I have a strong feeling in the process of watching: the director must be the same person as the male protagonist, a sanctimonious hypocrite who is full of benevolence, righteousness and morality but is indifferent to others. He talks about understanding, respect and love, but he is actually indifferent to his own sins. Wearing the mask of an adult downplaying or even ignoring its influence, he habitually pays attention to the people at the bottom, and takes it for granted that he does not need to pay attention to the people above the bottom. A handsome but not serious face, a personality who thinks he is self-indulgent but only wants to distance himself when the crisis comes. The Beast of the Upper Class is very interesting, but the girl's plot made me a little uncomfortable, "Is there no one to help her immediately?", "Why the beast doesn't violate men", although I know it is likely that the director did it on purpose, but still produced such a pain. The design of the two daughters is necessary, and the silence and expressionless faces of the biological children are the best feedback. If this is a midlife crisis story, then you can directly criticize the director and screenwriter. If not, then there is still a need to discuss it. However, in fact, it should be more anxiety about "political correctness", which is quite good. It took about sixty or seventy percent. If you watch this movie with this concept from the beginning, it may be much better. If you understand all the circumstances of the male protagonist from this level, you will like this movie more. But if you watch it without anything at first, some viewers may have a lot of negative comments on this movie. For example, I really don't like this movie very much. The long and empty long shots are annoying, and the excessive dialogue in the first half also makes you feel like a thorn in your throat (Mr. Li.jpg), but fortunately I passed by the water, otherwise I really can't see the end. The composition of the lens is good, but it seems blunt and deliberate, as if shooting a PPT. The theme soundtrack is a bit interesting, but it's just a bit interesting, and it's a bonus if you have to stand by. The male protagonist's exhibition looks a bit pediatric, similar to what we discussed in college. The only bright spot is that when you choose to "trust others", you have to put down your mobile phone and wallet when you enter the door. It is more like a splicing of multiple stage plays than a movie. The presence of female journalists is optional. The change in attention at the press conference was ironic. The confusion and embarrassment caused by the symposium's Touretteers and the hypocritical refutation of freedom of speech have also become a slightly tense contradiction. The most important little boy (is it the most important, it seems to be, but there is not much space for it) can't be found in the end, like Lu Xun's kite, but that kind of remorse takes a two-and-a-half-hour movie It is not as good as a novel written by Uncle Lu Xun that can be read in ten minutes. This movie cuts those damn long takes in half and makes it an hour, I guess it will look better.
View more about The Square reviews
