Well, this is just a title, the heroine's expression is too contrived, the connection between the supporting characters is too blunt, and the scene switching is abrupt - well, I have put up with all of these, even in the scene where the male protagonist appears, such problems still exist As always. . .
Actually, none of these are the big problems of this movie, and I don't want to criticize such a gospel movie at all for these technical reasons. After all, we need to take into account various practical constraints, such as funding. And, as I've discussed with some friends, such a film is strong, out of concern for practical issues of society—or rather, out of concern for neighbors (in the reverse sense of Samaritan's neighbors)— In my opinion, it is far better than some movies with huge investment, crowded stars, grand and beautiful scenes, but only satisfying the dreams of some directors, leaving the society from old to young and confused and chaotic. Blockbusters (a lot of blockbusters in China in recent years have been such a tragic situation).
In my opinion, the biggest problem with this gospel movie is that it doesn't understand the "movie", so it is impossible to use the elements of the script and movie to tell a story that is not only moving but also convincing, and has a deeper thought.
From a person like me who is not even an amateur, the feature of film, or multimedia imaging method, is that it contains a much richer amount of information than a single voice communication. The biggest difference between watching American dramas and Japanese and Korean dramas is here. Most of the former are eager to dump a lot of information on you and bring you into a more vivid scene-to a large extent, it is also a smoke tactic, hehe, while Japanese and Korean dramas have The consistent style is a single-line narrative, and the scene is simple or even similar to a stage play (the most recent comparison is CSI and the Japanese drama BOSS, the latter has the suspicion that painting a tiger is not an anti-dog).
However, the flaw of Japanese dramas - this is a mode of "hard work" in the current mainland and Taiwan idol dramas - is that they like to use language to express the content that is implied in various non-verbal expressions in the daily context. . Well, brake before I seem to be going any farther. . . To make an inappropriate analogy, watching Fireproof feels like an American drama "imitation" of a Japanese drama - the theme is clear, the clues are clear, and there are many deep lines, but the content is too thin and empty. What is uncertain is whether this "imitation" effect can be caused by the screenwriter or director, or is it the result of limited ability?
The above mentioned are just the differences between Japanese dramas and American dramas. The reasons may involve different aesthetics, literary styles, psychological structures, etc. between the East and the West, and I have no intention of digging holes here. But here at Fireproof, in a community of believers and church traditions we are familiar with, we can at least say one thing is clear: the distance between the Protestant tradition of evangelism and the multimedia means of cinema.
Fireproof inserted some humorous passages, such as the one in the bathroom and the part where the "chili sauce" is fired, and the career and life of the male protagonist are also revealed through several rescue events throughout the book, but, from the whole film Judging from the film, these accounts for almost one-third of the content but did not provide any subtle help for the main theme of the film, or the transformation and sublimation of the protagonist's heart - at least the director or screenwriter (or actors?) The touches that may be contained in it are expressed. So much so that in the conversion scene of the male protagonist, which should be the first climax of the whole film, the result is extremely abrupt, although his previous question about why he should love a person who has repeatedly rejected him is very shocking and can indeed guide He turned to Christ's love, but it wasn't enough to convert him (incidentally, it's irritating that the acting is blunt here).
A certain brother said that he can already remember some classic lines in the movie. I'll admit, there's no shortage of classic lines in this movie, and according to some, it's not easy for a movie to have memorable lines - are we talking about Zhou Xingxing? In my opinion, most of the classic lines of this film are actually interpretations from another angle of the doctrines we agree with, and the success of the lines is only a result of the tradition of Christian "words". So, is the film a success? In my opinion, no. As in rational theology, we start from a common problem, and in the process of seeking answers, we gradually turn to a particular belief—belief in Christ. Now, the question is a good one—how love and marriage are created and sustained, but the process of answering it seems too hasty, and it just gives a quick Christian answer, which may not be convincing to those who are not Christians. And it's only expressed through verbal persuasion - it's as if 8 lanes are only used for one lane. For Fireproof, in addition to failing to develop the story sufficiently to make it convincing, it's tempting to question the need for multimedia—why would there be a few more lanes to speak. . .
Words of a hole. . . . . .
I deeply feel that how to spread the gospel beyond words is a problem, not only in the use of multimedia means, but also in the inner and the behavior.
View more about Fireproof reviews
