Regarding movies, I always feel that it is better to have a single theme, pure amusement, pure saliva, pure eroticism, pure ethics, pure technology, pure blood, pure education,,, in short, simplicity is supreme. I can't stand the kind of films that have to show off the ability to run and shoot while taking pictures, ideological education, and reenactment of history, such as "Left and Right", "Nanjing Nanjing" and the like. "Left and Right" is better, at most, it proves that the director and screenwriter deeply inherited the textbook spirit of "the so-called creation is to put the concentrated contradiction on the concentrated character and express it in an extreme way", while "Nanjing Nanjing" uses ten It drove me out of the movie theater in less than a minute, and was still sick of the shaky footage.
So I like the special moves of "Special" and "Change 2". The plot is compact, and I didn't play any intellectual games. The beautiful pictures passed frame by frame, and the superficial mind and senses were greatly stimulated, or hilarious. , or burst into tension, it belongs to the kind of plot arrangement where you can guess the ending but can't guess how it ends, especially for leisure time.
I have met some men who claim to be "understood" movies. When watching movies, they are addicted to their imaginations, always thinking about guessing what the next step is going to be faster than the plot, or rewinding their minds to reflect on the plot that has happened. what a profound social background. After the end, I have to summarize the things in the movie and say, oh, the movie tells us that politics is dirty, the world is complicated, and belief is horrible. Every time I want to seal the mouths of those uncles with seals, you can't judge the world by yourself, do you have to believe the director to tell you what the world is?
There is one more thing, why the domestic screenwriters emphasize the psychology of the characters so much, but they portray the psychology of the characters a little thin, and the result is full of loopholes. Or are those films that emphasize their superior graphics, techniques, and plot just because none of them are good enough when viewed separately?
Hong Huang just scolded Xiaoxue, the editor-in-chief of "ELLE" China, saying that she has no aesthetic taste. At the same time, Hong Huang also admitted that the fashion circle in mainland China is not fashionable, and whoever has a good relationship with the brand will be praised in the magazine, and whoever is guilty will be banned. It's really unethical to say that. But the domestic circles are indeed easy to entertain each other and tout each other, so is it not the case when looking at the circle of friends around you. This kind of situation is a bit like the students who were top students in various high schools in the past. When they entered the university, they found that they were surrounded by top students. As a result, they collapsed when they were real. Before the Sino-Indian war, India also viewed its little elite army in this way. So maybe the film industry is like this, they held a small meeting within the circle, summed up the international trend into elements, and went to these elements that the camera is shaking, the body is naked, and the police are bad. After that, they are not advertised as "comparable", "superior", "The Day After Tomorrow", "Transformers", "Schindler's List" and so on, or they can't honestly step on the ground and work hard.
View more about G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra reviews
