At the end of the film, it seems that "there is hope for the earth again", but in fact, even if human beings perish, so what? The earth is not turning the same way, the sea water recedes, and soon all kinds of plants and animals will present a thriving scene. Without human beings, the earth may be more peaceful (here recommends a movie, or maybe a documentary, Life after People, which tells how quickly our earth will recover if human beings disappear suddenly)
Maybe we are the "civilization" of our "Looks like that. Just want to protect it so urgently and continue it? In fact, not only the hands and feet we have moved on the earth can be called civilization, not only our pyramids can be called civilization, can’t the coral reefs formed over tens of thousands of years be called the civilization of coral polyps?
I really do not understand. . . Is it that we always put ourselves in the position of savior and forget that we are the culprit of many disasters, so that our self-esteem makes us so desperately, as shown in the film, for the purpose of multiplying civilization, or is it just Is it the animal instinct for survival that drives us to save ourselves?
I don't like the way the movie deliberately elevates the human stance. . . (I call this kind of humanism.) It doesn't matter if it's too much. Human beings are just entertaining themselves. Anyway, animals don't know how to read it, let alone raise objections, and they don't care about human civilization.
If there is really a day of great destruction, my attitude towards the world is to let it go and let it go. The universe has its own laws of the universe, which are higher than the laws of our human beings. Besides, I have nothing to do with multiplying civilizations. Interest. However, as an animal, if I collided with such a boat by accident, I would still crawl into it without hesitation.
View more about 2012 reviews
