In the past two years, film critics and drama reviews have been filled with all kinds of critics who think they have three views. They stand on the moral high ground and criticize all plots and characters that do not conform to their three views. Isn't this a kind of narrow-minded degradation of free thinking? ? The ironies, metaphors, and mappings in the works can't be seen at all, and they can only see the surface that their big mung bean eyes can shoot... Back to the movie, all those who ridicule the three views from the background era are hooligans! Especially those remarks that are extremely harsh to women - they can't see the low status of women in that society, they can't see the sadness of men treating female protagonists as playthings, they can't see women with extraordinary talents and they can't achieve economic independence. Injustice... All I can say is that this woman is just a green tea bitch who relies on a man, is supported, and acts as a retribution. It's 2018 and still so...
Why should the ancient nobles help poor scholars, that is, Bole and Maxima, cherish each other. To be a talented woman is to sell yourself and rely on a man to be in the top position? The heroine's clothes are all designed by men?
I don't agree with the plot of the female protagonist being fostered, but don't you think about why in some period films, women can only become "Wu Zetian" by relying on men? Shouldn't this feel the cage bestowed by the times?
You may not understand or accept, but please do not condemn ignorantly. In the end, the movie does have a lot to criticize, if I give it three and a half stars.
View more about Coco Before Chanel reviews
