For Zhang Yimou's first spy war movie "On the Cliff", the author has only two points to complain about, both of which are related to casting.
One is the agent played by Sha Yi, in fact, his image and acting skills are not faulty, the problem may be that there are too many variety shows on Sha Yi, which is easy to make people feel like jumping, and some viewers say that they want to laugh when they see Sha Yi. Among the actors who have encountered similar problems may also be Shen Teng.
The other is the high section chief played by Ni Dahong, who has more than enough yin and a slightly insufficient aura, like a conspirator, not like a front-line conductor.
For the other plots of "On the Cliff", the author has nothing to provoke, the story rhythm is very tight, there is no urine point in the whole process, and you have no time to sum up the others, and it is over.
Of course, there are ten thousand old strategists in the eyes of ten thousand people, everyone's viewing experience is not the same, and everyone's level of cognition of film art is also different, this thing can not unify the point of view, can only seek common ground while reserving differences.
However, there are some so-called "film reviews" on the Internet that make it difficult for the author to agree, because the direction of their evaluations can be described as funny.
The first funny point of view: compare the movie "On the Cliff" with the TV series "The Cliff".
Countless netizens who hold this view compare not only the film itself, but also the two actors Cheng Yu and Ni Dahong, who play the high section chief, and Zhang Jiayi and Yu Hewei, who play Zhou Yi.
The movie "On the Cliff" and the TV series "Cliff" have similar story backgrounds, similar characters, similar geography, and even the screenwriter is the same person, Quan Yongxian.
Therefore, many netizens have compared "On the Cliff" and "Cliff", thinking that this point is not as good as that.
Hey, this so-called "film review" belongs to the kind of funny film review, because there is no comparison between the two at all, it is completely two things, how do you compare it?
For example, the atomic bomb is the principle of nuclear fission, the nuclear power plant is also the principle of nuclear fission, and the raw materials are all using uranium-235, is it possible to say that the atomic bomb is inferior to the nuclear power plant, or the nuclear power plant is not as good as the atomic bomb?
Can people's nuclear power plants boil boiling water, but can atomic bombs burn? Can nuclear power plants generate electricity, can atomic bombs be fired? Atomic bombs can kill people, nuclear power plants ... Yes, it's slower.
"On the Cliff" is equivalent to an atomic bomb, with a group of the best actors (more than 90% abundance uranium-235), reacting in a very short period of time, releasing the greatest energy and bringing the strongest shock to thousands of families.
"Cliff" is equivalent to a nuclear power plant, using a large number of good actors (3%-20% abundance uranium-235) to generate electricity by boiling water, and then transport electricity to thousands of households for use in daily life.
One is highly concentrated and then concentrated blooming, one is energy divergence and then fine water long flow, although the raw materials are similar, the principle is the same, but the production process is different, the use is also different, you say what can be compared?
The plot is like this, the actor is the same, the same actor, the way of acting in the TV series is not the same as in the movie, the TV series pays attention to stability, the movie pays attention to the explosiveness, the way to act in the movie is jumpy, the way to act in the TV series is to act in the movie is warm, the same actor, in fact, there is a big difference in the middle.
So, those netizens who compare the movie "On the Cliff" with the TV series "Cliff", how do you say hello? alas.
The second, slightly comical point of view, compares "Cliff" to "The Sound of the Wind."
The atomic bomb cannot be compared with the nuclear power plant, so the atomic bomb and the atomic bomb are always compared, right? After all, everyone uses one unit of measurement, or tens of thousands of tons equivalent, or several Hiroshima.
"On the Cliff" is a spy war movie, "The Sound of the Wind" is also, both depict the period of the War of Resistance, all have underground party undercover, all have sacrifices, all have sublimation, even have electrocution and injection bridges, and there are Ni Dahong, even the staged subtitle prompts are similar, this is always comparable, right?
In fact, it is not impossible to compare these two movies, but it is limited to limited quantitative data such as box office, you have a few Hiroshima, he has a few Nagasaki.
However, there are also essential differences between "On the Cliff" and "The Sound of the Wind".
Hit a place, the same are atomic bombs, the equivalent is the same, but because of the difference between air explosion and ground explosion, its killing range is also different, air explosion is wider, ground explosion is deeper, air explosion dry ground, ground explosion dry underground, horizontal and vertical there is an essential difference, so you have to compare the killing effect of two atomic bombs with the same equivalent, you must understand whether it is air explosion or ground explosion, otherwise there is no comparison.
Relatively speaking, the core of the story of "On the Cliff" is not about how the task is completed, the beginning of the task and the process of completing the rescue of Wang Ziyang are almost a flash in the past, the core of this movie is about the agent's escape from the trap when facing a desperate situation, just like the escape room, and then describes the humanity and emotions displayed in the process of getting out of the trap.
So, we watch "On the Cliff", the movie almost throws four agents into the trap at the beginning, until the end of the film to escape two, the whole movie is around this process of getting out of trouble, playing a clear card, intending to bring the audience a tense atmosphere and a tight rhythm, making you breathless, to achieve this effect, the movie is successful.
Looking at "The Sound of the Wind", what is the core of the story around this movie? It's a guess! It is a dark card, showing the possibility that everyone is undercover, and then gradually analyzing and solving the puzzle, there are misunderstandings and traps in the middle, and the atmosphere it shows is brain-burning.
In other words, The Sound of the Wind is more of a "killing game," like closing your eyes when it's dark.
So, if you say you love to play "killing games" and not "room escapes," or vice versa, there's nothing wrong with that.
If you want to say that "escape room" is not as good as "killing game", or vice versa, then the author can only say that your views are somewhat funny, all games are not false, appeal points are different, stimulation methods are different, how can there be comparison?
So, who should "On the Cliff" compare to?
Let's put it bluntly, compared to the audience's own heart.
You feel that "On the Cliff" attracted you, touched you, made you feel that the movie ticket is worth it, OK, for you, this is a successful movie.
If, "On the Cliff" doesn't attract you, doesn't move you, makes you feel that the movie ticket money is spent in vain, OK, for you, this movie is not a success.
However, whether you think "On the Cliff" is successful for you or not, there is no need to use the film and "Cliff" and "The Sound of the Wind" to make a meaningless or even comical comparison.
What do you think about boiling water for your house with an atomic bomb and finding murderers in an escape room game?