I remember it was 1997. At that time, Christopher Nolan was full of ambition and spirit, and shot a short film of 2 minutes and 55 seconds. This short film called "Antfly" tells a very simple story: a person shoots a "bug" in a small room. As soon as the sole of the shoe is about to pass, the camera suddenly goes over the shoulder of the protagonist. The big shoes that were only photographed towards the protagonist suddenly appeared in the air.
I don't want to meet again someday. This time, the inventor of the "Shentan Brand Assembly Line" put a dreamy shell on his product, and then smeared a layer of transparent yellow sand on the shell, and sent it to China for congratulations. Nearly two decades later, as the weight continues to increase, Nolan’s movies have also leapt in volume, from three minutes to three hours, from a room to the universe, from black and white to color, from IMDB The end came to the beginning, hit the world invincible, and entered the IMAX theater in one fell swoop-well, inspirational enough. However, maybe we should really take a closer look at this short film that only has "revelation" for Nolan alone, and then carefully consider, among all the above differences, what can really be called "progress" Something? I don't think so. Through combing through his personal history, we find that Nolan seems to never look forward when making films. He likes to look back, but he doesn’t have any style to speak of; he likes patterns, so it’s hard to make any move that surpasses himself and challenges himself; it is true that he prefers vests and puts layers of clothes on an ordinary story, science fiction Ah, sandstorm, love, and Wei, but after all, there is only so little effort.
I don't know much, but I hope no one will lie to me. Many people are unwilling to compare "Interstellar" with "2001: A Space Odyssey", but those who are rogues like me must ask, why not? I've copied all the copies, don't you let me compare? From the huge wheel-shaped accelerator to the dormant device like a coffin; from the unknown object above the planet to the colorful black hole journey, Nolan gave Kubrick a footnote alive. Nolan seems to be good after being yourself and being someone else. After all, there is hard work without credit! But this is indeed a very fatal problem. Especially the expression "the first one to dare to perform positively" is very worth considering. Because the word "first" often determines the position of a film in film history, and the number and quality of the first often determine how much part of a film belongs to itself; a film is full The seed of the tree is still a small green leaf on the giant tree, which cannot be ignored. From this perspective, "Interstellar" is nothing more than a legacy of earlier science fiction movies.
It seems that Nolan has only abandoned Kubrick's unchanging "black stele". However, the overlap of "black" and "ghost", "tablet" and "book shelf" is so shockingly placed in front of me, I really hope that I am overly interpreting it. Taking ten thousand steps back, the true meaning of this comparison is to show that when a mysterious thing is truly concrete, its philosophical meaning, its ambiguous form, and its ability to think are all collapsing in an irreversible way. In the end, the art of film has faded into an IQ game, an impulse of feeling has become a brain-burning puzzle, and a metaphysical thinking has become a metaphysical show off, forming an alternative, even non-imaging pleasure. If you use another word to explain it, it may be a kind of "brainwashing."
Of course, Nolan copied more than just "2001: A Space Odyssey". For example, Morse code and binary that have remained unchanged for thousands of years, such as robots walking on the ground with their hands on the ground, these ideas that appeared in "Time Contact" and even "Star Wars" were "tributed" to every corner in large quantities. , And then mixed with various laws of physics; in addition, there is a new world behind the bookshelf, which trembles the hearts of die-hard fans of The Chronicles of Narnia. So, instead of saying that Nolan was shooting an interstellar, Mo Ruo said that he was shooting an interstealer. Not only did his unscrupulous citations fail to improve the quality of his essay, but the originality was greatly compromised. So to be honest, who wants to treat a student with an astonishingly high repetition rate differently?
"Interstellar" is really one step away from the masterpiece? I can't stop. Putting aside the physical injuries, the story is delayed for more than half of the time, the heavy and unbearable cross-montage, the actors' performance and psychological state are extremely single, and with a seemingly humane ending, it seems to be the standard of a blockbuster film. Configuration. However, in my opinion, such a thing is far from being called a masterpiece. It is far from any work that can be called a "masterpiece" in my mind, let alone "great". Speaking of this, I think of a documentary about Hawking and his theory, directed by Errol Morris, called "A Brief History of Time." In the film, Hawking’s deteriorating physical condition and emotionless computer-synthesized sound are intertwined with each other. With the dying of the body and the improvement of the theory, the tiny human beings and the boundless universe finally form an intersection in the word “time”. . When Hawking finally discovered that time could never be reversed and health would never return, the computer-synthesized voice said: "People will continue to grow old, so it is unrealistic to wait for the universe to collapse again and return to the youth age." The voice was still calm, but it was full of sadness.
I call this movie a "masterpiece". It never wanted to control my emotions, but I still shed tears.
View more about Interstellar reviews
