"Director Please Advise" pulls the directors who are high in the audience's mind to the judging table, and like the draft players, they face elimination and promotion, which is very fresh. From the producers to the professional film team in the program, many people are very professional, and they have something to say, but they let the audience see a lot of wonderful debates. However, some film critics are very double-standard, some judge the director as useless, and some criticize the director on the spot, but some are overdone.
Director Channing Huang in the latest issue has experienced such a process of being criticized. Channing Huang himself studied animation, and his related works have also won awards. This time, he and the famous host Cai Kangyong engaged in a 1V1 confrontation, and finally lost 204:210 and sat on the to be determined seat. The "attendance rate" of the two works is not bad, and compared with the two, the "attendance rate" is not much different, but in the evaluation stage, the treatment of the two is very different.
Channing Huang's work "Oscar Best Short Film" was very bold, a director wrote a script for ten years, but it was changed by the program group, changed by the actors with funds, and finally made into a pseudo-documentary. There are many people in this film, from the program group to the capital to the actors, although everyone knows it, but there is no one who says it so bluntly. Therefore, Huang Minghao, who dared to make a short film of Channing Huang, was too brave to be able to blacken himself like this.
But perhaps only Huang Minghao dared to do this, who could be angered, but he would not. Because this is the first work he made, he has never filmed a play before, how can there be such bad deeds as transformation and interference with the script? Chen Zhixi CUE Huang Minghao said that he dared to blacken himself, in fact, he was also saying that Channing Huang was too bold. On the other side, the dangerous laughter of the professional film group is also CUE to Huang Minghao, but it is to criticize Channing Huang.
When the host asked the professional film group to evaluate, the first Wang Xudong came to be unkind, first satirizing Chan Ninghuang's title, thinking that he could go to the fantasy film festival, "encouraging" him to "refuel", and saying that his "hammer" was still light. The dangerous laughter in the back uses "anger" to express his viewing feelings, and even uses a large paragraph of reasons to oppose the evaluation of other people's "sincerity" and "literary and artistic films", as if Channing Huang's works are useless and should not have any praise.
He also gave Channing Huang a big hat, saying that he only used the film as a prop to vent his emotions and give poor guidance to younger audiences. He also had a series of questions about Channing Huang, which asked which role Channing Huang liked in the film and whether he supported the director's concept of love. Did he sacrifice love for his work, or did he sacrifice "beloved Mr. Huang Minghao" for love.
These words are actually confusing, not to mention whether the three views of the characters in the film are not correct to have a negative impact, let's say that the three views of any character that appears in the film must represent the director's three views, and cannot be critical and ironic? Looking at his CUE to Huang Minghao's words, whether it is in the film or in reality, "Mr. Huang Minghao" cannot add the "beloved" fixed sentence, such a statement, does it also expose the dangerous smile is actually evaluated with emotions?
The two works with little difference in "attendance rate" are very euphemistic to Cai Kangyong's evaluation, most of which are applauded, but They are so bitterly criticized by Channing Huang, I don't know how different the two works are. The group spoke to Channing Huang with a strange yin and yang, with inexplicable emotions, which was not a normal evaluation for the purpose of discussion. This makes people wonder, whose sore spot did Channing Huang poke? Dear friends, what do you think about this matter?