the differences between both countries, particularly in how people responded to the tsunamis and in perceiving life and death" (Wira, 2018).
Regarding those seemingly incongruous and contradicting expressions, such as the sea and tsunami representing both similarities and differences, Fukada's statements, "Hopefully each viewer will [. ..] think about the meaning of nature, life, and tsunamis after watching the film," and "Hopefully they have time to think about all that after seeing it" (Wira, 2018) provide a clue that the essence of the film is not presented explicitly and that the audience's role in drawing the meaning is significant.The following excerpts from the film trailer also suggest the presence of connotative meanings that need to be revealed, "jinsei wa fujouri da kara itooshii" (because life is absurd, it looks beautiful).The context of the sea and tsunami that connect and distinguish people from different cultural backgrounds, as well as the metaphorical statement about the absurd as beautiful, become the clues to reveal the film's meaning through metaphorical expressions.
This paper aims to understand the film The Man from the Sea by interpreting metaphorical expressions found in the film scenes.As mentioned above, the incongruity expressed both through the character Laut and the plot becomes a sign of the film's metaphorical expressions."The sea as a life-giver" points to the action of the character Laut when he saves a girl's life with his mystical power is an example of the film's metaphorical expressions.In another scene, a metaphorical expression "the sea as a life-taker" appears, which is contradictory to the previously mentioned metaphor.The two examples of metaphors show that the meaning of the film is related to something paradoxical in human life.
The essence of metaphor is to understand and experience one thing in terms of another (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003, p. 5).Principally, metaphor is about two elements A and B. Metaphors in film studies were originally recognized as the result of the juxtaposition of images from one shot to another.Balazs (1952, pp. 125-126) categorizes such metaphors as similes, the formation of which is based on similarity.Bazin (2005, p. 26) states that it is montage that generates the meaning of the metaphor, the image itself does not provide meaning.One shot plus the next that generates meaning is the kind of metaphor that is a language-based model, and Pryluck (1975) argues against this treatment of metaphor in film studies.Furthermore, Trevor Whittock coined the theory of imaginative cognition which emphasizes that metaphors have meanings that are not limited to formal-rhetorical formations, metaphors are not limited to verbal mediums and play a role in generating new meaning findings (Horowitz, 1992, pp. 52-53).This thinking shows that the concept of metaphor is not limited to a simile that relies on elements of similarity.Metaphors with language-based models are also known as monomodal metaphors in which the two constituent elements are the same mode.Charles Forceville with his multimodal metaphor theory made a significant contribution to metaphor research in film studies.Metaphorical expressions always consist of two elements.In the multimodal metaphor concept, the two elements can display different modes (Forceville, 2009, p. 24).This multimodal metaphor theory expands the possibility of finding metaphors in films, because tracking can be done through narrative domains that appear denotatively prominent, in different modes, and are also influenced by the subjectivity of the director (Rohdin, 2009, pp. 421-423).Referring to the multimodal metaphor formulation, Kappelhoff and Müller coined cinematic expressive movements as a space for tracking metaphors in audiovisual media such as film.
As stated earlier, the film's message is assumed to be expressed metaphorically.Therefore, this paper intends to interpret the metaphors with the goal of getting the meaning of the film through metaphors.For this reason, finding the metaphors that carry the message of the film must be done first before dismantling and holistically concluding the metaphorical meanings of the film.To achieve this goal, the method used is the combination of the theory of cinematic expressive movements first coined by Kappelhoff and Müller, and the concept of redescription from Paul Ricoeur's classical metaphor theory.These two concepts are key references for interpreting the metaphors in The Man from The Sea.

Methods
The theory of cinematic expressive movements plays an important role as a technical reference for how metaphors can be found in audiovisual media such as film.Müller (2019) calls these metaphors "metaphoricity", metaphors originating from cinematic expressive movements that are constructed and determined by the spectator's perspective and affective experiences.Meanwhile, Ricoeur's concept of redescription serves as a key to unfold the hidden meanings of the metaphors.The concept of redescription is chosen as it is aligned with the goal of this paper which is to interpret the meaning of films through metaphors.The concept responds by providing a way to connect the hidden meanings in metaphors with the real world.

Metaphoricity
Müller (2019) used the term metaphoricity to describe the process of metaphorizing (doing metaphor) the mise-en-scene perceived by the audience while watching a film.When the audience captures metaphorical expressions on the screen, what enters their minds and emotions are expressive movements.Kappelhoff and Müller (2011) thus state that the idea of cinematic expressive movements is the foundation for metaphor construction.
Before discussing cinematic expressive movements, it is necessary to mention Charles Forceville's multimodal metaphor, namely the form of metaphor resulting from the application of conceptual metaphor theory into audiovisual media (Muller & Kappelhoff, 2018, p. 20) as this multimodal metaphor strongly supports the process of metaphoricity (Müller, 2019, p. 64).Multimodal metaphors enable conceptual metaphors to be transferred into visual images such as films (Coëgnarts, 2017, p. 2).Conceptual metaphors are ideas that see metaphors not only as a rhetorical linguistic tool, but something that originates cognitively (Coëgnarts, 2017, p. 4).The most important concept of Forceville's theory of multimodal metaphor is the formation of multiple modes as a form of metaphor which in film includes visuals, spoken or written language, sound, and music (Eggertsson & Forceville, 2009, p. 430;Forceville & Urios-Aparisi, 2009, p. 4).In the case of multimodal metaphors, if a metaphor can be formulated with "A as B" to facilitate the reading of the metaphor, the mode in A may be different from the mode in B. A may be constructed through visual modality, while B may be constructed through verbal modality.When analyzing metaphors in several animation films, Forceville detects metaphors by focusing on the visual and verbal modality (Forceville, 2013).
