The most worth mentioning is its de-dramatic. Thinking of "French Drug Network", many people will think of the documentary style for the first time. Indeed, the super-realistic style of that movie gives people such a feeling, so can "Zodiac" also be regarded as a documentary style? I don’t think so, because from the beginning to the end, although it is very simple and simple in expression, it is not the same as the feeling that the documentary is trying to make the observer disappear. The effect of "Zodiac" is precisely because it is too much. Emphasize a kind of calmness, and make you feel the presence of the observer more and more, even the angle of observation is strictly limited.
In this movie, we can’t see the ghostly movement of the long Vinci-style lens we are used to. The panoramic description of the house in the "Panic Room" is quite stunning, replaced by a large number of There are almost no close-ups and very gorgeous long shots and mirrors in the middle shots and panoramas, and it gives you the feeling that he is always there. Take the double-kill bridge section by the lake as an example. The most common conversation is suddenly broken by a killer who gradually walks over. With the advancement of the killer, the position given to the killer has hardly changed. It is the victim’s perspective. During the smooth switching, the murderer can be seen walking at a normal pace, and then flashing the pistol-this is not like a murder scene in a movie depicting an unsettled case, it is as common as depicting a shopping on the street, and then the two sides confronted each other. At the time, it was still the switch between mid-range and close-range. It was so gentle that if it weren't for the natural tension in the dialogue, it even seemed a bit lengthy, and it didn't change a little bit until the murderer started to use his sword. How to shoot a general police and criminal film? It must be constantly switching between the victim and the murderer. When the murderer subdues the two and starts to commit the murder, it may be Hitchcock's knife held in mid-air--a close-up of the victim's horrified face. -The movement of the arm swing-the splashing blood (depending on whether it is retained according to the classification consideration)-the victim's swaying limbs... The specific method may be different, but it is almost impossible to create a sense of tension with fast switching. If it is a documentary filming method, how to shoot it? Although documentaries like to use fixed camera positions and keep the camera still, for this kind of scenes, the more likely way is to carry them by hand and shake them. Maybe they may not cut too much, but the real or simulated ones in high-speed motion The ambiguity still makes you feel nervous, such as "Bourne's Hegemony". However, no matter what kind of shooting method, although the tension and excitement created are much stronger than that of "Zodiac", in the slow and calm scene of "Zodiac", it seems a little hopeful to look at the two people. When all hopes were quickly put out and killed helplessly, the real sense of despair was unmatched by other shooting methods. I think this is the reason why Vinci "repressed" the desire for the lens like this. At the same time, we have also seen that he only removed the subjectively added drama in the narrative technique to the utmost extent, highlighting the event itself. From the point of view of the technique, it cannot be said to be documentary.
From the perspective of narrative methods, this kind of de-dramatization is even more obvious. Whenever encountering a plot worthy of a big book and special book, Finch always feels unexpectedly covering it. The more foreshadowing before, the more hastily it is. For example, when solving the zodiac code, the history teacher ignored the puzzle-solving process, only mentioned it when she was about to intervene, and then quickly announced the success of the puzzle-solving in the media. This is relatively small, and the two mentioned in "Midnight Field" are more typical. Old reporters go to meet the informant, as well as the mother and daughter of the victim. I know who I’m talking about, everyone forgive me) Escape the clutches, these two very dramatic scenes only give results quickly after the beginning, and the process is completely ignored. This is a counter-suspense. If you follow Hitchcock If the bomb under the classic table is used to illustrate, it’s like, I just saw you have a time bomb under the table, and the next shot will be cut to the ruins where the train was blown up. The police are investigating the scene. For people who are trained in grammatical suspense, there is even a naughty challenge: when you are ready to guess the victim of the information preset as the murderer according to the usual practice, and plan to approach your goal step by step in the unfolding plot. , The answer is revealed directly, no matter whether you guessed it right or not, you will feel like you have been fooled, because people did not intend to let you guess... Hitchcock’s theory is classic, but classics and cliches are often only one step away. Far away, Finch's narrative effect is undoubtedly successful-this success is based on people's familiarity with Hitchcock's skills. Although it breaks the convention of thinking, it has become a convention itself now. It is no exaggeration to say that Finch made a leap. It is worth noting that in the past suspense movies, the audience's concern is precisely the issue of the protagonist's concern: who is the murderer? What is the motivation? In this movie, Vinci wants to break this kind of concentration. Who is the murderer is really important, but that is a concern for several characters. Vinci uses this anti-suspense to try his best to break the audience's attention to this. And this kind of very deliberate or even forced cutting seems a bit wrong with the film’s constant smoothness, but this is not the inconsistency of style, but it is precisely through this inconsistency that breaks the so-called documentary illusion and truly conveys Finland. Qi's own intention: I don't let you run with the murderer. What you should care about is these people, these people who run with the murderer.
