If we put the Sherlock Holmes story in modern times, what do we get?
Hmm...not bad.
So what if we moved the story of The Lord of the Rings to modern times?
Hmmmmmm
Before its release, the film was shrouded in overwhelming negative reviews from the media, with some calling it "the worst movie of 2017". So I lowered my expectations, and fortunately, I don't need to go to the cinema to watch this film, which more or less leaves a way out for the quality of the film that is difficult to guarantee.
After watching it, I breathed a sigh of relief. The position of the 2017 bad film in my heart was not easily shaken. No second or third.
Objectively speaking, this film is not as bad as the media. But the problem is not small.
Fantasy settings have always been pleasing to the audience. After all, fantasy movies such as "The Lord of the Rings" have a large number of fans, not to mention the background of this film is that all races live in an era where magic and technology coexist, it is difficult not to let fantasy sci-fi Enthusiasts are not interested. In the trailer, we can also see that Jakoby, one of the protagonists, is the only orc in the police station, so racial discrimination will also be an element in the film.
The embarrassing thing is that neither of the two bright spot directors played well.
There are various supplementary explanations of the worldview interspersed in the dialogue of the literary drama. Although it may not give a better solution due to the length of the film, this method really gives people the feeling of remembering the knowledge points on the teacher's blackboard when they go to school.
The issue of race accounted for a large part of the proportion at the beginning, but the film talked too much about the relationship between Jakoby and Ward, and did not make a big fuss about race. The same thing was brought about by police corruption.
The problem with the plot, as our Sergeant Ward puts it in the film: "The context is a little off"
Obviously the director and screenwriter want to tell more stories, so the plot in the middle and later stages of the film is messed up, and it feels like chaos for the sake of chaos.
When the concept of the so-called "light spirit" and its rarity were proposed, I believe that you can already use your toes to figure out why the protagonist is the protagonist. The style at the beginning, the gang atmosphere of the whole film, and the soundtrack make it hard not to think of last year's "Suicide Squad".
The budget of nearly 100 million US dollars, apart from the remuneration of the two leading actors and the gorgeous original soundtrack, it is estimated that there is not much left. Therefore, this "Light" is actually another police and gangster film starring Will Smith in a fantasy coat that has not yet had a big scene. There is still some entertainment in this film. After all, there are still things to see in the scenes of the two main protagonists fighting with each other and gun battles. But the problem is similar to that of "Jupiter Rising" a few years ago. It clearly has a big background but tells the story very petty.
Let’s talk about director David Ayer again. Last year’s trailer for “Suicide Squad” earned enough attention. Due to the reputation of BvS, I once regarded it as the saving grace of DC movies. After reading it, I went to the director and what kind of mentality did you have when you shouted "Fxxk MARVEL"? Who gave you the courage? Liang Jingru? Afterwards, the director said that Warner had done too much interference and could not create freely, so he came up with such a movie. After the release of "Light", netizens couldn't help but speculate whether the original "Suicide Squad" would be worse if Warner let the director let himself go like Netflix.
In the face of overwhelming negative reviews, the director did not give in. After reposting indieWire's film review on Twitter, he responded to the film critic with a very ironic tone, "I will be very happy to read any script you write." Almost everyone can see that Ayer Between the lines, "you go, you go". Originally, as a Christmas movie audience, it would be more tolerant, but this is good. Before high-level intervention and spraying on high-level people were acceptable, but now the media criticized the film critics, in addition to highlighting their own low quality and angry attitude. Nothing to do with the movie. Besides, the director himself also said on Twitter that he does not expect the audience to like him, so he should not care about the next evaluation.
Looking at the comments, there are comrades who are "supporting justice". I also want to say a few words here. Everyone's standards for watching movies are different. Some people think that a movie needs four stars to be considered qualified, while others I think three stars is pretty good. It doesn't matter if you think it's good to score high, but when you see others scoring low, it's really unreasonable to say that others are not good enough to follow suit. In addition, we must also consider subjective feelings. Some people have been heartbroken by last year's SS, and some people are very disgusted with the director's words and deeds. Even I wanted to give this movie one star at first, because I can think that Netflix cut me off. Hypersensory hunting spends money on this kind of stuff. Movie rating websites are a mess (including Rotten Tomatoes and imdb). People who should have been reading reviews have turned into ratings, and movie reviews that should have been written and analyzed have turned into a pale look and feel for a scorer. Like it or not is always a personal matter, the important thing is to tell your own truth instead of blindly spraying people who do not agree with your own views.
View more about Bright reviews
