In the film, all the encounters are related to love at first sight. The protagonists seem so naive and absurd, but they speak philosophical dialogues earnestly. I remember that when I was a novel judge on the original website, I saw a novel with similar writing style. In the original natural and smooth storyline, suddenly large sections of very serious philosophy were added, which seriously affected the coordination of the novel. , became four dissimilarities. It's okay to add philosophy to the story. It only takes one or two strokes to pass it through. It's light and not pretentious. If there is such a large amount of filling, it is better to write a dissertation or a philosophical book. So watching this movie today, I always get goosebumps inexplicably. Thinking about what I see, I have never heard that the daily conversation of a pair of lovers is purely the language of philosophers. Such exaggeration, and some feel like wearing an orchid finger to wear clothes, is actually artificial.
The world-recognized French mood gets pretty bad in the film, and it feels a little frivolous. Love at first sight has always been a controversial topic, some say it is beautiful, some say it is frivolous. It should be romantic anyway. But in this film, it's not romantic, and several stories are all in gray tones. I organized my thoughts and thought that the theme of the first story was: private space; the second story: Electra complex; the third story: family and responsibility; the fourth story: all four are empty. In addition, the plot arrangement is somewhat beyond our imagination. Could it be said that the French romance in reality is so bizarre? The two went to bed naked when they first met, and the actors' acting skills were also average. Although the beautiful Sophie Marceau participated, they were still close to third-level films. Who says Sophie Marceau is a "first-class" star? I think it is also a corner of fame. Some of the dialogues in the film seem familiar, such as "Do you want me or her?" Strictly speaking, the content of the story is still very close to real life. For example, when the wife broke up, the house was swept away. There are many such situations, too realistic and too cruel. If you ask about the structure of love, it's really not clear.
The rhythm of the whole film is slow, the content is not brilliant, the philosophical dialogue is far-fetched, and life is inexplicable. Personally, I think it is a film that sells dog meat with a sheep's head, and wronged the audience's fantasy of "on the cloud". Of all the plots, I only like the small island, the wet and deep alleys on the island and the row of exquisite shops by the sea. It is like a fairyland outside the world, and the heart is far away from oneself. This is living on the cloud. Perhaps the author is just such a helpless metaphor.
View more about Beyond the Clouds reviews
