Unexpectedly, I, who was full of American personal heroism, really took a bite. The plot setting of "five fathers and one mother" can still refresh the audience's three views. Of course, like the general public, after watching the movie, I also had doubts about the fundamental question of "whose children belong to", which is deeply rooted in Chinese traditional culture for thousands of years. It seems that either the key plot was cut across the board by the radio and television, or the director committed the fault of the third uncle of the Southern School - dug a big hole and didn't fill it.
After being brushed off the three views, I recalled the movie again, and felt that it was not so pure anti-personal heroism. Because, although the movie spends a lot of space dealing with the conversation between the soldiers, it does not clearly describe the characters of each soldier, making the audience feel that there is little difference between each person. (Thanks to the high praise comment for reminding me of this) So it can probably be understood that five warriors fit into one person, creating a myth of personal heroism. (I don't know if soldiers are like this in real wars. Thank you for your efforts to make me so unfamiliar with this problem.)
So what did the large-scale language description do without clearly describing the character of the soldiers? I think it's probably emotional. Since this is the conclusion, the intended audience of this movie must not be the majority of male audiences who go to the cinema to enjoy the audio-visual feast, but a small group of emotional, literary and artistic minorities who are willing to bring their own experience. emotional people. This point is very similar to the film and television works of the Celestial Dynasty, no matter what people do and what stories they play, they must be love as the main body. But our domestic dramas are too straight to the bone, usually the rough and rough visual sense of "Mom, if you don't marry me, I will stand here forever". With this key, it is not difficult to understand why our TV works will be praised by the vast audience as long as the plays that depict emotional movements in a little detail.
But the war is destined to be cruel. Probably the real part of the whole film is only after the failure of the previous operation. It is said that the commentary of the Red Army in the Battle of Stalingrad only survived for 24 hours. Thanks again to these warriors who fought against fascism. And this film can probably only satisfy the senses of the niche literary youth, after all, every shot is picturesque.
Is such a literary-oriented war film destined to be the object of criticism? Wouldn't it be a bad idea to focus on the emotions beyond the war? Give the director a chance, and maybe he will be able to grasp the key points of the characters he wants to tell next time. Maybe he won't abuse slow motion again next time.
Four stars are given, and one is deducted because of the slow motion of the whole article and the unclear character characteristics and ethical relationships.
View more about Stalingrad reviews
