I don’t watch Super England. I don’t have a beauty complex. I don’t care about Mangai’s victory (it is said that Riman has already become the emperor of Mangai), and it is not a technology emperor. I just talk about the movie itself. This is a disappointing work.
The only commendable thing about the whole movie is Joaquin's superb acting skills. Otherwise, this is generally a superficial and old-fashioned story.
Let’s not talk about the old-fashioned plot, "Super British" itself represents the ancient times. But clichés are not a crime, superficiality is fatal.
Why is it superficial? Because it does not delve into the proposition of the generation of "evil" at all. To be precise, it avoids this problem perfectly, but directly jumps to the aesthetics of "evil" by means of modalization and symbolization, which triggers not deep thinking, but incitement.
The first level of "superficiality" is that the portrayal of society is basically modular. There is no special understanding and expression at all. The social problem only exists as the background of the story. The sinful song deletion city is a given that does not require further interpretation and explanation. The director did not even want to talk about it at all. It's just that the gap between the rich and the poor and the social stratification are modeled. But the gap between the rich and the poor and social stratification are not evil in themselves, they are the deeper problems of social fairness and justice they bring. Without this level of development and foreshadowing, the subsequent turmoil and chaos in Goshen City would be utterly illogical, and the movement of the clown mask would have no legitimacy or inevitability.
However, if the story is set as that the riots in the city are not just, and the violence against the rich and the authority is unreasonable, if this is the reason for the director's refusal to further interpret social issues, it is even more problematic. So this is a movie that endorses violence and hatred. I don't think any era should produce such a movie. I prefer to understand that the director is superficial.
This is the first level of "superficial".
The second level of "superficiality" lies in the characterization itself. On the ethical level of any work of art, the birth of a negative character must not be the cumulative effect of layers of negative deeds, but should be a kind of " pseudo-negative " shaping. In other words, it is always for the "positive" to shape the "negative".
For example, you can’t spend two hours simply praising Hitler. What you want to show is " battle " -the battle between positive and negative, sin and salvation, even if the "positive" and "salvation" are lost, it doesn't matter, but The defeat of justice always arouses regret, disappointment, pain and sorrow in people's hearts, rather than excitement, appreciation, excitement and joy.
This ethical limitation actually created trouble for the birth of the clown. Because the movie wants to portray the clown as a "hero" in a certain sense, this is obvious from the movie's mirroring, lighting, and overall presentation of the characters. But how does a negative character become a "hero"? First, the process of blackening must be convincing. Even if it were me, in that position, I would definitely be black. For example, Qiao Feng’s bloodbath of Juxianzhuang, readers released with him at the point Qiao Feng released. It is a long-term psychological substitution and paving process, making Qiao Feng’s feelings our feelings, and Qiao Feng’s collapse. Our collapse.
Secondly, as mentioned above, the focus should not be on "blackening" itself, but on " war between heaven and man ." The point is the process, the dialogue between the two mes, the constant tearing of the soul back and forth. For example, Gollum in "The Lord of the Rings", his struggles, self-tearing and dialogue are from beginning to end, is thorough, let you know his struggles, his weaknesses, and his failures. Even if you do not necessarily become him, you will have compassion and compassion for him.
The creation of the clown in "Joker" is blackened for the sake of blackening .
First, the blackening of the clown is not convincing. One important personal injury is that Arthur is a mentally ill person himself. With this premise, it doesn't matter no matter how much plot is laid. Because the feedback mechanism and response behavior of mental patients and normal people to the same event are completely different.
For example, one of the events that caused Arthur's collapse was "Loss of Love." However, we later saw that Arthur's so-called love is entirely out of his own fantasy, and there is no love in fact, so the so-called broken love does not exist at all. This similar plot actually severely weakened the audience's sense of substitution.
Second, the lack of "battle", or the lack of a process from sane to insane.
In order to express Arthur's final inevitable collapse, the screenwriter of course had to inflict a lot of torture on Arthur, such as being abused at a young age, being bullied at work, being chased by hooligans, and being laughed at. But to be honest, even if Joaquin's acting skills are good, I still don't see the struggle and transformation of the characters.
Because Joaquin's Arthur was black from the beginning.
He was black at the first shot. The desperation in the eyes, the constant transition between crying and laughing, the unstoppable laughter. Because of this, it is actually impossible to act later. The character can't develop. No matter how many episodes are, they just repeat this hysterical pathology. Encounters and story lines no longer have an impact on the change of characters.
This is a big injury in the characterization. It was because of Joaquin's acting skills that he was so confused and won the award.
Losing the complexity of the characters loses the depth of character creation. An in-depth perspective of human nature always reflects the transformation and complexity of the characters.
It is not difficult to represent the world of the mentally ill. Don't look at the strangeness on the surface of the fine points, but their world is very simple. For example, the delusion of being persecuted, you can spend two hours expressing the imaginary that he has experienced the harm caused by different people and things, but there is only one message in the end, that is, you will all harm me. This is actually quite monotonous. It is actually much more complicated to express the psychology of an ordinary person than to express the essence, and the skills required are more profound.
Therefore, the mentally ill setting of the clown makes it impossible to show the transformation and complexity of the characters. This is a big failure.
This is followed by a bigger failure. Because the creation of the background of the story and the characters basically failed, the extreme rendering of violence in the movie became quite weird.
This is no longer a "pseudo-negative" shaping. It is no longer the failure of justice that arouses people's regret and pain, but the praise of violence itself. The illogical and irrational violence itself excites, admires, excites, and rejoices. This is actually the terrible aesthetics of violence, the soil that gave birth to fascism and populism, and the pure evil itself that a normal person should feel disgusted and disgusted with.
Without exception, like various slogans and slogans, this extreme exaggeration and praise of "evil" must be extremely superficial .
In other words, superficiality itself implies evil .
"Joker" does not intend to explore in depth the existence of "evil" at the social and human level, which is more complex and diverse, which will inevitably lead to the end of a carnival celebrating "evil". Because, once you have to perceive and discuss "evil" in depth and earnestly, you will inevitably find "love" in it, and "love" makes evil no longer pure in any sense, and makes the "evil" The celebration became nothingness. And, you will find that you can't find any reason to endorse pure evil, whether in the social or human dimension. In a movie like that, the ending will never be a carnival celebrating "evil", but a funeral. Evil is born at the funeral and ends in sorrow and mourning.
View more about Joker reviews
