The logic loopholes in the whole movie are very obvious. As many people have said, it is not difficult to falsify. The protagonist has no way to logically prevent falsification. This approach is no different from hooliganism. Any proposition cannot be falsified as long as you define all the methods of falsification as causing you some kind of harm and do not do it. So in fact, this man is invincible, whether true or not.
Picking out real loopholes, an important loophole is that the author assumes that our current understanding of ancient humans and palaeogeology is almost accurate, so john can recall the past from the textbook. This is a very nonsense claim, because even the theory of plate tectonics is just a hypothesis, which is pretty much the cornerstone of modern geology. Another loophole is that unless the protagonist has the same undead ability as the CC in Lelouch, I think the probability of a person being able to survive all the chaos and chaos is almost equal to zero, infinitely approaching zero. And according to what he said, there are not many people with his ability. If you calculate the probability, then this is undoubtedly a reasonable doubt.
In fact, none of these matters. What disappoints me the most is the intellectual collision between the two sides. The level of debate and logic is really an insult to Harvard professors. The jump is great, the coverage is extremely broad, and the depth is very poor. Only the proposition about time is on the road, almost reaching the philosophical level of Kant's time. The hosts of biology and geology are unfamiliar and do not make comments, but the relevant discussions on psychology, history, religion, and anthropology are really unsightly. And the large-scale discussion of death is also incomprehensible. The biggest problem is not unprofessionalism, but the lack of tit for tat in the discussion itself. It seems that every time John finishes talking about these high-level intellectuals, he will be cowardly. As for the monism of world religions like Buddha and Jesus, there are still many people who believe in the public calendar in the West, and there are also some in the Chinese public who say that the Yellow Emperor is an Egyptian, and so on. Those who have a little knowledge of Buddhism and Christianity will find it very strange. There are some similarities between the two on the surface, but the logical framework and even the ideological theme are completely different. It is really funny to compare the two. . . Saying john is Jesus, oh my god, do you just want to tease the fragile and pure heart of the poor, sweet little Christian?
In terms of the plot, it can only be said that it is full of contradictions. Ideally, people should keep asking and getting nothing, leading to collapse step by step. In fact I don't see anything to break down with anyone other than Christian Granny. And the process of its collapse is also painful to pieces, full of various unknown performances. And the man took the initiative to walk out and walk in with a compulsive look on his face. Could it be that the screenwriter was afraid that the audience would fall asleep easily when they were sitting there all the time? ? ?
In the end, the plot unfolded, Nima is really 14,000 years old, and I really took the last fig leaf out of this movie. If not, this is a major challenge of science to reason and logic, and it is a question to the cornerstone of modern society since modernization - is what logic cannot falsify true? This question mark is too strong and powerful, and it can hide a hundred ugliness with one handsome man. However, the director obviously felt that the ending was not interesting enough. He first made a son for him and then killed him. Then the man seemed to see life and death and drove away in a daze. Nima, that idiot The woman actually followed, which is really blinding. . . It just doesn't give this movie a chance to survive. . . . .
After reading it, there is only one slag word, it is really impossible to spit.
View more about The Man from Earth reviews
