First of all, no matter how I look at it, I think this is more like a rumored work. Although there are so many fighting scenes, I still feel that it is not enough atmosphere, as the vicissitudes of life with Roman elements is not enough (I want to see these anyway).
Then the technique of linear narrative takes up too much, and the rhythm is a bit fast, which makes people feel that many things that should be explained have been omitted, such as E (Iska)'s loyalty to M (Marcus), which should be received in the middle. It's just that the transition is too fast. It's not that we can't understand it. It's just that we have to talk about the nonsense that should be said. It's like being knocked out by a masked stick on the beach. "I'll kill you when I get a chance." When you see E wakes you up, you should also slap him like a man, get up and stagger a few steps while listening to how E explains or scolds you from behind He said, "You didn't discuss with me before, why are you playing with me?!" That's fine, just say "I thought I'd lost you" and now you don't blame the public for wanting to YY, you have long been secretive to this kid Feelings and how reluctant he is, at this moment the man's self-esteem is in the clouds. There should also be a transition between emotional sublimation. And E is the son of M's enemy leader. When he knew that M was the son of the legion commander who destroyed his people, he would definitely be torn between commitment and revenge. This process should be explained to some extent. Remembering the VCR, you should finally reveal your thoughts to M, who cherishes each other, but there is no such thing. Is this the so-called being carried away by emotions? ? In the end, it seemed that I had given myself and my faith to the man who saved him, so the integrity was gone, the conflicts between the characters were simplified, and the weight of the film was lighter, and it just became "You are the wind and I am the sand. To the end of the world." (Forgive me for this quote...)
After reading it, I'm still wondering if the aunt who wrote the original was sitting in a quiet studio like Jane Austen, with the sunshine outside the window and the fragrance of birds and flowers. The atmosphere of the whole movie is too romantic, whether it's the whole "companion of the world, riding horses galloping", or the "true confession" of the splashing water, etc., is it because it focuses on the relationship between the characters?
There are not too many characters, there are no branching plots, and there are not too many grand scenes. Naturally, the cost is small. But fortunately, the film is dominated by sports men, the pictures are beautiful enough, the soundtrack is also good, and it still does a good job in terms of entertainment.
As for the fact that there is no female character in the film, I think the setting is very interesting. A romantic film like this full of men does not require the intervention of women at all, and it is not hypocritical. It really creates a world of pure men. And even if there is, her only role is to show that our protagonist is heterosexual. "The New York Times" bluntly pointed out the factors of homosexuality, and the film is implied but not explicit, so no one can confirm or deny it, and making arbitrary judgments can only be disrespectful to the original author. Isn't it good to have a setting full of infinite possibilities like this? And the focus of the audience's attention is different, you can't deny other people's rational views. The film still mainly wants to express the protagonists' pursuit and defense of honor, and slowly grow into a revered hero. In this case, what does it have to do with friendship or love between our heroes? Isn't any kind of emotion a good bond? If you are prejudiced, you will never be able to appreciate the charm of art.
This movie is a small cost, whether you watch it as "The Eagle" or "Brokeback Eagle", everyone is happy.
View more about The Eagle reviews
