Did you do too much reading and comprehension when you were young, and you have to dig out the central idea in a movie, and you must sublimate the connotation to be a good movie? If you don't do this, won't you see the movie?
Take the karma that many people are trying to prove.
The protagonists of Story 2, Story 3, and Story 4 of this film did not do anything evil.
For example: Story 2, a girl lost her friend, but whether she was responsible or not, the director did not give evidence. You can't guess by yourself.
It can’t be said that it is sinful for her to stay with her boyfriend overnight, right? Change to you, you swim with your friends, you temporarily stop going, your friends go, and you drown. Are you feeling so fucking lucky that you didn't go, or do you think you didn't go, so you killed a friend yourself, a murderer? Normal people don’t think they are guilty, right? The same principle applies to the heroine of Story 2. What is her sin?
The male protagonist of Story 3 killed someone while playing with a mobile phone. He was responsible for the traffic accident, but he didn't escape from the accident, right? He took the initiative to call the police? Afterwards, you have been working hard to save people in accordance with the "911" instructions, right? Is there anything he should condemn from a moral point of view?
Moreover, according to the logic of karma, the hero of story 3 has to be somewhat responsible for the death of the heroine of story 2, but the heroine of story 2 did not commit the ass and was tortured to death, while the hero of story 3 ended up. Retire all over? This TMD is not karma at all!
In order to save his sister, the male protagonist in Story 4 spent 13 years searching for him. What kind of crime did he commit and he would die by karma? Someone broke a leg to pay for a hand, not to mention who used the hand first to cause the male protagonist to fire, the atmosphere of Nima’s bar, the bartender’s repeated threats, all sorts of weirdness, The male protagonist is a fool if he doesn't fire his hands, and he will die without firing a shot. Is it cowardice and foolishness for everyone to laugh at the male protagonist again?
The only causal relationship here is the male protagonist of story 5 and the male protagonist of story 1. The male protagonist of story 1 is still for revenge, and the theme of the uncle who revenges his daughter in a different film is worthy of praise. The male protagonist of story 1 The Lord violated the law, but from a moral point of view, it is just a story of blood debt and blood repayment.
These are what the plot tells us, he told us so much, that's so much, you can't just extend it, deliberately create a theme idea. It's not that the main theme of good and evil retribution must be said to be a tasteful horror film. not like this.
What is a good horror movie, first of all, it must be horrible!
The director’s approach is actually to use the narrative method of the ring structure to string together five horror stories. The objective function is to keep the entire film from falling apart in structure. Think about it if it is five independent stories. After watching it, I breathe a sigh of relief, and then dissipate from the movie atmosphere, take a sip of tea, and then slowly substitute into the next story. It takes a lot of effort for the director to attract you to continuously integrate into the story.
And using a ring structure to string these five stories a little bit, you can’t escape from one story. You always feel that the breath cannot be let down if the story is not finished, and then the director Use the two or three small climaxes in each story to continuously stimulate you, and you will be unconsciously nervous to the end.
In the final analysis, such a circular narrative structure is to create a better horror atmosphere in the film.
View more about Southbound reviews
