dehumanize

Casey 2022-03-24 09:03:15

This film is the collision of philosophy and morality, but both of them only have an effect on people. The mainstream understanding is: philosophy is the philosophy of morality, and morality is the morality of philosophy. Like the physical boundary experiment, the doomsday basically brings both of these to zero, in this case, I think it is wrong to overemphasize the pull on one hand, because the current does not apply to the doomsday at all, these must be pushed to the beginning, survival It should be mentioned first, even if it destroys humanity!
Leaders, dictatorship or democracy, leaders are indispensable! The first two leaders were mentors. He was dictatorial and cold-blooded. Tyrants could describe him vividly. Ying Zheng was an appropriate template. The first time, the first time without him, the leader is a necessity, like air, you can't feel him, but he is necessary, and it is a group, he is not good, but indispensable; Second, a bad leader can cause internal disintegration. The third time, the leader became the heroine and the french fries man. The former is too ideal and the latter is easy to meet. In my opinion, they are not good leaders because there is no hope! They go to different extremes! As far as I can see, a good leader must be a mix of the three, rational, able to give up when sacrifices are needed, ideal, have a vision for the future, follow suit, and know how to adjust properly! Li Shimin is a good template!
I designed the fourth experiment: the tutor decided to choose one of the two at random. He is the rule maker, so if a pair of lovers are separated, given their love, a place will inevitably be vacated. At this time, the substitute is naturally the tutor himself. He is the leader of course, and since he can survive on his own for a year, it shows that he is competent enough to be a leader and lead everyone to survive with the shelter as the center! Then it's time to rebuild the annihilated humanity!

View more about After the Dark reviews

Extended Reading
  • Sunny 2022-03-30 09:01:08

    The name is beautiful, the poster is beautiful, but the plot and actors are too stupid

  • Roscoe 2022-03-17 09:01:07

    The director's idea is actually very good. It can be seen that he tried very hard to express his meaning, but he was too deliberate, but it seemed a bit artificial. . . A good actor is wasted and the leading actor is a very charming person. The leading actress is so ugly to death, but she pretends to be so nauseous as a goddess that I want to vomit. . . The supporting actors have many highlights.

After the Dark quotes

  • [Mr. Zimit just announced to the class that they'll conduct a final big thought experiment, about survival during a global cataclysm]

    Chips: But what kind of cataclysm are we talking about? Gamma ray burst? Pandemic? Erupting super volcano? A sudden shift in the Earth's axis rotation? Grey goo?

    Mr. Zimit: Hang on, Chips, we'll get there.

    Chips: But is it biological? Geological? Thermo-nuclear? Meteorological?

    Mr. Zimit: Let's go old school. Say... atomic.

  • [In the third iteration, Petra waives her own eligibility, and now announces who receives the last remaining bunker slot]

    Petra: Bonnie, get inside.

    Bonnie: I'm a soldier, I know how to knock things down. You're an engineer, you know how to build things up. I'm not worth as much.

    Petra: My logic's fuzzier. In my apocalypse, everybody is worth as much as everybody else.

    Bonnie: I'm not letting you sacrifice yourself to save me.

    Petra: I won't let *you* sacrifice yourself to save me.

    Bonnie: Then we'll both go up in smoke, and you'll have wasted a slot for someone to live.

    [Petra then asks Chips instead of Bonnie for the last bunker slot]