First of all, I am not a religious person. He is a firm believer in science and does not deny the existence of gods and ghosts, but believes that they are only categories or dimensions that modern science cannot understand temporarily, not forever.
Secondly, the first time I watched "The Doomsday", I was irritated. Although I am not opposed to the fact that "gods and ghosts may exist" per se, I do not like the preaching methods of most religions. God may exist, but the religion of the world has nothing to do with God, it is just a form of power-if you don't believe in the God I let you believe, you will go to hell, and if you believe it, you will go to heaven-the essence is a kind of power Intimidation. This film takes this kind of political lie into reality. Whatever the Bible describes, it will be filmed. It is no wonder that non-religious people have swarmed low scores.
Then I pondered it carefully. Although religious people are caring, I always feel that the taste is a bit wrong. When a director makes a religious film, he is either trying to explain the religion or trying to promote the religion. But "The Doomsday" does not have both, not only does it not, but has been madly beating the goodwill of passers-by.
If you don’t believe me, look at it. Normally, in this era, a scumbag who has cheated is bound to be thrown on the ground and set on 10,000 feet. But the actor played by Nicholas didn't even provoke much scolding on this point. Probably because of the role of the protagonist's wife, if you are not a religious believer, most people may not be able to live with her.
The portrayal of the "religious person" in the film mainly focuses on three people. One is a woman who suddenly popped out of the film to make trouble for reporter Cameron, accusing him of not believing in God, one is the wife of the male protagonist, and the other is on an airplane. The little daughter of a famous star. Little girls are probably used to prove that children who are inexperienced in the world are pure and do not make people feel bad. The first two are more intriguing-probably represent the two types of people who teach others. The first type is aggressive, you don’t believe it. Damn it; the latter type is a look of compassion, and when you catch the opportunity, you want to tell you that if you don't believe in God, you will die—
The common feature of the two types of people is that they are unflattering. The other "raptured" people were either children like the younger brother of the heroine without clearly indicating their beliefs, or they were like the deputy captain and another flight attendant, just like a face, there was nothing good or bad.
On the other hand, those who stayed, Cameron, one of the heroes, was sensible and powerful, and the heroine was smart and brave. The Muslims on the plane are steady and kind, and the captain and his derailed objects are very responsible workers (although the captain has flaws in his character)...
No one else needs to describe it anymore. Just by comparing the two, it is better to say that the director is to create "believe in God can go to heaven", rather than to say that he wants to create "people who believe in God are really cheating", if he intends to make a religious fanatic film, Then this number is too wild, and the director who can get a large investment shouldn't be so mindless, right?
So I went back and thought about it. What kind of movie is this? Sci-fi thriller. For all these kinds of films, humans must be a little bit unlucky. Otherwise, how can heroes be useful? Hello, my hello, everyone, how can I shoot this for more than an hour. In the past, in such films, either aliens came to the earth to kill people, or monsters came to the earth to kill people, or the earth itself caused some disaster to kill people. In short, there must be an incentive.
This film just took this incentive as "Like the end of the Bible described in the Bible, many people are gone." Next, it is time for disaster relief, to turn the tide, and God and his old man did not show up during the whole process. What saved everyone was the captain, flight attendant, reporter, the captain’s daughter who did not abandon and did not give up, and the Muslims who took care of the old lady with Alzheimer’s disease on the plane, and the old elite who tried to comfort drug addicts. In fact, there is no difference from the previous story of "Monsters killed people in half of the city, and the protagonist group rescued humans".
Even if you don’t consider the incentives, the story of "the man who saved a plane" is well filmed. It has a cause, a process and a result, a human nature with evil and good thoughts, twists and turns, climax and rhythm, which is more than pure science fiction. It's much better.
So, since religion is just a gimmick, this is not a religious movie at all, and some things become interesting. For example, although the missing people on the earth are all described in the Bible, but God is not on the list of actors anyway, it is not easy to say whether this is true or not. There are totally other possibilities. For example, there is an Asian man on the plane with endless long-winded aliens. The existence of this man actually tells us a possibility-is it possible that the missing person was taken away by some higher civilization as an experiment went? No one can tell what they are thinking-they read the Bible and then decide to do this to see what happens-who can prove that this is impossible?
The laboratory kept a lot of white mice in the box. One day, because of a certain project, the experimenter captured all the pups and red-eyed mice—the mice themselves didn’t know what was going on, in their opinion , Is there some companions somehow missing?
It makes sense, right.
What's more, the logic of the film is actually quite fluent-by the end, none of the remaining people made it clear that "this is a miracle, God really exists, and I decided to believe it". The hostess hated religion even more, and even smashed the Bible. When she felt that all her relatives were gone before she decided to jump off the bridge and committed suicide, she did not change her mind to confess to God, but only apologized to her mother and said that she broke her heart. The only three who think this may indeed prove the existence of God, one is a drug addict, because I heard from the strange summer camp, a woman who went crazy in order to comfort her lost daughter; one is a priest (this does not need to be explained); the other is a captain. The common characteristic of these three people is that they have been taught in every way, and they all have a certain degree of vulnerability and guilt. Without these two conditions, no one said that I had succumbed.
Of course, from a religious perspective, this film is worth the carnival. Because it does fit the Bible closely, it shows that God exists. As long as you don't believe it or don't believe it sincerely, you can only stay on the earth and wait for death. As long as you believe in other gods, it's useless even if you are a good person. (I’ve always had a question here. It’s okay to say that those who are “raptured” are innocent and those who believe in piousness are okay. It’s a bit of a problem to take all the children away—the newborn baby is also taken away, then Are they still in the womb? They are also innocent and pure. Do you want to take this away? If you don’t take it, then not everyone who is pure will be saved. If you take it, how to take it? The fetus is taken away directly? Christianity Think abortion is guilty, or does God have immunity from his own hands?)
The director is very ambitious. He wants to hide his soldiers in the grass and hide his soldiers in the valley. Both sides will please. Because it is true that religious and non-religious people can have explanations that belong to their own camp, and they all make sense. It's a pity that most people are not in the mood to analyze it (including me, if it weren't for being bored suddenly and watching it twice, I would still be disgusted with this film).
So it makes sense for most people to score low. After all, even if you want to understand what's going on, you don't think this reason is a shame. But its essence is indeed a good science fiction thriller, and the female protagonist, male reporter, and Muslim on the plane are indeed very popular, so it is not forced to score five stars.
And—the real Christians you come into contact with in your life are not as disgusting as the ones in the movie, and those whose mouths are dirty are even rarer—I’m afraid these people believe in cults under the name of Christianity, right?
In addition, the reason why it is determined that the director of the film is not a devout believer at all, because until the end, no one explained the problem that the heroine of the film posed to the female religious: man himself did not commit a crime, but because of the original sin, he would be destroyed— -God's behavior is so unpredictable, why do you still believe that he loves humans?
——"The God my mother believed would not do such a thing."
View more about Left Behind reviews
