I saw the trailer of "Green Zone" in the pre-broadcast commercial of "2012" last November. Since they are the original cast of "Bourne Bound", I was looking forward to it. The main line of the movie is still the same. The American soldier fell into the political conspiracy of the fanatical careerist. He was deceived and stationed in Iraq for weapons inspection, thinking that he was born and died to maintain peace. There were many doubts, so I found out the truth step by step; however, my personal strength is really a small arm, and it can't twist the thick thigh of the Bush administration, so I finally revealed the truth to the media, hoping to make it clear to the world. In such a tone, it seems that there is full dissatisfaction with the plot of the movie. Actually no, it can only be said that Hollywood's business routines have been difficult to affect my nerves. To sum up, these are the words. Saying it like this will make people feel very loud, so I have to defend myself: I always think that from the perspective of "story", movies cannot be compared with novels, and watching movies is never just watching." story". Moreover, it is obvious that a wonderful "story" may not necessarily lead to a wonderful film and television work. You can tell this by looking at how someone made Jin Yong's novels. On the contrary, a truly powerful creative team can often Decay into magic, turning a lackluster mainline into a compelling plot. It is precisely because of this that I complained that it was "not new so far", which definitely does not mean that I have an arrogant critical attitude towards Hollywood commercial films. In fact, I can count the literary films that are said to have more artistic appreciation value in one slap. With such a limited aesthetic cell, I don’t know how happy I am watching Hollywood routine films.
I don't know much about the screenwriter of "Green Zone", so I don't dare to comment, but at least it feels like a full story. He is very confident in his starring and director. Didn't expect it to surpass The Bourne, because even the same director and starring made a one-liner with a similar theme after creating the Bourne trilogy already considered a series classic It is really difficult for the film to make a breakthrough. Despite this, I still feel that if the order of the two came out reversed, when the audience sees "The Spy", they will feel that it is not so classic because of the foreshadowing of "The Green Zone"; even dare to say that "The Green Zone" is not as good as Any of the "Spy" is inferior. I remember someone commenting that Matt Damon is a very powerful male star in Hollywood, and the movies he starred in always make the audience feel that they are worth the money they put on the movie tickets. From this point of view, Matt · Damon deserves it. And the director Paul Greengrass (Paul Greengrass) himself is actually in the prime of life, but because of "Bourne Bourne" first, I want to say that his sword is not old.
When watching "The Green Zone", I was also overjoyed because of "applying what I have learned" - half of the course I just finished was about movies, and I also learned a little about shooting skills from the class, which was somewhat influenced. Every time I inadvertently find out that the usage of a certain scene in the movie is mentioned by the teacher, I will be a little happy. With the "doorway" seen by the current Wei Mo Dao Xing, there are two impressive things in "The Green Zone": one is the use of shaking shots at the beginning to express the tension and chaos, indicating that the danger has not been eliminated, and the thrilling battle will begin at any time; the other is the story. The climax of the chase in the back alleys of Baghdad. The shots were closed at different times. The five people and a helicopter were divided into two lines. And the dark line is where the chase ends (unexpectedly).
I also want to talk about Jason Issacs, the villain in the movie. I want to mention him because I have seen his villain before, but I don't know his name. After watching "Green Zone", I went to check it out. a moment. The first time I met Jason Isaacs was watching him play the villain in "Patriot" starring Mel Gibson. He really played a lot of villains, and they were all very villains. I don't know if it was because the villain played so well that he had fewer opportunities to play positive characters, and also lost more opportunities to be remembered by the audience. It is a typical photoshoot without leaving a name. Tribute to his acting, but also to his anonymity.
For this movie, I really want to give some comments like "tight rhythm and tension", "intelligent plot", appropriate, just right, wonderful, etc., but facing the mature works of mature directors, it is a bit embarrassing to use those words. ——Those traits are obvious, why should I say that? So in the end, I just said that I didn't expect more than three months in vain.
Carroll's novel "Alice in Wonderland" is an English literary masterpiece. Since 1903, it has been remade countless times by film and television directors. Remaking a famous novel is risky, because if it is not done carefully, the audience who are originally readers of the famous novel will not buy it, and the movie will attract a lot of criticism. The never-ending remake increases the risk index even more. This "Alice in Wonderland", I think, the risk index of being scolded will be relatively low. I was the first to enter the arena today. When I was bored, I noticed the audience who entered the arena one after another. Most of them were female audiences. There were not many children and male audiences, and the few male audiences were basically accompanied by girlfriends, wives or children. come. Such an audience group reminds me of "Transformers I" released in 2007. Although it is a cartoon, the adult audience in the cinema is always more than the children's audience. Because "Change I" is simply "looking for a returned world" for the post-70s and post-80s who are crowded with domestic cinemas. The memory of that childhood has long been imprinted on the heart; the inspirational power of that complex far exceeds the attraction of the film itself. Of course, on the other hand, the production of "Change I" did not disappoint the audiences born in the 70s and 80s. "Alice" is the same for generations of Western women for more than 100 years. They often fell asleep listening to this story when they were children, hoping that they would also roam Alice's wonderland in their dreams. After growing up, fairy tales are gone, but dreams and memories are still there. Therefore, no matter when the film was remade, the female audience at that time would be willing to spend money to go to the cinema to "relive the old dream"; therefore, it was originally a children's film, but the adult audience was mostly.
