I briefly mentioned "The Darkest Hour" in a previous article, which is undoubtedly an excellent film, and the actor Gary Oldman plays Churchill through "plastic surgery acting" and has just won the Oscar for best actor.
This movie probably talks about a theme, which can be summarized in two simple sentences: the upper level is traitorous, and the lower class is patriotic. This is also the problem we have been talking about in previous articles. The experience of history has proved countless times that when a country is facing a nationalist crisis, its own ruling class is more inclined to cooperate with the ruling class of a foreign country than to stand on the position of "loving our common country" and working with its own oppressed classes to resist foreign enemies. This further proves the theory that the state is an instrument of class oppression.
For example, when the Qing army entered the customs, although Li Zicheng experienced a major defeat at Shanhaiguan, he still had vitality, and taiyuan, Datong, Baoding, Xi'an, Xiangyang and other important towns were guarded by elite soldiers. The reason why the Qing army was able to quickly eliminate Li Zicheng's forces was because the armed forces of landlords everywhere organized themselves to defect to the Qing Dynasty and fight against the peasant army. This force eventually became the main force of the Qing army to unify China in the south. Just as the so-called kissing or not, class division, shaving hair and changing clothes is not a problem, letting mud legs climb on their heads is the problem.
Another example is France at the beginning of World War II, where the German offensive was so broken that the French army had little ability to fight back; the French "national hero" Pétain in World War I was in danger and was ordered - then he surrendered. Why did the "national hero" of World War I become a traitor and a "traitor" in World War II? At that time, although France was completely defeated and the capital fell, there were still thirty infantry divisions and a powerful naval fleet to resist, but after hearing the news that the Communists were preparing to launch an uprising in Paris, the Pétain government, as a big capitalist and agent of the big bureaucracy, in the noble consciousness of "preferring to friends rather than domestic slaves", could not wait to present chrysanthemums to Hitler. (Born in 1856, Pétain was a man who lived through the Paris Commune, which was eventually suppressed by the French government in order to resist Prussia.
In the film, we can see that churchill's wartime cabinet has not yet thought about how to resist German fascism, but has first thought about how to engage in power infighting, which is also the fine tradition of all self-destructive privileged classes.
Resolutely implement the capitulationist line, as long as we keep our privileges, no matter how much we sign treaties that lose power and humiliate the country, we can accept it, and we still call it "the pursuit of peace" and "protection of the people." Just like the conditions that Chiang Kai-shek proposed to Japan in the peace talks: The three eastern provinces can not be, and north China can be "jointly governed", but the lifeblood of the four major families in Jiangsu and Zhejiang will be given to me.
The so-called grandiose "protection of the people" is nothing more than a compromise with the German fascists.
Seeing that the entire wartime cabinet was this kind of urine, what could Churchill do, he was also desperate. Roosevelt could not give any assistance, and the planes he bought had to be pulled into Canada by horse-drawn carriage. Some capitulationists in Parliament were pushing again, and Churchill was really going to be unable to hold on. The scene in the movie is classic: weak, pitiful and helpless.
So he followed the advice of the female typist and the king: go to the lower level to have a look.
At this time, the king's situation was the same as that of the Chongzhen Emperor, whether it was you Li Zicheng or The Emperor Taiji who became the emperor, the group of scholars was still the scholar, but The destination of Chongzhen was the crooked neck tree on the coal mountain. So it is not difficult to understand why the king, who had always hated Churchill, would resolutely support this main war faction at this time.
However, this king is afraid that he has not read "Mao Xuan", "from the masses, to the masses" and "the people are our husbands, we are the students of the people", which is 66666. The beginning of the movie "Tunnel Warfare" is well said: "The people, only the people, can create such a position." The people, and only the people, can use such a position. War educates the people, and the people win the war. "The Darkest Hour" tells a dime-like truth:
Throughout human history, a common law is: "The nobility betrays the country, and the bottom is patriotic." Why the people at the bottom are prone to patriotism is not because they are ignorant or anything, because the fate of the people at the bottom is more fragile, and they must rely on the "big community" of the country to live better, otherwise whether it is a natural disaster or an invasion by a foreign enemy, the people at the bottom who suffer the most are the people at the bottom. Since the fate of the people at the bottom is closely related to this "big community", the "patriotic" feelings of the people at the bottom are essentially the simple feelings of hoping for this big community.
