It feels like Luc Besson took out all the tricks he had played before and played it again, but he played it badly insincerely.
First, this female assassin's murder scene is too fake. John Wick's botched version has neither features nor strength. How can a woman make a bloody path among all kinds of big bodyguards? At least we have to show us some unique methods to be credible, right? ! For example, the female teammates who appeared in Expendables 2 are very muscular, so forget it, right? I can accept that she beats men hard, but this model doesn’t even have the strong arm muscles of a Victoria’s Secret supermodel like Tangtang. The pure thin type, tell her to work hard? I didn't believe it when I saw her pull out a brass tube from the bar and insert it into someone. . . . Even a lot of heroic actors have given up resistance, a whole "come hit me" gesture. . .
Second, where is the IQ of the heroine? Except for the last resort threatening insurance measures (that anyone who has watched the movie wants to get), where is the smart? By the way, tell me about the stage where the heroine committed suicide. In this era, there are still people who cut their veins. The old school is really old school. . .
Third, why does the heroine want to engage in men everywhere? For me, Luc Besson is so vulgar because of the plot. He knows this is a good seller. And what is the significance of the existence of maud? She neither stayed with her nor told her anything. She was a completely inexplicable figure, as if to complement the heroine’s love story, especially in the end, the heroine also said that my family members are all At this table, I believe she didn't lie. Although Maud loved her, she didn't seem to take her seriously.
Fourth, the timeline. This is the only thing in this play that has little value for Mimi, that is, the constant reversal (Russian dolls). It may still be attractive to some people in terms of technology, but it is not for me, because the story is messed up. , The technique has no compensation effect. In addition, it is also valuable to add an obvious technical stalk of symmetrical nesting in the film. In many cases, each film has its own level that cannot be dealt with, which is enough to be complained about. A good film is that its outstanding advantages are shining, and the shortcomings are naturally ignored, but the core of the story is too simple for me, cool. The point can’t reach me again. The main reason for the low score of imdb is not because of his shooting skills, but because the viewers are not happy, so those shortcomings are so bugs. To be uglier, my interest in maud's beauty has been greater than that of the heroine and all the plot. . . .
Fifth, credibility. The credibility of Luc Besson's movies has always been extremely low, but because he touches the favorite part of the audience every time, it can be ignored. For example, Guo Dasen's taxi series, people just want to see what happened to him taking off his clothes and beating people, right? But the coolness that this movie throws at people is all betting on the female protagonist's sexual charm, but many people still don't know her. . . The rest is still abnormally unreliable as usual. When the audience is not attracted by the cool points, this unreliability will cause the whole movie to become more and more shit.
View more about Anna reviews