Multimodal metaphor is a term for metaphors that emerge from audiovisual media including film, however, this concept is not clear enough to explain how a shot or sequence in a mise-enscene can be recognized as a metaphor.Therefore, this paper uses the concept of multimodal metaphor as a reference to formulate metaphors, that modality is not limited to language expressions.Meanwhile, to trace metaphors in films, the concept of cinematic expressive movements plays a crucial role.
Cinematic expressive movements function as mediators to recognize the metaphors expressed through film.The main point of this theory is in the audience's role that "metaphorizes" the film, not in the artists' words or gestures.As stated by Coëgnarts (2017, p. 5), expression through language in film is not the main element, because the film represents a certain reality.As stated by Müller (2019, p. 64), "we speak of metaphorizing as embodied interaction and employ the term metaphoricity instead of metaphor."This indicates that the metaphor as the object of analysis does not appear explicitly in the film, thus the term metaphoricity is more appropriate to use.In addition, the process of tracking and constructing metaphors is more appropriate using metaphorizing mentions.Cameron (2018, p. 19)explains that the use of the term metaphorizing is due to the thought that metaphors in film occur as a sub-system of a larger system that does not occur in one process because its appearance is not explicit.
The main reference for metaphorical construction or metaphorizing in film is expressive movements by cinematic elements in mise-en-scene.Expressive movements are moving images that appear in a mise-en-scene, in the form of gestures (physical appearance) expressed by the artists' acting as characters (Bordwell, 2008, p. 141;Fahlenbrach, 2018, p. 71;Muller & Kappelhoff, 2018, p. 163).Expressive movements are an interactive process between what appears on the screen and what the audience perceives, between the process of viewing the film and the audience's perspective due to the affective experience they receive.For this reason, the metaphor is not explicitly stated in the film.Film is an audiovisual expression of the filmmaker's ideas and images, but metaphors occur or are formed through the audience's embodied experiences based on their perception of the audiovisual image.Thus, the audience creates a formula for metaphoricity through cinematic expressive movements as their ground to gain sensations and affective experiences through the process of film viewing (Kappelhoff & Müller, 2011, p. 143).
Through cinematic expressive movements, metaphoricity in the formulation of multimodal metaphor arises from the embodiment of activities in mise-en-scenes into the audience's minds.Activities in mise-en-scene are expressed through verbal and gestural elements as the film's diegetic elements.The activities in mise-en-scenes as expressive movements have a dynamic and temporal character so multimodal metaphors that are recognized also have dynamic and temporal characteristics.These characteristics arise because the metaphoricity process transforms a dead metaphor (Müller, 2019, p. 64) into a live metaphor.This concept is in line with Ricoeur's thought that in narrative text, metaphors that can be analyzed are limited to non-dead metaphors (Muller, 2008, p. 3).In a film, expression through language is not the main element, because the film represents a certain reality (Coëgnarts, 2017, p. 5), so multimodal metaphors in a film are not conceptual metaphors represented by the film, but new multimodal metaphors constructed by audience through expressive movements (Kappelhoff & Müller, 2011, p. 143).
The process of developing metaphors (metaphoricity) in films is divided into stages of macro, meso, and micro analysis based on the principle of temporality (Muller & Kappelhoff, 2018, pp. -230-231).The first stage is the macro level, namely watching the whole film, dividing the narrative into scenes, and identifying which parts of the scenes express metaphors.The steps to identify film scenes are easier to do by following the plot distribution according to Barsam and Monahan (2019, pp. 119-120) which states that diegetic elements build the diegesis or "the total world of the story".They divide the plot into five sections: exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and denouement.The second stage is the micro level, namely reviewing certain scenes through expressive movement, and drawing out metaphoricity with the formula "A as B".This formula is used to simplify the reading of metaphors in the film's scene (Whittock, 2009, p. 5).The third stage is the meso level, namely reviewing any repeated patterns of metaphoricity that are revealed at the micro level.The three stages of macro, micro, and meso are repeated to different metaphorical themes.
The following subchapter discusses the concept of redescription according to Paul Ricoeur.This concept serves as a method for uncovering hidden meanings in metaphors by focusing on the context, which is called split reference.

Redescription
Redescription (Ricoeur, 2003) is the most important notion in Ricoeur's metaphor theory; it is the final goal of metaphor analysis.To Ricoeur, the purpose of metaphors interpretation is to "redescribe the world" (Kearney, 2004, p. 54).Playing with metaphors enables us to redescribe reality, as an ability possessed by fictional works (Sugiharto, 2016, p. 106), including films.So, the task of metaphor is to create new possibilities of imagination and vision (Thiselton, 1992, p. 351), or as Fahlenbrach (2018, p. 76) states that the role of metaphor is to create deictic structures that make the audience moved by the narrative.To achieve this "redescription", the interpreted metaphors should be living metaphors, as the dead metaphors do not have the deconstructive power to redescribe (Abetz, 2014, p. 46).This is in line with Müller's argument that metaphoricity is a live metaphor.
Redescription is done through interpretation using split reference.Split reference is coined by Ricoeur as a way and a guide to interpreting metaphors that function as a referential function of metaphor expressions (Ricoeur, 1978a).The split reference refers to the presence of two different yet intersecting references.One reference that points inward is called the intralinguistic reference while the one points outward is called the extralinguistic reference.The logic of the split reference notion is metaphor analogy as mini poetry (Ricoeur, 2003, p. 109).It means metaphors can be understood as a discourse because poetry is a text.The statement "all discourse occurs as an event" (Ricoeur, 2003, p. 136) shows that metaphors carry meanings because a certain event must have a meaning.When metaphors as discourse are tied to meaning, the use of metaphor becomes contextual because meaning always depends on its context, as Ricoeur (1978b, p. 138) "Metaphor is such a contextual change of meaning".Because metaphor is always bound to context, split reference is the context, as Ricoeur (2016b, p. 156) states that " . . .discourse that carries sense and reference: what one says and about what it is said", shows polarity between "sense" (what it says) and "reference" (what it is said).Sense is "the immanent pattern of discourse" (Ricoeur, 2016a, p. 133), and a text is "an architecture of themes and purposes which can be constructed in several ways" (Ricoeur, 2016a, p. 137).Thus, "sense" as a pattern or structure that builds a text or discourse, is what functions as an intralinguistic reference.Here, the film acts as a text or discourse.The intralinguistic reference is completed with the concept of metaphoricity through cinematic expressive movements."sense" which triggers the imagination in the audience's cognitive information in the form of words equals to the realized imagination after the process of seeing "the total world of the story" through mise-en-scene.This imagination gives rise to metaphoricity through the expressive movements of the cinematic elements that embody into the audience's mind.So, when intralinguistic references are guided by sense, metaphors that were born from imagination cannot be dead metaphors.