How, does the value of this movie seem to be super positive? Is it super in line with the materialist view of history? So why should we criticize it? The reason is that this is a deliberate whitewashing of history for the sake of some contemporary "political correctness." There is nothing wrong with wanting to express this value, look at Nolan's "Dunkirk", where the heroic uncle is almost a main idea. But Churchill, in any case, is not a leader who can value the lower classes, sympathize with the lower classes, and unite the lower classes.
Churchill's words and ideas as a die-hard rightist, a die-hard elitist, an international anti-communist vanguard, a notorious imperialist, an old aristocrat who excelled in black box operations, were consistent in his words and ideas. On more than one occasion, he referred to the colonies as "barbarians," "backward and stupid peoples," and "nomadic tribes that savagely ate camel dung," and considered the colonization of the British Empire to be "the small conquest of barbarians by civilized people." During the Great Bengal Famine, which killed more than three million people, it was originally caused by poor management by British colonists, but Churchill believed that "Indians were too capable of giving birth" and "breeding like rabbits", and transferred all the life-saving food to British warships to transport away. (Consider Dusley Mukherjee's The Secret War of Churchill, which tells the story of many anti-humanitarian and even anti-human decisions directly ordered by Churchill during the Great Bengal Famine.)
Churchill actively defended British atrocities abroad. He argues that concentration camps for local blacks in african colonies "minimize suffering," when at least 14,000 people died in the camps in South Africa alone, much less in other parts of Africa. After entering Parliament in 1900, Churchill called on the British Empire to wage more wars of conquest, and he even chanted in Parliament that "Aryan blood will surely win". When the Kurds waged a struggle against British rule in Iraq, he said: "I am strongly in favour of the use of poison gas to wipe out uncivilized tribes." ”
When George W. Bush was president of the United States, a bronze bust of Churchill was placed in the White House office, but Obama returned the statue to Britain as soon as he entered the White House. The reason is that Churchill was prime minister and had brutally suppressed an uprising against British colonial rule in Kenya, and Obama's grandfather was imprisoned in a local concentration camp without trial, tortured, severely physically maimed, and left with a disability for the rest of his life.
The real history is like this, Churchill is a "moderate Aryan racist", Hitler is an "extreme Aryan racist", in the face of the great right and wrong of history, the moderate Aryan racist understands the great righteousness, timely and resolutely stands against the extreme Aryan racist, and very consciously cleans up the portal, the great righteousness to destroy relatives, so that it has not been crushed by the rolling wheel of history, and has become a relatively positive image.
In real history, the Conservative Party represented by Chamberlain did not overly restrain Churchill in the wartime cabinet, and Chamberlain publicly expressed his support for Churchill more than once. There is a plot in "The Darkest Hour", churchill's inaugural speech In which the Conservative Party decides whether to support Chamberlain whether he wields a white handkerchief, and Chamberlain puts Churchill together, and the whole parliament is silent and embarrassed. In real history, Churchill's inaugural speech was supported by 381 votes and 0 votes against, which can be said to be an absolute advantage and hatred of the enemy.
We respect Churchill's outstanding contributions during World War II, and we respect Churchill's outstanding personal qualities, abilities and will. You can praise Churchill's outstanding performance in the anti-fascist war in any way, but you cannot use him to embody the brilliance of the materialist view of history, which is a distortion of history and a sloppy treatment of artistic creation. You can let anyone express this idea, but Churchill can't. "Darkest Hour" was made like this, don't say we are not happy, Churchill himself is expected to kick the coffin board: what? Let the old man communicate with the mud legs? Let the old man shake hands with a black man? The old man's courage still comes from these subway buns? WQNMLGB！
So "The Darkest Hour" made me look particularly dramatic, probably like a movie made in Hollywood fifty years later: Trump gave an anti-racist speech at a rally in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr., and he burst into tears in his eyes... Just know this sense of discord. Nyima always felt that the end of the movie was about to be sung: "The invaders, he dares to come, beat his soul and trembles; the invaders, he dares to come, beat others on their horses and overturn." All the people are soldiers, the whole people participate in the war, and the aggressors are completely eliminated. ”
Now there is a trend that the "political correctness" of attaching importance to the vulnerable groups, the people at the bottom, and the minorities is the mainstream of Hollywood movies, but their materialistic view of history is not well studied, and the posture level is not up to standard, so they always make some self-defeating results. The films "The King of the Circus" and "The Darkest Hour" commit the same mistake, one glorifying notorious racists as left-wing activists, and one portraying unscrupulous businessmen with lust for profit as spiritual leaders and philanthropists for vulnerable groups.
