1. The core value of "Science Fiction" works is never to make predictions on the level of "science and technology", but to reflect the author's understanding of the modern world through the "illusory" future. reflection on the problem. Therefore, good science fiction writers must have good philosophical and sociological literacy. Their goal is not to play a simple "storyteller", but to play a "prophet".
2. From this level, "The Wandering Earth" is unqualified as a science fiction movie, because it lacks reflection on the present, and its outlook on the future has no philosophical elements. The themes it describes do not necessarily have to be presented in the "science fiction" genre. The attitude of the main characters in the film does not follow the spirit of science, and can even be said to be anti-scientific.
3. However, "is it a science fiction work" should not affect the evaluation of the level of a work. It's as if "is it a rabbit" should not be our criterion for evaluating an animal's vitality, resilience, or even beauty. A raccoon with a "I'm a rabbit" sign shouldn't affect your evaluation of it as a raccoon.
4. "The Wandering Earth" is not a science fiction film, it is a disaster film. It's just that the disaster happens in the future, and the way to deal with the disaster uses some technological means.
5. "Then who asked you to brag about sci-fi movies, what is the 'first year of Chinese sci-fi', if you dare to brag like that, don't blame the Lord for asking you like that", so I give a low score - I dare not say that this attitude is completely wrong Yes, but at least emotionally and somewhat paradoxically—originally stemming from an abhorrence of “overmarketing,” yet being so clearly influenced by its own evaluation. I still like no matter what a film "screams", but only sees what it "shoots".
6. According to science fiction, "The Wandering Earth" may fail, but according to disaster films, it is quite good - there is a story, there are characters, the structure is not obviously imbalanced, there is a climax, and there is a lot of effort in the production. Reasonable There are a lot of slots, but it does not affect the perception of the target group - the Chinese audience for the new year. (Actually, 99.99% of the audience have no ability to question "How many days does it take to drive from Hangzhou to Indonesia?" "Can 300,000 tons of fuel be burned to a distance of 5,000 kilometers?" "Why can't the space station explode and need to be 'ignited'? "Can the space station adjust its direction in such a short period of time and hit the 'spray gun'?" "Do rescue teams from various countries really have to rely on manpower to push the 'strike needle'?"... What they need is to start the film and put the What happened to the earth, speak more slowly, patiently, and with more pictures and texts.)
As a disaster film, it is not inferior to similar films such as "Future Water World", "The Day After Tomorrow" and "2012". Of course it's not quite as complete as Titanic, but it's based on true events. It is really inferior to "The Martian" and "Gravity". The rigor of the former and the philosophical thinking of the latter are beyond the reach of the Chinese in a short period of time in both directions; of course, the acting skills of both actors are better than It is much higher, but it is basically the average difference between foreign actors and domestic actors.
7. The film pays great attention to the details and makes a lot of tributes.
The "fake defection" of MOSS reminds people of HAL in "2001 Space Odyssey";
There is a top on Wu Jing's table, which reminds people of "Inception";
"Two lines of tears for relatives" and "deduction of 12 points" when driving, black market businessmen playing red and white machines, high school students wearing retro school uniforms, and someone using Douyin in the dungeon (this should be the problem of the gold master's father), people think "Blade Runner", "COWBOY BEBOP" and so on have the tradition of creating retro parts in the future world;
That small bottle of wine (vodka, I would like to believe) reminds people of the common use of beverages as fuel in many space movies, but it is also a small accident that it is used to set fire in the end;
Wu Mengda's "Sister I've Saved for Many Years" actually passed the trial. It was good that the prison guards wore VR glasses during the earthquake, but in fact, "Dried Earthworms" as a bribe is even more righteous...
The Proxima Centauri, 4.2 light-years away, that humans fly to is actually a triple star. It is written more clearly in the original work that humans will have "three suns"... So, from two levels, this piece is a bit "" The Three-Body Problem".
8. While admiring Da Liu's rigorous attitude towards scientific knowledge, I have always felt that he is a shortcoming in human psychology. The characters in his works are often geniuses in intelligence, but they are still elementary school students in terms of psychological complexity. level, or storytelling level.
The reason is that his understanding of human beings influenced by emotional factors is not deep enough, so his attitude is too contemptuous.
When he considers human beings as a whole, he always proposes and advocates a scientific spirit and avoids a sentimental attitude towards life.
However, if this "characteristic" is called a "disadvantage", it is also compared with serious literary works that take a nuanced view of the human psyche. To "correct" and "improve", one has to count on the delicateness of the Dream of the Red Chamber, not the blind enthusiasm of the Boxer.
What's more, the only "plot" of the original novel is that "people are killed by ignorant gangsters who stir up enthusiasm".
But in this film, Liu Peiqiang, played by Wu Jing, adopts an anti-scientific attitude.
His choice in the play reminds people of the "tram dilemma": 5 innocent people are tied to a rail, if you pull over the fork, you can save them, but the tram will kill the other on the fork. 1 innocent person, do you pull or not?
There is no right or wrong in the choice of "flip" or "not flip" in the "trolley dilemma", it only represents different ethical attitudes. But the difference is that no matter what you choose in the "trolley dilemma," the outcome is predictable. In "Wandering Earth", sacrificing the space station may not save the earth, but it will definitely destroy the hope of preserving human civilization through the space station.
"I'm all in, if you win, you'll win, if you lose, you'll lose, otherwise it's boring to hang on." Here, Wu Jing alone made such a major decision for the entire human race. If not for a layer of "I use my percentage 100 sacrifices, in exchange for my son's 1% hope", it will definitely more clearly reveal that it is the direct inheritance of the part of our nation's anti-intellectual, hooligan consciousness, and gambler psychology. And the results of these things being practiced in reality have been learned countless times. The result of "XX is cool for a while" has never been the crematorium of the whole family, but also the funeral of other families.
Fortunately, this is a movie, a Spring Festival movie, and it always has to be HAPPY ENDING in the end. Liu Peiqiang, who rushed to the flames, paid tribute to Huang Jiguang, Dong Cunrui, and Optimus Prime.
From this point of view, although Wu Jing is a "special star", he actually joined a "Wolf Warrior".
9. To evaluate a work of art, it is necessary to evaluate its artistic value. To evaluate a cultural commodity, we must evaluate whether it conforms to the local market at that time. To sum up, I don't think it's an exaggeration to give 4 stars to the movie "The Wandering Earth" in the 2019 Chinese Spring Festival.
I just wish the 9102 would be a little different.
View more about The Wandering Earth reviews