After the solution to "what it says", the next step is to solve "what it is said" which is a "reference".The answer to "what it is said" or reference to "about what" is "about a world, which is the world of the work" (Ricoeur, 2016a, p. 139).Ricoeur (2016b, p. 158) clearly states that polysemy characteristics brought by the metaphors are strongly related to historical reality, and this "reference" relates to what Aristotle calls mimesis (Ricoeur, 2016a, p. 141), even though mimesis that Ricoeur refers to is not just a duplicate of reality but a new creation of reality.Thus, extralinguistic reference is a reference to historical-social-cultural realities that the metaphors express as a part of the interpretation process and becomes the guide to capturing reality expressed through the metaphors.Interpretation of metaphoricity with reference to extralinguistic reference bridges the audience's metaphoricity with the real world.After having a perspective through affective experience from viewing the film, the audience needs to finalize the findings of the living metaphor by looking for correlations with the world in which he exists.The extralinguistic reference is the connector to the audience's reality.After the audience correlates the findings with historical-social-cultural realities, the interpretation of the metaphor is completed, namely with the results of a re-description of reality.

Metaphoricity in the man from the sea
This chapter discusses the interpretation of metaphors in The Man from The Sea.Based on the cinematic expressive movements, there are six metaphoricities found, namely: (1) "the sea as a life-taker" (2) "the sea as a supernatural existence" (3) "the sea as a life-giver" (4) "differences as obstacles" (5) "differences as non-obstacles" (6) "the enemy as a friend" The film begins with the introduction of the main characters: Laut, the main character; Takashi, Takako, Ilma, Kris, Kris, and Sachiko, as the major characters; and two minor characters: Ilma's father and Pak Nun.The story starts with the appearance of a young man from the sea who then collapses on the beach and loses consciousness.The next scene shows Ilma, helped by Kris, interviewing Pa Nun, Takako, and Takashi.Pak Nun is one of the Aceh tsunami survivors who loses his family.Takako is a middle-aged woman of Japanese descent who works as a volunteer in post-tsunami Aceh.She lives in Aceh with his son, Takashi.Ilma is a young Aceh woman who wants to be a journalist, but she cannot continue her study because she loses her house and all her belongings to the tsunami.Kris is Ilma's partner and Takashi's friend.The next major character is Sachiko, a Japanese young woman, who is Takashi's cousin.She visits Aceh to spread his father's ashes on the Aceh sea.Conflict happens when Takako is asked to identify the identity of the young man from the sea, which is suspected to be coming from Japan.Takako gives him the name "Laut" which means "sea".The character of Laut is mysterious, he does not talk much and can do magic, such as making fish jump around inside a basket, making the shower flow warm mater, and indirectly causing the death of an old man, among other magical things he performs.The magical things happen at the same time as the conflicts that happen between the major characters, but they do not show a direct cause and effect relation.The film ends with the scene where Laut is disappearing into the sea after the locals accuse him of causing the death of local boys.

Metaphors expressing "the sea"
The first three metaphors relate to "the sea".The expressive movements of "the sea" here refer to the word "sea" (denotatively) and the main character, "Laut" (connotative meaning).These three metaphors refer to extralinguistic references regarding the existence and contribution of the sea to human life and are related to the tsunami.
3.1.1.1.The sea as a life-taker.This first metaphoricty is expressed in the four stages of the plot.The first one in the exposition is through Pak Nun's (a minor character) verbal dialogue when Ilma interviews him (03:39).Ilma interviews Pak Nun about his traumatic experience after the Banda Aceh tsunami.Pak Nun tells her that he was taking his child to play on the beach when he heard a gun-shot-like noise.At first, he thought the sound came from the Mobile Brigade (Brimob), a part of the Indonesian police corps that fight against the Acehnese separatists.Pak Nun's traumatic account of the tsunami explains the historical background of the film, which is the 26 December 2004 tsunami as the aftereffect of the Sundanese subduction zone earthquake that spreads towards the western and eastern parts of the Indian Ocean (Griffin et al., 2013, p. 176).Besides sharing his account of the tsunami, Pak Nun also shared about the socio-political background of Aceh related to the conflicts that lasted until 2005 between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement which was founded in December 1976 (Ansori, 2012).The metaphor of "the sea as a life-taker" is revealed through Pak Nun's verbal dialogue which describes the waves and the gunfire shot by the police.Later, the waves are expressed through the word "explode" (03:57) and "run" (04:01).The use of the two verbs personifies the sea, and the events after the waves struck are implying the sea as the killer of Pak Nun's wife and children (See Figure 1).
In contrast to Pak Nun's verbal expression which refers to the sea denotatively, the three scenes below show "the sea", which is expressed in the metaphoricity of "the sea as a life-taker", as the personification of the main character, "Laut".Laut is an Indonesian word which means the sea.Laut's emergence from the sea (in exposition) and his return to the sea (denouement), give rise to the perception that Laut's existence is synonymous with "the sea".