It must be admitted that "The King of the Circus" is also a very good work, in which Barnum played by Uncle Wolf is as brilliant as Gary Oldman's Churchill, but this is also a movie with problematic values. The image of Uncle Wolf in the movie is a businessman with dreams, creativity, and imagination, and helps some people with physical disabilities to realize their dreams. Some of the plots in it are very analytical:
After Barnum became famous, he was still despised by "high society", and his daughter was ridiculed for "a smell of peanuts" (eating peanuts was a symbol of circus audiences – and a symbol of the inferior with poor aesthetics). So the poor are the original sin, and the birth is the original sin. It reminds me of the Eastern Jin Dynasty, when the Chen Liu Nguyen clan ridiculed the Chen Jun's Xie clan for being "new out of the door, tedious and rude" ("Shi Shu Xinyu Jian Ao"). You know, how much merit Xie An Xie Xuan made in the Battle of Shuishui, without their group of Partial Anshi Clan heads, they would have been cut down by Jian Jian that night pot. But no matter how great your merits are, they are not as great as my pure warrior blood, and they should discriminate against you or discriminate against you. Ironically, the United States was first ridiculed by old Europe as an "upstart without a background." Now that feng shui is in turn, old money is finally qualified to laugh at new money. Rousseau said it well, we have broken the hereditary inheritance of political blood through one revolution after another, but the hereditary inheritance of capital blood is still a problem.
The other is, who discriminates against the "physically handicapped" people in the circus the most? Rogue proletariat. Many historical experiences tell us that the proletariat is often the most vicious in bullying the proletariat. White workers boycott black workers, local migrant workers discriminate against migrant workers, and grassroots foremen are often the most fierce in squeezing workers (capitalists are often "compassionate"). There is a feeling of "convert fanaticism" in it, and it is also human nature that must be forced to find a sense of superiority, just like sharing articles such as "I blocked all the poor people" in the circle of friends is basically not very rich. Therefore, without the leadership of the vanguard, the proletariat tends to slide into the rogue proletarians, to a life of despair in constant infighting and attrition.
I like the end of the movie, the physically handicapped, the black, the sons of high society, people who climbed from the bottom to the upper class and returned to the extended family, what a reason, very simple, show that the world does not need nobility. Finally, the theme of "the noblest art is the art that makes people happy" is sublimated, how "materialistic view of history" and how "political correct".
"The Darkest Hour" is "from the masses, to the masses", "The King of the Circus" is "the people like to hear, you are not happy, how old are you?" "Well, doesn't it seem to be very politically correct?" But like Churchill in Darkest Hour, this is borrowing from whitewashed historical figures to satisfy today's "political correctness," an opportunistic and hypocritical approach.
Of course, the criticism of his values has nothing to do with whether he is "hyped" or not, after all, most commercial propaganda is inseparable from hype, and his worst behavior is to rely on the physically handicapped people to make huge profits for him, which is also the original sin of all capitalists - exploitation.
Barnum bought an old black maid for $1,000, and although buying and selling people was already illegal in New York at the time, he took advantage of loopholes in the law and spent $1,000 to "rent" her, claiming that the black grandmother was 161 years old and was Washington's wet nurse. Barnum forced the elderly maid to work 10-12 hours a day, only to die of overwork less than a year later. As if that wasn't enough, Barnum didn't even give up the opportunity to make money from the dead, arranging an autopsy display, publicly dissecting the heads of the "oldest people in the world" and charging the audience for expensive tickets.
It can be seen that the entertainment tycoon and the king of the circus did not regard these physically defective inferior people as "people" at all, in his eyes they were just tools to make money, just like the world's largest elephant "River Leopard" who had been bragged about who had saved a little girl who was attacked by a Bengal tiger, they were all animals, they were all exhibits, they were all slaves who could be squeezed to the last thread.
