The outline of the story is actually not complicated. Several soldiers on the border between North and South Korea, under the circumstances of "no war on the Western Front", had contacts in private. Of course, under the very severe political situation, this kind of communication can be described as trembling, full of temptation, and implied deep vigilance. So, in an accident, a tragedy inevitably happened: the two sides were finally on the verge of breaking out, and the last remaining survivors were sent to the trial court - things like shooting at the north-south border, of course, could easily rise to a very serious height. The story begins with the investigation of the incident, using flashbacks to unfold the whole truth. The two sides first rattled swords and blamed each other, and then of course our protagonist went deep into the investigation, and the result was unexpected: it was not a premeditated political event at all, but an accidental event that happened out of control in such a political mood. As a result, all those who were touched, including the audience, fell into contemplation.
Confrontation or Convergence? Maybe that's not the main topic, the main thing is the sense of absurdity when the truth finally comes out. Except for the unpleasant faces of some politicians (in fact, this film is quite good), none of the main characters are vilified, they are all ordinary, and the starting point of doing things is also very simple , is such a group of people, but in the end, guns were shot at each other, blood was flowing, and the tragedy of the story was revealed. Aside from this, this early film of this type is very tense and the characters are vividly portrayed. From the perspective of artistic appreciation, it is indeed a good film.
Perhaps this kind of film started to be successful, so a lot of it came out all of a sudden. Like "Silmi Island", although there is no brain, it is very masculine. Although the characters are no longer ordinary people, they basically follow the mortal tone of the past, and they can also be viewed as entertainment films. It's just that politicians have begun to play a more important role, and an emotion that was not directly expressed in "Life and Death" has gradually spread. Absurdity is no longer an atmosphere, but it is indeed pointed, that is, blaming the guilt on politics.
When it comes to "The Tai Chi Flag Flying", such a wave can be considered to have reached its peak! The protagonist of the film is no longer a civilian, and is comparable to Rambo: he first became a fighting hero in South Korea, and then his relatives were shot because he received relief food from the volunteer army. The hero of the strong red flag regiment! Later, the protagonist meets his younger brother serving in South Korea during an attack and is awakened from the killing. In the end, in order to cover his younger brother's retreat from being killed, he picked up his machine gun and turned around to fire at the Red Flag Regiment... Of course, he was beaten into a beehive.
After watching this film, I was simply dizzy. Such a brute force like a killing machine, who trades between enemy camps, makes a war meaningless. Of course, we can immediately start to sympathize with him: because he has no choice, he just doesn't believe in any doctrine, and he is dedicated to his family. Isn't that what Mel Gibson's "The Patriot" means. The so-called political positions are the affairs of politicians. For ordinary people, war is nothing but a disaster. What's wrong with the common people who received the relief food? All fell victim to...
Yes, there is a lot more to say about this. Just like those veterans recalled that year, they said that in the end, no one fought for the so-called political position or some doctrine, and in the end, only the life-and-death friendship between comrades in arms could be maintained. This is the origin of "Band of Brothers". When I hear this, I often feel bitter, because at this time life is not in my own hands, all the people shoot for no reason, and try not to think that the strangers killed are also flesh and blood and brothers. In the early days of the war, those soldiers who were afraid of death were ridiculed and despised by everyone, but later on, although people did not think highly of them, they had sympathy. This is obvious: when a group of people have encountered nothingness together, if they survive, the friendship is for a lifetime. Just like people hug each other after the plane made a successful crash landing, the rescued hostages hug each other and cry, and the survivors of the Titanic meet every year... This is indeed the deepest part of human nature.
However, when such a commercial film is in front of me, I have to start to fall into another kind of unease. Once upon a time, such an abstract humanistic trend of thought was louder than any other voice, which could not help but remind people of the eulogies of universal love for super-class, super-ethnic, and transnational in a certain era. We've all seen how such a utopia unravels the veil of falsehood, so the question to ask now is: Who exactly does such a film support?
The most impressive thing is that when the protagonist was a South Korean soldier, seeing the Chinese border, everyone secretly thought that they could go home for the New Year in the trenches. At this moment, I don't know who called out: "The volunteers are here!" The protagonist looked up and saw the red flags rushing towards the mountains and fields. When the Volunteer Army's combat effectiveness is so amazing, of course, my heart is hot and my national pride is greatly increased, but I know very well that in this film, the Volunteer Army does not represent another sovereign country, but is regarded as destiny, as a flood and a beast. of. If you look at it, you will even be as desperate as the protagonist, because the hope of going home for the New Year is dashed, and the war will continue endlessly.
When the protagonist can turn around and fire on his comrades a minute ago, justice and kindness are completely wiped out. It not only subverts the concept of politics, but also subverts all other right and wrong and values. Even if it is the family affection that is held in the hand as a life-saving straw, there will be only the purely external connection of blood. why? Because the so-called doctrine is regarded as a kind of discourse power, and now it is necessary to subvert it, and the individual must fight against this value that was once regarded as a universal good. However, the problem is that the individual can never win after overthrowing the former universal value, Because once this individual wins, for example, he declares that he does not fight for the country or faith, but for brotherhood, if such subversion gains positive recognition, brotherhood will inevitably become a new discourse power, and then itself will be subverted— - This dissolving force is bound to always turn itself into an object to be dissolved, which means that it cannot have any value, and it means that the content of human nature is completely emptied. Obviously, this so-called universal theory of human nature after abstracting all the real content can only lead to a kind of ruined nihilism in the end.
It can also be reminiscent of the previously banned "Towards the Republic", not to mention Li Hongzhang, from Yuan Shikai to Cixi have been beautified to varying degrees, we can even shed tears of sympathy for them. The details are all real historical data, which makes people even more wondering whether we have ever been deceived by an idea that is not our own. It is not only today that we begin to feel such a questioning of traditional discourse represented by textbooks, a general suspicion that is a shadow of contemporary post-metaphysical nihilism, the long night of the techno-medieval, where "all history is Under the slogan of "Contemporary History", people are scrambling to smash those once grand themes and institutions, and show off their more extreme betrayals. However, perhaps many things written in textbooks are not as real as those in TV dramas, and perhaps Li Hongzhang is more noble and respectable than the characters in the drama, but such a practice of subverting the historical truth with the truth of the details is still dangerous and fallen. In fact, such an approach is at best a continuous self-disintegration of value, which can never lead to a more hopeful tomorrow.
View more about Joint Security Area reviews