The second stage of the plot, the rising action, expresses "the sea as a life-taker" when Laut interacts with an old man who lost his child in the tsunami.The relationship between the major characters with Laut occurs when Takako tries to find the identity of a man stranded on the beach.The man does not communicate but he seems to be Japanese, so he is assumed to have a memory loss.Takako named him Laut which refers to his mysterious appearance from the sea.The sea in this part is the representation of the character Laut, as the character is associated with the sea (Laut is an Indonesian word that means "sea").
The encounter between Laut and the old man happens when Takako, Takashi, Kris, Ilma, and Sachiko bring Laut to meet the fishermen in their attempt to find Laut's identity (see figure 2).In minute 37:43, the old man who lost his child to the tsunami approaches Laut and is mistaken Laut for his lost child.Laut holds the old man's hand and brings his palm close to the old man's face.In minute 41:22 through a medium close-up shot, the camera focuses on the old man's face who lays down and lets out his final breath.The scene is followed by a shot of an evening sky with the setting sun, and a voice saying "Inna lillahi wa Inna ilaihi raji'un", confirming the old man's death.The visual expression when Laut puts his hand on the old man's face and the following scene of the evening sky and the verbal expression confirming the old man's death express Laut as a life-taker.The series of the scene in minutes 37:43 and 41:22 do not explicitly show Laut's action in taking the old man's life, so his action is seen as a metaphorical expressive movement that suggests Laut as a life-taker and does not state that Laut is a killer.
The third stage of the plot, the climax, carries "the sea as a life-taker" during the scene of Takako's death.This scene occurs when Takashi and Sachiko take Laut on a trip to a harbor to cross Sabang island.Sachiko wants to spread her father's ashes on the sea of Sabang island as his last wish.On the way there, Sachiko comes across Takako who volunteers to plant mangroves on the coast, and she stops the vehicle to see her.In minute 78:11 Laut gets out of the car and approaches Takako.Takako asks Laut about his identity in minute 81:42, "Hontō ni, Rau tte nani mono nan da?" (Actually, what are you, Laut?).Laut does not reply as he is depicted as a character who does not talk much.
In minute 83:36, a central framing shot shows Laut sitting on the ground when a butterfly distracts him, followed by a scene when he chases the butterfly.As he passes Takako whose back is facing the camera, Laut raises his hand toward Takako and somehow it causes Takako to fall.In minute 88:20, a central framing shot shows Takako lying down on the ground with her lips turned blue, which suggests that she is dead (see figure 2).The fourth stage of the plot, the falling action, shows the metaphor that occurs on Sabang island.The scene begins with a surrealist scene in minute 95:06 in a central framing shot of a group of children staring at the camera, and the shot shifts to a boy humming Laut's song (the song that Laut hums in minute 13:37 in the exposition) which suggests that the boy is Laut when he is small.The waterfall in the background of the child is suddenly flowing backward, from the bottom to the top.Later in minute 97:09, a group of locals approaches Takashi, Sachiko, Kris, Ilma, and Laut.The verbal dialogue between the locals and Takashi hints that some of the children are drowned, and they accuse Laut of their death because he is near the river where the children die.The locals' visual and verbal expression shows that they see Laut as the life-taker.
3.1.1.2.The sea as a supernatural existence.This second metaphoricity is expressed in two stages of the plot.The first is in the exposition when Takako, Takashi, Sachiko, and Ilma take Laut on a pick-up truck.The scene occurs when Laut is found by locals stranded on the beach, and they ask Takako to help to find Laut's identity.Pak Nun drives the truck, while Takako, Laut and three fishermen with their catch sit on the back of the truck.
In minute 13:43, Laut starts humming a song.The visual expression shows that the song causes the fish in the fishermen's baskets to leap around.The mise-en-scene generates a perception that Laut has a supernatural power.Then, Pak Nun, the driver, suddenly receives a supernatural vision when he suddenly sees a woman and her daughter on the beach waving to him.This mise-enscene further emphasizes the perception that Pak Nun's supernatural vision is triggered by Laut's humming.This scene creates metaphoricity of Laut's supernatural existence through the sound and visual expression (see figure 3).
The second scene occurs in the rising action at Takako and Takashi's house when Sachiko is about to take a shower.The Japanese have a different habit of taking a shower compared to locals Indonesian who live in the tropical climate.The Japanese usually use warm water, so Sachiko asks Takako (minute 18:05), "Oyu, dou yatte dasanain desu ka?" (How do you turn on the warm water?), and Takako replies, "Gomen, shawaa mizu dake na no." (Sorry, the shower has no warm water).In minute 18:21 after the dialogue, Laut who sits in front of the house with Takako touches the pipe under the door and somehow the shower produces warm water, as seen in Sachiko's dialogue (minute 18:55), "Takako san . . .nanka oyu dete kita."(Takako san . . . the water turns warm).This  visual-verbal mise-en-scenes expresses Laut as a supernatural existence, which refers to his magical power to warm the water.
In these three scenes, "the sea" as supernatural is the connotative meaning of the figure Laut, which is identical to the sea element, namely fish in the first scene and water in the second scene.

The sea as a life-giver.
The third metaphoricity is expressed in rising action through three scenes.The first scene is after Laut's encounter with the old man who lost his child in the tsunami.The scene is when Laut, Takako, Ilma, Takashi, Kris, and Sachiko are on their way home.When they walk towards their vehicle through a bushy footpath, Laut suddenly turns towards the bush, and a central framing shot shows a girl lying down unconscious (minute 39:40).
Laut's action of helping and curing the girl is seen through a close-up shot (minute 43:14) of Ilma's camera which captures the moment and replays it.Laut produces a water ball from his palm and put it in the girl's mouth which somehow makes her regain consciousness (see figure 4).
