The theme of the Son of Red is a very good idea, and it also has a lot of content to dig. After seeing the film version, I watched it with great anticipation. However, the director and the screenwriter have such a good subject matter, but they did not make the dramatic conflict that should have been created, or the value and institutional conflict in a deeper sense, reach the depth it should have, and even superficially make people feel offended. The story of the Red Sons is driven by authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union versus multi-party rule in the United States and the pros and cons of capitalism and communism.
In the debate on this topic, the director showed a good sophistication ability, which caused some misunderstandings. One of the sophistry is that the director implied from several aspects that the United States at that time was not a perfect society. For example, the media (Louise) that emphasized freedom of speech from beginning to end was actually always under the control of capital (Luthor);
Or to carry out inhumane genetic experiments against the Soviet Union.
At the same time, it also described the "autocratic and oppressive government" of the Soviet Union under the leadership of Stalin at that time, the most direct one being the "Gulag" concentration camp in the film.
The director seems to be saying: "I am very objective in advancing the interpretation, and I am not tolerant of anyone's shortcomings." Not so. Concept stealing and logical errors started after Hong Chao killed Stalin.
Since the previous failure of socialism was based on Stalin's dictatorship, what about changing a leader for socialism. Under the leadership of Hong Chao, the Soviet Union returned to its peak and prospered. Since then, the logic of the film has become weird. First of all, since the dictatorship has been shaken off, the way the opponents express their opinions is still to destroy everywhere; secondly, Superman still arrests people with different ideas, performs surgery to control the brain, and turns into a characterless walking dead (US This is the birthplace of prefrontal lobectomy).
So, is the setting of a socialist country so anti-intellectual from top to bottom? ? In this way, the logic of only emphasizing ideology without considering the facts makes people feel psychologically uncomfortable. For such sophistry, it can only be said that the director is still very good at propaganda of ideology, and Hong Chao's evaluation of Luther in the film is very suitable for the director himself.
If the first half can still be called sophistry, then the ending is completely confusing. Maybe the director also found that his logic could not be completely closed, so he simply let himself go at the end. What logic do you want, American forever That's right. In the film, Hong Chao's most important ally and only friend after becoming the leader, Wonder Woman has always wanted all parties to cooperate calmly. But Superman ignored Wonder Woman's repeated persuasion, and even broke with her at the end, going to the White House to fight Luthor.
With such determination, she didn't even enter the door of the White House, but was told by Louise at the door, and smoothly joined the capitalist camp, which was really fragrant.
And then the Soviet Union disintegrated after Superman died? ?
And then the United States will help people all over the world to transform capitalism? ?
That's right, it really is Laomei's consistent style.
Easter egg: Lao Mei really does not miss any opportunity of the Black Heaven Dynasty
This article only expresses opinions on the film and does not carry any political stance.
View more about Superman: Red Son reviews
