Because of Eco's "The Name of the Rose," I watched it to further understand the relationship between the pope and the cardinal. To put it simply, their relationship is like the relationship between the President of the United States and the governors of various states. I liked the movie for the first time, and then I was worried. I can't help but wonder if this will be a "religion right" movie.
The movie is produced by HBO, with a lot of money and exquisite pictures, high-profile and orthodox, which can be said to be pleasing to the eye. As the name suggests, the film tells the story of the current Pope who wants to abdicate in search of the next Pope. Uh... well.
1. Why does the editing trio of Silly White Sweet bring tears to my eyes?
At the beginning of the film, due to the death of Pope John Paul II, St. Vatican gathered cardinals from various regions, and wanted to elect the next Pope. The film was inserted with live broadcast footage from the news media in many places, except for the simple In addition to rudely telling people like me who don't know the relationship between the Pope and the cardinals how much local attention is paid to electing a new pope, it also tells us that only through "democratic" elections within the bishops with more than 77 votes. When he becomes Pope, it is very interesting that once elected, a chimney will set off white smoke and tell the people waiting outside, otherwise black smoke will be set off until the election. Here in the film, through the grand scenes, many close-up shots of the actors (especially the eyes) and the timely progress of the music, the strong appeal is created. This kind of devotion to the crowd still moves me. In addition, color, composition and music also have bright spots.
2. Is violent conflict really good or bad?
Any typical movie has conflict, and this one is no exception. How do movies create conflict? Can be a conflict between two people. So there are many uses of audio-visual language here, different dresses, preferences, opinions, and even focusing on a piece of pizza. The seemingly free bishop is too lovable, friendly and simple, supports the disadvantaged, and even likes the Beetles. Who doesn't like such a person? So much so that the director was embarrassed later, and pulled out a paragraph that the bishop caused his subordinates to suffer political persecution because of his cowardice. For this reason, he felt guilty for the rest of his life, and he felt guilty enough to give everyone a reasonable explanation for his refusal of the Pope's holy position at first. . If it is said that the current pope is inactive because of his deep conservatism, isn't it more alarming that the bishop chose to retire because he knew he was doing nothing in the urgency of reform? In contrast, the current Pope is almost unprecedented. Faced with his own coaching crisis, he actively seeks the next successor. Who is conservative? Who is free? This is not simply an inversion of conservatism and liberty, in my opinion, whether it is the doctrinal conservativeness of the predecessor, the current one, and the modernity of the times, or the very different attitudes of St. Francis and St. Vatican to money in the past. Attitude, maybe human nature needs to be different, so there is always one side to oppose the other, then the conflict itself is like a human necessity, like a movie. What's lower than this is that I was moved by the illusion created by this and chose the so-called correct.
3. Only when the Son of God returns to the ordinary can we gain more parishioners, Hallelujah!
In taste, this is more like a story of liberal democracy infiltrating religion. The latter part of the film tries to tell us that the Pope is just an ordinary person, like ordinary people who like to watch football games, like ordinary people who like to eat pizza, and like ordinary people can make mistakes, only in this way can we gain more parishioners, just as the film itself is correct Sex, for what!
Finally, to quote the film's narration "If the Lord is always on the move, where should we go to find him?" The answer is on the go. Like Ah Q, we are always looking for answers that make us happy. So the question is, what is the difference between the concept of freedom and democracy implanted by violence in this film in the name of religion and brainwashing? Liberal democracy is good or bad, it's so good that you can't say it's bad.
View more about The Two Popes reviews
