This is a very heavy movie.
When I was very young, I learned about the Nanjing Massacre from extracurricular books. When I was a child, I just gritted my teeth blindly and never had more feelings. I have seen two Nanjing Massacre-themed movies before, one "Blood Evidence of the Massacre" and one "Nanjing Massacre". The former has more brush and ink on slaughter and adultery, while the latter is better in the fluency of the story and the control of specific scenes. (In the film I watched in elementary school, the section of Grass Sandal Ridge was very impressive, and Lu Chuan seemed to have a reference in the position of the machine gun massacre), but it didn't give me a more specific feeling than the book, especially both of them tried to be a Chinese-Japanese couple. The tragedy is the main line, which is too hypocritical. In fact, the idea is not as clever as "An Unfinished Chess" filmed during the honeymoon period between China and Japan in the 1980s. But after reading "Nanjing! Nanjing! ”, when I came out of the cinema, I saw people and vehicles on both sides of the road, and I suddenly felt strange. Is this the devastated city I just saw in the movie? I don't know if other people see this movie like this, but this movie gave me a strong sense of dread, and regardless of other aspects of the movie, at least it managed to get the atmosphere right. Perhaps objectively speaking, the film itself is far from the extreme in terms of blood and cruelty among the films I have seen, but perhaps it is because of my constant self-hinting that "this is the city under my feet, this is the city under my feet" Well, I was really scared after watching it. It's not that I'm afraid of being hurt by a specific person or thing, but I don't know what I can do if I enter such a desperate situation.
After reading it, there are a lot of things I want to express, but I have been entangled and can't say it. In the past two days, the mood has been very low. Thank you, there are still people who volunteered for me to tease me. If it wasn't for the catharsis on these shows, I'm afraid it would be more difficult for me to get rid of this emotion. My requirement for my own film review is to reject emotional descriptions. But when the movie is played back in your head, it's hard to jump out and watch it. And not only feelings, history, current affairs, and a lot of information and gossip about this book are all rolling around in my eyes. Alright, let this lyrical crap out of the way, and I'm talking.
1. The failure of the beginning and the ending
The script of this movie is problematic, especially the ending.
If understood purely according to the plot of the film, the ending is reasonable: Kadokawa's character setting has always been a conscience, so his release is reasonable; after a lot of stimulation, his personal feelings for the comfort woman Yuriko are in a sense the only one sustenance, but Yuriko also died, which became the only straw that broke the camel; the two Chinese survived and regained hope, there is nothing wrong with a smile; the whole film should give people a little hope at the end.
The following items are detailed, in fact, not only the ending, but also many of the overall problems of the film.
Yes, if you follow the logic of Kadokawa's character setting, his ending is very reasonable. The narrative line based on Kadokawa's perspective has been criticized by many people, but I don't think it's a problem. Instead, it fills a vacancy. The problem is that other than Woody Allen's "War and Peace", I have never seen such a pure heart to childish characters. What Lu Chuan meant was not to make people confused, but to understand it too much, and wanted to understand human nature, but the problem was that it was ridiculously naive. In fact, even if Kadokawa's character and all aspects are not modified, referring to the last ambiguous fall of the British officer played by Alec Guinness in "The Bridge on the River Kwai", he can have more choices, and he has more choices in the shaping of the role. There could be more space. If someone wants to compare the truth of history with the truth of art, then the persuasiveness of this paragraph will be even worse. There are many suicides in the Japanese army, but only about 1/4000 of them commit suicide due to war weariness ( Thanks to the information provided by brother puma). What's more, this was still in the early stage of the war when the Japanese army was in a smooth war.
The reaction of the two Chinese people after escaping was a naive continuation of the above, and Lu Chuan's intentions became more obvious. But this is even more outrageous than Kadokawa's suicide. The setting of Kadokawa's death is at least in line with the logic of the film, and the two Chinese people's laughter and play are not in line with basic common sense: what if someone just got away from months of death threats , and the future is uncertain, can he relax completely? Many survivors of the Nanjing Massacre still have strong psychological shadows to this day, let alone just escaped at that time, how could they be in such a relaxed and happy state? This paragraph was criticized for purely deserving it.
At the end, from the technical point of view, the shooting is acceptable. However, after being suppressed for more than two hours, even if you want to "hope" for a while, it suddenly ends with such a big contrast in style.
The reason for this ending is to say that Lu Chuan had a very serious problem when planning the script: how to show hope in despair. Complete despair is not desirable, not because of those literary theories about what the purpose of art should be, but because the history involved in this film, if presented in this way, is difficult to accept, not only that, in the creation of art, Apart from crying blindly, there is hardly any development. Moreover, after all, this is a commercial production, and it has to face the market. When it is so entangled with this sensitive history, the choice is completely desperate, and it is almost a dead end.
