Regarding Zhang Yimou's first spy war film "Above the Cliff", I only have two opinions, both of which are closely related to the casting process.
The spy role played by Sha Yi is actually impeccable in terms of image and acting skills. The possible problem is that Sha Yi has appeared too many times in variety shows, which may make the audience feel that he has the urge to dance when performing, and some people can't help but laugh out loud when they see Sha Yi. Another problem is that his performance is too exaggerated, and he himself admits that when he plays some smaller roles in recent years, he always feels that it is not real enough. Among those actors who have encountered similar problems, Shen Teng may also be one of them.
Another role is the section chief Gao played by Ni Dahong, who has a lot of shadows, but his aura is slightly lacking, more like a conspirator than a front-line commander.
I don't have anything to fault about the other episodes in Above the Cliff. The whole story is very tightly paced and there is no suspense, which makes you simply have no extra time to think about the other parts, and you just read it.
Obviously, in the perspective of 10,000 people, there are always 10,000 old plotters. Everyone's experience and understanding of the art of cinema is different, and it is difficult to reach a consensus on this point of view, so we can only seek common ground and respect differences.
However, there are still some things on the Internet that are called "movie reviews", which makes it difficult for me to fully agree with them, because the direction of these reviews can simply be described by the word "funny".
The first humorous opinion is: compare the movie "On the Cliff" with the TV series "The Cliff".
Many netizens held such an opinion, they not only compared the content of the movie, but also compared Cheng Yu and Ni Dahong, who played Gao Section Chief, and Zhang Jiayi and Yu Hewei, who played Zhou Yi.
Whether it is the movie "On the Cliff" or the TV series "Cliff", there are many similarities in their story backgrounds, characters, and geographical locations, and even the screenwriters are the same person, all of whom are brave pioneers.
As a result, many netizens have compared "Above the Cliff" to "The Cliff" and feel that both are unsatisfactory in some aspects.
Hey, this genre called "film review" is actually a kind of comical movie review because there is no comparison between the two at all, it's just two completely different concepts, how do you compare that?
As an example, the atomic bomb is based on the principle of nuclear fission, which is also followed by nuclear power plants, and all the raw materials are uranium-235. So, can we assert that the atomic bomb is inferior to a nuclear power plant, or that a nuclear power plant is inferior to an atomic bomb?
Someone else's nuclear power plant can boil water, but can an atomic bomb burn? An atomic bomb can be underground**, but a nuclear power plant cannot. Does a nuclear power station have the capacity to generate electricity, but is it possible for an atomic bomb to generate electricity? Atomic bombs are lethal to nuclear power plants. It's also possible, but slow down.
The movie "Above the Cliff" is like an atomic bomb, by a group of top actors (more than 90% abundant uranium-235) in a very short period of time to carry out a chemical reaction, releasing huge energy, bringing a deep shock to countless families.
The movie "The Cliff" can be seen as a nuclear power station, where a large group of talented actors (3%-20% abundant uranium-235) generate electricity by boiling water, and then send the electricity to countless homes for trivial daily life.
One method is to release the energy after it is highly concentrated, while the other is to gradually stabilize the energy after dispersion. Although the raw materials and principles they use are all similar, there is a great deal of comparability between them due to differences in manufacturing processes and uses?
In TV dramas and movies, the actors also have different ways of acting. TV dramas focus on the stability of actors, while movies focus on explosiveness. Interpreting a TV series in the form of a movie makes people feel jumpy, while interpreting a movie in the form of a TV series makes people feel warm. Despite both actors, there are actually significant differences between the two.
Therefore, how should netizens who compare the movie "On the Cliff" with the TV series "The Cliff" praise you? You see, I like this kind of **. Ah.
Another slightly comical view is to compare "The Cliff" to "The Wind."
The atomic bomb cannot be compared with a nuclear power plant, but the comparison of the atomic bomb with the atomic bomb is absolutely necessary? If we use a dimension to compare, then we can compare it. After all, everyone uses a single metric of measurement, which could be tens of thousands of tons of equivalent, or several Hiroshimas.
The movie "On the Cliff" is a work with the theme of spy warfare, and "The Wind" is also set in the era of the Anti-Japanese War, describing the undercover, sacrifice, sublimation of the underground party, and even the plot of electrocution and injection. In addition, Ni Dahong's characters and staged subtitle prompts are also very similar, which makes the two somewhat comparable?
In fact, it's also acceptable to compare the two films, but that's only based on box office and other limited quantitative data, like your Hiroshima and his Nagasaki.
However, "On the Cliff" does differ in nature from "The Wind".
No matter how much you hit **, the yield of the atomic bomb is the same. However, due to the difference between airburst and ground blast, their killing range will also be different. Airburst has a wider damage range and Groundburst has a deeper damage depth. Airbursts primarily attack the ground, while groundbursts primarily attack underground. There are significant differences between the two in both horizontal and longitudinal directions. Therefore, when you compare two atomic bombs with the same yield, it must be clear whether it is an air explosion or a ground explosion, otherwise there can be no valid comparison between them.
Relatively speaking, the core plot of the movie "On the Cliff" is not about the way the mission is completed, but simply describes the beginning of the mission and the whole process of rescuing Wang Ziyang. This work mainly tells how to successfully escape in the face of a desperate situation, just like escaping in a secret room, and further shows the humanity and emotions shown in the process.
Therefore, when we ** the movie "On the Cliff", we can see that the movie cleverly throws four ** into a trap at the beginning, and it is not until the end of the film that two ** successfully escape. The entire film revolves around this crisis in order to give viewers a tense atmosphere and a tight pace that will suffocate them. As long as such an effect is achieved, then the film is considered a success.
When we ** "The Wind" again, what will we find out what is the core story of this movie? Is it suspenseful or real? It's a guessing game! It's a dark card game that shows the various possibilities that everyone could be undercover, and then analyzes and deciphers it step by step, and while there may be misunderstandings and pitfalls in between, the atmosphere is a headache.
In other words, "The Wind" is closer to a "deadly game", like closing your eyes when night falls.
So if you claim that you like to play "killing games" and don't like "escape rooms", or vice versa, that's completely understandable.
If you think that "escape room" is not as good as "killing game", then from another point of view, I can only say that your opinion is somewhat ridiculous, all because the game itself is real, the points pursued are different, and the way of stimulation is also different, how can it be comparable?
So, who should we compare ourselves to in the work "Above the Cliff"?
Frankly, compare it to the inner emotions of the audience.
You will find that "On the Cliff" not only attracts your attention, but also touches your heart, making you feel that the movie is a good value for money at the box office. For you, this work is undoubtedly a successful film.
If the movie "On the Cliff" doesn't pique your interest and doesn't touch your heart, then you may feel that the box office revenue of the movie has been wasted. However, for you, the work did not achieve the expected success.
However, whether you think "On the Cliff" was a success for you or not, there is no need to make a meaningless or even comical comparison of the film to "The Cliff" or "The Wind."
What are your thoughts if you are going to boil water for your home with an atomic bomb and look for ** in an escape room game?