The camera movement is mediocre and the picture is boring? Zhang Yimou's golden signboard does not work? Insider: Sharpness is not allowed

I'm in a hurry.

The finale of the Spring Festival stalls.

I still have to leave it to the real model worker-

Article 20

It's also a family carnival and a group comedy.

Compared with last year's "Man Jianghong" won the annual box office championship with 4.5 billion, this year's Spring Festival, Lao Mouzi's sense of existence is pitifully low.

The current box office is 750 million, less than half of "Hot and Hot" and "Flying Life 2", and even less than the 950 million of "Bear Infested".

Even the Douban score dropped from 8.0 points to 7.8, ranking fourth among the five live-action movies in the Spring Festival file.

It seems unremarkable.

However, Sir saw "One Second", which was briefly removed from the shelves for "technical reasons".

Zhang Yimou is the bravest and most compassionate expression at this stage.

01

Before watching "Article 20", Sir didn't have too high expectations.

The judicial theme and comedy style were chosen to be released during the Spring Festival, which doomed "Article 20" to be impossible to detach from the positive energy needs of the extraordinary schedule.

It's like whether it's a poster or a trailer, it's weakening the label of real adaptation and social criticism.

The shortcomings of article 20 are obvious.

First of all, the author's style is extremely weakened.

In the past two years, although Lao Mouzi's works have an unstable reputation, "Solid as a Rock" has been unrecognizable due to deletion, and "Man Jianghong" has also been criticized for having empty characters and incomprehensible logic.

But one thing is certain -

Zhang Yimou is still the director with the most obsession and ideas for visual expression in the domestic market.

However, the "Article 20" is very unscrupulous.

The camera movement is mediocre, the soundtrack is sensational, and the picture is boring, making people feel as if they are in an eight-o'clock TV series, or even an extended version of the sketch.

This is also what many viewers are criticizing -

I really can't figure it out, why arrange so many noisy and trivial parents?

For example, Ma Li suspected that Lei Jiayin and her first love had a leg, and she repeatedly found faults, which could actually become the core laugh of the movie;

There is also Lei Jiayin's popular science for his children about his humble family status, especially like the earthy plot of the middle-aged man handing over all his wages to his wife in the Spring Festival Gala sketch.

If it weren't for Ma Li and Lei Jiayin's deep comedy skills.

With Zhang Yimou's almost non-existent sense of humor, "Article 20" is probably a failing comedy.

But think about it from another angle-

Zhang Yimou, a director who is so handy, has such a strong obsession with film aesthetics, it is impossible for him not to understand this.

So why does he still magnify and prolong these boring and water-infused family ethics details in the eyes of young audiences?

Of course, there are Zhang Yimou's own reasons for this.

For example, he thinks that movies can't be boring, so they have to add easy-to-understand jokes.

But Zhang Yimou is 74 years old, and the era in which he lives limits his understanding of the laughter of the younger generation.

This has led many people to feel lengthy about such fragments.

But Sir felt it.

The more important reason is that it is actually under the seemingly short trivial package of the parents that Zhang Yimou has the opportunity to hide his true expression.

is like "Qiu Ju's Lawsuit", the lawsuit is not that important.

Qiu Ju's almost unreasonable axis of statement, her deep fear of officials guarding each other and abusing power, is the more important thing.

Because that is more Chinese, more local, and more engraved in our bones.

Equally.

In the "Article 20", in fact, how the justifiable defense evolved from the "sleeping clause" to what it is today is not what Zhang Yimou is most concerned about.

In fact, although "Article 20" is the title, it is the most superficial and least important element.

What he wanted to say.

is far from the end of the movie, Lei Jiayin's speech at the hearing was as simple as last year's "Man Jianghong".

02

The core issue of Article 20 is actually quite simple –

What price does an ordinary person have to pay if he wants to be a good person?

From Confucian gentlemen to modern Lei Feng, we have preached "being a good person" more than anyone else.

But why is it that now the rule of law is sound and the concept is civilized?

Do we think it's harder to be good people?

Many moments in Article 20 are reminiscent of social events that cannot be let go.

The barbecue beating case in Tangshan.

Shandong's mother-humiliating murder case.

Many people say that Article 20 is lazy.

Because fairness came too suddenly, and how procedural justice can be optimized to help achieve substantive justice, these discussions are too crude.

But Sir thinks that the surprise of this "Article 20" is precisely that-

Zhang Yimou does not want to answer these difficult legal concepts.

Because he also does not want to discuss in a suspended way how to improve the law in order to protect the rights of ordinary people to be good people.

Opposite.

The first thing he dealt with was a core issue that could hit the people even more -

The secret food chain of power in Chinese society is how to wipe out the conscience and dignity of ordinary people little by little.

