Refuting the refutation of "The Wandering Earth 2" by well-known media people is really not worth refuting

Text | Ling Hu Boguang

It stands to reason that "The Wandering Earth 2" has been released for so long, there should be no twists and turns. But Bo Guangjun recently saw a well-known Mr. Guo media person's evaluation of the film. The reason is that he previously criticized "The Wandering Earth 2" as a big bad film, and the director should face up to the failure of the movie, the content is as follows.

Mr. Guo's criticism is still justified in a few points, "The Wandering Earth 2" is too ambitious, in order to complete the world view, shape the characters, etc., even if 80 minutes are cut, it still leads to the movie time is too long, the amount of information is too large, and the various plots advance too quickly to give the audience time to breathe.

Mr. Guo may report that he is a well-known media person, and I criticize you for listening to your opinions, and I am urging your ideas (many media people will cultivate this view). As a result, I didn't expect that "Ball 2" was too popular, and now the Internet era is not like before, print media can be high, and then scolded by a large number of "fans".

Therefore, Mr. Guo criticized "The Wandering Earth 2", although the previous comment ended with "The Wandering Earth 2" and "Small Times", this comment deepened the content that Chinese films have not improved for ten years, and "The Wandering Earth 2" and "Small Times" are the same movies.

I think Mr. Guo's temper came up after being scolded by a large number of "fans", but the content is a bit funny.

Fetish, weak story plot, is "The Wandering Earth 2" overrated?

I think that Mr. Guo's criticism and most people's rebuttal will fall into the "good and bad" of the current work, and then criticize or refute it, but often ignore two fundamental issues.

1, "The Wandering Earth 2" fetish is not important, people are mainly "heavy objects" are not good movies, refuting the audience thinks you don't understand. The question is that even if the "fetish" is emphasized, it can't be a movie, can't it be a good movie?

In the final analysis, Mr. Guo believes that "Ball 2" focuses too much on showing the big scene of science fiction, and it is not good in terms of narrative rhythm, character shaping, story plot, and I believe there is probably the so-called artistic pursuit.

I don't agree with him myself, the problem of "The Wandering Earth 2" does exist, as mentioned above. I'm sure fans will have more angles to refute. However, I mainly think that even the "The Wandering Earth" series is a "fetish" sci-fi film.

Can't it be a good science fiction movie? Couldn't it be a good movie?

Film and television dramas are the most common cultural entertainment methods for modern human beings, but now the network information is too convenient, and there have been various "short videos" and the impact of watching movies in a few minutes over the years. As a result, many people now watch films with fast rhythm and reversal, and film and television dramas are to tell a good story.

This is really not the case, no matter what literary and artistic works are limited by its bearing form. Like novels, two-dimensional words can be imagined freely, so all aspects can be the most imaginative. Film and television dramas basically have core expression, light and shadow, text and technique.

Movies and TV series are the same in that they are images, and light and shadow have always been important; Therefore, a film and television drama has reached an extreme in the pursuit of light and shadow forms, and other levels do not pull the crotch to watch, is this not a good movie?

The difference between movies and TV series is the duration, so the narrative structure of the film is also very important. Which movie plays the narrative structure and spatial structure to the extreme is not a good movie? From Hitchcock's "Telephone Murder" to "Buried Alive", "Sniper Phone Booth", to "Killing in Another Dimension" and so on are not good movies.

There are also some film directors who let the narrative structure, light and shadow and characters serve a certain "emotion" he wants, isn't this a good movie?

When "China Qitan" was broadcast, the fourth story "Country Bus Took the Wang Child and the Immortals", many people criticized not telling a good story is garbage animation, I personally disagree, the director obviously wants this "emotion".

Of course, it is normal for the audience to like a literary and artistic work or not like it. I only think that media such as film and television animation can contain countless "art forms", and now the audience only asks for rhythm, reversal and so-called story, which seems to be more and more intolerant.

Finally, back to "The Wandering Earth 2", it is nothing even if it is just a "heavy" sci-fi blockbuster.

Over the years, the typical example of Hollywood is "Pacific Rim", which takes "heavy objects" to the extreme. What role do you remember in retrospect? What plot? The most outstanding thing in the whole film is the huge robot full of heavy industrial aesthetics to beat the big monster.

The well-known Hollywood monster movie "King Kong" (of course, the heroine's love scene is well shaped), and then to the Japanese monster IP "Godzilla", how many plots and characters do you remember now, and finally not huge monsters and fight scenes. Similar examples include the early Transformers series.

As for the early Marvel superhero movies, it focuses on hero character building, and this plot and special effects spectacle are for the characters, anyway, this thing seems to be similar.

Some would say that Hollywood blockbusters are ruined like this? Believe me, this only "traffic economy" type of industrial assembly line abuse that ruined film and television dramas is definitely not the ultimate display of film and television theme expression, light and shadow, text and technical skills. The traffic pipeline and political correctness are the main reasons why film and television dramas are getting worse and worse now.

"Pacific Rim" was released in 2013, exactly 10 years ago is it outdated? On the contrary, because Hollywood blockbusters fester, it is becoming more and more classic, and I believe that as long as humans like to watch mecha fighting monsters, this movie will not be outdated for thirty or fifty years.

"The Wandering Earth 2" if you cut out some delicate character shaping, emotional expression, and value expression in the middle section. It just shows the space elevator crisis, the important foreshadowing plot in the middle, and the rhythm in the second half is better, doesn't it feel very feeling.

PS: I've always felt that our stylized extreme genre blockbusters are not too much, but too few (and too restrictive).