The previous version of "Alice" hurriedly swept a cartoon version just for teaching, and there was no comparison. However, observing the interaction between the audience and the film, it is still very satisfying to experience this version from their happy laughter. It must be some familiar and creative plot that has stirred their long-silent heartstrings. For me, who has no memory, what touched me the most might not be the stories regarded as literary classics, but the use of 3D technology in the film. Compared with the 3D upstart "Avatar", "Alice in Wonderland" is like Xiaojiabiyu to Miss Qianjin-Miss Qianjin rather than a lady. The gorgeous "Avatar" won the box office but lost the Oscar, because there is more than enough extravagance but not enough internal show. Cameron is a box office magician. The "Titanic" he directed was the box office champion in film history, and now he is the director of "Avatar", which surpassed "Thai". Therefore, this director must have his brilliance. However, maybe my taste is worse than ordinary people, from "Titanic" to "Avatar", Cameron just continued his flashy in my impression. Compared with "Alice", in the use of 3D technology, "Avatar" gives me the feeling that it is overwhelming. In "Alice", 3D is the icing on the cake. There are no overwhelming scenes, only ingenious small designs. The fresh visual enjoyment will not affect the appreciation of the plot and the aftertaste of the famous book. I think that complementing each other is the meaning of the existence of 3D technology for movies. If 3D becomes the movie itself, then to put it bluntly, it is length, width and height, and it will not be worth watching.
In addition to using technology to touch me, through the movie "Alice in Wonderland", I saw the original author Carroll. I haven't read the original book, and I only have a rough understanding of the creative background. The novel was originally a story that Carroll improvised to put his child to sleep. In the plot of the movie, there is also a scene where young Alice wakes up from a nightmare, her father interrupts the meeting with business partners and gently lulls her to sleep. Although it is a bit sensational, the father and daughter in the movie are vaguely the same Carol of the year, speaking softly and talking about Alice's story, watching their sweetheart fall into a dream. What kind of fatherly feelings can trigger his unrestrained imagination and achieve an enduring classic? I couldn't feel the same, but I couldn't help being moved. Aside from the emotional factor, just watching the chess army against the poker army in the movie is enough to be amazed by Carroll's imagination. So now I really want to read the original book. A colleague who studies literature doesn't appreciate Carroll's fairy tale style, so she probably doesn't like any of the previous versions of Alice in Wonderland, but if she sees this one, she might.
Another reason for the good impression of "Alice", like the good impression of "The Green Zone", is the name of the director and starring Mu Qi. Johnny Depp and director Tim Burton teamed up in 1990 to create the modern robotic fairy tale Edward Scissorhands. Today's "Alice" is the consistent style of the director and starring of the play, and the shadow of "Edward" 20 years ago can be seen. But I remember that after watching the play "Scissors", I once discussed with the colleague mentioned earlier and told her that the play "Scissors" quite followed the style of Carroll. So, a bold guess here, Tim Burton has always admired Carroll's fairy tales, and 20 years ago imitated his style and made "Edward Scissorhands" (Burton is also one of the screenwriters of "Scissors" play. 1), 20 years later, Carroll's "Alice" was finally put on the screen again. When it comes to starring Johnny Depp, I personally think his play is very broad: in "Alice" and "Edward", he is a character who is like a character who has come out of a fairy tale; In "Loyalty and Traitor", he is an undercover policeman with flesh and blood and complex personality; in such a situation, who would have thought that he would make jokes, jokes and jokes by virtue of the good and evil in "Pirates of the Caribbean". What about Captain Jack's career peak?
The ending of "Alice" makes me a little regretful, because in reality Alice's next roaming destination is China. It seemed that he heard boos from other audience members in the movie hall, so he should not be applauding. I really feel that it is a bit nondescript for Hollywood movies to bluntly put China in the plot, and I even lost my appetite when watching "2012". Perhaps the mention of China or some hints about China in the film just reflect the interest and concern of the West aroused by the country's ZTE; perhaps, these interests and concerns are friendly. However, these always make me faintly feel that China is too conspicuous, and I would rather she continue to gather her energy and edge, and sit on the momentum and power without anger.
A light-hearted Disney movie that made me end with a sigh about the country's image seems to be unappetizing, so I want to pull the topic back. The small regret at the end does not hide the flaws, but "Alice" still brings me enough. The fun of staying up all night to write "after watching", but half of it is because of her.
The two movies I watched last night were both positive reviews from the bottom of my heart. At the same time, I deliberately looked at their scores in imdb, which were 7.4 and 7.1 respectively. For comparison, "Avatar", which I despise a bit, has a rating of 8.5. I believe that the eyes of the masses are sharp, so my eyes are probably astigmatism. What about astigmatism? The point is, watching movies makes me happy.
View more about Green Zone reviews
