Before leaving for the cinema, I glanced at the trailer. Obviously, "high concept". Few trailers dare to put such a long and continuous detail shot, and there is no concept and clues of "story" in the trailer. "The Look, the Hook, and the Book"-the big deal is the beautiful space, the blue planet; in order to go home, it is hard to go back and forth; steadily and steadily, start to develop the climax and the end of the regular plot, and finally it must be done. . (In fact, this is the case. The plot of the film is so simple that the only way to not be spoiled is to not say a word. According to who/where/what, the plot is-"Astronaut, in space, want to return to earth" The story, you don’t even have to give it. Nothing.) But
when a scene of "gravity" appeared, I immediately stopped making noise (maybe it was because someone deliberately asked us to remember that Kubrick had left us Space nightmare)-we are like satellites, in the oxygen-free and lifeless endless universe staring at this beautiful blue planet on which we live-I can't help but "wow"-I must be on the space station As the astronauts on the spacewalk saw this, they must have thought and wow from it. Sure enough, the foreground of the lens entered the face of the beautiful uncle astronaut George Clooney staring at the earth. Against the backdrop of the blue planet, perhaps this will be the most beautiful shot of Uncle Clooney in all of his films. Because he wants to open the folding fan and gaze into space on behalf of the entire audience.
We are all people who have never been in space (excluding the sporadic ones). If you have to say that you look at the sunset and aurora in the picture, the mountains and oceans on the earth, and the vastness of space, what is the point of view of a meteor It feels nothing, then you are ZB. Even though you have watched hundreds of BBC documentaries, your physical instinct is chicken jelly in the face of the super-realistic "illusion" in front of you with the super-large screen. 3D, IMAX and the like are future movie-oriented, and there is a reason for this.
Although I know that just looking at the scene is so strange, it does not mean that this is a good film and tells a good story, but I think carefully, this kind of film that is alone in the difficult and dangerous survival of thousands of miles in space, if it is not in this situation, you still Will you watch it? Although the plot here is set in space, it is actually the same as the traditional survival on a deserted island, survival in a secret room... Spectacle. And gimmick. No one has done it more clearly and thoroughly.
The advancement and development of the film's plot is actually nothing to say. Undoubtedly, it is difficult, difficult, and "almost done" one by one with ordinary escape movies. Even its plot design is more far-fetched than other movies, and there are more bugs. (Because... from my shallow space knowledge, I also feel that if someone in space encounters a spacecraft crash, one hundred will be dead! Hey! Director, you and your son dare to dare to do it, I have such a moment , I was moved by the courage suddenly!)
Movies are not only dreams, but also myths. Well, mythology, the responsible attitude is to create surprises for magical people. There is nothing too harsh. If you are watching the movie and you are not holding your breath due to logic bugs, then these bugs are actually invalid. (It seems that commercial films do not have the option of being responsible for the beauty of the world. But if the director is not only pursuing a few brushes of commercial films, it is totally another matter.)
When Sandra Bullock climbed from the lake to the shore, he suddenly got it. Gravity made her not even get up under one stand. Such a gentle "can't get up" is better than how many big movies the hero and the heroine hold each other and nibble in the sunset. Although its essence is actually equivalent to this, it's just that the protagonists are "human beings" and "Mother Earth."
Therefore, "gravity" is not without emotion. This kind of emotion is one of the most basic and primitive emotions, and almost none of us can be conscious of it. Most of the authors don't know where to write when mentioning it, but they are far away from it. (Reminds me of Diego in "The Old Man and the Sea".) It is the attachment of life to life, the attachment of people on earth to the earth and our mother. Existence is in the meaning of existence. The love of men and women, the love of mother and child, friendship, and morality all give way to this most basic emotion.
The director of the film didn't talk about "how good life is and how terrible death is" such preaching, and even the handsome man Clooney's calmness to death and disappearance of the night sky is as beautiful and calm as poetry. Bullock also wanted to learn his appearance and go to death calmly, but the flashback before death made her nirvana. With such a nirvana, everything is there. (I have to say that the value of this film is to slam the dominant value of "The Matrix". Now I understand why the free people in The Matrix have to go deep into the ground. Looking down from a height, what you see is the greatness, correctness and warmth of the "maternal body".)
Living on the earth, everything that is dirty makes people no longer want to live. How can I jump out and give myself a reason to live? ? Go into the night sky. In the face of such a watery spirit, full of vitality, a unique blue sphere...Do you still hate it? If you don't go into space, do you know how "mother Earth" is to you? Gravity, something that you may not have thought of struggling to get it from birth to death. In space, do you understand? Where are you from"? "Where are you going"?
Movies are dreams. It is a myth. Still a fable. The simpler it is, the more room it can be interpreted.
(Some people think that the shell of "God zu" looks a bit like a toy in the film compared to the American one; the Russian satellites burst into flames and disappeared in a flash, just like the former Soviet Union; American astronauts were teased by Chinese, In the end, I borrowed the plot of chickens and eggs, because Mao made me feel that Americans are so worried about foreign debts. I feel that Hollywood has a very "complex" and "tangled" attitude toward everything about China. Still welcoming the heart...)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
My point, in fact, it’s not about how awesome the visual effects of the film are, whether the screenwriter’s approach is correct, how bloody is the script, what is the space for thinking behind the story ...But how our so-called "physical experience" has re-emerged as the dominant player in movie viewing, and has become the main reason that induces the audience to stretch on the theater seats and breathe tightly.
