The film critics are dissatisfied with the flesh, and then give low marks to the righteous words. What kind of mentality?
————————————
It's been a long time since I came into contact with the subject of "spy". The last one was the British "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy", more to feel the British flavor. Going forward, it was a war movie. Going forward, I bought a book about the famous spy cases in the world. Risky, pre-secondary reading overlapping Maupassant, Hugo and Marta Harry, Lafayette…
"Skylark" was watched completely without knowing it. At first I thought it was a show of totalitarianism, and later I thought it was about love, and then I thought it was a high-intelligence crime film, and I suddenly came back to my senses, oh, a spy film. It's just that I haven't figured out when the era is, the Putin era or before? Timing is important.
If it was before Putin, during the Yeltsin period, or even earlier, then these 136 minutes were just gimmicks. Capital punishment, pornographic spy training centers, mutilation among relatives, espionage activities in the context of the Cold War... It is logical and nothing new, because The consistent impression of the Soviet Union of that period is already acceptable. What's interesting is that the guy who started everything at the beginning of the episode had a close-up of what he pulled out of his pocket before he died: a full-screen, touch-screen phone. So I tend to be at least after the 2010s.
Apart from the consistent image of a just leader and humanitarian espionage in the United States, the film still clearly feels ideological tendencies. This is just an American-style obscenity about the current situation in Russia, which is not good, and it is easy to cover up the concerns caused by some news about Putin that have been rumored so far.
Nearly 30 years since Gorbachev announced the collapse of the Soviet Union, it seems that Russia has democracy and is developing steadily in the promise of "returning you to a strong Russia". However, Putin was re-elected for many terms, and in 2019, he began to copy the work of the Celestial Dynasty and tried to continue his re-election. The ghosts operate wave after wave. Some time ago, when the Vice President of the United States held a meeting in Oceania, he released a speech and reiterated the word "Cold War", but the two sides changed from the "Soviet and the United States" of the last century to the current "China and the United States". However, the core difference between the two sides is the dictatorship of socialism and the democratic universal suffrage of the federal system.
And one of the things I pay attention to in "The Cardinals" is that it reminds me whether a person who has come out of a party system like socialism can really consistently implement the original commitment to the foundation of democracy? Is the back, or even its core, still the original KGB-style treatment? Is its prestige established by improving people's livelihood and national strength, or by virtue of the Cold War ideology and governance methods that have always existed and still inherited? This film thinks about the problem from this aspect, and its silence is also that it still presents the former Soviet Union's power methods, but the time is Russia in the period of democracy and legal system. The voice of allegiance to the country is still trying to hide it from time to time.
View more about Red Sparrow reviews
