Well, don't look at the fog.
Why did those cowards who did not fight, were timid, and even hurt others to protect themselves, were rescued by the party-state government in the end, but the protagonists who fought and resisted the slaughter of fate had to end up in such a noble, tragic and tragic end?
I want to say that this is an ancient Greek tragedy of fate, a life.
Previously, in my impression, I always felt that the tragedy of ancient Greece was inexplicably pessimistic-fate overrides everything and cannot be resisted. People and fate struggle, the old saying, "How can people fight for their lives." This sentence is often a negative teaching material in our values. If you can win, you have to fight, but if you can't, you have to fight and try. Indeed, rather jade broken. But is this movie really that simple? Tell us, be sure to leave bullets to fight monsters, and don't commit suicide easily. That's not a Greek tragedy, it's a medieval miracle drama, sad for sadness's sake.
When the mother took her two children and sat in the military rescue vehicle and slowly drove past the protagonist, it could be seen that the main creator of the movie was not destroying people's confidence and hope unreasonably. The mother who passed by took the child out of the fog safely. So it's not that the main creator denies the necessity of people fighting against destiny, but the chance of luck and misfortune comes.
Mainstream comments are generally interpreted as "the companion died of blind faith in the protagonist; the protagonist seems to be shrewd and strong, but in fact his own weakness is no different from others, so he gives up the struggle", but is this really the case? Running away from the convenience store all the way, these people have always held the idea of "try to rush out, as far as you can go", is this idea the belief instilled by the protagonist? Obviously not, some people may choose to follow out of trust in the protagonist, such as the old man; but the female teacher did voluntarily generate the idea of "rushing out of the siege instead of sitting still", which coincides with the protagonist, That's why she asked the protagonist to "count her share"; and Amanda played by Laurie Holden is also a very thoughtful person, she was the first person to explicitly oppose Mrs. Carmody's "miracle" remarks, and also after the protagonist proposed to escape Immediately stated that he "would rather die than give it a try" idea. Obviously, several people made a plan together after reaching a unified mind. They were not just blind followers who just depended on the protagonist to obey him, but were rational people who each took the consequences for their decisions. For example, the mother at the beginning asked everyone for help, and wanted to ask someone to escort her home, but no one could accept it. If you want me to say, this is a very shameless request. In this kind of danger, no one is responsible for anyone, and some people take the initiative to lend a helping hand. That should be extremely grateful, but even if no one does anything for her, it is understandable. She should not curse and hate others because of it, because people who ask others to be "humane" are themselves rude. Be responsible for yourself, use yourself as a bargaining chip, and don't expect others to save you. This is a strong personality, and it is the person who dares to fight against fate.
Besides, I agree with the argument that "the protagonist's own weakness is no different from that of others". Fear is human nature and what makes people human. In the face of the unknown, even if it is said to be glorious, correct, great and strong, isn't it ridiculous and reluctant? Fear manifests as weakness, but weakness does not mean cowardice. The bloodthirsty creatures in the fog give people fear, and all of them show the weakness of creatures equally, but what is cowardice and what is strong? Look at those who are addicted to the illusory salvation of religion, who dare not fight but can comfortably cry out to take others as blood sacrifices; who blamed a young soldier, who obeyed the instruction to take that woman and Children's lives make atonement for themselves. This is blind obedience. Isn't that cowardly? Are those who use themselves as bargaining chips to fight their fate cowardly?
There is also the argument that "only those who believe in love and who have lost their ego in love are the most advanced among human beings and are worthy of enjoying miracles." Where has this sought-after mother gone? As mentioned above, she asks others to be "humane" to her, and she is not satisfied when others are not responsible for her. According to the argument of "worthy to enjoy miracles", that is to say, only her love is love, and everyone else has to serve her love, only she is fighting for love, and no one else? It is very touching and powerful for a mother to risk her death into the fog for her child, but it cannot deny other people's motives to fight. Seeing the death of his wife in his studio, he was so beautiful as a painting, he had to keep walking without even looking back. He wanted to take his son to fight. He always knew how far his oil could go, but he still struggled. Gotta give it a try. I think the struggle for survival is the struggle for love. We have always advocated "selfless dedication" and "sacrifice glory", and we are used to listening to the advanced deeds of pioneers and models. If we publicize too much, people in this atmosphere will feel paralyzed and used to it, and feel that these nobles are within reach , easy and reasonable. Although not actually. So don't shout at every turn, because we are just mortals living in the lower levels.
The reason I think of it as an ancient Greek tragedy is because there are many scenes in the movie that show the fickleness of fate. The tragedy of Sophocles is called by Aristotle as "a model of Greek tragedy". Although fate cannot be resisted, fate itself is irrational, emphasizing people's struggle against fate. This is how I always thought life was. Then, now, and later and later. Now I am more awakened by the so-called fate, fate is the trajectory of life, or another name for life. Success and failure are only the judgments of human society. Their respective probabilities may not be the same, but they must be two phenomena and two possibilities that exist forever in life. The impermanence of life is that you never know whether the next one you encounter may be a success or a failure. Yes, just happened to meet one of them.
In the movie, some people are strong and some are cowardly. Is it true that the strong will succeed and the cowardly will be doomed? Not in life anyway. Needless to say. Being strong is only a path you choose for your own life, a kind of personality development, but it cannot become the weight for your triumphant success in life as you wish. On the contrary, cowardice is also. Life will not punish a person in every possible way because he chooses cowardice. If it really rewards good and punishes evil, then there will be no evil in this world, and goodness is also a benefit. That's the magic of life. No guidance, no requirements. Life is silent, but the rules are comfortable. Just like people are born without their own consent, in fact, according to social thinking, it is unequal and unreasonable, but it is the most natural and natural. It can also be said that life itself rejects reason. People have no right to choose not to fight if they want to live. This is also the most natural and unreasonable nature of inequality. No one is forcing you to make a strong or cowardly choice. Everything is your own judgment and adjustment.
Fate cannot be resisted, "resistance" does not mean failure, success is equally "unresistable". When you think Mrs. Carmody is too loud, bugs should bite her, even she thinks she is going to see her master, but she managed to avoid it because there is no reason. The reason why the mother can get home safely and survive the disaster with her children is that there is no reason. The car stopped, it could be eaten, it could be rescued, it could starve to death, there could be other possibilities, but how many possibilities are irrelevant to them; they can wait, they can kill themselves, and if someone doesn't want to die, they can say no at all, I think Others will respect that person's own choice, and they also have the right to continue to choose for themselves. As a result, everyone unanimously chose the latter, which resulted in the sadness on the screen. Who has the right to say that those who chose death are weak? ? But it's a personal choice!
Going back and forth, the simple wisdom of the predecessors is startling here: the results cannot be controlled.
Fortunately, there is still an option to fight.
View more about The Mist reviews
