Ang Lee's compromise

Many film studies on Ang Lee have mentioned that Ang Lee is a relatively mild person, and what he does not refuse is also a strong emotional expression, such as about his father, about gay men. Someone uses the Confucian golden mean to locate the cultural core of his story. It's not so much a mean, it's an Ang Lee-style compromise. In the director's biography, he mentioned the feeling of living under the authoritarian system of the Kuomintang. On the one hand, he felt repressed and suppressed, and on the other hand, he felt the insecurity of losing the protection of the political system. If the regime of Chiang's father and son means father to the mainland veterans in Taiwan, then Ang Lee, a second-generation native from other provinces, obviously feels the restraint of power from his father's majesty, and on the other hand is worried about losing his father's protection of panic. Therefore, in the early father trilogy, the tension between father and son/father and daughter was not completely resolved, nor was it completely intensified and disintegrated. It always obtained a certain buffer. It seems that the contradiction and crisis have been resolved, but In fact, it is only temporarily put on hold, or both sides have made some kind of compromise. This kind of compromise is not because I agree with you, not because I recognize the crux of the problem, but because I don’t agree with your lifestyle and standpoint, but I can turn a blind eye and stop fighting each other. Debating right and wrong. It's not necessarily that the father really agrees with his son's gay life ("The Wedding Banquet"), it's just that you live your gay life in the United States, and I go back to Taiwan to live my life, out of sight and out of mind. At this point, "Billy Lynn's Midfield Battle" still shows Ang Lee's compromise. Regarding the Iraq War, the film's attitude shows a certain ambiguity. Obviously, the views of my sister in the movie represent the views of the left. Against the war, the US invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with justice, it is just a battle for oil. This has been the basic consensus of the international left-wing academic circles. Lynn didn't agree with his sister's point of view, but Ang Lee didn't let him slide to the other extreme - the war madman. Thinking about the rather mainstream and conservative stance of another classic "Forrest Gump" that has been regarded as a classic in the world's film history, you can see that Ang Lee is trying to find a balance between anti-war and war fanaticism. In the film, this balance is set as a duty as a soldier. When the justice of the war is excluded, and only use duty to encourage themselves to go back to the battlefield, then what is the difference between such a person and a terrorist? This is also the confusion I feel in the Ang Lee movies.

View more about Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk reviews