In washington, for example, visit tickets alone cost as much as $1,500 a week — in the 19th century, $1,000 was about 25 horses. Similarly, barnum's heavily invited "Swedish Nightingale", a noble European artist, did not earn the respect of "calling one a man". Barnum not only became his own "scalper ticket seller" (selling tickets by auction), but also hyped up the fabrication of Ms. Linde's lace news in the major media, so that Ms. Linde could not bear to end the contract early. But by this time Barnum had made a net profit of more than half a million dollars.
Barnum successively hired "exhibits" such as bearded women, dwarfs and conjoined twins. In the film, with Barnum's encouragement, these marginalized characters who have been discriminated against and hurt finally find their own value and live out their true selves – which is actually very disgusting. The real history is that this group, like the Swedish Nightingale, became a prop for Barnum's profiteers, performing to fill his insatiable greed and huge debts caused by frequent investment failures. For example, in 1855 Barnum invested heavily in a Watch Company in Connecticut and went bankrupt; in 1857 Barnard took Thumb Tom and 9-year-old genius child Howard to England and Europe to perform, which was very popular and filled his huge debts.
The famous dwarf "Thumb General" Tom, who was only six years old when he was discovered by Barnum, began brutal acting training at this age, including not only song and dance, acrobatics, imitating Napoleon's horse riding, but even drinking a bottle of champagne in one gulp or smoking six cigars at the same time. Judging from the current morality and law, such the use of child labor and even child abuse is long enough to send Barnum to prison.
Barnum, the "King of the Circus," managed to name an era known as the "Barnum Dark Ages" in the history of public relations. In this period, the gist of public relations was not to gain the trust of the public through communication today, but to deceive and fool the public, as well as the famous phrase "fuck the public." The motto of barnum in that era was: "Everything for themselves or the organization they represent" and "The less the public knows about the operation of the enterprise, the more effective and profitable the operation of the enterprise." Contemporary public relations scholars evaluate that era as follows: "They sought fame only under the condition of a complete lack of professional ethics and the principle of safeguarding the public interest." They will never hesitate to take advantage of people such as sick little girls and people with disabilities, as well as the broad and sympathetic public. ”
How to better understand the critique of The King of the Circus and Barnum, let me give you an example. In the twenty-second chapter of the second part of "Born Poor", "Marxist Morality", I talked about the causes and consequences of the criticism of the film "The Tale of Martial Arts" in those years.
On the surface, how noble and affirmative it is to look at the martial arts as a righteous beggar, begging for schools, and supporting education, but why is it forbidden? Chairman Mao's theoretical level, that is certainly not known to where it has gone, his old man felt that there was a problem when he looked at it, where was the problem? Mr. Fan Wenlan made it very clear that when Wu Xun was thirty years old, he and his brother divided their families to get three acres of land, sold for one hundred and twenty hangings, and accumulated ninety hangings for food, a total of two hundred and ten hangings, kneeling and begging the squire Lou Junling, Yang Shufang to lend money to the poor for him to generate interest, from the age of thirty to fifty, Wu Xun accumulated more than 230 acres of land, more than 2,800 hangings of cash, and became a landlord and usurer. Seeing the problem, the money begged by Wuxun was far from enough to run the school, and he begged the local squire to issue a usury loan for him in the name of "running a school"—in twenty years, the land had increased eightyfold, and the cash had increased thirtyfold. To put it bluntly, the essence of the martial arts school is to successfully enter the blood-sucking system of the ruling class to gain benefits in the name of propagating values of the ruling class, and to use the benefits obtained to publicize feudal values to cultivate a new generation of slaves. Of course, this man of martial arts did not have such a high level of insight, and he could be noble, not self-interested, and had good intentions, but it was not strange that he did this thing, and it was not strange that he was not criticized by the Communists who smashed the old values of the old society at that time.
This is easy to understand, how the "Legend of Martial Arts" and "The King of the Circus" are so similar. Wuxun is like a naked loan in those days, and later did charity; this is much better than Barnum, Wuxun has helped some poor children in a down-to-earth manner, and Banham has simply treated people as slaves who make money.
