After a long absence, Huang Bo was on the hot search.
Not filming, not on the show, but "on the job".
As the ambassador of the 17th "Sino-French Cultural Spring", as a representative of the Chinese side at the opening ceremony of the art festival, he talked and laughed with French President Emmanuel Macron, who visited China.
This has nothing to do with the topic Sir is going to talk about today.
But this scene reminds Sir of a passage from Huang Bo's interview many years ago.
Especially suitable for today:
In the past, I could always meet all kinds of people, all kinds of careful machines, all kinds of things. After you go, you can't settle the bill, who will take care of you?
But now (I became famous), I am surrounded by good people, and every one of them is full of smiling faces.
Teacher Huang Teacher Huang, you are not tired, rest for a while. Teacher Huang, what do you want to eat, drink, what will I bring you? Teacher Huang, you worked too hard.
Yes.
At the moment, you know, it refers to the recent collapse of various celebrities and top scandals.
And after the collapse.
It's also time to see behind these stories of ascension and fall.
Hiding that "smiling face".
01
Let's start with the film and television industry.
Sir recently saw two "apology statements" and was puzzled.
First, Zhang Songwen apologized.
The object of the apology is Zhang Jizhong , a famous producer and director, but the two have not cooperated recently, and Sir only cried and laughed when he went to search for the reason.
It turned out that netizens picked up a past story of Zhang Songwen, who was thrown in the desert by the crew for picking up garbage on the set, and Zhang Jizhong was the producer of that drama, so fans burst Zhang Jizhong Weibo, causing Zhang Songwen to have to respond to explain and even apologize...
Yes, Zhang Songwen apologized for picking up garbage in the desert N years ago.
The second thing is even more outrageous.
#"Crazy" villain actors collectively apologize for the character #
Tang Xiaolong is a heinous person, here to say sorry to everyone;
I say sorry to everyone for Tang Xiaohu;
I apologize to the audience and friends on behalf of Gao Qisheng...
Later, even undercover policeman Li Xiang joined the apology meeting:
Li Xiang did not adhere to his principles as a police officer at a critical time... So, say sorry to the audience in this regard as well.
Is it absurd?
Indeed, this is just a publicity activity for the crew, and these actors have not been subjected to online violence.
The question is why did such a plan come to mind?
Behind this, it is even more frightening:
Both apologies were initiated from Smiley.
Netizens picked up Zhang Songwen's past, which is a compliment.
Exaggerate his dedication, praise him for his environmental awareness, and praise him for his professional duty, even if he used to speak lightly.
The villain actor apologized and was moved.
Behind it is propaganda and media propaganda for a simple justice.
Why do you do bad things with good intentions?
Some kind of boundaries that we once took for granted are becoming blurred.
02
The first boundary is easy to understand.
Namely:
Identities and roles.
Sir has always insisted that actors do not need and should not apologize for the negative roles they have played.
"No need" because the quality of the character has nothing to do with the actor itself, it is more the creation of the screenwriter and director, and the actor is only responsible for injecting the character into flesh and blood.
It's easy to understand.
"No", from the creative level, the actor does anything for the character, in fact, it violates the principle of creation.
In the history of literature, there are two classic stories.
Tolstoy cried after writing "Anna Karenina":
Because in the end, Anna committed suicide by lying on the rails.
Tolstoy's family was puzzled: you are the author, if you don't want her to die, you can not write her to death!
Tolstoy said sadly: I can't help, she has to die.
Coincidentally, another novelist Alexandre Dumas wept when he created "The Three Musketeers" because he had to let one of the musketeers die.
He liked the character very much, and even tried to change the fate of the character at one point, but because the character had taken shape and had his own independent destiny, he could not do anything.
Why?
This is the principle of creation, the essence of art.
When starting to create, of course, the author has the power to determine the character, personality, appearance, living environment, life experience... But as the story develops, the character gradually forms an independent individual, simply put, with a complete "personality", he has to make behaviors that conform to the character, and the choice and fate of the character will be decided by himself.
The author has also changed from being a founder at the beginning to a recorder.
Liu Cixin also told such a small story outside the main line of "The Three-Body Problem".