The same are "fetish", "The Wandering Earth 2" and "Small Times" are not a movie

2, even if they are all "fetish", "Small Times" and "Ball 2" are not the same, Mr. Guo starts from "outside the movie", but the conclusion is the same as the film reviews of "Three-Body Problem" and "Ball 2" written by New York film critics, which seems to be a common phenomenon of "high intellectuals" like them.

Mr. Guo said that "Small Times" fetish, full of all kinds of brand-name goods: Ferragamo, Dolce & Gabbana, Louis Vuitton... "The Wandering Earth 2" fetish is fantasy or real "heavy weapon", earth engines, space elevators, drones, spaceships...

Finally, the conclusion is to replace the imagination of history and society itself through the imagination of "things", thinking that having "things" means having the identity and life of the symbol of "things", and finally he believes that "Ball 2" and "Small Times" mean that this is an era of spiritual emptiness.

With all due respect, my conclusion after reading Mr. Guo was: ?

Is Mr. Guo's conclusion really not worth refuting? The fetish of "Small Times" Ferragamo, Dolce & Gabbana, the space elevator behind the fetish of "The Wandering Earth 2", the drone -

First of all, I don't understand the identity and life of "things" and "things" symbols, which are particularly separate. You are so spiritually rich why don't you wear leaves to live in a cave, you enjoy the beautiful material life brought by modern technology, and what "things" you pull cannot symbolize identity and life

Secondly: they are all fetish, why can Dolce & Gabbana and the space elevator draw an equivalence? According to the set of literature and art extended to reality, this is not the same thing at all.

Dolce & Gabbana and others are luxury brands in developed Western countries, and few people can consume them. Space elevators, drones, etc. are behind the rise of modern China brought about by the development of Chinese science, Chinese heavy industry companies, Chinese technology companies, etc.

How many Chinese employees do foreign luxury brands like Dolce & Gabbana have? How much tax was paid? "The Wandering Earth 2" has more than 25,000 employees in the XCMG Group around the world, and the same is true for other technology companies, not to mention the development of Chinese science behind it, and the impact of China's scientific and technological development on China's modernization.

Just say that the crew of "The Wandering Earth 2" has more than 1,000 permanent staff, about 10,000 off-site special effects personnel, and more than 20,000 group performances (about 17,000 foreign group performances), all of which are also "fetish", can this be the same?

Finally, the main reason why "Small Times" was criticized by public opinion was that China was not yet fully rich, which was a small number of rich Chinese bourgeois-like "fetishisms". There are not many people in the film crew, and there is no contribution to the Chinese film and television industry, Chinese cultural industry, etc.

At the same time, its high investment and high box office only flow to a few people, and there is also this reason in the public opinion criticism of "Manjiang Hong".

Moreover, his "fetish" view is correct, and the characters and plots become appendages of "things". "Small Times" is the consumerism of pure material little bourgeois, and behind "The Wandering Earth 2" is the rise of Chinese science, Chinese heavy industry, and Chinese science and technology.

According to my understanding of the development of China's cultural industry, it is that China has about 5 fetish blockbusters such as "Ball 2" in 1 year. "Fetish" can be combined with local Chinese brand promotion, and it is better to generate commercial value, such as the NIO car implantation in "The Wandering Earth 2" can be more in-depth, more scene-oriented, and more naked.

If you say it, you may not believe it, but there really was a time when it was the comprehensive rejuvenation of modern China.

At that time, Chinese film and television were not in the meaning of popular culture, which represented the comprehensive rise of Chinese beauty, clothing, food, housing and transportation, automotive electronics, heavy industry and technology products. At that time, the popular culture of Korea's national strategy extended what beer fried chicken and beauty tourism were all compared to Hotaru and Haoyue, really.

Fetish, what if the movie is not a masterpiece? Chinese movies need "The Wandering Earth 2"

Bo Guangjun never said what kind of film critic he was, but said that he was a self-media who earned his own food. This is not to criticize Mr. Guo, or that sentence to express views is as free as aesthetics, and our difficulty is that it is easy to rise to "takedown" or what hat-wearing position criticism.

Finally, in recent years, observing the development of the domestic cultural industry, cultural public opinion, and social reflection, two phenomena have been found.

First, now in the domestic "cultural phenomenon" level of literary and artistic works, the official response is often dull and rarely spoken, once the speech official must maintain the "tone", often grand and empty, in recent years better but still not very good, most of the mainstream media is ruthless forwarding machine.

Those media people and celebrities who are accustomed to speaking, you tell him literature and art, he tells you the position, you tell him the position, he talks to you about literature and art, when everyone derives from the literary and artistic works to say the position. Hey, their position is often different from the public, and netizens criticize the "ungrounded" of current domestic film and television dramas.

Second, these people do not care about their professional field, but now public statements are often the last paragraph of the last paragraph. Entertainment does not talk about entertainment, literature and art do not talk about literature and art, only the output of edification point of view. And then there are no arguments, no data, not even content. This is not impossible, but it is often drowned in the vast sea of information of self-media, fans and netizens who pick up details, find angles, cite data, and freely imagine.

Therefore, we feel that the official and mainstream media cannot fight, and the vast majority of media people and celebrities are singing against the masses.

Of course, since the binary opposition of public opinion brought about by the high information dissemination of self-media and netizens, the problem of rice circleization is another topic. I think that compared with foreign countries, especially the West, this is really worthy of Chinese society, media public opinion, and even literary and artistic works need to think about and study.