At noon today, at the moment when "Green Book" won the Oscar for Best Picture, Twitter was fried. A black screenwriter, Ira, tweeted: ""Green Book"? I think it's more like a "white book"." So far, this tweet has received more than 40,000 likes. Then he said: "Crash is witnessing "Green Book" replacing it as the worst Oscar winner."
Of course, the mainstream media in the United States is also booing, but the in-depth comments will probably have to wait until tomorrow. The New York Times just reposted a long comment on Twitter when the Oscar nominations were released last month. The title was " Why do Oscars continue to indulge in the fantasy of racial harmony?" ". However, the "Los Angeles Times" was well prepared and published a long review written in advance , using the title of this article. Its author is Justin Chang, a well-known film critic who served as a jury member of this year's Berlin Film Festival.
But I still agree with Ira's view that "Green Book" is not the worst since "Crash", but worse than "Crash". Note that we are not talking about the quality of these two films themselves, but their misnoming as the best Oscars. I myself admitted without reservation that these two films are good-looking, but they are not convincing to get the best film.
Let's talk about some data. First, the Metascore score of "Green Book" (representing the evaluation of authoritative film critics) is the lowest among the best films in the past since "Crash". Both films have 69 points, and the other 13 films have an average score of 90 points; Second, "Green Book" is the third best film in history (disregarding the two earliest films) that did not even get a nomination for best director. The other two are "For Miss Daisy" in 1989. Driving" (similar to the theme of this film) and 2012's "Escape from Tehran" (generally considered to be a legacy); third, "Green Book" is the number of nominations in history (regardless of the earliest ones) The least best film, with "Anne Hall" in 1977 and "Infinite Walker" in 2006 at the bottom.
In addition, although the two films also won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, "Crash" has 12 best screenplay awards, including BAFTA and Screenwriter Guild, which is well deserved; and "Green Book" only The four best screenplay awards, including the Golden Globes selected by dozens of foreign journalists in Hollywood, are far behind the records of "Favorite" and "First Reformed".
I have no intention of collecting more data. Just combining the above data, "Green Book" is relatively poorly evaluated as a film critic, has received very few Oscar nominations, and has not won the Oscar for best director. Nominated, and the best original screenplay won by it can't be played at all. If it is the best film Oscar that can't match the box office with those award-winning blockbusters, I can only say that it is the worst Oscar winner.
Taking a 10,000 step back, in fact, these data are not important. What makes the "Green Book" award really unpleasant lies in its theme itself. No matter how much "Crash" was complained back then, its discussion of the theme of moral conflict is beyond reproach, but it is too "safe" compared to "Brokeback Mountain" which reflects the taboo of the same-sex love of cowboys. The "Green Paper" is not only "safe", by the "post-racial black Green Paper" by Jan Miles two days ago in the "Washington Post" published a review of the terms - it is "dangerous" of. He believes that this kind of film that tells the history of racism through the perspective of a kind white man is more harmful than harm.
Even today in 2019, systemic racial discrimination is still a widespread phenomenon and problem in the United States, let alone the conservative southern part of the United States half a century ago? The atmosphere at that time was much worse than it is now. In fact, the discrimination and mannerism of southern whites against blacks is far more cruel and darker than in the movies. However, the screenwriter deliberately weakened the dark side, using the formalization of comedy to make the whole story unpredictable, and finally came to a happy ending of the white and black family. To put it nicely, this is a kind of artistic creation, but to put it awkwardly, this is just whitewashing peace.
If the creator wants to pursue and call for harmony between people, he can completely fabricate a story, but the biggest publicity point of this film is that it is based on a true story. In this regard, the descendants of Donald Shirley stepped up and said that there are too many untrue aspects of this story. In reality, Don did not regard Tony as a friend at all. The first screenwriter of the film is Tony's son. All the material comes from his own interview, and all the explanations are only his own words. Both parties have passed away. Who knows?
Probably because the main creative team of the producer and the director are all white people, the film very naturally tells the story of the inner core of a "White Savior" (White Savior). Historically, the "white savior" is a commonly used story setting in Hollywood, in which the black man (or any non-white ethnic group, refer to Zhang Yimou's "The Great Wall") as a supporting role is saved by the white man as the protagonist. Oscars have always favored this theme. There are too many to mention, and the most recent are the 2009 "Weakness" and the 2011 "Help" respectively. There are also many movies that partly involve the "white savior" in the plot, such as 2016's "Hidden Characters", this situation is not discussed. The "Green Book" completely uses the "white savior" as its core, which is very frowning.