Luo Ji has a fantasy girlfriend Zhuang Yan, from appearance to personality, he carefully portrays, and when the final character takes shape, she has her own life, Luo Ji cannot control her behavior.
In the original article, Luo Ji and his real-life girlfriend Bai Rong discussed this issue:
"Rong, I used to think that the characters in the novel are controlled by the author, that she is what the author tells her to be, and that she will do whatever the author asks her to do, just like God does to us."
"Wrong!" Bai Rong also stood up and walked back and forth in the room, "Now you know it's wrong, this is the difference between an ordinary writer and a literary scholar. The process of shaping the literary image has a supreme state, in which the characters in the novel have life in the minds of literary artists, who cannot control these characters, or even predict their next behavior, but just follow them curiously, observe the smallest parts of their lives like voyeurs, record them, and become classics. ”
This is true of literary creation, and the same is true of film and television drama creation.
Each character has their own mission.
Everyone in literature is so powerless in the face of their characters, how can actors be qualified and able to make choices for their roles?
Or think the other way around, when a deeply rooted villain suddenly repents and apologizes to the audience, then, is the character still valid?
The "Joker" wept bitterly and apologized to the audience.
After performing "The Silence of the Lambs", Anthony Hopkins suddenly said: I say sorry to the audience for Hannibal, I shouldn't eat human flesh...
Some people say, don't take it too seriously.
"Apologizing" is just a show, just have fun.
However, Sir felt that the attitude reflected behind this "apology" was dangerous and needed to be vigilant.
Every actor and creator should be in awe of the characters in the work, the actor is not God, the actor is just the actor of the character.
Making decisions for roles is an act of disrespecting neither the role you play nor your profession.
03
A second blurring boundary:
Works and reality.
A casual search can find that in the past two years alone, a large number of actors have apologized for their roles, and it has gradually become a common practice.
Why do such apologies happen again and again?
Public opinion dictates this.
You know, it's already a cliché for actors to be scolded for playing villains too well.
Director Shen Yan once apologized to actors who played negative roles.
The reason is that in his plays, there are many people who play negative roles and encounter groundless abuse in reality.
This happens all the time.
Teacher Li Mingqi, who plays Grandma Rong.
Once she took a taxi, was recognized by the driver and refused a ride. When I went grocery shopping, I was thrown eggs and tomatoes.
The former Chinese drama villain "Professional Household" Yao Gang.
In "Sin Domain" (aka "Sin City"), there is a shot of his subordinates stuffing glasses into their mouths, and he himself is scared when he sees them.
Because he acted too realistically, he was also regarded as a "villain" in real life.
When passing through the security check, the staff wanted to scan him several times and accused him: You are too hateful!
At the restaurant, the waiter poured tea for everyone, but Yao Gang did not because he "acted badly."
No more examples will be repeated.
It is worth noting.
The more developed the network, the more often villains are attacked.
Those who play queens, concubines, "juniors", and those who play "mistresses" but don't look good enough "mistress"...
Is this just a pot for the audience?
Not necessarily.
The audience's emotions are too full, spilling reality from the work, which is one thing.
On the other hand, it is now more like a complicity between reality and work.
Director Shen Yan also talked about the audience's inability to distinguish between roles and actors in an interview, and his views on transferring their anger at the characters to the actors:
- In the end, it shows that your work has a lot of influence
Or is it that in fact, the aesthetics of society are very immature
Or rather the lack of society
Another outlet for outlets
-Yes, the latter, I think it will be a little more
Not only reality.
Rather, whether in the work or in reality:
Audiences, it is difficult to find the exit of evil.
Because most of the time.
Each other, always greet each other with a smile.
04
"Positive energy" vs. "negative energy".
The boundary between the two should be blurred, just as human nature is neither good nor evil, and reality is not black and white.
But now it's getting clearer.
This is certainly not the fault of one person, or even a certain part of the population.
This is almost a microcosm of our current environment:
Our demand for "positive energy" has permeated every corner, even in literary works, we will also demand "moral sterility" treatment.
Remember the three views of Qiong Yao's novel that people scolded a few years ago for being incorrect?
