I wrote it down at random. Based on the
plot of the film, it should be a more realistic restoration of the real prototype. The two story lines of men and women are alternately unfolded in the front, and the intersection in the later stage and then the final game. The climax of the plot line did not have much bright spots, but it successfully told the story.
From the title and a general background, it can be guessed that it is another politically correct affirmative action film, but besides the main line of affirmative action, it also contains many other elements, some of which enrich the plot and some dilute the main line. I don't like the LGBT part in it very much, it seems too deliberate, it has nothing to do with the main line and is forcibly related to it; the appearance of the hair salon girl has not played a role in promoting the growth and mental process of the protagonist, except that people despise the female protagonist's derailment in marriage Except for the warm husband who sympathizes with the prairie on his head, he is flattering to Oscar's political correctness. If we can focus more on equality, there is actually more content to discover. The creation of the WTA and the participation of other female players in the same era in the affirmative movement are good story points.
When it comes to Oscars, the film's ambitions for the Olympics are very obvious. Feminism and LGBTQ are two-pronged. If the heroine is replaced by a black actor, will it be guaranteed to win next year's best film? Too many close-ups of faces reminded me of Jackie's too much force to support Natalie Portman; but Emma Stone's performance in this film is very tense, and it is a step higher than last year's La La Land, which won the nomination There should be no problem. In photography, although the 35mm film has a retro feel of the 1970s, the excessive noise always makes me feel dirty on the screen. Compared with other film films, it is not very comfortable to watch; I don’t know if it is the problem of the film itself. It's still a matter of screening.
In the end, God's to God, Satan's to Satan, and I love what Bobby Riggs said at the Gambling Conference. Those who go to the Gambling Prevention Club have lost the bet, and the winner will not go. Everyone is a gambler in life, and all decisions made with insufficient information are a gamble, and they are all fighting against probability. When buying stocks, whether to bet on the upside or downside, bet on whether you will meet the police while driving after drinking, and bet on which one has a better chance of winning when you meet two job offers or two girls you can pursue. A decision with complete information is not a decision, but not being stupid, and in most cases, there is a risk, and you have to choose a side to place your bet.
If you don't gamble, you can only lose.
2. Regarding equality,
I don't really like the core idea of this movie, because there is a problem with the logic at the beginning. From the idea of the movie, it is a very simple cause and effect relationship: because female tennis players beat male tennis players, women are not weaker or even stronger than men in sports, so men and women are equal. But if we start from the details, the logic itself is subject to the attribution fallacy problem. There are too many factors other than gender compared to the active women's singles champion who is in his prime sports age and who has neglected training and unscientific diet. There are too many factors other than gender, so this victory cannot simply be attributed to Differences in athletic levels. In the final analysis, the significance of BJK's victory is not to prove the equality of male and female competitive sports ability, but more of a spiritual victory.
The physiological structure of men and women is different, and each has its own strengths. It is an indisputable fact that men have better results in most competitive sports. The essence of equal rights should be the equality of men and women in status, and equality in status and recognition of the strengths of men and women are not contradictory. The key to promoting equality should be to promote the strengths of women over men, not to deny the shortcomings of women over men. As the main theme movie in recent years, I appreciate Hidden Figures to express the theme of equality by showing the strengths (wisdom, toughness, etc.) of women/blacks.
The conflict at the beginning of the film is motivated by the issue of unequal pay for equal work between male and female tennis players, which is actually a matter of economics in the final analysis, that is, compensation depends on the value created. So, I agree with BJK's questioning of the tennis association boss in the movie: Why did the men's singles and women's singles finals sell the same number of tickets, but the male players' prize money is eight times that of the female players? Indeed, men and women should be paid equally for equal work on the premise of equal value creation; if old beliefs get in the way, the invisible hand of the market will bring it to the point of equilibrium it deserves.
If we zoom in on the issue of unequal pay for equal work, Ronaldo, the highest-earning male soccer player, earned $22 million last year (excluding commercial income), and Marta, the highest-earning female soccer player, earned $500,000 last year. . Is this 44-fold gap caused by their gender differences? No, it is caused by the market. Because the market has higher demand for men's football, high demand will naturally raise the price equilibrium point, and the high market value created by Ronaldo determines his higher salary. If you switch to modeling, the highest-earning male model, Sean O'Pry, earned $1.5 million last year, and the highest-earning female model, Kim Xiaomei, earned $22 million last year. In the same way, the market value created by Jin Xiaomei determines her income.
If we switch to other industries, broadly speaking, labor income is ultimately determined by the value created. Indeed, discrimination against women in the workplace is widespread, and it also causes income discrimination. This is where affirmative action can change. But is discrimination against women the only reason for unequal pay for equal work? No, market factors are also important factors. I hope everyone can take a more comprehensive view of this issue when discussing it.
2017.12.2 London
View more about Battle of the Sexes reviews
