To be honest, I think this show is very, very attractive except for those obvious flaws.
I remember seeing a comment before saying: The reason why the rating is so low is because I thought it was an E grade, but it turned out to be a D grade (dog head). As a D-rated film, I may want to be more attractive, and every episode will suddenly come to XX for no reason. However, since the setting of this drama is so, the society uses sex as one of the means to restrain people's thinking, and the relevant scenes are not very explicit, but appear very beautiful through the changes of light and shadow. So I think the astringent picture is a bit abrupt but very reasonable.
Another very criticized place is the bloody love line of the show. A total of 9 episodes are indeed a bit rushed, and the emotional development of the characters is very fast and abrupt. In the beginning John and Lenina suddenly fell in love, me: WTF?? Then the next episode heated up quickly and couldn't leave each other, I think it's okay for them to be able to, think about them, they do have this character foundation. As a result, in the next episode, John couldn't accept Lenina going to XX, and suddenly changed his face. I wonder if the two of you are so close. I can understand the conflict in your heart, but you can't say it properly. (The lines designed by the screenwriter are also clever, and the two people are not on the same channel.), why does John act like a ghost, and the result is from After that, the relationship between the two people was very frustrating. Either good or bad, as an ordinary audience, I feel 10,000 points of hurt, Lenina has feelings for John, the two lie on their chests for a long time, but when John said let's go together and leave here, she said again : I am afraid of you, you bring disaster wherever you go.
me: ↓
So what are you doing on your chest? ! Do you love me or not! Can TMD make logic a little more normal, I feel like I'm hurt!
Another point is that the barbarian settlements in the first two episodes were a bit too much. At first, John was suddenly horrified when he saw the personal background music, and then it turned out that it was not the enemy, but the "opposition" who asked John to help them kill. This is a bit It's bloody. According to the hints of the picture and background music, it is easy for people to think that John was killed. In addition, the "opposition" also appeared in the first two episodes and the last episode. If there is a second season, it can be used as a foreshadowing, but if you watch this season alone, it seems a bit redundant, and the number of episodes is not enough to accommodate that many. It is better to cut off the content and tell other stories well.
Apart from the above mentioned flaws, I think the rest of the content is ok. I haven't read the original book, so I don't feel bad about artificial intelligence that is different from the original book. The most powerful thing is the lines of this drama. The design (the repeated occurrences of the word "fall" and puns, and "tell me about my day" makes me feel the sadness of despair and a little bit of hope), the color and structure of the picture (which can The picture becomes less stark and beautiful), and there are many, many details (hair and costumes when Lenina feels lost, and Hannah's transformation for entertainment).
From the spiritual core, what I feel is the conflict between the so-called human nature and external influences, as well as the discussion of the rationality of the social structure shown in the play.
What is suppressed by sex and soma is the so-called nature, people are inherently sad, angry and jealous. Constraints are formed through external conditioning to form mindsets. To the savages, the people of New London were not real, and could hardly be regarded as human, and to the eyes of the New Londoners, the savages were immoral and abominable. The plot trend in the play is a process in which the nature of New Londoners gradually loses its restraint and the conditioning gradually fails. Of course, as "barbarians", the plot we wrote developed like this, but in the long historical period of mankind, moral concepts and social conditioning have also been changing. Who can say which is better? It can only be that different social forms have different requirements for morality. As for people who are naturally angry and jealous, and soma suppresses this emotion against humanity, I think this nature is difficult to prove. Maybe one day in the distant future, new human beings will not be angry with the things we are angry with. , will not be jealous of what we are jealous of? Everything is unknown. The answer given by the screenwriter of this play is to affirm our current values. Although there is jealousy and violence, but always making oneself "happy" will lose the ability to deal with crises, the society will lose the ability to progress, and the so-called stability will also be touched. i.e. broken. From another point of view, staying happy in ignorance will lose more possibilities of happiness. When the heroine saw the scene of nature where people at the bottom were, she shouted angrily: Why have I never been here? This scene is really shocking. It reminds me that I don't seem to appreciate the beauty of the world. The people in the play are restrained by conditioning and never want to go to other places to visit. What about us? How many of us stay "happy" all day in bed with that little electronic gadget?
In fact, there is also a society like this kind of solidified class performing its own functions in the Divergent movie (in that one is to choose the right group by yourself, which is defined by genes in this play), and there is a line at the back that says: Do you want to be happy or not? free? I think the word freedom has been said badly. In fact, many times people do not want freedom, but equality. Just like in this drama, what people pursue is not freedom but equality. I don't understand why the imagined future society is like this. If the technology in the future is very advanced, why does it still rely on manual labor for basic cleaning and farming? Why keep the position of servant? (To be honest, there is no such setting as servants in society today). Higher people make lower people do lower jobs, this is not equal, what if people have to thank you after every cleaning? Is this inequality due to the job or the way people treat you, or is it due to what you get from your job? The more you think about it, the more unreal the settings in the play seem~ This social system in the play regards stability as the highest pursuit, but the result of everything being stable is the loss of the possibility of progress. In fact, our fundamental goal should not be stability, and there is no society in the world today whose fundamental goal is stability. Progressive evolution, or refusing to change and standing still, is just a simple truth.
View more about Brave New World reviews
