The lines in the movie, (just remember a sentence or two)
1. Shrinking the body is self-help, which can reduce personal stress, especially financial stress
2. No one wants to work in a small world, the rich will become richer, and the poor are just small
Actually, I was interested in this movie a long time ago, but I don't know why I didn't watch it...
Now, I finally thought of this movie again, and then I was surprised to find that the heroine of the movie was Kristen Wiig. As a result, she finished before the half of the movie...
Then don't be addicted to the heroine, I'll just watch the movie and see what problems can be involved in this shrinking life. However, when I watched the movie later, I discovered a new problem, that is, it seems that the style of the film before and after is different. The style of shrinking the world is talked about in the front, but in the second half, it seems to be talking about the end of the world. (That's the part where they were in Norway).
Well, let me talk about the things I have about shrinking.
At the beginning, when the concept of shrinking community came out, I especially wanted to know how the original human would think of these reduced people?
After all, I am also the person who has seen the canned villain...
That is to say, when a person shrinks, he is definitely no match for "normal" human beings in terms of force. In other words, he cannot pose a threat to "normal" human beings. So, how would a normal human see these shrunken people? It must be very curious at first, like at the beginning of the movie, but then what? When "normal" human beings find that the social and economic value created by the shrinking person is different from that created by themselves, (by economic value, I mean tax payment and contribution to GDP, etc., I believe that if it is In terms of income generation in technology, whether it is "normal" people or shrinking people, the value they create can be equivalent), but they enjoy the same power. Do they feel that they are not equal, so what are they going to do? Will it start to discriminate, isolate, or even hostile?
And then, with regard to the idea of shrinking in the beginning, that is, the same loaf of bread, obviously, shrinking people need less than the average person, so this piece of bread alone can eat for a long, long time. In addition, the wastes eliminated by shrinking people are also much smaller in quality than ordinary people, so it seems that shrinking can reduce the pressure on the environment to a certain extent.
So, first of all, who will actively choose to shrink ? Those environmentalists who intend to guide us to protect the environment and reduce environmental pressure? Or do they force other people to shrink and then sit back and enjoy it? Or is it something else?
To take a step back, when the number of people who choose to shrink reaches a certain level, when the environment can once again meet human needs, or even more than enough, what will the surviving ordinary people do ? Still choose to shrink and stand with all humans? Or, take advantage of their large size to enslave and shrink people? Or simply abandon the shrinking person and continue with a normal life?
As the film progresses, it's truly breathtaking when an actual miniature community comes into view. Was this built by shrunken workers? Or is it 3D printing, or something like a micro-community created directly by ordinary people?
This question is actually quite important, that is, do these shrinking people have their own productivity ? If not, then it means that their production activities are completely controlled by ordinary people, rather than shrinking people themselves.
This largely determines whether they can survive independently of ordinary people.
Next, in the movie, there is another concept about the miniature community that makes people smile, and that is the setting of money .
Although the money is still so much money, because the things in the miniature community are much smaller than the ordinary world, the "purchasing power" of the same money in the two worlds is different.
For example, two dollars can buy a bottle of 350ml of mineral water, but in a miniature community, 1ml of water may be 350ml of water in an ordinary community (for example, it has not passed rigorous calculations).
Economically, of course, as long as there are people in ordinary society, then it is very simple to restock the goods and make huge profits. Whether it is for people in the ordinary community or in the micro-community, (you try, a bottle of ￥2 water is sold for ￥350).
Well, this has led to a person with a relatively tight economy, who needs to work 24 hours a day to barely make a living, after entering the micro-community, he can live a decent life. That's right, he lived, consumed, and lived.
And a rich man, if he feels that he is not rich enough, then when he goes to the miniature community, he will be rich enough to rival the country. This of course exacerbates the gap between rich and poor in tiny communities. Not to mention that there are people who, by accident, (such as those in prisons), enter the micro-community penniless.
In fact, what makes me even more embarrassed is that when Matt Damon's neighbors appeared, that kind of party, that extravagant style, undoubtedly made people feel that it seemed that, when entering a shrinking community, environmental protection was Secondary, go in for consumption, go in to have fun, go in to play is the main thing. This is undoubtedly a luxury consumption.
In fact, when the seemingly beautiful concept of shrinking the community continues like this, many problems will be exposed naturally, and many problems can be directly discussed. However, the story about shrinking the community comes to an abrupt end. One is the one that pisses me off the most.
Well, I hope that after this, someone can seriously discuss this issue.
View more about Downsizing reviews
