Watching the movie from the perspective of "Australia"
(Text: Vulcan Ji)
I'm wondering why many people don't like this movie. What we cannot deny is that the difference of regional culture dominates the objectiveness of what we think. When we feel that we are objectively criticizing something, we have unconsciously carried the deepest cultural glasses of our entire nation. to watch.
I dare not say that I am very objective - I just hope to interpret the world as I perceive it in an egoistic way.
- Vulcan Ji. Inscription.
First of all, I really hated the horrible translation of "Australia" when this movie was introduced. This in itself has defined the film; and this subjective and strong imposition will mislead us. Why are many people saying that this movie is just a copycat version of "Gone with the Wind", and some media in the mainland are also promoting it in the name of "Australian version of "Gone with the Wind"; this itself It is a subjective inducement to us innocent movie fans.
The naming inducement set a tone for the film - troubled times, love; then it seems natural for the media to intervene. With both love and troubled times, it doesn't seem too strange to mention "Gone with the Wind".
What I can't accept is that people clearly name this film after the country, but why do they have to subjectively add a frame to it, and call it a euphemistic name-this is a free translation rather than a transliteration. Does the name of the country of Australia have the taste of "chaotic times" and "love", or Australia should have been translated in this way, and the four big characters of "Australia" that we used before were originally mistranslated.
Whether fans still have to be led by the nose today is the question. It's important that no one subjective point of view is representative of everyone's point of view. Whether the person who translated this film and named it will be complacent is out of my control, but I have my reasons for expressing my opinion. Free translation - whether it's properly translated or not, there will always be people who can't be satisfied. All I'm asking for - just translate the original movie name as authentically as possible, and that's enough, isn't it?
To name an imported film, the mainland might as well learn from Hong Kong. Although it is only separated by a water, it is the free translation of the free translation, the transliteration of the transliteration; and even if it is a free translation, the translated name in Hong Kong is always much more authentic than the translation in the mainland - the title party and the self-righteous translation method is actually unacceptable. of. I don't know, when will China's film introduction mechanism understand this simple truth?
How we look at a movie and from what angle we look at it will affect our final impression of the entire movie. Sometimes, it's not that a movie isn't well done, it's the cultural context in which we live that limits our perspective and thus reduces our aesthetic strength and depth. I don't dare to blame people who don't like this movie very much, but I have my own way of interpreting it.
If we are tolerant enough, we can think about this issue from another angle; if we also have such a movie: invest 130 million US dollars as funds, let a local director who has been recognized as an international film master to work hard Directed, brewed for ten years, equipped him with the most sophisticated production team in the world, and international powerful actors, it took him a year to create a big international blockbuster, depicting a certain historical stage of our country, and finally with the The name of our country named this film, and the final cut is a super blockbuster with a length of 165 minutes... How would we look at such a film, and whether we would have a different perception of such a film Woolen cloth.
First of all, what will rise from the bottom of our hearts will never be the memory of a similar movie, but a sense of national pride and recognition, whether it is all those historical events that we are already familiar with, or along the way. The beautiful scenery that we have turned a blind eye to. And from this point of view, we would give the film a very high preconceived score first.
Secondly, when we watch the movie on such a basis, we have a preconceived overall impression, we no longer criticize and blame the movie too harshly, and we become more tolerant.
Of course, you'll say, we're not Australian, so we can put that tolerance aside. So we made the same mistakes as the Australians - we were always overly tolerant of local films, we were always too critical of non-local films; of course, there were also some of them who tried to get their way out of the blockbuster blockbuster. , so in their eyes, it is not too much to chase and fight blindly regardless of race, nationality, or quality, as long as that movie can bring them enough attention.
In my opinion, these three attitudes are not healthy enough. Instead, we should perhaps be a little more strict with our own films; because our opinions ultimately shape the future direction of our films. And maybe we should be more tolerant of foreign movies; because most of the time we go to the cinema, we just want to have fun, why should we be so inhumane. As for those chasing sectarian views, I ignore them most of the time.
I remember saying that no matter how bad a movie is, there will always be something to it. After all, people who invest in making movies are not fools. Let them invest in making a movie that is completely meaningless, and they won't do anything. A movie is created from its script, to attracting investment to find a director to negotiate actors, from finding a venue to post-production, and finally it finally enters the theater when it is fully presented in front of our eyes - which part of it is not After countless hard work and countless days and nights of overtime.
Therefore, we should give due respect to any film; even if the final effect of the film still makes us feel unsatisfactory, should we also pay attention to the creation of those who have invested countless energy and time for this film give due respect. Watching any movie with this kind of respect, perhaps, we won't be like some people, who are just like some people.
Let's go back to the movie, if it sucks -- it's not bad; and it's well-made. Of course, it depends on where you put the bad height; if you raise the bad height to "non-classical is bad", then 99% of the movies can be called bad films.
Judging from the design of the plot, it also has a beginning and an end, with a climax and an ending; judging from the cast of actors, the sexy and glamorous Nicole Kidman, the elegant and handsome Hugh Jackman (Hugh Jackman), plus a clear, innocent and mysterious Brandon Walters, who also poured out the show, is there much to question about such a cast; and After seeing Baz Luhrmann's "Romeo + Juliet" and the arguably classic "Moulin Rouge!", who wrote and directed Baz Luhrmann, who can doubt his abilities.
