Since I have always preferred films with a realistic style and social consciousness, I just finished an exam and I was relatively idle, so I wanted to write about this film that was labeled as "reality" and was very topical. little idea.
First, three concepts are mentioned: realist style, realist narrative, and realist value (sociality). The essence of the so-called realist style is to present as real and rich details as possible, so that the audience can see pictures or scenes (looks) that are not arranged, modified and artificially manipulated. This kind of movie audience needs to capture the director on their own and actively. Seemingly inadvertently laid out many details. This kind of realism can be the Darney brothers who are very close to the characters and use a handheld camera to make the audience feel the plight of the characters, or Haneke is far away from the characters as a peeping on the sidelines. Filmmakers can complete the restoration of reality in different specific ways, and they all belong to realist authors.
Realistic narrative naturally serves as the means of completing the realist-style plot arrangement (a kind of arrangement that makes the narrative look unarranged), it needs to hide the narrative skills and obvious narrative structure, and minimize the dramatic conflict and plot tension as much as possible. Carry out emotional rendering and value guidance, and present it to the audience with a life-like but neither lyrical nor exaggerated attitude.
After clarifying these two concepts and watching "I Am Not the God of Medicine", it becomes very clear. It has absolutely nothing to do with realism. As a commercial film, both the plot and the performance are highly typed, and obvious screenwriting skills can be seen everywhere. , nor can it have anything to do with realism, but this is precisely what I am particularly sure of this movie, that is, its type completion and commercialization, because this is what domestic movies desperately need, and this is precisely based on African Under the premise of realism, when mainstream commentaries elevate "I'm Not the God of Medicine" to that level, the victory of the genre film itself will be buried, which is the starting point of my writing this article.
The so-called type completion, that is, telling a story, and writing a character while telling a story (don’t ask too much for a sense of film, after all, it’s easy to pull eggs when you step too big), it sounds simple, but it’s true that domestic movies have always been difficult to achieve. , "I am not the God of Medicine" achieves the simultaneous advancement and mutual influence of plot development and character development under the premise of no obvious logical loopholes. From the beginning state to the ending state of Xu Zheng's character, all the other supporting roles focus on influencing him, and his behavior after being influenced has a reverse effect on the other main supporting roles (Xu Zheng's character has eaten this for a lifetime. In the end, almost everyone has a convincing arc transformation, even the police and the fake drug dealer (the fly in the ointment, the former does not play a key role in the plot but has a lot of scenes), all the character relationships It is organized into a large and dense network.
The absolute binary opposition in the plot creates tension. Xu Zheng sells smuggled drugs. The boss of the pharmaceutical factory and the police have been obstructing him. This binary opposition runs through the whole film and makes the main plot more vivid and tense. It is also the binary opposition that reminds me of the third concept: Realistic value is also realistic meaning.
The first two concepts cannot be achieved and there is no need for extravagance. I just clarify rather than criticize, and some realistic factors are indeed what I expected but it failed to achieve, because the film has never touched the most fundamental crux of the matter. That is why the price of medicine in China is so expensive. The genre requires that this movie must have a villain. Then the boss of the manufacturing company is portrayed as a superficial villain. In contrast to the protagonist, we can only see that he is indeed a morally flawed one. , that is, he is not good, but his behavior is almost not illegal at the legal level, so where is the root of the contradiction? tariff? cost? Intermediate spread? This kind of operation related to the pharmaceutical system and its drawbacks are not involved in the slightest, which means that a bar is inserted horizontally, and the subtitles at the end of the film are even more powerless. Those are the ones that should be filmed! In the end, it is only through sensationalism that the protagonist has finally won a spiritual and moral victory, but the impact of his actions on the system and the law can be used as a manifestation of reality.
Taking a step back, I don’t think it has to have practical significance as a commercial film. The problems mentioned above can also be understood as a lack of narrative in a sense, because the presentation of society is very complex and multifaceted. If you really start to analyze this event, it may not have such a degree of completion. Specifically, for this movie, you only need to briefly introduce a process of pharmaceutical, distribution, and sales, and then add higher-level insights into events and events. The decision-making process can be treated as open-ended (subtitles are removed) if the ending is unclear, so it is not necessarily perfect, but it is undoubtedly more complete.
Reality comes from criticality and critical spirit. "I'm Not the God of Medicine" doesn't even have the object of criticism. This is the reason why I can't affirm it further than the degree of completion. Therefore, I think any film should still be about movies. It should be recognized and questioned. There is no need to pull out any practical significance. Instead, it reflects the lack of confidence in domestic movies. The same theme of "Dallas Buyers Club" It's rare to talk about the subject matter. If people take good pictures, they take good pictures.
There is also a type of criticism that this film consumes reality and exploits reality. I would like to respond to this point. It is different from some Korean films, such as sexual assault ("The Furnace"). In those films, the victim is the subject, and the director wants to express his own Humanistic care, but also to show curiosity and horror (the spectacle of the villain in "The Furnace"), this is exploitative suffering for me, which is unacceptable to me, and positive examples like "Carnival" are real In focusing on victims, Focus is exploring social factors. But "I Am Not the God of Medicine" is essentially not the same as those. Its main body is "celebrated", and its characters themselves already have a certain legendary character, and we can even narrowly regard it as a biopic. In the final analysis, there are such criticisms because many viewers have not escaped from the so-called realistic theme (this is also related to the rhythm with subtitles at the end of the movie), so just treat it as a purely commercial movie, and you will see that this movie is a domestic movie. A big step. (Although I haven't learned to run yet)
View more about Dying to Survive reviews
