I have long forgotten how Kate Winslet looked in Titanic. Hannah in Long Reader left a very deep impression on me, and then it was this film. If Hannah in Long Reader always has a secret sadness, then Kate in infectious diseases shows a kind of insightful sadness. As a staff member of the CDC stationed at the place where the disease occurred, she has firm eyes, quick action, introverted and reserved expression. Kate used a stiff face and clear wrinkles on his forehead to interpret this strong-looking character but soft-hearted. When she woke up from a fever and cough in the huge hotel bed, she wrapped herself in a quilt and cried alone, and then quickly called her boss to tell him about her situation, restrained and quiet, maybe this is the job that gave her Traits. The boss promised to do his best to get her home, but the reality was so weak that she would never go home again. And she just lay quietly in the makeshift medical center, wearing a breathing mask, and with the last of her strength, she wanted to pass a down jacket on her to the patient who felt cold nearby. This is the character I admire most in the whole film. She shows a kind of turbulent air, dedicated, calm, calm, and warm. Although she died alone in the film.
Kate Winslet was not the first big-name movie star to die in the film, but Gwyneth Paltrow was. From the end we learned that she was the first person to be infected. She is an ordinary wife. What is unusual is that she took a "motor car" on the way of a business trip. I feel that the arrangement of this plot is mainly to increase the complexity of tracking the source of the disease. So the beginning of the film arranged the details of her conversation with an unknown man, and then went home, fell ill, died quickly, together with her poor little boy. I thought that Gwyneth came to make soy sauce for the director, but none of them made soy sauce. Numerous stars and their respective fragments put together a panoramic view of the whole story.
Matt Damon, who plays Gwyneth’s husband, shows how an ordinary man responds to sudden disasters. The kind of bewilderment when learning that his wife died suddenly and rejecting the news, the firmness and toughness to protect her daughter from infection, the warmth and warmth when she held a dance party for her daughter at home, and when she saw the previous image of the wife in the digital camera The loss of voice and crying embodies the various psychological states that ordinary people may present in various stages of facing disasters. Disasters come too fast and there is no time to wait for others to prepare, but life always has to go on.
But not everyone is calm in the face of disaster like the husband played by Matt, so we saw the scene of the group frenzy in the film, the crowd who did not know the truth and panicked, and even the slightest disturbance could start a riot and burn it. Looting, in the end, the film also shows the inferiority that human beings are easily exposed to in the face of disasters.
Some people appeared in the face of heroes, but they were eventually found to be as mean as a villain. In this play, this person is an Internet freelance writer played by Ju De Law. When he first appeared on the scene, Jude Law was like the lone man of the modern "pooping movement". He was the first to realize that those individual cases might be a chain reaction. After the newspaper expressed his disinterest in his news, he worked tirelessly to track the matter alone. He accused the government of concealing the truth. He appeared in the epidemic area wearing a simple self-made isolation suit. He was "infected" and tested the medicine. The whole process was broadcast live. He told people through his personal internet communication that the traditional Chinese medicine "Forsythia" is useful for the disease, which led to a wild looting of pharmacies. He accused the government of colluding with pharmaceutical companies to seek huge profits through the epidemic. He is "righteous" like a fighter, and he seems to have uncovered the government's shady alone, but what is the result? It turned out that what he was accusing was the crime he had committed. It was he who took advantage of people's trust and obtained benefits from the so-called "exclusive news" and "personal experience" of walking. This has to make us think about how we can discern the truth in the face of the Internet tide. We see that the development of Internet technology seems to provide a possibility for the Internet to become an open and diversified new media. Dan Gilmer said, "Your voice is very important. Now, if you have something to say, your voice can be heard by others." Since the media era, bloggers post messages, and audiences use their fingers to "click". Helping to spread seems to be a freer and more harmonious way of spreading. So the truth? Whenever a major event occurs, there are always various "conspiracy theories" that accompany it. People (especially disadvantaged groups) are more worried about information asymmetry caused by power inequality. At this time, credibility has become a scarce resource that needs to be robbed. The disadvantaged groups, which account for the majority of the population, are worried about their lack of access to real information, and naturally have a sense of distrust of the powerful media and powerful groups that have the advantage of channels. Therefore, whoever has more credibility has the right to speak, but in any case, the truth is still in the hands of a few people. In the end, the truth is only a Schrödinger cat for ordinary people. They can only choose to "believe" a kind of "truth" instead of "getting" a kind of truth. Only the truth? Really. I think the plot setting of this film is very good, giving more people the introduction and space for thinking.
