I don't pay attention to the Oscars or the Golden Globes, but when I see the Disaster Artist being honored, I think I'll never doubt the jury's appreciation again.
This is the second time I've written a movie review. First, most movies don't need too much interpretation, and everyone will give their own unique script. To read a movie kills its soul. Second, I don't know film critics or pungent or essential writing. If I were to write, there might be very few readers.
But there are exceptions, and my first film review was dedicated to the priest. In professional terms, this is a dialogue-type drama. I watched this movie when I was 18 or 19 years old. I even suspected that it was a masterpiece of suspense for a while. To the death at the end, I also kept thinking about who was going to kill the priest. When I look back now, I don't think about murder or revenge anymore, but redemption in this world would be a better label. If given the opportunity, I would like to seriously dedicate another review to this film.
Speaking of disaster artists, I don't think it's a good movie. If we didn't know it's a seed, maybe you want to switch to a comedy for the first five minutes and laugh. But making a movie for a movie is an interesting story in itself. In most cases, Documentary mode is more suitable for shooting such subjects. The biggest problem with documentaries is the inevitable objectivity.
If we watch the Star Wars documentary with great interest, it is easy to be satisfied with the revelation of the truth and the realism brought by the details of the real life of the actors. But such a sense of realism does not require us to be emotionally involved, and we do not need to understand the so-called spirit of script writing, the director's lofty dream. More just use the movie as an entertainment tool to learn about his birth and death. It's like watching a Coca-Cola production documentary. But when we put everything into a time machine, let's sit in a movie theater and forget that it was a movie viewing, and really go back to the beginning of filmmaking. We need to face the dramatic and true story of life.
And that's exactly what disaster artists do.
My advice to those who haven't watched it yet is to not search for any storyline, any characters in this movie. Sit quietly and this movie will tell you all about it. The fantasy of its own story is enough to satisfy the most cunning appetites. As for the so-called detailed arrangements and so-called character presets, I am not a professional, so I have no professional evaluation. But Tommy Weisu, I think, deserves our questioning and admiration.
When I first saw Wei Su's exaggerated theatrical performance in acting class, I didn't think it was a lunatic or a crazy person. The zest and tension he has are just the basic elements a performance needs. In contrast, Greg's restraint reminds me of the so-called Brothers and Sisters films. Wei Su's touching story of helping Greg on the road to success. Of course, the end result is true, but the story in it is unexpected.
The most unexpected thing is that we all thought that when Wei Su was performing, he was just showing. To me, the greatest actor can do is act out a completely different persona. This requires the actor to be dedicated enough, familiar enough with the characters and script or he is a genius! Ke Weisu, I think, he has no professionalism. He has taken this film as his passion from the very beginning. He will use a film to realize his value and prove his belief. That is to say, he is not a director or an actor, and he does not need to be responsible for his part according to the script. Looking at the field manager and other staff, they are dedicated, but Wei Su seems unreasonable. He rejects reasonable advice, he alters the script, he acts arbitrarily. If you still think that Wei Su is an actor and a director at this time, then you will also fall into a kind of incomprehension or even disgust.
The most reasonable response would be a jeering or incomprehensible laughter in the room after the screening. Many people think of the room as a comedy. Wei Su was in tears. If he was a third-rate actor and a second-rate director, it would be a blessing to win the title of comedy wizard by mistake. But imagine that when Jesus was crucified, he wept not in awe of the miracles he had done, but in human ignorance. Of course I dare not say that Wei Su is the Messiah, the prophet who awakens mankind. But for him, the room was the road to redemption. He's not acting, he's looking for ways to release his true self. His passion for acting is the very meaning of his own existence.
Wei Su's life is unknown to this day. We only know that he experienced a car accident, and he boldly called himself an American with a Polish accent. Even his best friend, Wei Su, didn't want him to understand him. It made me think of ascetic monks who gave up their family life for their faith. They are considered unreasonable to abandon their wives, but they have to embark on a road of no return. Although Wei Su's final cry was interpreted by Frank as an incomprehensible disappointment. But if he really cried, it would not only be a disappointment for not being understood, but also tears for the realization of redemption.
As Wei Su said, the room is in a way his own autobiography. He spent millions to make a movie, that's our understanding. For him, he has written a Bible for himself.
I'm willing to give this movie a 9 precisely because Frank didn't want to modify Wei Su, the crazy Christ, to make him more understandable. Frank made a good saint, and he told us the story of the mad Christ, giving us an authentic experience of a peculiar adventure of self-redemption.
View more about The Disaster Artist reviews
