(Spoilers are available) This is the kind of very manly and thick film I have been looking forward to for a long time. "Rough" here. . . . The noise is coarse. A film with a fast exposure speed will be very coarse when taken in a dark place. The grossness of this movie has no precedent in the past ten years. At a glance, the British director of photography. Sure enough, rough. As for "man", it means being able to hold on to the point of view to be said in a sense of integrity. The political films of the past year were all impotence. The two films "nothing but the truth" and "State of the Play" that criticize American politics are both ambitious at the beginning to expose the conspiracy of those in power, and finally through the characters’ children’s love, the moral and justice that can be expressed at the climax. Feeling, all as a condom, sneaked out of the toilet. This film, as a political action film, is more protective of its own subject's chastity. Although this film describes the scene of war, it is not a so-called "war film". The kind of "Field Platoon", "Black Hawk Landing", and "Saving Private Lane" are war movies that focus on the growth of soldiers and emotional trends. Sissy narcissism. These fragile people in the face of war showed their deep humanity, and thus understood that life, the meaning of survival, and other nonsense, are all brainwashing for the public or venting rebellious emotions. You suddenly realized that in savoring the meaning of life, "emotions" make you intolerant of cruel killing and enslavement in front of you. When you burst into youthful hormones and wanted to vent your inner violent tendencies, you were caught upright by the state machinery. When you gave up your right to free choice and fell into a forbidden military camp, sorry, the unfortunate fact is that no one would kneel down. Thank you for freeing them or defending them. The soldiers in the Green Zone are all efficient killing machines, going straight to the target and completing the mission. Career terminator. The characters in the film, from Saddam’s dictator generals, dedicated soldiers, authoritative spies, ambitious Pentagon lackeys, contradictory names, and Freddie, who both values wisdom and courage. Emotional clues or psychological clues of life perception. Every character in the story is a symbol. They all represent a kind of "values." What Dabing wants is the most direct and simple professional meaning, which is no different from Miss Universe's goal-world peace; The head of the CIA is to implement the most effective and unsuccessful new dictatorship. Of course, Saddam was cultivated by them in the past (but he does not admit that the status of the CIA is different from that of the Vietnam War); the Pentagon special commissioner represents it. The interest groups of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld-find reasons to spend taxpayers' money to make weapons (creating new disputes is the best way), find oil, find people to rebuild Iraq and lend them money; "Spades "General Gou", trying to judge the situation and judge the situation is a stumbling block. . . . When these symbols representing different values collide simply and rudely for their own purposes, the story begins. Seven years after the Iraq war, people on the earth may no longer pay attention to the story of the US government fabricating weapons of mass destruction, and will not buy tickets because of this, but the mainstream audience's expectation of world peace is still constant. So when the pure and honest soldier Miller questioned the search for the show, to for the real peace in Iraq, to form an alliance with the CIA, prepare to keep the general, and install a new dictatorship, we all recognized his values and hope that he can win. At the same time, when we saw the cover-ups of the Washington commissioners and the black-box operations, and the extravagance of American speculators in the Green Zone, we saw the cold blood and greed of the aggressors and despised their values. We hope they will be Not what you want. But suddenly an old Iraqi kidnapper rushed out and said to Dabing, do you think we passers-by, A, B, and C are just to help you achieve what you want? Are we just for your reward? We are patriotic! My legs are donated to the country! I also hope you can help me realize my wish! What a profound and vivid lesson. But we spectators have long been accustomed to Iraqi citizens who have no right to say anything, so we don't believe that they have any dreams, desires, and values anymore. But the first lesson of the old crutches tells you, this story, don't forget the values of our Iraqis! The soldier seemed to understand, but in the end there was no second political lesson that could surpass the old crutches. I don’t have Jason Bourne here When the skill and wisdom of the soldier was about to succeed with his own luck, the old crutches used the pony-like capable marksmanship to shatter the dream of the soldier. In all political struggles, the final victor can tell the loser in earnest words, don’t be sad, this is fate. The old crutches is the victor of this story, and he has also become the character of the highest level of values. "This is not something you can decide." The climax of the film is more violent for soldiers than a rocket. But isn't it? Your mistake was not because you came to Iraq because of lies or the wrong reasons. Your mistake was thinking that you could use some kind of pretext to invade a sovereign country. All Americans in the story have always guided their aggression with imperialist values, thinking that this is an act of justice. Actually, what right do you have to do this or that in other countries? Understand that no matter how you want to arrange our country, this is aggression, not justice, is the key. Paul Greengrass slapped a loud slap in the face, stunned. Too man, this is the attitude that political films should have. What I'm talking about is that it's wrong for the United States to invade others, and it's wrong for the United States to point fingers at others. Iraq is to be mastered by the old lame man in Iraq. Conservatives in the United States will immediately label this director as a communist. Who will let him advocate letting the proletarian poor be the masters of the house?
View more about Green Zone reviews