The second scene occurs in visual expression (minute 61:58) when Laut faces his palm towards a withering rose and it brings the rose back to life.The third scene is when Laut cures Sachiko who has a high fever.In minute 64:54 through a central framing shot, Laut suddenly stands up in front of Sachiko who lies on the bed.He turns his hand toward Sachiko's body and makes some movements as if he draws something from the body.The shot is followed by a surrealistic scene when Sachiko suddenly in the middle of the sea before the scene shifts back to the room when Sachiko is awake and recovered.The sea in this scene carries a connotative content when Laut, with his magical power, and the sea inside Sachiko's dream, give her health back (see figure 5).
The three scenes suggest that Laut represents "the sea" as the "life-giver" for the girl, the rose, and Sachiko."the sea" as a life-giver is also the connotative meaning of the figure Laut.The sudden appearance of the waterball from Laut's hand and the shot transition from Laut's hand movements on Sachiko to the shot of Sachiko in the middle of the sea raises the audience's perception that Laut is synonymous with the sea.The metaphoricity in these three scenes is based on the expressive movements in the form of visual modality.

Metaphors expressing human relationships
This section will discuss the results of the fourth metaphoricity "differences as obstacles", the fifth "differences as non-obstacles", and the sixth "the enemy as a friend".These three metaphors express relations between people of the two nations, so they can be categorized as relationship metaphors.This fourth, fifth, and sixth metaphors refer to the extralinguistic references related to the socio-historical background of the Free Aceh Movement and the bilateral relationship between Japan and Indonesia.

Differences as obstacles.
The fourth metaphoricity is expressed through four scenes in the rising action.The first and second scene shows similar expressive movements from the interaction between the character Ilma and her father.The first scene is the dialogue between Ilma and her father who just returned from the hospital (minute 20:28).This verbal expression hints that the cause of Ilma's father limping is the government, which suggests that her father is an ex-member of the Free Aceh Movement who rebelled against the Indonesian government.Ilma's father also expresses his disagreement with her friendship with Takako, who is a Japanese.He thinks the Japanese support the government through funding to make people's lives more difficult such as by imposing expensive hospital fees.The second scene that shows Ilma's father's disagreement with her relationship with Takako is expressed in minute 61:30.The scene depicts Ilma's father's visit to Takako's house during a small welcoming party for Sachiko, to which Ilma is invited.Angrily, he tells Ilma to leave the house and come home with him.The metaphorical expression in the first scene is shown through verbal expression, while for the second scene it is understood through visual as well as verbal expression.Ilma's father gesture and verbal expression suggests that Ilma and himself are different from Takako, and that difference becomes the obstacle in Ilma and Takako's friendship.
The third scene that expresses the metaphor relates to the first scene in minute 21:34.After Ilma argues with her father, she goes into her room and continues replaying the camera recording on her laptop.The recording shows Takashi who says in Indonesian "Sometimes I don't know who I am" because even though he sees himself as an Indonesian, others often see him as a foreigner.His verbal monologue expresses a rejection of Takashi's existence, who wants to be acknowledged as Indonesian, but the difference obstructs him.The fourth scene that expresses the metaphor is Sachiko and Ilma's dialogue in minute 52:00 when they both travel to the tsunami shipwrecked monument.Sachiko asks Ilma about her relationship with Kris and Ilma explains that they were in a relationship once, but she broke up because she and Kris profess a different religion.Wearing a hijab, Ilma is a Moslem, and judging from the name Kris, he is probably a Christian although the film does not mention it.Ilma then says that their parents will not bless their relationship.Ilma's verbal expression shows that different religions becomes an obstacle to build a love relationship.
The four scenes create a perception that bigotry based on ethnic and religious differences is an obstacle in human relationship.

Differences as non-obstacles.
The fifth metaphoricity is expressed in three scenes in the rising action and the climax.The first scene in the rising action expresses "Takashi is like Indonesian" in minute 63:07 which shows Takashi is eating with Takako in an Indonesian manner (visual mode).
His gesture of eating without using utensils while lifting one foot to the chair shows a traditional Indonesian way of eating (see figure 6).This scene shows that Takashi is still part of Indonesia even though he is considered different because Takako, his mother, is a Japanese.The second scene is in the climax when Kris, Sachiko, Ilma, and Takashi sit side by side on a boat taking them to Sabang island.Kris, an Indonesian, sits side by side with Sachiko, a Japanese, Ilma, an Indonesian, sits next to Sachiko, and Takashi sits next to Ilma.This shot is part of a scene in minute 87:45 when Ilma sings a children's song in Indonesian that goes like this, "Kalau kau suka hati tepuk tangan . . ." (If you're happy and you know it claps your hands), which is followed by Sachiko, and Takashi who joyfully sings the Japanese version of the song, "Shiawase nara te o tatakō . . .".This scene as the verbal and visual expression shows metaphoricity "differences as non-obstacles", that ethnic or language differences can be united in a joyful activity and togetherness (see figure 7).
The third scene, which is the climax, is expressed visually when Sachiko spreads her father's ashes on top of a bunker towards the Aceh sea in minute 95:21.Sachiko's mission to Aceh is to fulfill her father's wish to spread his ashes in the sea, and that location is the sea on Sabang island.Sachiko's father's will of wanting to be rested in the Aceh sea expresses that nation border or ethnical difference is not an obstacle.This scene shows "difference" through Sachiko, a Japanese, when she spreads her father's ashes in the Aceh sea, Indonesia.

The enemy as a friend.
