After reading so many comments, I feel that basic education in the world needs to work harder. Literary films should also have reality as the cornerstone. It is said that artistic creation is based on reality and higher than reality. If the film presents a castle in the air, it will create an uncomfortable sense of disconnection for the viewers. This is not what some people say "this is a literary film, you can't understand it is your own business", but the defect of the film itself. In other words, many people say that in everything they do, the Basic Law must be taught. A good literary film, such as "The Pianist at Sea", will the audience come to pick your "logical flaws"? After watching it, the audience will say the beauty of the plot and their own perception, because in the audience's heart, this film is based on reality. Reasonable imagination made to develop a wonderful plot that would not exist in the real world. A child who grew up on a boat never went to land. This plot does not violate the basic reality, but expands the film on the basis of the basic reality. plot. This is the Basic Law, first to follow the basic reality, and then to rationally imagine.
Going back to this film, this film obviously violates the basic reality in many aspects. From the physical point of view, we can see that some domestic anti-Japanese dramas in the later period have a sense of sight. Too many things that go against reality make the subsequent extended plot even more outrageous. As a literary film, the final thought to be expressed has become a castle in the air. Because the central idea expressed by all films can be described in one sentence, this is the "core", only it is empty and empty, it needs a "skin" to reflect the shape of the "core", so that the "core" can be The audience understands and observes, that is the plot, characters, special effects, music and so on. If the "skin" is incomplete or does not fit, the "core" that the audience finally understands - the central idea is incomplete or even meaningless.
To sum up, I think there are many people in the comment area who think that there is nothing wrong with sci-fi plots. Now sci-fi movies are the hardest hit area. Based on my above point of view, human beings have begun to look forward to the universe in the 21st century, so there have been many movies. It is said that it is a sci-fi literary and artistic film if it randomly picks up some sci-fi elements. Many people think that the subject matter is novel and the content is profound. In fact, it is because the public does not understand science and technology that a series of magical and outrageous sci-fi film and television themes appear on the market. Watching sci-fi movies is not about watching special effects, and it’s not about watching special effects. Literary films should pursue elegant sentiments, profound meanings, and the relationship between human beings and the spiritual world of the material world, rather than arbitrarily violating facts and improvising them into so-called literary films. Basic education includes science education and aesthetics. Less scientific education leads to lack of understanding of scientific common sense, and no concept of basic physical phenomena; lack of aesthetic ability leads to lack of feeling for the sense of incongruity presented in film and television works, and a lack of in-depth understanding of a thing. Both are essential to human development.
We can expect that in the future, sci-fi films will become as clear as other types of films with a clear aesthetic concept, and literary films will also absorb content from various themes and become a unique existence in various types of films as a profound exploration of the nature of people and the world.
PS: After the technology in this film is upgraded by one level, these plot flaws can be solved, and the redundant two branch plots are deleted. This film still has a good theme and connotation.
View more about Ad Astra reviews
