Have you watched the popular movies during the Spring Festival? "Article 20" has received praise from all sides since its popularity, and the popularity has remained high. However, behind the many praises, there are also many doubts.
For example, there is a scene in the movie "**", the director's original intention was just to express Hao Xiuping's tragedy, and there was no inappropriate bridge.
However, it was this seemingly ordinary scene that could no longer be ordinary that was complained about*** Many netizens angrily denounced the absurdity. What are the causes and consequences of the incident?
1. The original intention of the movie
Director Zhang Yimou is very good at telling stories through the lens, and in Article 20, he gives full play to his own strengths. It seems to be in the ** law,In fact, it is talking about the most simple emotions between people.
At the beginning of the movie, a case was introduced, the ** who committed the crime was called Wang Yongqiang, and the deceased was called Liu Wenjing. At the beginning of the movie, at first it seemed that the audience would think that this ** was heinous.
As the case unfolds step by step, the audience understands that everything is not as simple as imagined.
Wang Yongqiang and his deaf and dumb wife Hao Xiuping gave birth to a daughter, unfortunately the daughter is also disabled, but she can**.
In order to treat their children, the husband and wife had no choice but to borrow usury from Liu WenjingLater, I found out that I was fooled, and the two of them couldn't pay back at all.
Liu Wenjing is a demon, he "scolded Hao Xiuping on the grounds that Wang Yongqiang and his wife are not usurious", and even said the absurd remarks of "200 debts at a time".And Wang Yongqiang in the movie was chained outside the door without dignity.
Hao Xiuping went out and told Wang Yongqiang that she couldn't live anymore, and the husband and wife looked at each other and cried, as if they were about to remove the screen.
Wang Yongqiang couldn't bear it anymore and went to Liu Wenjing to discuss the explanation.
Even so, Liu Wenjing said cruel words after going out, and said that he was going to the car to get a knife.
Wang Yongqiang was afraid that his wife and daughter would be hurt, so in order to protect himself, he stabbed Wang Yongqiang with scissors, and finally unfortunately died.
This case serves as the main thread of the entire moviePull to the limit between "justifiable defense" and "brawl".
Second, the lens ** is complained?
Some netizens said that anyone who has watched the movie knows that the paragraph between Hao Xiuping and Liu Wenjing is just a passing paragraph. There was nothing out of place in the whole process.
Besides, the director's original intention was just to show Hao Xiuping's helplessness and despair, wasn't it?
Even if the characters are shown so peacefully, the movie has even been complained.
The most laughable thing is that the reason for the complaint is that it is not suitable for children. Many dissatisfied people said that the footage of Hao Xiuping being violated was unnecessaryIt can be presented in other ways.
There are also viewers who gave the movie a 35 points, commenting that he doesn't want to see the cliché "** picture" anymore.
Some netizens also think that the impact of the picture is too strong when Wang Yongqiang is tied to an iron chainIt is indeed easy to have a bad influence on children.
3. The benevolent see the benevolent and the wise see the wise
For many people who think that the movie is ***, some netizens angrily denounced the absurdity.
For vulnerable groups like Wang Yongqiang and Hao Xiuping, being bullied or even insulted, how can they show their grievances and despair? How can we empathize with the audience?
Admittedly, there are other ways of expression, but we also have to admit that to perfectly show the above two points, this is perhaps the best way to show it, and it is also the best way to achieve emotional resonance with the audience.
If you do feel angry and worried while sitting in the theater, I think it's appropriate.
Of course, the world is multifaceted, and aesthetics are also diverse, and it is normal to have different points of view.
As long as movies teach us the meaning of positive energy,It doesn't make sense to see if some of the shots are suitable.
There is a sentence in the movie that is impressive, "The law cannot give way to the lawless".
When you are on the bus, you see a woman who is "groping", and there is no one on the bus who lends a handWill you step up? Even if the result is that you may face the loss of your job and the misunderstanding of your family afterwards.
Everyone has the answer in their hearts, but no matter how you choose, you can't judge right or wrong. "The law cannot yield to the lawless" tells us that as ordinary people, they have the right to act bravely, and they should be protected by the law.
In the confrontation between reason and law, reason will definitely be slightly superior, after all, the meaning of the existence of law is to make the crime of the bad guys more expensive and have a deterrent effect.
Conclusion
No movie is perfect, and there are a few flaws to blame.
There are still many people on the Internet who think that the character Lu Lingling played by Gao Ye in the play is very abrupt, too idealistic, and Han Ming, played by Lei Jiayin, has some personal heroismThe reversal also feels inexplicable.
In any case, cinema is just a form of representation. We can't characterize a movie just because a child is scared.
As a parent, what we need to do is not to cut off the source of transmission, but to give appropriate guidance when there are violent images and tell children to learn to protect themselves.