has always been that the possibility of time travel has been forbidden in science, and the paradox it produces is also forbidden logically. Later, the good scientists let go, saying that it is possible to achieve, but science fiction writers insist that science fiction is a fantasy of science, and it doesn't matter whether it is forbidden or not. Even so, logically you can never eliminate the paradox, unless you are not making a science fiction film, but a neuropathic film.
The paradox is that you become an unhappy person in an unhappy world, so you go back in time and want to turn the unhappy world into a happy world, so you also become a happy person. So, where do you come from, that unhappy one? Without the unhappy you, who would make the world happy?
One solution is that you cannot change the future. Perhaps it is because you can only be an observer (for example, Kunlun witnessed the fall of the Snow Country in "The Promise"), or it is because all your efforts to change the world eventually contributed to the formation of that unhappy world (all of "Doraemon" The story of time travel is self-defeating.)
Another solution is that you can change the future, but what you change does not come from a world. The happy world and the unhappy world are parallel. The world-to use Borges' words-is a garden with forked paths. The people who changed the world did not change the world he came from, but entered another world, like turning from one road to another, from one story to another, the previous moment was the lonely and helpless pseudo in Nanjing. Father, the next moment he will become the majestic dark knight in Gotham City.
In this way, the paradox was eliminated. I went back to the past and killed my grandfather, but from a world where a grandfather lived and gave birth to me, to a world where my grandfather died and then no "me" was gone. In fact, all movies that claim to be able to change the future are parallel worlds in their bones, including the Sharu chapter in "Dragon Ball."
But I have always been dissatisfied with this formulation, one is because it is too far-fetched and helpless, as if it exists in order to cope with the paradox and force the story to be self-consistent. The second reason is that what we think is important is the world we come from, and the misfortune of that world is doomed and has not been changed. We have just come to a better world. This world is not the one we love and want to change. , So this is an escape, a thing that exists as a good wish. So I am very dissatisfied.
This year there is a film that made me feel refreshed. It is "Men in Black 3". There is an alien who can predict the future. He cannot predict what the future will look like, but can only predict how likely the future is. , How likely is it to be that way, and what kind of behavior will affect the possibility. The future is uncertain and measurable. Probability theory is introduced into predicting the future. How clever is this method. It is recommended that people who pretend to be blind fortune tellers on the street should arm themselves with such scientific theories.
"Loop Messenger" is a magical film that introduces probability theory into time travel movies. The conversation in the film that shocked me the most was easily missed by most viewers. When Bruce Willis and Jessoff talked about their time travel experience, he said that when he came to the past, his mind was chaotic. There are infinite possibilities in memory, and only after Ji Cerf takes a certain action, a certain possibility is realized, his memory becomes clear, and he remembers what he did when he was young. If Jessoff took another action, then another possibility would come true. All he remembered was that he did another thing when he was young.
The world is still only one, but there are infinite possibilities. When one possibility is realized, the other state collapses, just as it has never happened. This is completely different from the parallel world. More importantly, in the parallel world theory, people who travel through time and space are determined. In other words, he was formed from the original world, and everything about him will not change with the changes of the past world after he travels back. He is eternal and unchanging, and in "The Ring Messenger", this person is not It is decided that he will continue to change with the changes in the past world, because there is only one in the world. The past and present are just two points of the same ring.
In this framework, we reconstruct the story of "Back to the Future". Martin changed the future and returned to the future. He did not realize that he was changed in the future, because he was also changed at the moment of changing the future. The future he returns is the future he came from, the future that determines his current situation, his memory, personality, and interpersonal relationships are all related to that future. Just as the former is related to the former future, but the possibility of that world has disappeared forever, and never appeared. .
This is the most powerful setting in this movie, and in my opinion, it can completely change the story of time travel. It's just that few people noticed that it should.
The price of superpowers and love.
One thing that is more criticized in the film introduces the concept of superpowers, which is said to greatly reduce the core of the film's science fiction. Let me not talk about whether the core of science fiction has been lowered. What I am interested in is that the screenwriter knows that super powers are incompatible with science fiction, why bother to introduce such a concept? I have my explanation.
Because a person is too awkward to deal with it, so he travels back to the past to deal with him as a child. What kind of movie is this? It's "Loop Messenger" and "Terminator". But what is the difference between these two movies? The difference is that the kid in "Terminator" is a positive character, evil people will come to kill him, and the righteous people will protect him; while the kid in "Loop Messenger" is a villain, and in the end, the boss, Bruce Willis, will kill him. It is for justice, or at least to make the audience think that he is for justice.
In any story, there will never be a person who thinks it is a bad thing and does it, unless it is a bad story. As soon as we saw the child in "Terminator", so weak, we sympathized and stood on the side of the transformed t800, and wanted him to save the child; if we also stood on the side of the young rainmaker for the same reason, Bruceway The character Liss became a flat villain, and the story could not stand up.
How to do? The first way is to exaggerate how evil this child was when he was an adult. That is, Xu Qing who was shot and killed constantly flashes back in the film (to be honest, she is so beautiful.) The second way is to make the audience realize that this person is annoying and threatening even as a child.
No matter how irritable and cunning a child is, people will only regard it as cute, because he is not a threat at all. The child’s intelligence and physical strength are completely incompetent with adults. How can people believe that this child is dangerous and that it is reasonable to get rid of him from Bruce Willis’s point of view?
Of course it is super power. A super power that lifts people up in the air and explodes when they get angry.
So when you see an obtrusive element in the movie, don't be busy spraying it, because it is most likely the key to supporting the story. Otherwise, for such obtrusive things, there are old churros screenwriters in Hollywood, how can they be stupid than you?
Finally, let’s talk about the end of the video. I think this is the only ending I can think of anyway. I remember watching a short film like this: it’s all images from the Nazi period, a military parade and Hitler’s close-up, and then there are gunshots outside the painting, and that group of shots are reversed, which means that Hitler’s death history goes back to the past, and then Another set of shots with a younger Hitler close-up, gunshots sounded outside the painting, and that set of shots went upside down, and it kept going back. It seems that all the unpleasant history has gone back. This shot is getting faster and faster, and the shots are also Faster and faster, Hitler was getting younger and younger. The last close-up was the baby Hitler. At this time, the camera was still, and the gunshot did not sound for a long time, faded out, and ended.
It means that you can't bear to kill the baby Hitler, so history will repeat itself.
One of my classmates said that she couldn't understand Cheng Xin in "Three-Body". I told her that Cheng Xin is a conscience of mankind. When people can break through various bottom lines in order to survive, she is that kind of opposition, or at least a hesitation. "Lost humanity, lose a lot. Lose animality, lose everything." Indeed, Cheng Xin also told us that all that was lost for humanity is worth it.
So she is so twisted, so mentally retarded, so unpleasant.
View more about Looper reviews