The film focuses on "justifiable defense".

Divide the plot into three threads -

The main line is the main case that Lei Jiayin is dealing with.

Liu Wenjing, a loan shark, locked Wang Yongqiang with a dog chain and raped the latter's wife many times.

In a hurry, Wang Fa was ruthless and stabbed Liu to death by mistake.

But when the king heard that Liu was going to take a knife from the car, in order to protect his wife and daughter, he would stab people to death.

The difficulty is that-

No matter how the police investigated, they could not prove that there was a knife in Liu's car.

Even, bullying, abuse, rape that happens in broad daylight...... Because of the mutual protection of the local society, it is as if nothing has happened.

What is even more ironic is that Wang Yongqiang delayed the prosecution because the case was suspicious and the evidence was insufficient.

And what about the other side?

Liu Wenjing's family, because they have lawyers and influence, will put pressure on the prosecutors.

They were able to gather people in front of the procuratorate and say that the prosecutor had delayed the prosecution, causing Liu's convoy to not pay his salary, and to build up public opinion.

They were able to find Hao Xiuping faster than the public officials, threaten Hao with the safety of their daughter's life, sign a declaration that there was no rape, and then put Wang Yongqiang to death.

Law, what is it?

For ordinary people, this is a fence that reminds us to hold our tails and be human.

But once Liu Wenjing's identity as a martyr's family is superimposed, and their clan power is superimposed in the primitive rural society of Kangcun, they are unconscious.

Law is a rampant shield and a bloodless butcher's knife that kills people.

The subplot of the movie is the case that Han Ming has handled.

Zhang Guisheng, a bus driver, saw hooligans sexually harassing a young girl and stepped forward to stop it.

The other party beat him violently, and Zhang Guisheng had to the guy to fight back, but accidentally beat the person and fractured his skull.

According to judicial practice, Zhang Guisheng's actions cannot be recognized as legitimate defense, but can only be a fight.

He was not convinced, and went to Beijing again and again to petition, but he could not get an explanation.

Han Ming, played by Lei Jiayin, is not a cold-blooded person.

He understood Zhang Guisheng's difficulty, so he helped him find a job.

But only if -

Zhang Guisheng must promise not to petition and not to cause trouble to the government again.

Of course, it is also not to cause trouble to his work.

But why did Zhang Guisheng petition?

Daughter's insistence.

The daughter doesn't understand that the father is not a good person for sexual harassment, and why is the bad guy not sanctioned, but the good guy has to leave a criminal record?

The same doubt also happened in Han Ming's son's heart.

He saw bullying at school and broke people.

As a result, it was the son of the dean who bullied him.

Han Ming's family originally lived in the county seat.

Because of a temporary job opportunity, I had the opportunity to come to a big city and let my son study in a prestigious school.

Now, a fight and brawl will not only be used to borrow books, but also may leave a criminal record.

Han Ming and the teaching director are both in the system, they are not short of money, but they are fighting for face.

Ma Li is reluctant to make her son apologize: My son does good deeds without leaving a name, why should he apologize?

But the director of education thinks: My son was beaten, and he won't come back with an apology, how will I manage the students at school in the future?

The same is "Article 20".

The same dilemma of law and emotion.

But in different strata, it is also so clear and insurmountable.

Wang Yongqiang's counterattack is not because he wants to be a good person-

This kind of request is too extravagant.

All he wants is to live, be a person, and protect his deaf and dumb wife and daughter.

Zhang Guisheng, a little better, mixed with a fairly stable job in a big city, he is satisfied.

Because he thought—

Be poor, don't be afraid.

At least I can lead by example and teach my daughter to be a kind, upright, and courageous person. But the reality told him, poor people, you shouldn't have this kind of delusion.

Han Ming, a grassroots prosecutor, is a senior intellectual.

This may be a class that doesn't worry about anything.

But he also can't be a good person.

When he was in college, his first girlfriend was molested by his senior, and he insisted on coming forward. As a result, it is not known whether the obscene matter has any results, and he himself was assigned to the county seat because of demerits.

That's 20 years.

And twenty years later.

The world doesn't seem to have changed in any way -

His son wants to be a good man.

He wants his children to have the courage to be good people.

But in the face of the child's question, Han Ming could only be silent.

Son: Am I wrong?

Han Ming: You're right.

Son: Is the law wrong?

Han Ming: There is nothing wrong with the law.

Son: Who's at fault?

Han Ming: ......

03

In Article 20, who is most qualified to be a good person?

Or rather.

Who is a good person, can do it with ease, and get full applause?

That, of course it is-

When the mute girl played by Zhao Liying committed suicide, Liu Wenjing's case caused an even greater sensation, and the upper echelons had to give guidance.

