The Oscar director Higgis is also very clever, and the narrative is very easy. After finishing the layout at the beginning, I think the most exciting thing is the first hour of the film, that is, how the protagonist Crowe learned how to escape from prison. I always think that whether it is movies or other narratives, life is too streamlined and idealized, so that the most exciting details are often missed. But in many cases, these so-called trivial matters are often the key.
For example, there are a lot of history books about Hitler's expansion of the Nazi Party, but I have not yet read the materials detailing his initial beginnings. How did Hitler get to know those who are like him? How does he control the risk, knowing that these people are not undercover? Did he have a guilty conscience or make mistakes in the process? These are often very few, as if Hitler happened to know his accomplice all at once. But in fact, we often don't know how to do something. Now you ask me to join the gang and I don't know how to go to worship (of course there is no underworld in China, this is just a hypothesis).
The beauty of "Three Days in Crisis" is that we can learn how to escape from prison step by step with Crowe. During this period, there will be hesitation and failure, and there will not be a "Doraemon" mission like a big vulgar movie to help the protagonist quickly develop skills, understand the market, and provide all necessary support for the protagonist. Crowe, like Hitler in real life, must slowly learn how to become a master, sometimes even paying a high price.
But because it is a genre film, the second half of the movie is entirely a customary plot, completely losing its previous sense of reality. All kinds of chasing and all kinds of misleading in the pursuit are all clichés. As Ebert said, when Crowe turned into a "Gladiator", the movie became boring. Although the movie will make Crowe's hands shake and other details, overall his planning and execution are basically flawless. It takes Omar a lifetime to learn how to rob drug lords. Crowe basically got it overnight, and I don’t want to think if drug lords are so easy to be robbed, what else would they come out to do?
In addition to some of the characteristics of early Crowe's college teachers, the characters are also full of Hollywood colors. Liam Neeson told Crowe at the beginning that in order to escape from prison, he must be prepared to hurt others. This paved the way for Crowe to "do evil" in the future, and also allowed the audience to understand his motives for "as a last resort". At the same time, the film also gave Crowe a lot of plots to prove his justice, such as not robbing the bank, but robbing the drug lords, etc. In short, it is to prevent us from hating the damage he may cause to bystanders, like when the subway brakes suddenly. People who might fall.
Even so, we can still see the good intentions of the director and screenwriter. The clichés are also divided into good execution and bad execution. Higgis's execution is absolutely top-notch. Many scenes are written concisely and concisely, accomplishing the dual tasks of narration and characterization in the most beautiful way. Many details are also quite ingenious. For example, in the four appearances of the single mother, the field functions are different. It is not easy for this kind of little person to develop and function. In addition, many of the details of the film are well designed, and they often have many missions. For example, "Don Quixote" introduces the background and heart of the characters, and also pave the way for the development of the plot and the morality that is actually unreasonable for the film. View to defend.
On the whole, the film has been hovering between exquisite and conventional, even the rhythm. Although the film was slow at the beginning, the overall rhythm is very good. The whole film is almost a classic case of the book "Story". But afterwards, the police's almost hackneyed tactics became cliche every time.
Like the movie, Crowe is the most exercised in this movie, and he also acted in half of the good movies. For some reason, this handsome guy's recent films are not popular, but there are many good-looking films. The previous "Body of Lies" and everything are very good-looking. Moreover, Crowe's acting skills are always excellent. In the first half of the film, he played an English teacher very superbly, but later, Crowe also had to let his role make way for the clichéd plot, so it was not his fault. I think the biggest reason why Hollywood is always looking for Crowe is that William Goldman said that Hollywood doesn’t know what movies will sell, sometimes good movies just don’t sell, but what Hollywood can do is to make good movies as much as possible, and then pray for them to sell. .
Therefore, although the film is not at the box office, it is worthy of the creators. Higgis did not let everyone down. The film was shot in the best genre. To quote Goldman's theory again, a good creator may not be able to make a good movie. There are too many uncertainties from idea to execution to finished product. Therefore, it is commendable for Higgis to continue to encounter such high-quality goods. Although he should be able to produce better films with his potential (for example, the whole film is the same "Three Days Crisis" in the first half), it is already very good to be able to do so.
View more about The Next Three Days reviews
