It seems that the male protagonist doesn't wield a knife, just to sublimate the relationship between the male and female protagonists, and conforms to the female protagonist's not killing (especially if she is stopped by the female protagonist, which is particularly embarrassing), which is a bit of putting the cart before the horse. It doesn't reflect the theme at all. The ending can't be shaped. Just imagine, if the male protagonist swung his sword and cut off the life of the villain himself, how strong would the tension be? Certainly not only the ending is so weak and slightly boring. The male protagonist cuts off the villain. At this time, the heroine fainted, and the hero went to pick up the heroine. In the flames, the male protagonist picked up the unconscious female protagonist and walked away. The camera gave it a lonely back shot. Without a line, I met the second male on the road, and the second male mocked the male protagonist as the only line in the second half. Combining the male protagonist's inner entanglement and his vow not to kill, the inner emotional contradictions broke out at this moment. How strong will the tension be? It's definitely not as fucked up as the ending, which cut off the audience's cool point abruptly. If the ending of the movie is arranged for the male protagonist to kneel in front of the tablet in the martial arts hall, and the whole movie ends, how strong will the tension be? In fact, it can be seen in the second half that the director wanted the protagonist to show that he was fighting the era when samurai had to kill with a single person's Bushido spirit (not killing people). (It can be seen from the lines of the second male at the end.) The director wanted to express the changes of the whole era of the samurai at that time. The new era is an impact on Japan's traditional forces.
But since the male protagonist didn't kill people, the idea is very unclear. The audience was dumbfounded and felt inexplicable. To be complete and complete.
In the first half, the narrative is purely for the sake of foreshadowing. The plot can basically be guessed. The length of the film itself is only two hours, which is very long. It is easy for the audience to lose their attention. , The coolness is uneven, and the first half of the story is not able to attract the audience at all, and only read the first half of the narrative. Really persuaded. If I hadn't known that the later play was very exciting, I wouldn't have been able to watch it for two hours (I only watched it three times myself anyway). But there are really films in China that can achieve a high degree of unity of action and narrative. For example, the master played by Liao Fan is the real narrative and action, and the cool points are unified. Really let the audience watch it, but they don't realize it's over (it has been added to the supplementary film, and those who like to watch action films must make it up). In general, the plot has seriously affected the quality of the whole film. The fighting is so good, why does the plot have to be drawn like this?
Another point, the samurai expression in the film is also very comprehensive, anyway, it is really the ultimate performance of the action scenes, and the plot is also pulled to the end. As far as I like it, I unify the two, but his storyline is too much, which is why I gave him three stars.
Maybe it's because I heard a lot of people say it looks good before I watched it before, and my expectations were too high. It feels too bad to feel bad now.
It is true that the greater the expectations, the greater the disappointment. Good as an action movie. It's worth watching, but if you want to discuss the impact of the Meiji Restoration on the traditional samurai in Japan at that time in this plot, forget it.
Discussions are welcome.
View more about Rurouni Kenshin Part I: Origins reviews
