How to describe such a work? It can be described as "three noes": no stars, no scenes, and no villains.
No stars.
Let’s not talk about whether you can call them by name. To be honest, the actors who are familiar to the author of this film can be counted on just five fingers. Whether it is Kevin Costner or Keira Knightley, it should be classified as a past actor. And the little captain Chris Pine, whose star career has just opened, is not a popular star. The two "villain" characters, although the author can't name them, were also impressed by them in previous movies. How can such a cast of actors attract audiences to the cinema?
No scene.
This is a typical spy movie. As for the type of movies that spy movies should be classified as, all I can think of are war movies or action movies. In fact, neither the 007 series nor the Mission Impossible series are structured in a war context, so they are ultimately placed under the category of action movies. Then this movie should be considered an action movie. However, just like other Cold War spy war series similar to this series, the main focus is spy war, that is, fighting wits, and action, that is, fighting bravely, is only an auxiliary means. Whether it's The Bourne Bourne Trilogy, the Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, or Munich, their core is the intellectual competition between agents, supplemented by force competition, which makes the film very full and suspenseful. The same goes for this one-on-one hit. The film designed a political conspiracy, in which the enemy and the enemy launched a witty contest and, if necessary, used force to confront each other. The film does not blindly show off gunfights, fists, explosions and car chases, nor does it design some unrealistic sci-fi high-tech props or conspiracies. The events that the movie tells are the events that can happen at any time in our real life.
No antagonists.
This is the difference that I mentioned earlier. Whether it is 007 or Mission Impossible, after entering the new century, they all fell into the contradictory situation of not knowing how to create the script. The Cold War is over, and they are gradually turning their attention to terrorist activities. Especially after the 9/11 incident, almost all action films with similar plots focus on counter-terrorism operations. This brings us to The Bourne Bourne trilogy again, which is a very successful transplant of the Cold War spy war story to the new century context. However, this one is on the verge of breaking out, but it has braved the world and blatantly put the Cold War on the stage. In fact, although the Cold War has ended in name, in fact the battle between the camps has never stopped, but in the context of globalization, it is customary for everyone not to mention this sensitive word. That is, on the surface, there is a mass of peace, and the undercurrent is turbulent under the table.
The film is still about the intelligence confrontation between the world's only two superpowers, the United States and Russia. As a bystander, I really can't find a villain in the film, everyone has their own masters. However, from the standpoint of the United States, the villain actually exists. Like the popular games Call of Duty and Battlefield in recent years, this film consciously or unconsciously pulls China into the American camp. The film tells that Russia is trying to destroy the US economy by selling a lot of dollars. In this way, China suffers the most losses, because China is the largest holder of US treasury bonds. Therefore, if there is an economic war between the United States and Russia, China is bound to stand on the side of the United States. This kind of gang-forming behavior is clearly proposed in both the battlefield and the call of duty, both of which put China on the opposite side of Russia and beside the United States.
From the standpoint of a spy film, the quality of the film itself is quite good. It's just that the general aesthetics of Chinese audiences have always been deformed. I'm afraid this kind of movie without scenes will not be well received by people. The film is only 106 minutes long, but the amount of information is huge, so the rhythm of the film is very tight, and I even feel that the rhythm of the film is a little faster, so that there are jumps in many places, and a lot of information is lost. For example, the author can't figure out how the "villain" killed his security minister. There was an obvious jump in the plot in that place, and I even doubted whether it was deleted. For another example, the emotions between the hero and heroine are also a kind of leaping development. They fall in love inexplicably, and inexplicably have a crisis. Fortunately, the process of reconciliation between the two in the end is relatively clear. What the author can't figure out the most is the protagonist's name. It was John Patrick Klein that was clearly mentioned at the beginning, how could it suddenly become Jack Klein!
The fast rhythm also makes the film not show the protagonist's struggle as a newcomer in the intelligence community, and directly let him take the lead and solve the crisis successfully and beautifully. There are so many unexpected things about the film. The 9/11 incident mentioned at the beginning, as well as the protagonist's experience as a soldier in Afghanistan, made the author think that the film would tell a story of counter-terrorism, but it turned out to be the Cold War. There's still a lot of detail in the film that will make the audience reason a little about the outcome, only to find out that it's not at all what you think it is. Although these are details, they will affect the audience's perception and ultimately affect their evaluation. As a rebooted work, there are many places that should be treated with caution.
As a reboot, the film isn't quite as competent. However, purely from the point of view of a spy film, the film can meet the needs of the audience. Fighting wits is often more exciting than fighting strength.
It's just that the confrontation between the United States and Russia is tied to China. This is not what it means to die.
View more about Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit reviews
