Chapter 1928

"Play list", 25 points, "we are all looking forward to a contemporary science fiction Oracle comparable to '2001 Space Odyssey', showing the mystery of space and the complexity of human nature; But "Star Trek" is like a liar, showing a Star Trek process that seems to have never been appreciated. After thinking deeply, it is the familiar movie pictures and the vulgar and stereotyped emotional resonance. We have seen too many similar movies.

What's more, we all know that Langley hall is an excellent actor, but we don't need to see two works of such high homogeneity as "gravity" and "interstellar crossing" in just six months. Is hall's performance outstanding? beyond all doubt; But did hall break through? Obviously not. To be honest, I don't understand the need to shoot this movie. What's on the mind of the Nolan brothers? "

Full fire!

"Playlist" magazine completely did not hide its disgust and hatred, and there was no soft talk between its words. It criticized the whole film in a sharp and direct way, and even lanli suffered and was criticized. It pointed the spearhead at lanli who did not want to make progress, This should be the first time in the history of Langley's performance that he has encountered criticism - not even the "detachment" with mixed praise at the beginning.

The above is just a short review. In the long review, James Rocchi, the professional film critic of "playlist", expressed his views more completely.

There is no doubt that Langley is outstanding. But after four consecutive years of nominating Oscars, completing the great feat of egot, and keeping his films unbeaten, James Roche believes that people's demands on Langley, as well as Langley's demands on himself, should be raised to a higher level, because Langley is now the leading figure in Hollywood, Even if we can't make a breakthrough in every work, we should at least not repeat ourselves.

"If Ben Affleck or Gerald butler or Adam Sandler are repeating themselves, does anyone care? Of course not! Because they like to repeat themselves, and they are so used to repeating themselves that even the audience is used to it. But Lanley hall shouldn't be like this! "

James Roche expressed his strong view that the homogeneity of "gravity" and "interstellar crossing" is too close. Langley's performance has level and depth, but he has not been able to get rid of similar routines. This is undoubtedly a backward step for Langley. He thinks Langley is beginning to become "lazy".

Undoubtedly, this is a very interesting and special criticism. It's not only the first time in Langley's career, but also the first real criticism since the negative wave of the awards season. People can disagree, refute, even sneer at it. But James Roche is not "against for the sake of opposition.", Really speak their own point of view, and with content support.

This is very rare!

Of course, he didn't hide his disgust for "Star Trek" either. He even made a remark with such a fierce adjective as "bad soap opera", and made a clear statement of his position, stressing that it was "the worst work of Nolan's career so far" and that it was a great retrogression, Nolan needs to make a good review of himself, "what kind of work do you want to shoot, not just satisfied with the superficial and superficial idolatry of Stanley Kubrick.".

The downright bad comments did not leave any feelings. The "play list" thus clearly stated its position, and sent the first dazzling red bad comment to "star crossing", which opened the prelude of the media comprehensive review.

Objectively speaking, in the comprehensive media review of commercial films, this is a normal sight. Even "Inception", which has gained the support of countless diehard fans, has also suffered from bad reviews; The reason why "comprehensive evaluation" has become a comprehensive evaluation is that it is of great significance to draw an overall conclusion after counting a number of professional media and make a judgment on the quality of the film.

The bad review of "playlist" is only one of the comprehensive reviews of the media. More accurately, it is the only one.

After the premieres in Los Angeles and New York ended one after another, the media review was officially released, and 49 professional media gave comments at the first time, which easily surpassed "Captain America 2" and became the most popular work in media reviews since the opening of this summer's program, which clearly showed the attention of "Star Trek".

Even after the upsurge, the publicity period was greatly shortened; Even if the feedback of the internal audition is ambiguous, which casts uncertainty on the quality of the film, it is still one of the most eye-catching works in 2014. Everyone is curious about what sparks can collide between lenley and Nolan, and film critics from professional media are no exception.

49 media, 49!

A bad comment.

Ten medium reviews.

Thirty eight good comments.

Just from the comparison of data, we can see that the media review continued the ambiguous attitude of the previous internal audition, "Star Trek" failed to win the support of film critics like "gravity".

However, "gravity" is originally an art film taking the route of the film festival. Warner Bros. hesitated in the tactical selection stage of the award season, which is the best proof. The outbreak of commercial box office later can be regarded as a surprise; And "Star Trek" is a commercial film aiming at the box office. Whether it's Thanksgiving or summer, the box office is Warner Brothers' main goal, and the uneven media reputation is not surprising, even acceptable.

"Los Angeles Times", 40 points, "Nolan ', It is no doubt disappointing to find a foothold in the pattern of human being's self moving.

Objectively speaking, visual effects, sound effects, film editing and other parts all performed very well, and the actors led by hall, chastan and Hathaway also gave wonderful performances, but all of them were based on the "father daughter relationship", which is an unbearable degradation for science fiction films. Nolan's performance should be higher than that - it has to be said that hall lost his sharpness for the first time in script selection. "

"San Francisco Chronicle", 50 points, "most of the time in the film, Nolan once again showed his courage, not afraid to use a huge production with an investment of 165 million US dollars to tell a grand theme about human self sacrifice and the choice between the ego and the big ego; Until Nolan let the two protagonists resolutely choose to return to earth, the theme core of the whole film began to collapse, and finally degenerated into a family soap opera. The huge theme has not been sublimated, but has fallen back, which is undoubtedly a retrogression for science fiction films.

If I'm talking about the great part of the movie, then I'm going to choose Langley hall. Although the film failed to make a breakthrough on the science fiction level, Hall's performance has given the characters and stories more possibilities for discussion - although these discussions are not what I expected. "

"Guardian", 50 points, "the epic with great visual effect is a farce with shallow content. The script lacks enough foreshadowing to give the characters and stories more room for development, which makes the subsequent plot turns frivolous. It tries to show the smallness and humbleness of human beings in the face of time, but on the development curve of "love can conquer time and space", it discards all the profundity and turns into a cheap sensational work.

On the performance level, Nolan once again showed his timidity to the actors. The performances of Hathaway, chastan, Damon and Kane were all too vigorous. The emotional burst of the close-up shot threw away all the delicacy and refinement of the performance, and finally presented only the roaring performance of Columbia soap opera. Fortunately, hall saved all this, restrained and delicate, simple and profound performance to calm the scene, otherwise the film will become a big car accident, I can't imagine how bad it will be; But even Hall's performance was wasted by the script. "

"Voice of the village", 60 points, "no matter what Nolan's strengths and advantages are, the only thing to be sure is that he lacks the touch of human nature. All his films lack real "sexuality" - I'm not talking about clapping for love or taking off clothes. In fact, those pictures are never really "sexuality", just pure sensory stimulation; In all Nolan's works, the connection of human nature is just a 'sacred idea', just like a concept or a noun in the textbook the Bible, which cannot capture the flesh and blood under the human skin.

In "Star Trek", we try to break the shackles of time and space through the fetters of family affection, but the lack of details makes the script look more like a good student who fills in a series of elements in order to piece together a chemical equation, but has no real soul.

In the Q & A after the premiere, Raleigh hall mentioned the lack of Tom's role, which just proves that hall is still correct in capturing the human nature of the characters in the script. In fact, Hall's performance largely makes up for Nolan's shortcomings, but Nolan's director control is too strong. Even Hall, as an actor, The remedies he can make are also very limited.

After watching the movie, think about it carefully, and the answer comes out: all the reflection, all the shock and all the moving come from Hall's performance, from Hall's spirituality, not about the movie. If there is no hall, then this is a popcorn movie without soul. I don't think it's better than transformers. "