gorgeous proposition composition

Gloria 2022-03-21 09:01:19

Gorgeous propositional composition When I
was in high school, I always had to write a propositional composition for exams, that is, Bagu. Analysis topic - argument - argument - conclusion. The first paragraph, to clarify the central idea; the middle paragraphs, to prove through examples; the last paragraph, the conclusion. Of course, there are very few articles that can break through this framework, but generally speaking, the composition of the college entrance examination is not about your imagination and creativity, but whether your writing skills are good and the examples are incisive.
When I was in college, I watched a "Tower of Babel" that was praised to the sky, and was surprised to find the similarity between the two. Argument: "Tower of Babel", which refers to the allusions in the Bible that God destroyed the Tower of Babel, making people in the world unable to communicate with each other in their own languages, has already pointed out that "understanding" is the central idea of ​​the film. Argument: Of course it's gorgeous, the "Inaritu"-style story itself, dozens of characters pulled by a rifle, a dazzling platter-style story (in fact, compared to the chronological order. For the fragmented previous work "21 Grams", this film is actually very popular), all point to the central point of "understanding communication". Fortunately, the end of the movie did not end with the protagonist shouting "Long live for understanding", but made a point with the plot of father and daughter embracing, which is better than the domestic theme.
However, this film is very similar:
20XX College Entrance Examination Composition Question: Understanding Long Live A
Full Score Composition The
Tower of Babel
Understanding is important, communication is important, and understanding and communication are the key words for human survival in the 21st century. ...
an American couple was injured by a stray bullet while traveling in the Middle East, causing an international political uproar. Countless people have been implicated because of this, and if we could understand each other, then there would be no need...
A Mexican grandmother wanted to take an American child in her care across the border, but was suspected of being a kidnapper, and the old woman was forced to go into exile in the desert and suffer. If we can understand each other, then we don't have to...
A Japanese mute girl fell into autism because of her mother's suicide, and she indulged her body to communicate with others. In the end, the father and daughter hugged each other on the balcony, which made us understand the greatness of understanding. ...
Long live the understanding. ...

The difference between them is only that Inaritu uses his usual platter-style method (or the big cliché of "good movies" since the 1990s, see Pulp Fiction, City of God, Dream Requiem", "Crash", etc., as well as Inaritu's predecessors "Love is a Bitch", "21 Grams"), make the film into a dizzying kaleidoscope.
I don't want to hurt the movie, I just feel like a lot of people are holding it up too much right now. I believe that anyone who has seen "21 Grams" must be somewhat disappointed in it. The film itself is still wonderful, with the theme of "Long Live Understanding", which still has great positive significance in today's world. But it is this excessive ambition that undermines the power it could have had.
The story of the film will be in the Middle East for a while, the border between the United States and Mexico for a while, and then to Japan for a while. The creator obviously wants to illustrate the concept of "long live understanding" through various stories happening in all corners of the world, so we can see the political situation in the Middle East, the undercurrent of racial discrimination in the United States, and even the perverted pornography culture in Japan. Such a broad perspective is naturally impressive, but if you look closely, these grand propositions are blurred into the background of the story in the film, and we can't see much real in-depth thinking.
In terms of emotional expression, the film obviously has a tendency to be too forceful. For example, in the paragraph of the American couple, when the wife was healed, the director spared no effort to use various methods (shaking long shots, close-ups, and the actors' endless crying). Let the audience feel the pain of the protagonist being shot innocently. So looking at their entire passage, all you can get is the feeling of pain. And it's purely physical, it's not really deep emotion. I think it's a waste of time to have a good actor like Cate Blanchett cry and moan on the ground for ten minutes.
It is precisely because the thinking of the film itself is not in-depth that the creators want to scare the audience with extreme emotional concentration. Like the lengthy healing scene (the director has a sadistic streak for such nuanced performances of pain), like the Japanese dumb girl who lets strangers see her private parts. Those who say this film is profound are basically intimidated by these extreme ways of presentation. However, strong emotional concentration does not equal profound thinking. Known as a narrative thinker, Kieslowski's films are universally recognized for their rational depth, but they also tell the stories of ordinary people. That can't even be called touching. For emotions that are not sincere in themselves, a moderate sensational technique can have a proper auxiliary effect. But put too much chili, you can only be too spicy.
Why does this happen? Why can't this movie be as deeply shocking as Inaritu's predecessor "21 Grams"? Why does this talented director need to use these purely technical things to bluff people, instead of winning praise and respect with sincere emotions like he used to?
Maybe it's because it's a "good" movie.
Produced by Paramount, high investment, filming around the world, the story focuses on international issues, talented director, accommodating idol stars, powerful actors, and exotic super-perfect casts, exhibiting in Cannes, in autumn and winter when Oscar films get together show. All of this is what makes a "good" movie. However, this good scope goes beyond the film itself. In other words, it's courting everything. In Cannes, using the title of "Masterpiece of Genius Director" to please the international judges, and using the invincible cast lineup to please the audience in the market, the release season must be in the golden autumn when "art films" gather together, similar to the theme of "Crash", pay attention to international and domestic Social issues, targeting Oscar.
There are too many entanglements of interests involved, and no one can take it easy.
Such a film is a good word from head to toe. But there are so many benefits together, and without sincerity, it is just a gorgeous propositional composition.
I still remember the end of "21 Grams", Paul's confession before his death, what is the difference between the 21 grams before and after death? Perhaps what "Babel" lacks is this "21 Grams".

View more about Babel reviews

Extended Reading

Babel quotes

  • Mike Jones: My mom said Mexico is dangerous.

    Santiago: [in Spanish] Yes, it's full of Mexicans.

  • Chieko: [signing] They look at us like we're monsters.