So again, we respect the artistic achievements of "The Legend of Martial Arts" and "The King of the Circus", and we highly praise the outstanding performance and noble character of Zhao Dan, the star of Wuxun, and Hugh Jackman, the main actor of Barnum, but it does not prevent us from criticizing the ideology of these two films.
I have expressed this view in the year-end top ten film inventory, and some people say that I always talk about "politics" when I watch movies, but "ideological film criticism" itself is an important genre of film criticism, that is, Chinese netizens are always ashamed to talk about "politics" and do not know when to develop habits. We, the proletariat, have always been so naked and unconcealed.
Movies can be viewed in two, including artistic and values. Artistically, Darkest Hour and The King of the Circus are undoubtedly excellent works, and in terms of values, this is what this article says. Similarly, there was "The History of the Demise of Romanticism", which was released at the end of 2016, and I also wrote a film review at that time, which also praised the film from the artistic achievement, but criticized it ideologically. As a result, at that time, the official micro also turned, and it may really be that I only read half of the article:
The person who was pitted at the beginning of "The History of the Demise of Romanticism", when I first watched the movie, I thought it was another gangster, and the more I thought about it later, the more wrong it was, and after many confirmations, the prototype of that image was Wang Shouhua, the leader of the early workers' movement of our party and a revolutionary martyr.
This is a bit of an overstatement. Wang Shouhua was one of the main leaders of the may thirtieth anti-imperialist patriotic struggle, participated in and commanded three armed uprisings of Shanghai workers, and was buried alive in fenglin bridge in the west of Shanghai on the night of April 11, 1927, at the behest of Du Yuesheng, the leader of the Qing Gang, and was the first communist party member to die in the April 12 massacre. In the "History of the Demise of Romanticism", Wang Shouhua is ugly as a lewd middle-aged man, raising a small wife in Shanghai, afraid of his head and tail, greedy for life and afraid of death; and wang Shouhua in history, whether it is a strike parade or an uprising battle, is always on the front line.
Ge You said to Wang Shouhua in the movie: "Some people (the strikers) don't want to make Shanghai good" - the "good" here should be added a qualifier, which is "good" in upper society. In the world of flowers and flowers in the Ten Mile Ocean Field on the beach, this big underworld family represented by Ge You can be elegant, can be toned, can be romantic, want to drink porridge and drink porridge, want to eat snacks and eat snacks, want to dance and dance, want to make movies and make movies, want to cut off whose hands are cut off, want to bury who is buried alive... They naturally miss this world of flowers and flowers, and naturally miss this romantic. But this has nothing to do with the broadest masses of the people at the bottom in Shanghai, with the docks, with the cars pulled on the street, with the factory workers, they are the ants under the romantic, they use their own blood and sweat to carry this world of flowers and flowers, but in this world of flowers and flowers they are no different from cattle.
"The History of the Demise of Romanticism" is beautiful, really beautiful, from the story shown in the movie; romantic, very romantic. This is also why the content related to the Republic of China has always had a large audience, because it can perfectly satisfy the illusion of the lower class to the upper class, and there is a subtle sense of substitution. Any literary and artistic work can satisfy this kind of "fantasy" and "obscenity" to a certain extent, and watching "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" can fantasize that you are commanding thousands of troops and horses to charge into the battlefield; watching "Dream of the Red Chamber" can fantasize that you have a good brother and a good sister, and come to a love that has turned thousands of times; the most typical, the modern Network's Xiu Xian Wen, the domineering president Wen, and the Korean drama are all depicting a beautiful and picturesque skin that is out of reach.
Just like why I complained about "The Golden Age" and thought that its three views were not correct, Xiao Hongxiaojun took these two pen names originally meant to be "Little Red Army" together, and the two of them were originally revolutionary youths, and the "dark age" they wanted to subvert has become the "golden age" that commercial capital and the market require them to live in. Che Guevara lived on his shirt, and the "Little Red Army" is still alive in the "Republic of China" today.