In fact, this is a problem in itself. When watching the movie, I often have this feeling: This paragraph cannot be written like this, it is wrong to shoot it like this, but if I really think about how to shoot it, I find it difficult for me to give any answers. When faced with this problem, the answer given by Lu Chuan, represented by the ending, is not very good. Where else? In many places, there are similar problems: for example, in the paragraph "China will not die", for example, Mr. Tang said "my wife is pregnant" with some pretense. Lu Chuan wanted to express that hope too much, but he fell into a cliché. In fact, the death of Kadokawa can still find the prototype - Svidrigailov in "Crime and Punishment", but even such a long-term role is far more plump and complex than Kadokawa. It was like a predicament. Lu Chuan wanted to express hope too much, and even sacrificed his role and some rationality, but in the end he couldn't please anyone. In fact, it's enough to show it in a few corners. Xiaodouzi smiled at Liu Ye twice. There was a tacit understanding between his comrades, but also some helplessness and calmness (especially the second time). Although this detail is a smile, it is enough. It's important, but unfortunately Lu Chuan made him laugh four times...
Second, is it a conflict or a record? divided Nanjing.
As mentioned in the previous article, "Nanjing! Nanjing! "The script was a failure, because its too scattered plots were almost unable to form a framework, and eventually became a pile of historical "scenes".
This is half right. According to Lu Chuan's interview, see "Nanjing! Nanjing! "The creative process, Lu Chuan himself mentioned that he originally wrote a script, and then when filming, he constantly revised it according to the shooting mood, deleted and added a lot of scenes, and in the end it was completely unrecognizable. Make movies this way, unless you're a very controlling director or producer (Selznick's), or you expect the movie to be prosaic or fragmented (Wong Kar-Wai's films, and Stone's) Natural Born Killers), otherwise getting into a state of clutter is hard to avoid. As the director, Lu Chuan obviously didn't have enough control. The script follows the emotions, the emotions follow the shooting, and in the end, the integrity of the script is lost. However, according to the original more commercial script mentioned by Lu Chuan, some shadows can still be seen in the film, but the dramatic conflict often only appears in a single scene, and often the drama is relatively insufficient or inappropriate. When it looks messy. So when I watch this movie, I often feel time travel, sometimes I feel the drama obviously, and sometimes I feel that the drama is not enough like a battlefield documentary - no one can have such a good adaptability and can switch between the two styles at any time. As a director, Lu Chuan couldn't do it himself, so when he needed a documentary, he always made a big close-up out of time (the first 1/3).
The split also manifested itself in his problems with character building. Lu Chuan himself talked about the difference between this film and "The Diary of Rabe". The latter is basically a traditional melodrama according to its advertised and promotional films. Lu Chuan deliberately made "Nanjing!" Nanjing! " and "Rabe's Diary" to draw a clear line, according to him, should be more inclined to panoramic records. If "Rabe's Diary" gave Rabe a lot of elevation angles and close-ups, I wouldn't be surprised, because it is to shape a hero, to shape a star, and to focus on him is what it should be. But "Nanjing! Nanjing! "Since it is to pursue a more simple and flat perspective, even if some star actors are considered for the box office, it is best to let them "disappear" in front of the camera (refer to "Black Hawk Down"). But it's a pity that even in the battle scenes that were filmed well, Lu Chuan did not miss Liu Ye's close-up - no matter how much ashes his face was smeared, the audience would not agree that the person was an ordinary soldier of the national army, and Because of the star's prominence, he will instantly appear in the play. Then the scene designed for Liu Ye to take the lead in death is even more problematic - if you want Liu Ye to be a hero, then this section is not designed to be a hero; if you want Liu Ye to be one of the victims, why not? Make him stand out? As for Mr. Tang's character setting, it can be seen as a line of dramatic conflict that remains acceptable, but his final death is still inexplicable. Perhaps in order to pursue a sense of redemption and political correctness for the crimes committed before, Mr. Tang must die, but at least there must be a clear reason. Does Lu Chuan want to use Mr. Tang's death to prove the complete irrationality of the Japanese atrocities? Rather than saying that this paragraph seems to be irrational by the Japanese army, it is better to say that Lu Chuan's screenwriting is nonsensical.
