In general, this film is not a plasma film that can satisfy the refreshing point. On the contrary, the development of most plots will make people feel a little embarrassed. At the end, they pass by the fake black mobile phone and they just want to To make a conceptual social experiment, it is probably a multiple-choice question of survival or death, overwhelming or radicalization.
Generally, this kind of movie is carried out by a few iconic characters as representatives. In a broad sense, there are two sides of good and evil, and then a refreshing killing. Finally, the male protagonist becomes the last survivor after a catastrophe.
This is the general development model of this type of film.
The result is the well-known justice will prevail.
However, as I said before, this is a plasma film that is not enough to satisfy the refreshing point. The problem is that the so-called justice in this film is incompatible with the experiments in the whole film, and it can even be said to be too much. ...Utopia.
When the entire building was closed, people were panicked. The choice of the male lead and the COO was to stand up and calm the public's emotions. This is very important. Before the event is uncertain, a sober or as relaxed atmosphere as possible is more important. Conducive to ensure thinking and make a response plan.
Then, someone died randomly, and it was concluded that after everyone had bombs in their heads, the illusion of this as relaxed atmosphere as possible would collapse into chaos, and people would no longer be able to create the illusion of being calm. The opinions of the masses are divided, the weak, the rational, and the radical collide with each other, thus showing the greatest degree of entanglement in human nature.
Of course, this movie didn't want to express these meanings, and it just took care of it.
Then, the male protagonist stood on the good side of human nature. From here on, the differences increased. The male protagonist insisted that he was not qualified to judge the lives of others, and that the life he believed was sacred (this sentence is the false black hand at the end. Said), and then, the male protagonist began a series of chaotic and reckless practices.
He saw that the radical leader and several people wanted to break the weapon arsenal forcibly, except for a simple stop, he went upstairs to warn everyone to be careful of this leader, and did not continue to take any precautionary measures.
I really don’t know how to understand this. After the leader has clearly expressed the hope that thirty people will die in exchange for the survival of the remaining people, and that leader has begun to have ideas about weapons, he can even let it go. Regardless of the other party, is this considered too self-confident in human nature, or is it just that his heart is bigger.
Then, on the rooftop, he showed that he was sufficiently reckless and unable to examine the situation. When the warning had already been carried out and his life was in the hands of others, his reaction turned out to be just facing difficulties. I have seen After a word, there is only a line between bravery and stupidity, and the male protagonist shows this very well. His excessive stupidity results in only hurting his companions.
Of course, this can be interpreted as he just wants to survive and work hard, but we need to consider the premise that even if he hangs a banner, the people behind the scenes can use bombs to threaten people to take off the banner, let alone that The leader has already said remote words here, that is to say, if the banner is hung, nothing will change in a short time, but the male protagonist still rushes forward regardless of it. That's why I say The hero's performance is too stupid.
After full panic and confusion, the radicals waved the flag and mastered the weapon, which was equivalent to mastering the power. Then, the whole film happened to me the most important point.
Pay attention to the leadership’s selection method, for people over 60 years old and people with children over 18 years old.
I don’t know if you have noticed these two points, but I think from the performance here, the leader is the rationalist in the field at this time. He didn’t want to kill because he got the right to judge. , But subtracted from the crowd in a rational way.
At this moment, I feel that the leader is not like a villain, he is just too sensible.
The so-called radical may be too sane that is not understood.
Of course, the protagonist’s aura is revealed at this moment. The rights established in a short period of time are quickly broken. After the fear of being judged and the fully expanded chaotic factor, the scene becomes completely chaotic. The people took up arms and began to survive for themselves. And killing, either you die, or I die.
The answers to multiple-choice questions began to skew.
At this time, the male protagonist still maintained his beliefs, he was like a lotus flower out of the mud but not stained, and a pure pair with the female protagonist.
This is not a bad thing. People should have faith in order to keep their way forward and not get lost.
However, pay attention to my turning point...
In the next moment, everything began to turn around. The heroine died, the hero was crazy, rose up to resist, and then realized the anti-kill...The hero insisted on the belief of the whole movie and collapsed instantly because of the death of his lover. The development here is thus The point expressed is that the male protagonist does not actually care about the death of other people, or that the death of other people does not touch his soul.
All of a sudden, the pattern of the whole movie fell to the bottom. All the persistence and behavior of the male protagonist before suddenly became a petty formalism, revealing the hypocrisy hidden in it. Nature.
After that, all the experiments were over. The second interesting point occurred here. As soon as the male protagonist entered the house, he placed explosives on the fake black hand beforehand. Then, the fake black hand asked the question. , The hero's anti-kill.
In other words, the male protagonist was actually ready to kill when he came in. At this moment, he has completely abandoned his beliefs, perhaps because of anger or fear, and then, the film is over. At the same time, an easter egg was thrown out, expressing the possibility of a sequel if the film scores well.
The existence of this turning point seems to be just to make the film mainstream, but it makes the author feel bored.
By this time, all the previous performances of the male protagonist can no longer be described as idealists, and only two words are left, which is useless.
I don’t want to blame the leader COO for the death of the heroine, because at that time the leader had the highest number of homicides in the audience. If things continue to develop, the hero and the heroine will just postpone the death. The leader only needs to find someone. When the local waiting time is over, he is considered to have won the experiment.
So who should be blamed for the death of the heroine?
It was the black hand behind the scenes, their cruel experiments led to the distortion and death of everyone.
But at the same time, he is also the male lead.
After the incident, the male protagonist didn’t think about making himself strong so as to control the situation and protect the people around him. Instead, he woke up after the people around him died one by one. At that moment, the male protagonist had something in his heart. There is no regret for this emotion, I don't know, but my heart is full of depression, this is true.
If this film is finally processed, the leader is ready to enjoy the fruits of victory, the male lead rushes out to kill the leader, and then suicides with the female lead individually, and finally the female host becomes the last survivor, then it will reveal some humanity experiments. The shadow came out.
Or on the contrary, it can also highlight the cruelty of this experiment.
But for this ending, I can only say that you are happy as the director.
View more about The Belko Experiment reviews
