A certain woman, after falling in love with a certain man, finds that she cannot become a partner because she is not in the right household. In addition to the pain, the woman followed the teachings of her mother, who was a prostitute, and devoted herself to the porn industry, inheriting her mother's mantle. The man also subsequently completed his political marriage.
That's how the story should have ended, like a thousand other unrequited love stories.
But they don't. Thus, a pet prostitute and a married woman began their "love affair". This love is so conspicuous that when the prostitute was framed and guilty, the married woman used her identity as a senator to overturn the case and save the prostitute's life. The two lived happily ever after.
The most fake place, the trial.
First of all, the trial itself is very nonsensical, because the crime is actually "witchcraft". If you want a prostitute to master witchcraft, she has to know it. Well, since the plague in Venice has caused panic, the rulers need to give a gap for the populace to vent their anger, and the era of prostitutes is indeed over, so grudgingly admit the accusation.
The defense didn't get much better either. Marco kept saying that Veronica's trial was a "private grudge", so was his unauthorized remarks in court in the "public interest". Is there any wider meaning besides preserving the life of his mistress. If this woman is not his mistress, will she still risk her death to defend her in court? Is this a non-"personal grievance" hysterically emphasizing her status as a senator. very funny.
One funny versus another funny showdown.
But obviously, the defense's antics are more brilliant. Because another apologist appeared - the godmother. The background of the godmother is very clear in the front, and she hopes that her daughter will be disciplined by Veronica and become a new generation of prostitutes. Even though Veronica pointed out to her the fate of some despicable prostitutes, and taught her not to watch thieves eat meat, but also to watch thieves be beaten, the godmother remained infatuated. So, when she saw that her idol was dying, her godmother said, "If she is a witch, then all the women in the city are." Well, poor women of Venice, you have a great godmother who gave you a great title.
It's not over yet.
In the end, the Prime Minister waited for all the prostitutes to stand up in court, and the plot of admitting that he was the "lover" of the prostitute was even more false. Let's psychologically analyze why they stand up, because of the so-called "love" for their pet prostitute? Obviously not. Why else would they have to pay for the night, a question that seems to have been avoided by everyone in the courtroom. And even if it is, can so many people really share this "love", ignoring everyone else's standing up? Please forgive me for not thinking that human beings are such a simple group, at least not in Italy at that time, otherwise there should be no marriage. Or is it because you can't bear to watch the woman you've had a relationship with die? Then what do you think of the main room listening to the judgment on the side? Going out to go to prostitutes is not enough, and he even stood up and said, "Yes, it's the uncle that I went to prostitute." Speechless. Or even if the main family can pass the test, in the Middle Ages when political marriages are all over, wouldn't the maiden's family come to ask for trouble? No matter how you look at it, there are more reasons for not standing up.
It seems that the director wants to sublimate this "love" to the end, so the subtitles of the ending are even more shocking-they live happily ever after. Is it true? Can't take it anymore, go check it out.
The film is based on the biographical novel The Honest Courtesan. And Veronica has someone in history. Positioning is Veronica Franco (1546–1591) was an Italian poet and courtesan in 16th century Venice. One poet, two favorite prostitutes. At that time, there were two kinds of prostitutes in Venice. The high-end pet prostitute was called the cortigiana onesta, and the common warbler was called the cortigiana di lume. Veronica is said to be the most famous of the high-end courtesans. In 1955, Veronica left Venice to escape the plague, and after returning to Venice in 1957, she managed to get rid of the "miko" accusation. There is evidence that she was exonerated because of her inextricable ties to the Venetian nobles. There is evidence that her connections among the Venetian nobility helped in her acquittal.
The above historical record is a development trajectory that is more reasonable in any way. Then when the historical facts and the movies are combined to look at it -
yes, it is false in the so-called "love".
The only place where the movie doesn't match the historical fact is in the fictional Marco and his "love". It was so abrupt when the director tried his best to add the main line of love into the historical background, so that it created an absurd scene in the final court. In fact, it is possible for the nobles to help Veronic to clear the charges, but it is impossible for them to stand up collectively to defend without prior consultation. It is possible for a prostitute to have a bleak evening because of her expulsion (Although her fate is largely uncertain, she is believed to have died in relative poverty.), and it is impossible for a lover to be happy forever. Just like countless death row prisoners will come to their senses before they die, it is possible for a prostitute to say some high-sounding words, but it is therefore impossible to change the outcome of the trial.
I fully understand what the director wants to say, even prostitutes have the right to love, and this love can move the world (such as godmothers and identifiable clients), change fate, and be happy with xxx. But don't use such a fake way, on the basis of reasonableness, surprise the audience and surprise the audience.
Do not vomit quickly. above.
View more about Dangerous Beauty reviews