The sixth metaphoricity is expressed in two scenes.The first is in the rising action when Takako, Takashi, Kris, Ilma, and Sachiko take Laut to see some fishermen in their effort to find Laut's identity.The mise-en-scene in minute 36:00 show their encounter with an old man who sings an old colonial Japanese song.Takako asks the old man how he comes to know the song.The old man says that he learns the song from a friend of his, a Japanese soldier who fights along with him against the Dutch colonial.The next mise-en-scene in minute 37:04 is in contrast with the previous scene when the camera shifts to another old fisherman.He says, "Ke manakah romusha itu?Pemuda pemudi digiring sebagai ikan yang masuk jaring . . ." (Where are the romusha?Young people are herded like fish into the nets).Romusha is a Japanese word for Indonesians who were forcibly worked by the Japanese that colonized Indonesia from 1942 to 1945.The old man's verbal monologue suggests the tragic fate of the romusha as most of them were dead in the end.The old man's expression when talking about romusha suggests the Japanese as an enemy that caused misery to the Indonesian people in the past.However, the other old man singing a Japanese song contrastingly expresses the Japanese as a friend.The first old fisherman's verbal expression followed by Takako's verbal expression shows a good relationship between them.The next mise-en-scene, however, shows a contrasting verbal expression, namely through the monologue "young people are herded like fish into the nets" which shows dislike or hate.The cinematic expressive experience in this scene raises the perception of a paradoxical relationship which is expressed through the antithesis of "friend" and "enemy".
The second scene is expressed in an event through verbal and visual expressions, related to a minor character, Leni.She is Takako's good friend, a journalist living in Jakarta.She involves in the story when Takako asks her to come to Banda Aceh to help her find Laut's identity.The close relationship between Takako and Leni is seen in rising action in minute 53:15 when Takako takes Leni to a small party in her house.In the scene, Takako introduces Leni to Ilma with the purpose that Leni can help to realize Ilma's dream to be a journalist.In minute 56:39, Ilma, based on her trust in Leni as Takako's "friend", shows Leni the recording of Laut and his magical power that saves a girl's life (as elaborated above in minutes 39:40 and 43:14).Based on Leni's request, Ilma gives her the recording.The event in the climax in minute 72:28 shows Leni's betrayal of Ilma's trust when Leni holds a live televised press conference with the footage of Laut performing his magical power.In addition, Leni claims that the recording is her handiwork.The initial premise "Leni is a friend" is inversely proportional to Leni's actions in the climax, which appears as a hidden enemy of Ilma and Takako.Metaphoricity occurs due to the affective experience through two events in the rising action and climax.The expressive movements in the mise-en-scene in minute 72:28 (climax), are captured by the audience's memory as the continuation of the mise-en-scene in minute 56:39 (rising action).Leni's visual and verbal expressions in two parts of the plot are paradoxical between "friend" and "enemy".

The sea as a life-taker + the sea as a supernatural existence + the sea as a life-giver = life as a paradox
The existence and contribution of the sea to human life, as well as the tsunami phenomenon, are extralinguistic references to the first three metaphors: the sea as a life-taker (the first metaphoricity), the sea as a supernatural existence (the second metaphoricity), the sea as a life-giver (the third metaphoricity), especially in the reality of Japanese and Indonesian people's lives which become the socio-cultural background of this film.The following extralinguistic references result in an interpretation that the existence of the sea towards human life in the Japanese and Indonesian perspectives shows the attitude of society that is: 1) dependent 2) inferior.This behavior shows a paradox: humans' dependence on the sea that supports human life and humans' view of the sea as a frightening figure.
Japan and Indonesia have similarities as archipelagic countries, and the tsunami is a threat to people's lives in both countries.As stated above, the tsunami that hit Aceh, Indonesia, in 2004 was a human tragedy that claimed many lives and devastated the coastal areas of Aceh.Likewise, the tsunami in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011 was a disaster which resulted in a nuclear reactor leak and damage to the Fukushima area.
Humans' dependence on the sea can be understood mainly through the reality of the following two phenomena which indicate that the existence of the sea is a support for human life.The sea for Japanese people is a source of food with thousands of types of fish in it.The Japanese fishing industry that has developed since the early 20th century has produced superior quality fish products, which are characterized by sashimi, Japanese fresh seafood, as a part of the Japanese food culture which has gone worldwide (Bestor & Bestor, 2014, p. 53, 54).For Indonesia, the sea is a symbol of state power, which is shown through the political strategy of President Joko Widodo who wants to make Indonesia the word's maritime axis (Fathiraini et al., 2022, p. 1;Zuhdi, 2020, p. 140).This strategy emphasizes Indonesia dependence on the existence of the sea.
Humans' inferiority towards the sea is reflected through the following tales and local beliefs.The Japanese fairy tale Inamura no Hi, which is used as a medium for teaching disaster preparedness, tells of the heroism of Gohei, who was willing to burn his rice barn to save the lives of villagers from the tsunami (Thompson, 2021, p. 113).This tale shows that humans are inferior to the sea which can bring disaster, thus requiring human sacrifice to survive.Furthermore, Japan's native religion, Shinto, which is known as the animistic religion, looks at the sea as a dwelling place for the gods.According to Japanese vocabulary, the sea is called "ama" which has the same pronunciation as sky or heaven (Senda, 1992, p. 132).This shows that the sea is considered a mystical place like the sky and reflected humans' inferiority to the sea.The third is the figure of an amabie, namely a yokai or monster originating from the Edo period (1603-1868), which reappears to ward off the COVID-19 virus in 2020.Amabie is a green mermaid with a bird's beak-like mouth, originating from the sea.This amabie phenomenon also shows humans' inferiority to the sea as the sea is considered to possess a mystical power that far surpasses human abilities.
Like in Japan, tsunami is a threat to Indonesian people living in the coast.After the 2004 tsunami devastated Aceh, another tsunami formed in the south coast of the Java island in 2006.The Java sea which is also connected to the sea in Aceh, is believed to be controlled by a female god called Nyai Roro Kidul or the Queen of the South Seas (Reid, 2016, p. 99).Inferiority towards the sea is expressed through the ceremony of giving yearly offerings to Nyai Roro Kidul that is carried out by the Javanese and Sundanese people on the south coast of Java (Suryanti, 2017;Yusuf & Finaldin, 2022).
