Of course, this news is really a big blow to many viewers who insist on the image first. Fortunately, some people with higher political consciousness have speculated about the hypocrisy of capitalist democracy, the personal grievances between the leaders of the judges, and the sensitive and unharmonious topics of the film, and they have come to some reasonable conclusions about the brutal censorship of the gods. explain.
I laughed. There is no doubt about the technical content of the pictures, but what to say about epoch-making, what mainstream culture, and even what anti-demolition, is just the imaginary that the audience is poisoned by YY. Not to mention epoch-making, not to mention the technical aspects, the CG version of Final Fantasy was definitely a precedent, although it is a bad movie as a movie. Not to mention the box office, this indicator represents far more than the movie itself, one of which can refer to the analysis of the phenomenon of Xiao Shenyang by Lang Xianping. And what I heard most is: the movie is good-looking, no matter what the plot is, whether it’s tired or not! These people are strange to me. Have you ever heard the term film review?
Those friends who are rumored to be behind the shady scene, who are as commercial as the Oscars, reject a local blockbuster with a global box office of 2.5 billion, really does not involve the elements of the artistic level of the film?
-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
Update on the 10th:
There is no need for some friends to use "Bomb Disposal" In comparison, do you think this is a relationship between Ji Sheng Yu and He Shengliang? I did not promote the meaning of "Bomb Disposal", but it is an indisputable fact that avatar lost in the plot. According to this standard, even if there is no "Bomb Disposal", avatar is just those few technical awards.
Well, in my eyes, avatar is a technical accumulation with a little plot, although it is extremely gorgeous. In terms of technology, Cameron is more a promoter than a creator. Speaking of people who have not seen imax and have no right to speak, it is ridiculous. First of all, I do have the so-called right to speak, but I want to ask a question. Do you think that the Oscar judges do not wear 3D glasses and the comments made by wearing 3D glasses will have What's the difference? After all, the technology awards have been given out. . . To mention that 3D glasses bring a say, only shows that Avatar is more in line with the pleasant experience of a video game city.
Leaving the origin of the film, technological innovation is only a matter of time, and the excitement it brings is naturally limited. If someone is deeply shocked by Cameron this time, I can only say that he/she has probably not experienced several "epoch-making" times before. And today, a certain group of people may not cry as much as they do now when they face the next innovation in the future. It is not that Avatar was unprecedented, but they were once stimulated by the same things.
Borrowing WALL-E's comment: Avatar is not an iron ship after all. It is enough to have one in the world of wonders. It only shows that Cameron was able to take the Avatar back then. Then it is called a spectacle, and the iron ship is worthless. (Of course, it was impossible to shoot with the technology at the time), so the advocating technology will eventually be replaced by new technology. The return to the human text quality is the initial touch of the movie.
I can't say that avatar has no plot or story, but aside from the shell of "sooner or later, it will be better", how much is left worthy of being regarded as a classic?
View more about Avatar reviews
