I don't know if you've found out.
The recent Douban is good, or Weibo.
There are too many "convicted" movies.
Let's take a look at these movie reviews first, and guess the movie
1. A film that caters to Western ideology and beautifies Japan's war of aggression against China
2. Typical political correctness and universal values are correct, especially World War II films
3. True TM will beautify men
4. It's really daddy
5. Nausea, pedophilia
The answer is revealed.
They are "Farewell My Concubine", "Beautiful Life", "This Killer Is Not Too Cold", "The Godfather" and "Porco Rosso".
Sir is a little skeptical about himself, whether the movie he watched is different from their version.
Why is the resentment on the Internet getting bigger and bigger, and the comments on one thing and one work of art are becoming more and more dualistic.
Today, I'm here to talk to you about this year's "vicious words" and quarrel.
01
Paying attention to "evil words" is still because of an unwritten "Xi" on the Internet.
Quite a few people have become extra cautious:
"I think xxx is more fun/better-looking/I like it more, (but I don't mean to say xxx is bad). ”
"I don't mean to target it...... I just ......"
Why?
If you don't agree, a hat will be smashed on the head.
There are too many hats, and the head is almost out of stock:
"Pulling and stepping", "crooked buttocks", "entrainment of private goods", "politically incorrect", "flattering men", "female fists", "capital invasion"......
Sir's obvious feelings are:
Such words are increasingly being used in movies.
than in the past.
The exchange of different views was enthusiastic.
Have a leisurely discussion.
After watching a movie today, it seems that everyone is in a hurry to stamp a big red stamp with their own stamp:
The louder the cover.
The more dazzling and eye-catching.
to be satisfied.
As a result, an army of "right" people who sweep away all art criticism is growing stronger and closer.
For example, the crooked butt of "Assembly Number" and the trend of "entrainment of private goods" in "Eight Hundred" began, and "Volunteer Army" was "entrained with private goods" because of a still.
Even the main theme film is like this, and other movies are not immune.
Starting from "The Wandering Earth", it was said to be "insulting China" in the trailer.
and then to the Hong Kong commercial movie "Bomb Disposal Expert 2" is a movie with private goods.
In "Lion Boy", they are all "squinting eyes and crooked butts".
The biographical genre film "I Am a Mountain" has a crooked butt.
The introduction of the blockbuster "Oppenheimer" with private goods; the rare domestic mythological blockbuster "Fengshen" is also said to be the director's entrainment of private goods; even the animated film "Thirty Thousand Miles of Chang'an" has become "entrainment of private goods", and the "stepping" between Li Bai and Gao Shi .......
Sir doesn't understand why people nowadays don't watch movies and love to stare at their butts.
I don't understand why "entrainment of private goods" is derogatory, the value of the movie lies in the authorship of the director, if you don't entrain "private" goods, then whose goods should you entrain?
In addition, gender issues are also the "hardest hit area" of today's film reviews.
Even "The Long Season", which has a score of 9.4 on Douban, has begun to be attacked by "daddy", and Yaoqin in "Man Jianghong" has become the embodiment of "sexual anxiety" of elderly directors, and a science fiction literary work "Cosmic Exploration Editorial Department" is considered to have "hidden misogyny".
If the character setting is contrary to the mainstream ideology, the proportion of the characters is different, and the focus of the story perspective is different, that is, there is ulterior motives.
These "evil words" are more like the content expressed in the movie, and after they are contrary to what they think and perceive, they neither delve into the director's creative intentions nor care about the main expression of the work.
With only a "big hat" buttoned up, he was hastily convicted:
"It must be xx, it must be xxx. ”
02
Why has this kind of "bad word" gradually become the mainstream consciousness of judging the "good or bad" of movies?
It's not even a criticism of acting, scripts, and character settings.
But it goes directly to "a certain value"?
First of all, the biggest problem comes from the "speed reading" of movies.
If you compress a book or a movie into 3 minutes to read it, all you can get is a one-sided understanding and evaluation of the movie, and even, you can only see a one-sided side of the movie from these few minutes or ten minutes.
