Some people may question the possibility of such a plotless film being successful, but we have seen too many nature documentaries that are forced to connect the plots, some are good, but many feel contrived. I think the success of [Microcosm] is due to its natural de-engraving, allowing the camera to tell the story of each insect (actually a small slice of their life). Moreover, this masterpiece can be said to be almost minimalist at this point.
For example, there is a section in the film about the relationship between ants, ladybugs and aphids (ladybugs feed on aphids, and ants need to collect the sap secreted by aphids, so ants will protect aphids from being caught by ladybugs. worms eat - the equivalent of grazing), but since the film has no voice-over commentary at all (except for a few quotes at the beginning of the chat), this is difficult for people to understand, and this little puzzle is not correct Embody the magic of nature? And examples like this can be said to be everywhere in the film.
Having said that, the [microscopic world] is not without its shortcomings. For example, many of the shots were obviously shot in indoor simulated conditions. After all, it is almost impossible to complete such a work in a wild environment.
One more word, the music in the film is really amazing.
View more about Microcosmos reviews