People always like (or don’t like it, but are just used to) labeling, labeling to a certain country, to a certain government, to certain people, things, and things. Then, many times, they don’t understand this country, What are the government, people, things, and things like? Sometimes they don’t know how to label them after they have finished labeling them. Sometimes the more labels you put on, the more people can't see the true colors of things.
The CDC official, played by Lawrence Fishburne, was labeled by Jude Law: the covert of the truth, the profit-seeking behind...So the people who didn't know the truth surrounded the CDC building and asked for an explanation. But in these places that people can’t see, what we see is that this CDC official demonized by Ju De Law is just an ordinary American man of flesh and blood. He may have diplomatic rhetoric when he releases information to the outside world, but He has love for his wife, he called to inform his wife to evacuate from the epidemic area (although it is definitely illegal, from here, we can feel the kind of social injustice, which will be described later), and he has a relationship with his subordinates (Kate • Winslet's concern (he tried his best, although he still failed to get Kate home), he has compassion for the disadvantaged, and turned it into practical action, he gave his own vaccine to clean Gong’s son, I think the moment when he used his vaccine on the little boy and put the logo of the vaccine on his wrist was the most brilliant and touching moment of the image of the American man in the entire film. And these are things that people who have been blinded from the label cannot see clearly.
Many things are like this. We can only see the innermost by peeling off the labels like an onion. China has never had a very positive image in American films, and this film is no exception. The WHO staff, played by Marion Cotillard, was sent to HK to investigate the source of the infection. When he completed the investigation and was preparing to return to the country, he was kidnapped by the relevant HK department staff. The kidnapping was just because people in a small village feared that they would be forgotten on the list of vaccine distribution, so they wanted to use her as the quality to get the vaccine first. I believe that Marion will not know more about China than the American media advertised, so if it were not for personal experience, I believe she would think like the staff member who finally came to exchange her for a "vaccine": Kidnappers like this compromise. We only give them a placebo is a good way. But she would never think like this again. When she knew the truth, she ran out of the airport. I believe she was going to the small village to tell them the truth. At this time, she was not looking at China through the labels, the poor Chinese in the village, or the people who kidnapped her, but she had a sense of involvement. She felt something in the innermost part of things, and these were Will not blur her or blind her. So, I want to say: If you don't get involved, you have no right to speak. Don't put labels easily, and don't trust labels easily.
People often say: the same earth, the same home. However, the people in this family are divided into three, six or nine grades. Bill Gates once had five great pieces of advice to young people, two of which are: social injustice exists objectively, so don't think about reforming it but adapt to it. Every place in society must be ranked. In fact, needless to say, most people on Earth who are not 2x know it, but when they encounter such injustices head-on, they will always have ups and downs in their psychology. So the villagers in the film kidnapped WHO officials to prevent themselves from being "unjust." So the young people in the film rushed into Lawrence's home and threatened his wife to ask for a vaccine. Lawrence’s wife said that if I were not your wife, I would have to wait another year to get the vaccine. Indeed, social injustice exists objectively. It is also difficult to find a fair way. Perhaps the drawing method in the film is barely one in that case.
The film is recorded according to the day by day timeline of the occurrence of infectious diseases, but the suspense of day1 is put at the end. Unintentionally creating dramatic conflicts, unintentionally setting off the atmosphere, unintentionally creating a climax, showing the objective, calm, and recorded atmosphere of a type of documentary film, but it does not make people feel boring, and does not make people watch frequently Watch the impulse. I think it's different from the performance methods of many American disaster movies, but it's pretty good. In fact, I think even if the film did not reveal the origin of day1's illness, the film is full, and it has already told us a lot, and it has also made the audience feel a lot. With that day1, the incident has a head and tail integrity. Of course, if you have the heart, you can also make some interpretations, such as human intervention in the natural ecology, destruction of humans, etc. (the film is the work of Gwyneth’s company) Personnel knocked down a tree-bats on the tree flew into the pigpen-pigs ate bat excrement-people slaughtered the pigs-infected with the virus-spread, spread); it can be said if it is unintentional There are many accidents in life, like a set of dominoes. You don’t know which card you are in, and you don’t know which card to fall will involve you, so live in the moment!
Soderbergh is a good director.
View more about Contagion reviews