Watch the director interview and say that the idea behind "The History of the Demise of Romanticism" is "anti-war", the English name of the film, The Wasted Times - wasted time - why a good era was "wasted", romanticism died out, because of war. The Japanese came in, the ceremony collapsed, and the "Chinese nobles" were gone. But the director is unaware, and does not express a deeper meaning: that is, "the self-destruction of the upper class" is a predestination. It is said that the pyramid of human social stratification is a stable state, but in fact, the pyramid form is the most unstable state: the lower class wants to climb up, wants its own romantic; the upper class people in order to compete for social resources, for greed, these are doomed to conflict. In an interview, the director said that he wanted to reflect the cruelty of war through the demise of romanticism, but what should be seen more is that this kind of war is inevitable. Why the Japanese invaded China, why the Japanese upper class could not get along with the Chinese upper class, there is no special reason, that is, the economic crisis, in order to consume excess productive forces, the explosion of large ships and tanks to embark on the road of militarism, the occupation of more markets and raw material production areas to embark on a road of no return of war.
More deeply, it is precisely because the "upper-class romantics" belonging to the Republic of China have disappeared, and we ordinary people at the bottom have our own romantics, and we can watch the film in the cinema with relish. Otherwise, as in India, where society has not undergone great subversion and revolution, and is still a stubborn caste system of 100 million people and a billion cattle , who can say for sure?
The illiteracy rate in China in 1949 was about 80 percent, and the 20 percent of people who were considered literate already included those who knew only a few hundred Chinese characters and those who were only semi-illiterate today. In the 38 years of the Republic of China, the population has hardly grown. The often said population of 450 million is actually the household registration figure at the end of the Qing Dynasty, and the actual population should be more than this number. By the time of the first census in Chinese history in 1954, it was found that the Chinese population in 1949 was 5. 400 million people. The 38-year full count has only increased by 90 million people, an annual growth rate of 0.48%, which may actually be much lower than this figure, and the growth rate is basically close to zero. Under the conditions of medical and contraceptive techniques at the time, the normal birth rate should be between 3.7 and 4.3 per cent, while the natural mortality rate should be between 1.5 and 2.0 per cent. That is to say, in the 38th year of the Republic of China, there may be about 2 abnormal deaths. Nearly 10 million people die a year, and 300 million unnatural deaths have accumulated in 38 years. Famine, war, poverty and the spread of infectious diseases should be the main causes of death. Because in the 38 years of the Republic of China, there was only 7 years without major famines, and there was no war in 3 years. After 49 years, there was only three years of famine in the full count, but the 38 years of famine in the Republic of China caused 31 years of famine. In 1960, the three years with the highest mortality rate and the worst natural disaster in 1960 were only 2.543%, which was not even in line with the average of the Republic of China.
What does it mean to say this, basically, in the Republic of China era, either I can't read or understand movies, or I don't even have the odds of living to the age of understanding movies. If I hadn't lived in the countryside and been whipped by the landlords, or if I had been forcibly pulled to be a strong man, I would have been robbed by inflation in the cities to the point of poverty. The Kuomintang was a political, economic, and military genius party. Democratic elections can elect two military personnel as president and vice president. Constitutionalism can break the world record for the length of martial law and lock up 3 percent of the population as political prisoners. The economy can maintain more than 100% inflation for many years. After the issuance of fiat money began that year, the most inflationary year was 55% in 1936. After the eight years of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, 110 percent per year, and after the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, 1,000 percent per year, the Kuomintang changed its french currency to gold dollar coupons in its last year on the mainland, and it swelled by 2,000,000 percent in ten months. People are bad money to drive out good money, and the Kuomintang is bad money to drive out themselves. I can still build warships and steel mills, but what did the Republic of China build in the golden decade? Even if it is not built, the first lady still has to use the US loan to buy fighter jets to invest in futures, and finally she is trapped and loses money. Cixi Lafayette probably looked down on Chairman Jiang. And the Four Families of the Kuomintang are a bunch of economic wizards who can amass 6 billion yuan in assets at a time when GDP is only more than $3 billion (the cash portion of illegal assets in the United States that has been detected and frozen in the United States alone is $2 billion). What we have to see is what kind of a republic gave such a romantic to the upper class.
