On the other hand, "Ink"'s grasp of the details of the image and narrative is astonishing. The image of the whole film wanders between virtual focus and real focus, and the whole film is immersed in a vague dreamland - just like the film's focus on "dream". Interestingly, no matter the image or the story, the film strives to create a kind of dream, as if to remind the audience that this is a film about dreams, but the final theme of the film does not fall on dreams, the narrative of "dream". The premise has also become dispensable. But in terms of form alone, it's still worth a look.
The opening scene of the film orients the theme of the film to the impact of the accident, but until the end, it is unclear how big that impact will be. It doesn't seem to matter to me. Even another car accident can lead to two very different outcomes, and the root cause of the problem is not brought about by the accident. For the accident, a scene in the middle and back of the film is a repeat of the car accident at the beginning of the film, but this scene perfectly demonstrates the difficult scene scheduling skills. There is a close connection between the various characters and details, switching back and forth in countless close-ups, and the emotions are grasped with great precision without falling out of the way.
The discussion of the fate of details and accidental events permeates the entire history of the film. It can be traced back to the time of Chaplin. In recent works, "Rejuvenation" and "Butterfly Effect" have been deeply discussed. In Hong Kong movies, "Accident" has also systematically discussed this topic. As far as this scene in "Ink" is concerned, its ingenious connection of details even surpasses that of "The Butterfly Effect". In my opinion, this scene saved the whole movie. But from the other side, "Ink" is left behind.
View more about Ink reviews