The first metaphoricity of "the sea as a life-taker" is understood through four stages of the plot, namely 1) the scene of Pak Nun expressing how the sea has taken the lives of his wife and child, 2) the action of Laut which causes the death of an old man, 3) Takako's death scene after Laut raises his hand toward her, 4) charges against Laut for the children's deaths.The four parts of this plot show the power of the sea which far surpasses humans, both denotatively and connotatively through the character Laut.The expression of the power of the sea is in accordance with the reality according to the extralinguistic references, that humans view themselves as inferior to the sea which has destructive power.
The second metaphoricity "the sea as a supernatural existence" is understood through two stages of the plot, namely 1) Laut's action that causes the fish in the basket to jump and a supernatural vision by Pak Nun, 2) Laut's action when he makes the shower water warm.These two parts of the plot express the mystical power possessed by Laut.In this metaphor, "the sea" is interpreted connotatively through Laut's actions.Laut's appearance and his mystical powers mark the inferior human feelings towards the sea.
The third metaphoricity "the sea as a life-giver" is understood through three scenes, namely 1) Laut's action of healing a girl, 2) Laut's action of reviving wilted flowers, 3) Laut heals Sachiko.These three scenes show that the existence of the sea (which refers to the figure of Laut) is imagined to have mystical powers that can support human life.The imagination of this mystical power reflects humans' dependence on the sea, hoping that the sea can contribute positively to human welfare.
The understanding of paradox refers to identification which Sainsbury states, quoted in Sorensen (2003, p. 6), is "the unacceptable conclusion of an argument that has acceptable premises and an acceptable inference pattern".The first metaphor "the sea as a life-taker", the second metaphor "the sea as a supernatural existence", and the third metaphor "the sea as a life-giver", show the relationship between the sea and humans' lives through negative and positive aspects that both destructive and supportive toward lives.The three metaphors that explain "the sea as "a life-taker" /"a supernatural existence"/"a life-giver" show a paradox as they cannot possibly result in an acceptable conclusion."a supernatural existence" as expressed through the character "Laut", although it relates well to "a life-taker" and "a life-giver", both concepts show polarity.The paradox expression in these three metaphors is a reflection of extralinguistic references that view the existence of the sea paradoxically.

Differences as obstacles + differences as non-obstacles + the enemy as a friend = life as a paradox
The extralinguistic references that underlie these three metaphors: differences as obstacles (the fourth metaphoricity), differences as non-obstacles (the fifth metaphoricity), the enemy as a friend (the sixth metaphoricity), reflect two opposing attitudes in this film, namely 1) an attitude that is intolerant of differences, and 2) an attitude that is tolerant of differences.The first attitude is reflected through the socio-historical reality of the separatist movement the Free Aceh Movement and the second attitude through the bilateral relations between Japan and Indonesia.The attitude that is reflected by this socio-historical reality produces a paradoxical human relationship which is shown through these three metaphors.
Aceh is the most northern province in Sumatra island, Indonesia, and known in the past as Aceh Sultanate (16 th century) which is the most influential sultanate in the eastern Islamic world (Kloos, 2018, p. 26). Gaillard et al. (2008, p. 515) quoting Reid, argues that the Free Aceh Movement is a separatist movement founded by an Aceh businessman, Hasan Di Tiro in 1976, who was dissatisfied with the social-economical condition in Aceh under the central government in Jakarta (in Java island).To the Indonesian government, this group is a threat to the unity of the Indonesian Republic, thus military action is required to suppress the movement.The cause of this separatism, according to Anderson (2013, p. 34) is that the Free Aceh Movement always thinks that historically Aceh is an independent sultanate and now is colonized by the Indonesian government (thus needs to be freed from Indonesia).They also spread the anti-Javanese sentiment, related to the central government which is located on Java island.The Aceh tsunami on 26 December 2004 brought destruction to Aceh.However, the tsunami also brings positive effects (Gaillard et al., 2008, p. 518).It triggers peace in Aceh, as proven by the dissolution of the Free Aceh Movement in 2005 through the Helsinki agreement between the Indonesian government and the Acehnese Freedom Movement.Even so, until now, Aceh is the only province in Indonesia that applies Sharia rules, "a code of conduct for Muslims, guiding every aspect of their life" (Nurrahmi, 2022, p. 1).The implication of implementing this rule is that it often creates polemics such as intolerance towards non-Muslims and violations of human rights (Nurrahmi, 2022, p. 2;Rahman, 2020, p. 104).
Today, the Japan-Indonesia relationship is very close and the two countries become partners, as proven through the first foreign visit of the Japanese Foreign Minister, Suga Yoshihide to Indonesia in October 2020 (Miyake, 2020;Wanandi, 2020) and Emperor Naruhito's first state visit since ascending the throne (Susilo, 2023), although historically, Indonesia was once colonized by Japan during the second world war from 1942 to 1945.The Japan-Indonesia bilateral relationship in economics is done through the Official Development Assistance (ODA), an independent fund given by first-world countries to developing countries.In 2015, Indonesia is in the top five countries that receive ODA from Japan (Barber, 2020, p. 124;Kashiwabara, 2016, p. 59).Japan-Indonesia friendship is also proven through the Joint Credit Mechanism project for climate change mitigation initiated by the Japanese government, and Indonesia was one of the first countries to make an agreement in 2013 (Hasanah & Puspitasari, 2019, p. 147).
The fourth metaphoricity "differences as obstacles" is understood through four scenes, namely 1/2) Ilma's father's action against her friendship with Takako, 3) Takashi's experience of being unaccepted as an Indonesian, and 4) Ilma's story about her interfaith relationship with Kris.The extralinguistic reference that this metaphor refers to is the separatist movement that views Aceh as different from Indonesia.The ethnic differences between Ilma and Takako, the differences between half-Japanese Takashi with local ethnic groups, and the different faith between Ilma and Kris, become obstacles in their interpersonal relations.