Sir casually told a few stories:
"The underage girl has been working as a maid in the master's house for many years, and when she became an adult, the housemother sold her to work in another family, and in the end, the maid girl used her hue to take the position, squeezed out the fiancée of the young master, and successfully became the wife of the house. ”
Is it a green tea? Is it a female competition! Is it objectifying a woman again?
I'm sorry.
This is Vietnamese director Tran Hung Hang's "The Taste of Green Papaya", the protagonist is a girl who has been hard-working and compassionate since she was a child, and she slowly attracted this young master through her charm.
It is a film from the ultimate female perspective.
One more one.
"The teenager has been skipping school, fighting, and mixing in society since he was a child, and only at his mother's funeral did he cry bitterly. After the death of her mother, she ignored her paralyzed grandmother, and even after her death, ants crawled out of her body to find out that she was dead. ”
Let this conscienceless child be the protagonist, this movie is not right, and it shouldn't be filmed!
I'm sorry.
This is Hou Hsiao-hsien's "Once Upon a Time in Childhood", as an autobiographical film by Director Hou, he opened up his understanding and perception of nostalgia and family affection through the death of his family three times.
The charm of the movie is that you enter a certain life story of a person in these 2 hours, and you share the joys and sorrows with the characters, worry, anxiety, pain or happiness.
The wonderful thing about it is that if you can't immerse yourself in it, some small emotions can't be perceived.
And those comments that are dominated by "evil words" comment on a movie in the most correct way: "crooked ass", "entrainment of private goods", "political (in)correct", "flattering men and women".
In the end, it became the most glorious sentence of the movie.
Secondly, there is another problem.
It is an interpretation of the film that is out of the times.
Today's audience, the biggest requirement for film and television works is to "have correct three views".
You can see many reviews about the movie "three wrong views" and people who gave it 3 stars.
According to a survey by China Youth Daily (2018), 90.4% of young people believe that they will pay attention to the values conveyed by them when watching film and television dramas, and 76.7% of them refuse to watch film and television dramas with incorrect views.
The correctness of the three views has become the first consideration in film and television dramas, and these three views are not the three views in the period in which the work is located.
Instead, with our current three views, we ponder the three views of a certain work at that time.
So, you can watch it on Zhihu:
Even the four famous works have three wrong views.
Not to mention any other works.
"Camel Xiangzi" is Lao She's three views that need to be improved; in "Crescent Moon", because he believes in "scumbags", he can only go on the moon to sell himself, which is not in line with the "three views" of women's independence now.
"Thunderstorm" has become "Cao Yu can't think of such a plot without cerebral thrombosis for 20 years".
The three views are not only incorrect, but also incestuous and dirty.
When today's new film.
And the classic masterpieces, when they are surrounded by evil words that gather like flies.
Can our literature and art continue to grow?
Of course, you may say that Sir is too worried.
Even if it is not literature and art that are imprisoned.
That's at least too:
The one who spits evil words himself.
03
What is a bad word?
It must be stated that this is not the same as a bad review.
There are two characteristics of bad words: one is simple, and the other is rough.
For example, "Let's Wrestle!
Although this film is as high as 9.0 today.
But before the release, there was a "house collapse turmoil".
Some viewers who have seen it in advance have criticized the film as "disgusting patriarchy".
Because the father in the film forced his daughter to train and shaved her hair short.
It wasn't until more people watched the film that the reputation of "Falling Dad" reversed.
Those who say that the male protagonist should not force his daughter.
Perhaps ignoring the social reality of rural India, what will be the future of her daughter if she is not forced, and whether she will have "freedom".
This is a bit similar to questioning that Zhang Guimei should not force girls to shave their hair short.
It is certainly good to respect the wishes of girls.
But in such an extreme and special environment, would it be good for girls if there was no Zhang Guimei to act as a "villain"?
The critique of the slogan, of course, spreads quickly.
But if we want to truly understand a movie, it is impossible not to take the time to understand its complex context.
So sometimes.
Bad words rush away, and bad money drives out good money.
There is also this year's summer blockbuster "Fengshen".
In the midst of many doubts, Sir saw a recurring statement:
"Fengshen" = man and horse = patriarchy.
Pawn: "Barbie".
Is that really the case?
First of all, Sir doesn't understand what is wrong with making a man and a horse in a movie.
