The establishment of film contradictions is very similar to that of a certain type of Western. The wolves were stubborn Indians, the Mongols were domesticated Indians, and the government represented the American military. This type of Westerns changed the tradition of demonizing the Indians in the early Westerns, starting from the perspective of the native residents and ending with their elimination, reflecting on the various crimes committed by the white Americans during the pioneering period. The invaders destroyed the old local way of life, rules and awe, and the conflicts between nature and technology, emotion and reason, farsightedness and utilitarianism were highlighted in the process of armed struggle, and the latter won without exception. fruit. Outside of movies, though, our pity for the weak prevails.
This sadness, this lament over the demise of the old order, is almost the same as the emotion we project into the late Song and early Yuan, the late Ming and early Qing, and even the late Qing and early Republic of China.
There is a general, but not always applicable, rule of film ethics that the weak are always right. The rules of nature and the wheel of time are just the opposite. In our time, technology, reason and the pursuit of utilitarianism, although often criticized in movies, rule the world, and their fruitful results further confirm their legitimacy. Even if it cannot be said that they are right, at least it is ill-considered to assert that they are wrong. Or we compromise and believe that nothing in the world is right or wrong.
The questionable nature of ethics leaves room for filmmakers to operate. Therefore, Western films in the early and late stages can move people's hearts, and "Kangxi Dynasty" also poured all sympathy into the invaders. We stand on Kangxi's side instead of Obai's side, because Kangxi's power is far weaker than Obai's.
The uniqueness of "Wolf Totem" is that it does not pity a certain human race, but a pack of wolves. The justice of the wolf is difficult to establish, as a carnivore, when it is endowed with human nature, it is often the evil side of human nature. Its anthropomorphic image has always been the aggressor. Because of this, the values of Jiang Rong's original work have been criticized. It praised Kublai Khan's aggressive spirit, which is too out of place for contemporary people who have experienced two world wars. In the movie, the propaganda of aggression has been greatly weakened, and it has only become Abba's teaching to the first protagonist Chen Zhen.
But justice must be established, and thus giving humanity to the wolf is unavoidable. They are smart, tenacious, lonely, unruly, vengeful, and most importantly, they are executed by executioners. They have feelings and lives, no different from the Jews killed by the Nazis.
The values of the mastering film, to put it simply, are that killing lives is wrong. The government's destruction of the ecological balance and the mechanical transplant of the farming system to the Mongolian grasslands, which are not suitable for farming, are another guarantee for the justice of the wolf.
However, this set of master control values is difficult to explain after careful consideration. If killing wolves is wrong, is it wrong for wolves to eat yellow sheep? What about people eating mutton? The answer given by the movie is that killing wolves is wrong, but the latter two are not. First, the creators anthropomorphize wolves through numerous individual close-ups of wolves and their gazes, descriptions, and desires from humans (whether shepherds or governments)—they are humans, injured sheep and horses They do not enjoy such treatment at all; secondly, wolves are not invaders from the beginning to the end, they are forced to attack the human herd in desperation, and in the process of attacking a large number of casualties, convey to the audience only the tragic and spectacular of revenge and struggle The scene actually gave people a sense of pleasure.
This unequal treatment of different lives is of course contradictory, and the romanticized treatment of the wolves is somewhat self-indulgent, but acceptable, and does not prevent the film from touching people’s hearts. Because human beings want to survive comfortably, they must make contradictory choices. Just like dog lovers can't stand others eating dog meat, not all of them are vegetarians. To be more extreme, plants are also alive, but we are not willing to sit still. Likewise, exterminating wolves, while cruel, protected herders from fear. It's just that it's hard for us to tell where the solipsism of mankind will lead mankind.
I like this movie. But I think that if we avoid anthropomorphism and romance, and take the natural, life and historical issues that may be involved in the subject matter of the film more seriously, and push down those manipulative dramatic oppositions, we will see a more moving film.
View more about Wolf Totem reviews