When Qiong Yao challenged the unreasonable order of the year with love, we accused her by today's standards.
Remember the story of an actor who has a slight improvement and will be rummaged through the black history?
People pull on the actors' various social traces.
Severely criticize his or her adolescent preferences, or not quite fit the prevailing views and speeches of the moment.
As if it is not ice and jade, it should not debut.
Remember some time ago someone wanted to delete an excerpt from "Water Margin" in the textbook?
Because the novel "destroys the three views of mankind refreshes the lower limit of mankind", it is believed that "there is no need to find text materials from poisonous novels".
Some things they did.
But as a result, has our society become full of "positive energy"?
Apparently not.
The evil on earth never stops.
And the other side:
The real villains in domestic dramas have long disappeared.
At one time, our villains were in full bloom.
In addition to the above-scolded Grandma Rong, meddlers, and saboteurs, we also have Zhang Dongsheng, Li Fengtong, Qi Tongwei, who can be named...
Farther, An Jiahe, Guo Xiaopeng, Nie Mingyu, Chen Junwei in the millennium...
These charming villains/villains complement the positive characters and support the classics.
Not to mention works like "Black Ice", "Black Hole" and "Conquest", with villains as the protagonists and writing legends of rivers and lakes.
But now, it's hard to even see a relatively negative character with enough character.
Some are just stereotyped:
The feudal dogma patriarch.
△ "Canglan Recipe"
Crooked mouth smiled at the Dark Lord.
△ "Agarwood like crumbs"
There are also jokes that seem to create contradictions, but are actually selling terriers.
△ "Brilliant Star"
The bad is as bad as the surface, and the evil is as evil as a single evil.
And this kind of environment that cannot be seen directly and intolerated by the evil in film and television dramas will give rise to more evil in reality.
Why?
Look at what the vicious events that occur in reality and what the real bad guys are, we will know that the villains in film and television dramas, the more alive, the more valuable they are.
Because good villains not only make the audience hate, but more importantly, let the audience learn to think.
A bad guy is not an either/or concept, he is also a living person who may be present in our lives at any time.
Only by seeing the complexity of people can we learn to discern and tolerate, and we will not be blinded by the evil around us, nor will we be unable to play for the villains in film and television dramas.
And now.
We draw the line between good and bad.
Phalanx of positive and negative.
The reason for laughing and crying.
What's next?
Perhaps, the angle of laughter, the time of laughter, and the amount of laughter are also marked with a scale.
Speaking of this, Sir thought of Stephen Chow again.
Stephen Chow has always been good at using "laughter" to cover up those ambiguous hesitations and helplessness in life.
"Nine Pins Sesame Officer".
It sounds like this is a story full of "positive energy":
A sesame green bean official, after unremitting persistence, rehabilitated the women at the bottom, and finally fought corrupt officials and beheaded evil people with the support of the emperor.
But Stephen Chow was not immersed in the pure and flawless god-making narrative.
Sesame Guan has a problem with lustful and greedy money, and his ability to rehabilitate in public court is not a high authority, but a quarrel trick he learned in a brothel.
What about the "Shangfang Sword" given by the emperor before?
Hehe.
It's just salted fish, swallow it.
But it is precisely because of the flaws of these little people that Bao Longxing has become credible after witnessing the transformation of evil deeds.
This is not Stephen Chow's most ruthless ridicule of the grand narrative.
Remember the ending, Bao Longxing resigned from the government, opened a "pharmacy" (selling divine oil), and even used the imperial underwear given by the emperor as the signboard of the town store.
The story seems to be complete at this point:
The little people counterattack, justice is served, and the world is peaceful.
The time has come.
Stephen Chow chose to overturn all illusions at this moment and sweep away the atmosphere of "positive energy".
With a "joke" again, let's go back to the world where tragedy repeats.
Just when Bao Longxing picked up the dragon underwear and sniffed vigorously.
"Report!"
What's wrong?
"The emperor is dead!"
How did he die?
"Flower Willow."
Everyone looked at Bao Longxing, and then at the underwear in Bao Longxing's hand.
Huh.
The picture of this article comes from the Internet
Editorial Assistant: Doraemon