They specially called Han Ming over, fully demonstrating the importance they attach to judicial fairness and public opinion in the face of this case.

There was emphasis.

Han Ming had the confidence to do things.

He was suddenly able to hold an expert hearing, and that's why he had that "passionate speech"-

"The law is to make the cost of committing crimes higher for bad people, not for making the cost of being good people higher. ”

This kind of treatment has made many people criticize, and they feel that in the end, it is the same as the old man of Qingtian, but you look back and think about it, how is this kind of treatment not a realistic way to shoot?

Just like many people question that it is not as good as "The Defender".

Because in "The Defender", the little-known little lawyer is willing to give up the life safety of his whole family, and is awakened to the strongest sense of citizenship to fight against the biggest villain in the country-

Abuse of public power.

But such a thing is not made up, but has happened in the history of South Korea.

And what about us?

If you don't shoot like this, will you believe that this is China?

Speaking of which, Sir thought of "Qiu Ju's Lawsuit" thirty years ago, which was obviously not a comedy.

But its observation and satire of reality.

is something that all domestic comedies today can't do.

An old man said that Qiu Ju's lawsuit would definitely be won. Because at that time, the law of "civil prosecution officials" had just been introduced. The above will definitely take the Qiu Ju case as a successful case, and then play a role in popularizing the law.

As a result, Qiu Ju's lawsuit was lost.

But the irony of the film doesn't stop there.

Qiu Ju hated the abuse of private power, just as she hated the village chief for throwing money on her face and insulting people, and even more hated the reconsideration document of the Public Security Bureau, which fell into the hands of the village chief of the "public family" without saying a word.

As a result, she gave birth to a difficult child, and if she didn't rely on the village chief to use her private power, how could she pick up her life.

The end of the movie.

chased Qiu Ju, who asked the village chief to apologize all the way, and decided to forgive the other party. She even came to the door in person and invited the other party to participate in her son's full moon wine.

At this time, the most dramatic scene appeared - on the full moon wine, the village chief did not appear for a long time, but waited for the police. The police informed them that they would be detained for 15 days in accordance with the law because the village chief's kick was found to have a minor injury.

Hearing this, Qiu Ju was caught off guard.

She spread her legs and chased after the police car, which went farther and farther away.

At the end of the film, it was frozen in Qiu Ju's confused and frightened eyes.

This look is really Chinese.

Because it's not only satirizing Qiu Ju, but also waking us up in front of the screen-

We hate the abuse of power, but we rely so much on it.

Article 20 is certainly not good enough.

Compared with "Qiu Ju's Lawsuit", it loses its sharpness.

But.

Looking back and thinking about it, is it sharp at the moment?

Today's audience, as they did back then, may have such a great ability to accept these unsolvable and helpless dilemmas?

Let's take the simplest example.

At present, the most intense controversy in Article 20 is not even about creation.

It's another "discomfort to see".

For example, like last year's "Man Jianghong", there was a "rape scene".

Even.

Some people feel that "Article 20" is promoting daddy flavor and male gaze again.

Why does the progress of justice and the progress of society depend on women's bodies and even lives as sacrifices?

Sir didn't want to respond to this question from a gender perspective.

Not to mention that the rape scene is fleeting, without any nudity, not even excessive violence.

When "comfortable to watch" becomes the evaluation criterion of the movie.

In fact, this is equivalent to maintaining the maximum conscience in an environment where there is little truth left.

We can no longer accept it.

That's right, in recent years, Zhang Yimou has indeed been criticized for "hollowing out female roles".

This is true.

But in fact, "Article 20" is Zhang Yimou's most successful portrayal of female characters in the past five years.

On the surface, it is men who "do good deeds".

But what man doesn't have a strong, chivalrous, and straightforward woman as an important force?

Including Zhao Liying, who has been praised the most.

In the past, she was still an actor who relied on instinct to act, because of the limitations of her appearance, she challenged many more complex TV series roles, and her acting skills still did not make a qualitative leap.

But in "Article 20", even if there is not a single line, only rely on eyes, limbs, and crying scenes.

She impressed everyone.

This is not only a mother who has suffered so much.

She is still a tough woman who is tough and brave, knows right from wrong, and can stay sober even if she is cornered.

If it weren't for the maturity of the script and the profundity of the characters, we wouldn't have such a deep resonance with the extreme situation of the people in the film.

So, in that sense.

Sir is willing to applaud Article 20.

Even if it has a lot of shortcomings.

Even if it won't surpass "Qiu Ju's Lawsuit", it won't even reach half of the former.

But it is still a retrograde of this era.

The picture in this article comes from the Internet