And the audience who shouted "God Movies" should be because of this reason.
"I read countless films, and after all the battles, I didn't dare to show the atmosphere when watching your diao film. I sat with all my attention for 90 minutes! You are awesome, you are god!" In fact, this feeling is the same as "the train comes into the station". There is a reason why the audience scurrying at times. They also admired the movie as a magical thing at the time!
(And people who hate it are more because they hate the frustration that their emotions or mental activities are disturbed by such a logical and simple plot. Thank them for their "rather than giving up reason".)
Looking at it this way, this film looks like The advancement of film fundamentalism. Laughing
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * After
"gravity" was released in bo's film archive, I would like to see "Zorro's Mask" in 1920. I wanted to watch it (in foreign countries, watch silent films) The most labor-saving, there is wood!!), the result was too cold to hold on and left. As I walked, I sighed that history really is drawing circles...the so-called spiral. It will always reach a position above the origin, which mirrors the original dim sum~
When the "business card" "Train into the Station" when the film was invented more than 100 years ago scared the audience and flee, the reason that shocked them was not because they believed in the "realism" of the film, but was substituted into the film's time and space. , Had a real psychological reaction. But today, when the audience stares at the night sky and blue planets of the universe, when the astronauts in the film are holding their breath due to insufficient oxygen, all the audiences are also bored with them just like the “movie audience” born yesterday. Gasping with them while breathing under the mask. In the film, critics and audiences complained that the plot was too simple and too blunt, the "last second rescue" that appeared many times, 1% oxygen, the "first-line" lead, and so on, the third set of dog blood...why does it need so much? The old story structure?
In fact, this is a film like "Zorro's Mask" in 1920 and "Birth of a Nation" in 1915 that does not require language and complex psychological expressions. What is "GRAVITY"? It is the sword in Zorro's hand, and it is the "birth of the country". The "Mask of Zorro" and "The Birth of a Nation" are actually much more complicated than this film. They have too much meaning and subtext in between. It is actually more like "The Savior of the Righteous Dog" in 1905, or the end of "Travel to the Moon" in 1902-Escape from the Moon and return to Earth. There are a total of five shots. And "gravity" is the simplest and most primitive survival plot. Back to Basics. It's as simple as that, as simple as the mother's womb!
Film history has gone through more than a hundred years... Suddenly I realized this deja vu feeling, as moved as if I suddenly heard "Love you always the same".
It turns out that the teacher of the film school was talking about the film history and film theory classes-the most essential function of film "material restoration and reproduction", those old-fashioned bridges that disrupt your psychological rhythm, the kind of tricks that deceive others and can't deceive yourself Immersive physical experience-in fact, has not gone far, has been supporting the progress of the film.
Bazin, the forerunner and godfather of film theory, must have never imagined that the definition of "reality" in film has been broken today. What is more "clear" than "reality" is the fictional "unreality", and our "gaze" itself has essentially changed its meaning. According to Bazin, it is difficult to say whether "GRAVITY" was filmed by a director who believes in the pictures, or believes in the truth. Faced with a film technology that allows you to see everything you think, all crazy images, the definition of montage may also be rewritten. If montage is to create rhythm and drama, then the audience is shocked to see the drama of their own "dreams" or illusions in a shot, what is it called? (I'm stupefied here. The road ahead is long, teacher, should we dare to think about it? Not copy?) Whether we believe in the truth or in the picture, "gravity" at least gave birth to new branches on the road to the combination of the two.
Don't compare 3D IMAX's "Pacific Rim" and "Avatar" with this film. Those are science fiction films, fictional and completely fictional. The cornerstone of this film is very realistic. That's why this film is special, and it's worthy of so many words. It is a pure "dream", yet realistic enough to fit every earthly person's self-projection. (Don’t tell me that when you watch Avatar, you also fantasize about turning blue, and when you watch the Pacific Rim, you also fantasize about standing in a robot and dancing. There is still a big difference between emotional identification and mental projection. The latter allows you to produce something This kind of "indirect" "physical experience".) "GRAVITY" is based on the perspective when every earthly person stares at the night sky. That was when we were about eight years old. We just learned to think. One day we asked our parents: What is the outside of the earth? What does the earth look like from the outside of the earth?
The appearance of this film shows that "Hollywood", the pioneer of the world's film development, has explored the breakthrough and innovation of "new film" in a deeper concept. This innovation is an attempt to combine the panacea of traditional Hollywood movies with the greatly extended visual possibilities under the new technology.
After understanding this layer, I think about it again, and I feel that this film can be made more elaborate in the drama, and there can be more connotations that can be put into it. At least if Kubrick is still alive, let him take over this idea, it must be more powerful and evocative than Alfonso. But as a commercial film, Alfonso Cuarón and the producer have already embarked on their own footsteps (what a lucky boy!) on the road leading to the future of movies.
The steps leading to the future movie model are endless. What is important is that we have to rely on our own imagination and ideas to practice step by step.
(On the bus going home, looking at the various trash carrying wine bottles on the streets of Europe, trying to bear the tears back-thinking back to the thinking and current situation of domestic movies, except for Nima's speculation and copying-I feel that I have nothing to do with these trash. Different. The pressure brought about by the reality gap can sometimes make people really sad. I am afraid that I will not be able to do it in my lifetime... so... heartily)
@乔酒
谢绝Reprinted
View more about Gravity reviews