A story with dramatic tension is used as foundation, big investment + good team are used as pastels, and efforts are made to create makeup techniques - a good makeup artist has a kind of rottenness even on a mediocre face. Fantastic effect; not to mention, the face is not too bad except for being a little pale.
We'd even love this movie if we knew what Australia was like. Brendan Waters was cast in the film as a neat touch - Australia itself is an immigrant country, a nation made up of native Aboriginal and foreign peoples, for a mix of European and native Aboriginal, They have a stronger sense of identity.
Using a clear child's voice as the narration of this story gives this somewhat pale story a bit of childishness; what can we say, no matter how we look at this story, this story itself is a Children have the most direct perception of love and war. As the so-called child's words have no taboos, coupled with a child's immature world view and values, this story can directly remove some technical cover-ups and return to simplicity.
New World. Glory of pioneers. The ultimate realization of the dream and the acquisition of a sense of honor. love. cause. What crazy reveries all these words can bring us. And this story, which seems to belong to a man, has chosen a woman as the practitioner of all this. We can't help but say that it has made a relatively successful attempt in terms of perspective.
The American Western was moved to Australia, and the story of CowBoy was castrated into CowGirl. How many stories would happen between a weathered veteran, a noble widow from Europe, and a lovely indigenous child. In the depths of the ancient Australian continent, how many stories have happened; when a civilized nation drove a mighty fleet to settle on an undeveloped continent, they brought advanced culture and barbaric conquests, which are part of civilization. An omen or disaster; when a more brutal militarism roars with planes laden with machine guns and bombs, an otherwise peaceful life can only be more thoroughly blown up...
Perhaps, Australia is a tolerant continent; they may have forgiven the old Europeans, but will they forgive the more savage Japanese? After the transition, how will a country treat its own history that has become the past?
Brandon Waters once said sadly in this movie - biracial. I am neither black; nor am I white. I; half and half. I; is the generation that was stolen. This sets a bleak tone for the whole film - the lack of belonging; it's just the bleakness of Nullah alone, or the bleakness of the entire Australian nation. For the native indigenous peoples, because of the influx of foreigners, home is no longer home; a large number of foreigners leave their homeland to come to this place, whether the home they miss is the hot land they are trying to build in front of them; and the mixed race, The feeling in this regard is perhaps the deepest and most urgent.
Australia used to have some inhumane national policies towards the "stolen generation". Although times have changed, how does a country treat the mistakes it once had? In 1973, the Australian government abandoned the original aboriginal assimilation policy; 2008 In 2018, the Prime Minister of Australia formally apologised to the "stolen generation".
Why do we never pay attention to the humanitarian light reflected in the movie. It's very boring, even very vicious, to keep pulling someone's pigtails without seeing the radiance of humanity in that person.
If we look at this movie from the perspective of "Australia", not from the perspective of that terrible "Australian Troubled Times"; if we can put ourselves in the national point of view of Australia This movie, rather than stand on the other side of the ocean to watch this movie; if we forget the futility of the title party, if we are more sincere in our own perception... In fact, we only need to grasp one of these ifs ; perhaps, we are not so ignorant and ridiculous.
It may be healthier to apply our viciousness to this film to a domestic blockbuster - for example, "Chibi". It is also a big investment movie, it is also a collection of stars, it is also directed by international film masters, and it is also a historical drama... But why do we always like flashy movies like "Red Cliff", and don't like to focus more on human nature. The humanitarian spirit of Australia.
Just because "Chibi" is a domestic film, while "Australia" is an imported film? In my opinion, "Australia" is more than a notch better than "Chibi". It's not that I am arrogant to others and destroy my own prestige; rather, we must have such a vision, an aesthetic tendency - to use an almost harsh attitude to promote the further development of Chinese films, and to look at it with an entertaining attitude Introduce movies. This is the correct viewing attitude that our generation should have.
Blindly xenophobic and even more blindly self-proclaimed, have we regressed to the ignorant era of closed-door isolation in pre-modern prehistory? In fact, the dream of heaven and kingdom has been shattered early in the morning, but the pride of the nation has blocked our eyes, allowing us to see things we want to see with a short-sightedness, and let us always turn a blind eye to things we don’t want to see.
But when we stop and think about it, do we understand that when our national pride is so surging, are we hurting the national pride of others?
2009-02-05; The 11th day of Xinsi, the first month of Bingyin, the year of the ugly ox; Taijun's mother's birthday.
-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
P.S.: Movie information extension link.
■Title: "Australia"
■Translation: "Australia", "Australia"
■Director: Baz Luhrmann
■Starring: Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman (Hugh Jackman), Brandon Walters
Genre: Adventure, Western, War, Drama
Duration: 165 min
Origin: United States, Australia
Language: English
Color: Color
Mix: Dolby Digital Surround Sound, Digital Cinema System, SDDS
Format: 35mm Anamorphic Film
Production Cost: $130,000,000
Production Company: 20th Century Fox Films
Distribution Company: 20th Century Fox Netherlands
Premiere Date: 2008 November 26, 2009 (Australia)｜January 28, 2009 (China)
View more about Australia reviews