Then, putting aside the value judgment and being realistic:
Does "Barbie" express the idea that "patriarchy is a man and a horse"?
That's right.
"Barbie" does satirize the ubiquitous male power in this society, and there is indeed a plot that is willing to be very good at horses.
However, the lines of the movie could not be clearer:
To be honest, when I found the patriarchal subject
It's not the time for horses
I'm not interested anymore
Didn't we watch the same movie?
Again.
"Barbie" is not "horse-weary" at all, and Barbie toys have a lot of horse and farm themes.
What Barbie actually advocates is:
Girls can also ride horses, they can love horses, and the courage and heroism of riding horses are never exclusive to men.
So.
"Patriarchy = Men + Horses" is itself a superficial misreading of "Barbie", and then it is used as a weapon of criticism and brutally applied to another film.
Again.
Sir is not against bad reviews, whether it is 9.0's "Falling Dad", or 7.8's "Fengshen", or other movies with many points.
Both positive and negative reviews are allowed.
But are we becoming more and more addicted to simple, crude, reflexive vocabulary today?
and the ability to think more deeply and openly.
When you gaze at others from a narrow perspective, it is precisely yourself who is limited.
Once you give up on the full scrutiny.
Abandoned empathy.
In the end, no matter how many words are exchanged, no matter how many words come into play, there will be no correct solution, and no consensus will be reached.
Cinema also loses more dimension.
There seem to be only two options left: life and death.
made Sir think of such a detail in the movie "Alive".
Fuki hurried home after hearing that Ryuuji had been shot.
Ask my wife Jiazhen, what was the composition for our family at the beginning?
Jiazhen thought about it, it was a common man in the town.
Then, there was a particularly absurd dialogue.
"The poor are good, the poor are good, nothing is better than being a common man. ”
Qualitative.
It is an important condition that can determine a person's life and death.
After a simple qualitative, he will never think about this person, what is the measure by which he should die, or should he live.
Today, that fear has not been dissipated.
Who wants to live day in and day out in the shadow of being "judged" and from time to time "judged"?
Under the cultivation of Internet speed that is about to make judgments quickly, netizens who have been "eating melons" for many years have finally learned to "let melons fly for a while" after slapping their faces many times.
As for the comments on film and television works, why do you still "react" and act immediately.
In Peter Handke's book "Scolding the Audience", there is this sentence:
"You follow along. You listen. Then you will understand. You didn't get it. You are not thinking. Your minds are not free. You are repressed. ”
This mode of thinking of holding high the "banner of ideology" and not letting go seems to have been thought through, but it has returned to the era of ideology.
It seems to be right.
But it is not free.
Such a single dualistic thinking has gradually led many works to embark on the path of self-censorship as a last resort.
Just as, in "The Annual Meeting Can't Stop!" a few days ago, Bai Ke asked the director, "Isn't it dangerous for us to satirize the workplace?"
I say that the central idea of overtime is not to get the job done
It's about showing attitude
Isn't this a satire of the workplace?
Isn't there any danger in this
The director thought about it.
"Yes", but changed the phrase: "I don't know." ”
Where does this danger come from?
Not just censorship, but also censorship from the audience.
There is always someone with a hammer and sees that everything is a nail.
In recent years, in high-scoring film and television dramas, we also value its "boldness", it dares to tell the truth and tell the real things in a certain era.
Whether it is "The Silent Truth", "Hurricane", or "More than Endless", they are all pointing to some themes that we once dared not scold and may be said to be crooked.
While we are talking, why there are fewer and fewer realistic films.
On the one hand, he uses ideological issues to examine current works of art, trying to find the "dross" in them.
In "Farewell My Concubine", when Cheng Dieyi was pressed in front of the fire and was forced to expose by the revolutionary generals, what he said was:
I expose the purple and red, and expose the broken walls.
Every word is a bloody rage.
Is it wrong to be red?
Is it wrong to be an emperor and a general, a talented and beautiful woman?
What he exposes is nothing more than the longing and self-confidence he has gained in art.
It turns out that culture is self-destructive.
It's like we've all forgotten.
Again and again, the brain is formatted to purge the labeled "problematic" works.
I thought I could get perfection.
As everyone knows, there is only a void behind it.
The picture in this article comes from the Internet