It's been a long time since I saw such a depressing work. Because it adopts a very calm and plain narrative style, I can't cry even when I make you cry. I just feel that my chest is pressed and I can't breathe. To sum it up, what kind of movie-watching experience it is, it is two words that are uncomfortable. My heart is particularly uncomfortable. Is it because of the death of Felix, played by Matt Bomer? That must be true. It's hard not to feel uncomfortable when people see beautiful things withering. And this work really has too many scenes of dead people and close-ups of decayed AIDS-affected areas, and even the plain narrative techniques can't erase the uncomfortable feelings they bring to the heart.
In view of the special objects this movie is aimed at, I think it's better to talk about the position first-I am not corrupt. Although I don't look like a rotten girl, I have an inexplicable madness for gay, but I am a human being. After watching this movie, a person of flesh and blood is unlikely to say that he is innocent. But I think different people should have different touch points when watching this movie. Personally, there are 2 points that make me uncomfortable. One is that every time a half-dead AIDS patient is shot, some of them have names—Albert, Nick, Craig...some of them have no names but passers-by. Seeing the young lives and sections of the otherwise wonderful relationship being tortured into a horrible state, I really can't bear it. The second point is the inaction of the US government and the Medical Association. In fact, these are all expected results. I thought that I would no longer see resentment and injustice, but in fact, every time when the official and the association learned that AIDS only had gay cases and did not infect heterosexuals, they immediately refused funding support. Still indignant. It's really hot-blooded girl.
I have to talk about the annoying part of this work. The first is the only sex scene, which is really not addictive to watch. The peacock cried so beautifully, Ryan Murphy, are you so stingy to give more clear shots and close-up shots?! Where did your selfishness go now... well, maybe this is my own selfishness. Collar" That's it. Speaking of the topic-in fact, it is excellent to choose such a theme with a relatively calm, objective and comfortable technique, but the screenwriter has arranged too many angry scenes for the male protagonist played by Ruffalo. Well, we all know that he is born in his heart. Angry youth, it's too much to be ready to give a speech all the time. You have to give a speech when you have a dinner date with someone you like, you have to give a speech to gay friends who are struggling side by side, and you have to give a speech when you get the government’s attention...Life adds an educational atmosphere to the movie. The most annoying for the audience is being nakedly educated. Good works should reach the level of educating the viewers but not letting the viewers feel educated. "The Normal Heart" obviously failed to do so. Not only that, but it also destroyed the hard work to create a plain and objective feeling. Fortunately, I felt that the final ending was taken back, so it was not too out of control, and it was still possible to give a 9/10 point.
Talk about acting. Taylor Kitsch is the only one in the cast who is not welcome to see me, and his Bruce is as unwelcome as himself. Not only is he a plague who kills anyone who is good, but also squeezes out the male lead Ned. organization. I really don't want to waste pen and ink on him, but I still have to say that being caught in a crowd of excellent actors is even more negative in acting skills. Ruffalo's performance this time is the best I have ever seen, but it is a pity that he repeatedly gets angry and then gets angry until finally it gets bored. The best thing about this movie casting is to find gay to act gay. After all, there are too many straight men acting gay in Hollywood works, and the audience is eager to see gay appearing in true colors. Take Jim Parsons, although he still has the shadow of Sheldon, it is not difficult to make people enter the scene. As for Matt, reading other people's comments said, "Choosing a peacock is a tragedy that destroys beautiful things for you. I don't like to pinch my heart and ask if it hurts." In fact, it is correct, but in order to make viewers feel more sympathetic and touched, it is not impossible to choose Matt, who is both beautiful and gay. Besides, the peacock in this movie is so cute and so beautiful, who cares about the others. As for Julia Roberts, she has been watching her play for almost 10 years. Except for the first few romantic movies that I watched did not test the acting skills, and suspected of being a vase, for many years after that, I thought it was a very powerful actress, and I often felt that his acting skills were underestimated. Last year's "August: Osage County" and this "The Normal Heart" gave amazing performances without exception.
Finally, a digression. Gay rights protection in the United States is in full swing, and more and more states recognize same-sex marriage; I was studying in Britain and I personally watched the gay parade last year, and soon the queen signed the same-sex marriage bill...I wonder when the gay rights movement in China It will start. After all, there is nothing if no one stands up to fight. At this time, it should be a bit of the stubbornness and stubbornness of the male protagonist Ned.
View more about The Normal Heart reviews
