Although I gave this film 1 star a long time ago.
Although it has already switched to Global as its spiritual shareholder.
But I still did it again inexplicably? And to briefly record my own views.
Paramount had already made many confusing decisions before I left (by mistake). In 2014's "On the Moment", you can choose a spy war script and put the skin of "Jack Lane" on it and sell it, without even considering why Jack Lane is Jack Lane. Seven years have passed, and Paramount still hasn't adapted the old problem of "sleeves", but has learned to use fancy shells to wrap the unrecognizable "original adaptations".
First of all, "Infinite" has a large Hollywood production team in addition to screenwriters. Director, actor, production designer, editing, soundtrack, photography, set, costume designer, everyone in each position is currently fighting in the first line of Hollywood, and there are two or more famous works on hand.
Director Anthony Fouquet is a veteran action movie actor, from "Trainer" to "Life and Death Sniper" watching very comfortable.
Art from "The Opposite Sex: Contract" and "X-Men"
Photography is from "Avatar" and "Steel Fist"
The soundtrack is from "The Kingdom of Heaven" and "The Martian"
The only screenwriter...Such a high-concept story allows two screenwriters who can be counted by one hand to adapt such a rudely adapted story. Wouldn't you no longer ask a senior screenwriter to polish it? None of the characters are three-dimensional, and there is no color from the story to the world view. I want to make an alternative superhero world, but at best, it is a replica of speed and passion.
But even if the eighth and the ninth part tramples on his inheritance, people still have the family highlights of the fifth part and the ultimate feelings of the seventh part. Moreover, no matter how outrageous the speed and passion are, his first part is also a steady and steady fight for the role. At present, from "Percy Jackson" to "Terminator: Genesis", to "The New Mummy" and then to "Infinity", both want to create a new series/universe, but also want to start a highly entertaining route. Movies can't avoid the fate of a big death.
In contrast, Villeneuve’s fairly safe approach to "Dune P1" is invaluable in the current impetuous (and declining originality) Hollywood, and to a certain extent it can be regarded as a real experience of learning the success of the MCU universe. .
MCU has never reaped the global box office because of fancy special effects and mouthpieces, but by the excellent shaping of the first-generation movies. It doesn't matter if you hit the street in the first stage. At least one movie has been used to create a good character. No matter how the quality of subsequent movies crashed (such as "Thor 2"), the solid foundation of the previous film is also an important factor in its box office not crashing. Not to mention the repeated mention of I'm Ironman in "Iron Man 1", how many Hammer-based CP fans are not based on the subtle relationship between them in "Thor 1" that shaped their love and killing? What the audience likes is never pure entertainment elements, but adventure stories based on stable characters. After the death of Paul Walker, the family structure of the Su Ji series has been in name only, and a new (Family) structure has not been constructed. In the end, it has been reduced to the shabby appearance of "Su Ji 9".
However, it seems easier to engage in fancy CGI, which is physically exhausting, than to spend your brain on constructing character relationships and plot logic? Anyway, the money is enough, isn't it?
Speaking of actors, in fact, I personally have no particular cold with Mark Wahlberg. It may also be the reason why he hasn't seen his masterpiece yet. In my mind, he is roughly a Gerald Butler with better luck and wider play. Therefore, when the protagonist was changed from Captain America Chris Evans, the first reaction was regret (from the setting point of view, the age of the United States team is indeed more suitable), and the second reaction is that the quality of the movie may be problematic. .
The acting of the villain Bathurst... I don't know why, it feels unusually exaggerated. It is said that it is crazy but lacks a kind of ease of retraction, and it is said that it is a berserker who feels particularly fond of posing. In short, the writing is not in-depth and the acting is quite chaotic.
Then there is a waste of great settings. I heard foreign original writers say that this movie has completely changed the original novel. When I searched for the character introduction, it seemed that there was no "Bathurst" character (I don't rule out changing the name of a character like the protagonist). However, the personal feeling of the setting of "reincarnation and inheritance of past life memory" is very local, and it provides a very good platform for the "matching wits and fighting courage" of both sides. However, the screenwriter not only downgraded this metaphysical reincarnation of cause and effect to both good and evil robbing McGeffen, the villain's motivation seems to have returned to the pseudo-major pattern of "destroying the world" of the 007 villain in the 1980s and 1990s.
Because I lost Faith, I want to destroy all human beings if I don't want to reincarnate? What about logic?
And, the super power of Treadway. Tell me if you understand, what is the use of his superpowers. He can reach out his hand to feel the wind speed, and then he can stand on the edge of the plane, or jump out of the spinning speed car? These two actions don't seem to have any special relationship... I really didn't understand them.
But fortunately, Fuquia's action scenes looked good, the melee part was a little weaker, and CGI chasing cars was quite imaginative.
And, although it was a bad film, it aroused my interest in buying the original.
View more about Infinite reviews
