Later, I opened a color silent film called "Acrobats". In fact, a group of tall French people put on wigs with obvious traces, put on fancy clothes that looked like today, and lay down on a black cloth to make some seemingly empty movements. The color looks like an out-of-date prostitute. Everyone was shocked and put on heavy makeup. After the shooting, the camera was a little stiff, but I really cried. The background music of the flute base is really moved. Later, a professor asked me why I was so moved. I didn’t say it well at the time. I thought it should be this kind of clumsy and simple, without a well-written story, and deliberately lead you into an emotional trap. This kind of simple art made me feel for the first time. The greatness of movies lies in the exploration of novel worlds by human beings. If we understand it according to my favorite sentence: I do this just for fun.
Then came "The Birth of a Nation", then "Battleship Potenkin", "Deep Doubts", and then Hitchcock, the new wave of countries, and James Cameron was out of control. The recently brilliant "She" also won in delicate structure and exaggerated but well-founded imagination.
The beginning of a movie is inseparable from the story, the story is king, and not writing a good story will always be the biggest shortcoming. Zhang Yimou has not told a good story in his life, which is really pitiful.
A large number of adaptations of famous novels have flooded into the film market, and I always hear the saying: either stay true to the original or serve the film. The original book and the film adaptation cannot complement each other, and the film adaptation is a hundred times different from the original book everywhere. But there are also successes. When I think of the adaptation, the first thing that comes to my mind is "Youth School" and "Lust and Caution". Uncle An did a good job. It should be cut and added. There is no sloppy feeling. The key points are prominent. full drama. The second thing that comes to my mind is Uncle An's, "Sense and Sensibility", that version is mainly because the British actors are too solid, with a strong Jane Austen British country nostalgia. The third thing that comes to my mind is the recent Dutch adaptation of Venus in Furs. I haven't seen the new version of Roman Polanski, but the Dutch version not only shoots the best lighting engineer I've ever seen, but also The linear structure of the whole story has also been perfectly adjusted. The time, place, and era have all been diluted into vague things, trying not to attract the attention of the audience.
The reason why adaptation is a kind of popular art is, of course, because the status of the art of change has always been compromised. One of the functions of many adaptations is to help some busy people who are now overwhelmed by fast-paced life. The audience can recharge a little by the way. After watching a two-hour movie, they at least know the name of the protagonist and the outline of the story in the 400-page book. When chatting, you can also share your experience of watching movies after "reading this book". It is easy to discuss things on the video and it is explosive. The worst thing is to discuss whether the heroine is beautiful or not. It's okay to talk about the recent scandal. .
So this poses a big problem for directors, and I'm slowly starting to wonder how certain writers agree to sell the rights.
The two discussed below are not the worst, and I have no disagreement with Haruki Murakami and García Márquez.
I knew before that Chen Yingying was because of his "The Smell of Green Papaya". He was quiet and not impetuous, as if he didn't dare to make a fuss about the soundtrack. Although the director went to France when he was a teenager, the filming was very Vietnamese. What really surprised me was his adaptation of "Norwegian Woods". Although Japanese films are declining sharply, there are still many good directors, and Haruki Murakami's writing style has added a lot of Western music philosophy, but that's not the case. A kind of Japan is natural, because Japan has been westernized for many years. He is cautious about traditional Japanese aesthetics, and even the pessimistic characters can even see the shadow of figurative sadness, such as the autumn street, the heavy tree surrounded by three people, and having sex when the snow is flying, beautiful and accurate. What surprised me at first sight, however, was the mastery of tone—a far cry from the gray Tokyo, steel forests I imagined when I was reading. Reiko wasn't desperate enough either, and it wasn't that song playing at the campfire; Naoko's moment of looking back when she was walking was always too stiff, and she didn't even show nervousness; Midoriko was clearly underdeveloped, a spooky but a vigorous young woman Taste, too flat, not sexy at all. The film adaptation of "Norwegian Forest", as a rare (although not obvious) work in Japanese films in the past two decades, certainly surprised me, but just from the viewing experience after reading, it is still "surprised" a little more.
I have a movie I hate called Memoirs of a Geisha. Zhang Ziyi is a freak in it, Gong Li's English always has a strong northeastern flavor, and a group of Chinese people speak English to play Japanese geisha, which is really scary. But when I saw the 2007 adaptation of "Love in the Time of Cholera," I thought my cynicism about my nationality was really hopeless.
A British director and a group of Spanish actors tell the story of playing a Colombian in English. But very harmonious.
I once wrote a review of Fassbender's "Lonely Heart" titled "If This Film Relegated to a Hollywood Production". On the whole, unlike "Lonely Heart", the adaptation of "Love in the Time of Cholera" is very satisfying in terms of setting and scene scheduling, and is almost the same as the description in the book. In order to unify his style, Fassbender's abuse of mirrors and book-style synopsis in "Lonely Heart", as well as the adaptation of black and white films, makes people very speechless, as if he hadn't read the book. But Neville, as a director who graduated from the English Department of Cambridge University in the United Kingdom, is at least faithful to the original work. From Fermina's gardens to Dr. Urbino's parrots, from their bedrooms to the streets littered with cholera, there seems to be a contrast in the original book.
However, what is disappointing is that although the film's idea of aerial photography is consistent with my imagination when I was reading at the time, it is obvious that their planes always fly erratically, resulting in all the magnificent telephoto shots being unable to become the iconic long shot. In the camera, this situation happened twice, both when Fermina went to her cousin's manor, which was a pity.
Second, "Love in the Time of Cholera" describes the unforgettable and affectionate feelings that happened over the past fifty years. The director has made a choice of content, ignoring the beginning of the suicide and death of the Belgian photographer who moved me very much. However, Later, the mastery of the whole rhythm was too loose, because the relaxation would feel extremely unnatural, and the story of fifty years was not well told in two hours. Ariza's woman was changing so quickly that the audience couldn't even recognize her face. The most unwise thing about the director is that he cut out the smallest details in order to shorten the time. For example, the lipstick mark drawn by Ariza on the stomach of "Lady Pigeon" did not cause immediate danger after her husband discovered it. Her husband cut her throat with a knife when she was asleep in the middle of the night. In the film, she didn't even have time to film her reaction, so she just let her husband rush to get a knife and kill her the moment he saw it - not shocking enough, as if he was completing the task.
Overall, the casting was two-thirds successful. Ariza and Fermina are very similar. The moment when young Ariza saw Fermina, it was like my Déjà vu picture was always moved to the screen. When Ariza and Fermina were on their honeymoon in their old age The moment they stepped out of the cabin and put on their Panama hats, the reaction of the two of them was really like a teenage lover with white hair and a waist. Fermina also performed the shrewdness and toughness described in the book. Dr. Urbino is too handsome, not as calm as a nobleman, and his role has also made the greatest concessions and sacrifices, hardly reflecting his unique and rigorous personality and ascetic sexy. What displeased me the most was the affair of Dr. Urbino's black woman, who was definitely not enough of the glamour on the verge of bursting out, and Ariza's nineteen-year-old lover in her twilight years - she didn't have long hair! How can she look older than Fermina?
When this movie is used as a source for some people who don't have time to read, it's half the battle. In the last grandparents love, the most important thing is to have fun for the rest of your life, to have fun in time, and the hysterical party with the cholera flag was not filmed. In the end, when Ariza said "forever", she was answering the captain's question. They should stand on the deck and watch the endless horizon. The ocean and the sunset, instead of the Titanic, the old couple slept together to accept death. It's such a shame it ended hastily.
View more about Love in the Time of Cholera reviews