This finally touched on the subject of Vinci. What did he want to express by doing this? This is a very difficult question to answer. We might as well watch the zodiac killer in this movie first. According to the general crime film or suspense film, either the murderer is omnipotent, standing behind the scenes, extremely powerful, but will always be magically subdued by the protagonist at the end, or it is to humanize the murderer (especially in recent years) The trend was originally a new thing, but it turned out to be stinky.) It is realistic style and somewhat flattering. Vinci's se7en has some meanings of the former, but the murderer is the last one to subdue the traditional justice party. According to the Zodiac case, it would definitely be very dazzling if you shoot like the former one. But Vinci is not the case. Not only did he break through himself, he also did not use the clichés of the second method. What he did was to disenchant the murderer and prevent him from becoming a star. This is very important. Propaganda has made the Zodiac a mythical figure no less than Jack the Ripper. First, remove the things covered by the unscrupulous media and restore it to an ordinary person. This is what Vinci will do. Through the previous few We have already seen this cool description of the murder process. This so-called mysterious killer is just a guy with some perverted actions, not cool thoughts, and not genius. The halo disappeared. But Vinci did not intend to do anything to humanize it. He just intends to disenchant it. At the same time, this murderer is basically not seen as a "human", just the fake rabbit that lured the dog to run in the greyhound. Qi wants to show that group of running dogs.
Yes, that group of people, they are what the film wants to show. I originally thought it was the same as "Memories of Murder" made by Bangzi. It was a movie that borrowed a case to show a panoramic view of society, but I was wrong. Except for a case-related "Dirty Harry", the film has almost nothing to do with society. Context-related content. The irony of the inefficient cooperation between the police stations and the cold eyes on the news media’s over-commitment are only slightly mentioned. As soon as the story unfolds, it focuses on the big reporters, the police and the small reporters in order, and radiates to all followers through them. People involved in the case. At this time, Fincher’s ambitions revealed the tip of the iceberg. A suspenseful story that could no longer meet his needs. A philosophical suspenseful story that he had already played. It seems that there is a precedent for a history that refracts. Why? You can't just care about the case itself, why can't you just care about the people related to the case, and explore how a case affects people's lives — it sounds like old Martin, like, but Not all, because what Vinci did was a brand new business. It remained calm from beginning to end. There was no relief from the traditional truth, nor was it moved like the "JFK", "Rocky"-style "victory of the loser". Those are all a bit clichés. Introverted but with choices, I will tell you faithfully that I am not surprised (Note 1). At least I will still have a feeling of being touched in the end. Perhaps it is the persistence of the characters, but I think it is a kind of silence in the whole film. Sense of power.
Finally, give me a comment. Some people say that this is Vinci's best movie. Some people say that Vinci is not angry and betrayed himself. In fact, I think it may be possible to comment, but it is too early to cover the coffin. This is far from Vinci’s best film-both in terms of the quality of his past work and his expectations for the future, but in terms of style, it can only be said that the image may not be as good as the past. Pioneer, but in his bones he still maintains Vinci’s consistent exploration and innovation. I personally feel that although this is not a masterpiece, it can be regarded as a great experiment by Vinci. The ambiguity in the theme makes Its expression is somewhat vague, which is its shortcoming, but Vinci has shown his more proficient control than in the past-if the radical publicity in the past was boiled water, then this restrained and stable now is more like boiled bath water. , Whether it's cold or hot, and you need to be more careful in the scale, but you can't be moderate. Basically, he does it well. It is not so much that he has transformed, it is better to say that he does not shape himself at all, and is continuing to explore, and there is reason to expect that Vinci will have a more outstanding performance.
Note 1: The only dramatized plot in the whole movie is the episode where the reporter went to meet the informant and the basement was frightened, but we can see that that paragraph has little effect on the advancement of the case, so it is the whole case. In other words, this plot is irrelevant, it serves to further improve the character image of the young reporter.
View more about Zodiac reviews