Even if you haven't watched a movie, it is clear from the head size and position relationship on the poster that this is an opponent drama of a white protagonist and a black supporting role. The whole story is unfolded from the perspective of the white protagonist. Obviously, it is a "master-servant" relationship in which a black musician hires a white driver. In the movie, it is a story of a white driver leading a black musician to "pass through the barrier". The audience is obviously more interested in this elegant black musician who is not the usual film and television image. As a result, the story strives to create a kind white driver who gradually makes the audience love it. Of course, the performances of the two actors are remarkable.
Throughout the film, it was under the guidance of the white driver Tony that the black musician Don began to let himself go, walked down the clouds, accepted KFC, accepted jazz, accepted his gay identity, and finally, at Christmas, he walked in alone. The big family of white driver Tony feels the warmth of the holiday. It must be admitted that Tony has also been changed in this process. He has changed from a fundamentally racial discriminator to a friendly racial communicator, but this change is not mainly from the intentional guidance of Don (to be precise, the screenwriter). , More of his self-awakening and redemption. Well, white people don't need black people to save, even if the setting is vulgar white people and elegant black people.
In the countless American media, film critics, and anonymous Oscar members’ comments on "Green Book" I have seen, the following high-frequency words have appeared: old-fashioned, out-dated, crowd -pleaser (please the audience), cliche (cliche), stereotype (stereotype). I agree with every word here, they all point to the key point of the film's narrative.
To say that it is old-fashioned is not only the core of its "white savior", but also the way it tells stories. The director of the film Peter Farrelly has always been shooting popcorn comedies and romance films. Whether it is the audience rating of IMDb or the Metascore of film critics, most of them are below the pass line. When the story of the film is halfway through and the shelf is fully set up, the following plot is basically predictable, lacking tension or conflict. For example, I directly guessed that Don would invite R. Kennedy to appear. The audiovisual language from the beginning to the end of the film does not make people feel high-level, but many places make me feel clumsy or uncomfortable, such as the treatment of Tony's dislike of the cup at the beginning, such as the low-level black man working in the plantation. That style of painting, such as the scheduling of the scene where Don was rescued halfway through, such as the tedious end of the family group scene.
Saying that it pleases the audience is actually in the same line as the director is used to making popcorn genres. The most typical thing is that it appeared in the trailer. In the feature film, every audience will probably learn to eat chicken nuggets and pick up trash in reverse. This is the section where the audience is chuckled with precision calculations every second, but it is actually very deliberate. This film uses a lot of background music and various props to create a nostalgic atmosphere, and many routines are too much. The happy ending is what the audience needs. Let us escape the complicated reality and have a good dream in the movie. Then why do you claim to tell a true story?
To say it is stereotype, not only refers to the initial image of Tony, an Italian boss living at the bottom, is very rigid, but also refers to the various whites and their racially discriminatory remarks or behaviors that appear in the film as if they were carved out of a mold. , The typical reactions of typical characters in typical scenes. One or two people are okay. If there are more, it will be boring. It is also a manifestation of the screenwriter’s lack of creativity. In addition, why a well-educated black person knows nothing about the popular culture (blues) of his ethnic group and the folk culture (fried chicken) of his own country. In fact, while countering the stereotype, it creates another stereotype. impression.
For such a movie, ordinary audiences in China and the United States have shown that they like it very much, which is beyond expectation. However, Oscar, who represents the highest level of the world's largest movie kingdom, even chose it as the best film, which has to be criticized. Especially in this year's rare Oscar "New Year"-three of the eight best film nominations are winners of the three major European film festivals, and three are blockbusters with a local box office of more than 200 million, and eight nominated films It occupies more than half of the nomination awards (the third highest proportion in history) and finally won at least one item in each of them-it was finally selected, which can be said to be an overnight return to thirty years ago.
This result proves once again that the Oscar, dominated by a group of old and white male members who make up the majority of all members, still loves the main theme and positive energy, while avoiding innovation, radicalism and openness. Among them, there is no Chinese audience who is keen to talk about it. The imaginary "political correctness" of Zhezi's, those masterpieces that truly reflect the lives and plights, reality and hesitation of ethnic minorities, there is still a lot of resistance to getting Oscar recognition.
Finally, if you can, please walk into the cinema to watch this movie with a cautious and critical eye. Rather than being confused and obscured by its narrative, he smiled while being moved.
View more about Green Book reviews