Speaking of Du Yuesheng, played by Ge You, no matter how he talks about righteousness, no matter how firm he is not a traitor, but I will say one thing, the tobacco house knows it, the kiln knows it, who monopolizes the business of the big Shanghai tobacco house? Who built the "morphine factories" on the outskirts of Shanghai? Du Yuesheng, who has an "official background", was replaced by Du Yuesheng's person later by the Anti-Narcotics Bureau. At least half of the kilns were also from their homes, and the prostitutes had to "pay taxes" to Mr. Du. It is reasonable to say that now a drug-related artist is regarded as a street rat, there is no need to hold a gang boss who sells drugs and provides drug use places, right?
The director said in the interview that the scene where Ge You returned to China and was inspected by security is typically meaning "the demise of romanticism", you see a big guy who is so popular, and finally a customs soldier, let him reach out, let him take off his hat, this battle is over, their status is gone. At that time, I thought, what is the problem with customs security to let you take off a hat, why do you have privileges, you have to be satisfied with the country when you are home, just romantic.
The self-destruction of the upper classes gave the lower classes a chance. After the founding of New China, land reform, farmland water conservancy construction, rural literacy campaign, campaign to eliminate infectious diseases, popularization of compulsory education, plus rural teachers, barefoot doctors... For the first time, the light of civilization in human society illuminated the vastest soil of The Land of China.
From the point of view of historical development, it was the romantique that destroyed the upper class and the romantic tycolle that belonged to our lower people. Those who were once "Chinese aristocrats" and the remnants of the Republic of China can naturally lament the "demise of romanticism", but this is a question of where the ass sits. At least I can express the following views on behalf of the proletariat:
The demise of romanticism is good, not small good, but great good.
The critique of film ideology is further generalized, which is the critique of values. Let me give you another example, such as the movie "Wolf Totem", which promotes "wolves are proud and noble species, they are not domesticated", and poisonous chicken soup such as "You have seen tigers and lions in the circus, but you have never seen wolves". But what is the truth, dogs are domesticated by wolves:
(Source: Guns, Germs and Steel)
If that's not enough, let's take another critical hit:
Of all the animals, the wolf was one of the first to be domesticated, about two thousand years before sheep, pigs and other livestock. If you have played "Civilization 6" friends should have the impression that at the beginning of ancient times, you must first study the technology of "animal husbandry" in order to build a ranch and obtain resources such as "sheep" and "cattle", but the scout sent at the beginning of the game has a dog.
If that's not enough, how about another critical hit? Many anthropologists have shown that wolves are not actively domesticated by humans, but "passively domesticated." How to understand it, like pigs, we know that meat is delicious, so we circle it up and reproduce it from generation to generation, which is domestication with human subjective intentions, while wolves are different. Because in the wolf pack, some old, sick and disabled wolves will be excluded, they will actively approach the human settlement, seeking some leftovers - and excrement. Over time, it became a dog and became "man's best friend".
Don't feel disgusting, prehistoric humans didn't have so much leftovers to feed wolves, so it's really nice to say that leftovers are really good, and the main food of wolves is human excrement - dogs can't change the history of eating for at least 10,000 years. I still remember Stavrianos saying in the first chapter of the "General History of the World" that human beings have changed from hunting to farming, in fact, the living environment is worse, because hunting shoots a place, excrement stays in the local area, and lives in a new place; and under the settled agricultural life, excrement is not easy to deal with, which brings serious problems of germ hygiene. And what is the main way to deal with human excrement - to eat it by dogs.
So what is the wolf worth blowing! They have become dogs by eating, why would some authors lick their faces and say that this is a species that is untamable and eternal pursuit of freedom! You say that domestication does not domesticate this poisonous chicken soup, the key "Wolf Totem" movie also has a particularly disgusting extension, saying that nomadic peoples are "wolf nature" and farming peoples are "sheep nature". Anyway, our farming nation has lived a good life for three thousand years, and I don't know where your Huns, who are full of "wolf nature", have gone? Are the Khitans still there? Do you want to know about the wolf Juxu? Yanran Leshi to understand? Snow Night Break the King's Court to understand?
Therefore, a film is divided into many parts, and elements such as script, photography, and performance can judge the merits of a film, and ideological and value levels can also judge a film, which is not in conflict. Obviously my knowledge structure knows that wolves have become dogs by eating, you still have to blow wolf nature for me, you say this is not a diaphragm to me, I spit on your movie is not too much, right?