The fifth metaphoricity "differences as non-obstacles" is understood through three scenes, namely 1) Takashi's eating manner, 2) the major characters' singing in two languages, 3) Sachiko's action of scattering her father's ashes in the Aceh sea.These metaphors refer to extralinguistic references to bilateral relations between Japan and Indonesia, that even though there are differences in ethnicity and nationality, close relations can still be maintained.
The sixth metaphoricity "the enemy as a friend" is understood through two scenes, namely 1) the old fishermans' actions: one singing a colonial Japanese song while the other stating the suffering under Japanese colonialization, 2) Leni's action of manipulating Ilma.In colonial times, Japan was once Indonesia's enemy which is the opposite of the current reality.Then, the scene regarding Leni's act of betrayal emphasizes that human relationships are a paradox, so that without tolerance or intolerance, understanding the existence of enemies and friends is ambiguity.As shown through the old fisherman's action in the first scene that shows an attitude of accepting differences by being friendly with Japanese soldiers.However, another old fisherman who emphasizes the cruelty of the "enemy" criticizes the tolerant attitude of the other old fisherman, so that being tolerant or intolerant seems a paradox.
The definition of paradox is as stated above: "the unacceptable conclusion of an argument that has acceptable premises and an acceptable inference pattern".The scenes that express the fourth metaphor "differences as obstacles" and the fifth "differences as non-obstacles" show that the differences in human life are both obstacles and non-obstacles in human interpersonal relations.The scenes expressing "differences" shows a "life" process of the characters.The supposition "as obstacles" and "as non-obstacles" shows paradox, a contradictive pattern to the unacceptable conclusion that relates to humans' lives.
Likewise, the sixth metaphor "the enemy as a friend" shows a contradictory equivalent which results in an unacceptable conclusion, that human relationships are like a paradox.

Result of redescription: life as a paradox
The six metaphors found in the film can be divided into two categories, namely metaphors expressing "the sea" and metaphors expressing relationships.As stated above, the first category of metaphors is metaphoricity: 1) the sea as a life-taker, 2) the sea as a supernatural existence, 3) the sea as a life-giver, and the second category of metaphors is metaphoricity: 4) differences as obstacles, 5) differences as non-obstacles, 6) the enemy as a friend.This categorization was made according to extralinguistic reference which refers to the reality of Japanese and Indonesian people's lives which become the socio-cultural background of this film.The first category is the cultural reality regarding the existence of the sea towards human life, while the second category is the historical social reality of Japan-Indonesia relations and its connection with the history of Aceh.This extralinguistic reference refers to the principle of temporality, because it is very dependent on a certain time and space.In terms of the concept of "the sea", the cultural context lies on the interpretation of the sea in the context of Japanese and Indonesian culture.Likewise, the relationship between Japan and Indonesia is related to historical time, namely the historical context of the Free Aceh Movement political events and Japan-Indonesia diplomatic relations.
As has been discussed above, the discussion of extralinguistic references to these two categories of metaphoricity points to the conclusion of "a paradox".The juxtaposition of "the sea" with "a lifetaker", "a supernatural existence", and "a life-giver" shows a paradox.Likewise, the juxtaposition of "differences" with "obstacles" and "non-obstacles", "the enemy" and "a friend" shows a paradox.Thus, referring to Ricoeur's concept of metaphor interpretation as a redescription, "life as a paradox" is a redescription of reality understood through the six metaphorical expressions that are found in The Man from the Sea.The words in the film trailer "jinsei wa fujouri da kara itooshii" (because life is absurd, it looks beautiful) confirm the use of the supposition of "life" which the film expresses.The redescription of "life as a paradox" is an interpretation on the description of "life" expressed through the six metaphors as a result of holistic relations from split references, namely through narrative plots and socio-cultural realities.Gaillard et al. (2008, p. 518) mentions about paradox when he expresses the effect of the Aceh tsunami as follows "Without any doubt, the tsunami disaster acted as a powerful catalyst, but it could not be pinpointed as the only agent of peace in Aceh".In other words, the destructive tsunami plays a role in bringing peace to Aceh.

Conclusion
The analysis above show that six metaphoricity categories are traceable in Fukada's The Man from The Sea.They are referred to as metaphoricity because they are manifested through the process of metaphorizing as a result of affective experience while watching the film.Watching a film means going through the three stages of macro, micro, and meso with a focus on cinematic expressive movements, from plot exposition to denoument.The metaphors found are the result of formulations of affective experiences that are captured through observing cinematic expressive movements.The results of the analysis show that cinematic expressive movements received by the audience become affective experiences and then form perceptions.Furthermore, the concept of multimodal metaphor plays an important role in formulating the audience's perception into the formulation of A as B, because verbal and visual modalities can appear simultaneously to form elements of A or B.Even so, cinematic expressive movements are the main actor to produce metaphoricity, because modality as a form of elements of A or B are integrated in expressive movements.
This paper intends to interpret the metaphors in The Man from The Sea to get the meaning of the film.The metaphor interpretation referring to Ricoeur's metaphor theory is redescription.To describe metaphors in films, a split reference is needed: intralinguistic reference and extralinguistic reference.Intralinguistic reference plays a role in viewing film texts holistically, and this role is carried out by the cinematic expressive movements theory which produces six metaphoricities.The six of them are living metaphors, because they are multimodal metaphors resulting from new formulations through expressive movements.As explained in the subchapter above, the result of the redescription is "life as a paradox".This redescription is obtained through extralinguistic reference analysis, namely by conducting a review of the socio-cultural-historical phenomena of the film's underlying reality.Thus, "life as a paradox" is the result of the interpretation of the six metaphors in The Man from The Sea which is represented through the six living metaphors.If formulated, the steps for interpreting the metaphors are: metaphoricity by cinematic expressive movement + extralinguistic reference = redescription