Having said that, I remembered that the Japanese massacre mentioned by Lu Chuan in the interview was not actually a superposition of individual atrocities, but an organized and premeditated plan, which was actually ordered by the army. By the way, I discussed the issue of the Nanjing Massacre and the slaughter of Jews two days ago, but I ignored it for a while. It proves that this organized massacre is not just a matter of motivation and rationality. If it is a personal atrocity, it is only a matter of the soldiers themselves It’s hard to say that, just like the massacre of American prisoners by the SS to be magnified. If it comes from an upper-level organization, it will rise to a state crime, and the nature is completely different. Not only the massacre of Jews, but also the notorious Nazi shooting of political commissars. , starve Ukraine and other policies. That part of Lu Chuan said it very well in the interview, but in the film, unfortunately, he tried to express it, but he was too hasty in this conflict and the wandering of records. All that can be seen are the seemingly organized machine-gun fire and the mention of the commander of the occupation army about recruiting comfort women. Yes, in terms of filming, Lu Chuan cut the massacre scene between four or five scenes, and then added a big rocker arm, which raised the shock of the brutality of the massacre to a higher level. But from the retrospective point of view of the problem, Lu Chuan's performance of the massacre is still at the level of the two films I mentioned earlier. It has been so many years, and there is still no progress in this point. This cannot but be regretted.
3. Blocking the gate and ceremonies - two magical strokes
1. The blocking of Jiangmen at the beginning is very good. Compared with the siege of the Japanese army, it is difficult to give the audience a sense of psychological substitution. The scene of Yijiangmen is very calming, and it is very good as a set scene. From stillness to movement, the transition is very fast and the impact is extremely strong. At the same time, it also gives a surprise to audiences who have no psychological expectations. Of all the films about the Nanjing Massacre, none of them has such a spirit.
What's more important is that this passage is often vague when talking about it in the past. It is the first time that it is expressed so directly. It is very good, but there is one thing - what happened in reality is much crueler than the one presented in the movie.
2. In the whole film, the festival part may be the most controversial.
Not only because it can be seen as a kind of propaganda for the arrogance of the Japanese army, but also because it is abrupt in structure, and many people can't understand it.
But I think this is the best scene in the film, because it is the scene where he is the most open-minded, without considering too many box office and realistic concerns, nor is he still wanting to leave some points everywhere when he is desperate like before The bread crumbs are the hope (what was actually thrown down were steamed buns), he shot very pure, very clean, the shots were cut very smoothly, and he did a lot of work.
Why did he insert this paragraph?
My understanding is. First, he wants to stimulate the audience. A very important purpose of Lu Chuan's filming of this film is to tell people how strong our opponent was back then. Although we won in the end, we should not take it lightly. If it is still not shameful enough to say that the capital of the country was burned, killed, and looted, Lu Chuan chose this soul-like celebration. This is no longer a physical conflict, but a spiritual oppression. Why can the Japanese wreak havoc on Chinese soil? This is the question Lu Chuan wants to answer. And this paragraph is the answer he wants to give: a powerful spiritual force, nothing can express this terrible will more than this kind of memorial that seems to return to the wild state.
However, while this will is terrible, it will also backlash. This is what I thought, what I deduced from the video, and that is the roar of Kadokawa's despair and dazedness near the end of the festival. This kind of willpower is actually inhuman. When it destroys the opponent, it also makes its own individual disappear, and only this monster appears. A nation that has lost its individuality is bound to go to destruction blindly.
However, it is very risky for Lu Chuan to choose this method, especially I feel that he has referenced the shooting method of "Triumph of the Will", and the extremely regular composition of the high elevation angle of the spirit banners with the army numbers and the strong drummers, Paired with a tense drumbeat, the image was overwhelming. I'm not worried about him being called a traitor because of this - those remarks are ignorant, but they're not harmful - I'm worried about the demagogic power of this video similar to "Triumph of the Will", and the weak-willed may be overwhelmed, like Legend has it that the professor of Beiying was reluctant to fully play "Triumph of the Will" in class. But there's only one Yukio Mishima in the world, and he's dead, so I hope my worries are unnecessary.
Fourth, "Nanjing! Nanjing! "The question of history
is inescapable.
When I talked about Kadokawa's role earlier, I have already talked about it, and that is basically my point of view: it can be seen that the film is indeed based on a relatively strict textual research, and there are no obvious and excessive historical errors, but Lu Chuan's problem is not that he is not faithful to history, but that he is naive within the limits of what is really possible in art. When the whole film is carried out in the name of being close to the historical facts or claiming to be close to the historical facts, if you have to play with characters like Kadokawa who have little chance of appearing in the early stage of the Japanese war, it will not help the dramatic plot (because it is too cliché). ), and it will also hurt the film's "historical" name.
Regarding Rabe's question, don't look at Lu Chuan's words in the interview, which seem to be very provocative. Judging from the film, Rabe did not actually vilify Rabe. In the film, Rabe has already done what he was in that environment. All that can be done is that the film does not use him as the center of the narrative.
Regarding the statue of Sun Yat-sen in the city center, it is true that the statue of Sun Yat-sen was erected in Xinjiekou in 1942. If the historical facts are strictly followed, it will be crossed here. But this is the freedom of artistic creation. I have seen a photo of several Japanese soldiers humiliating a bronze statue of Sun Yat-sen (maybe from the Sun Yat-sen Mausoleum, I can't remember exactly), which shows that similar things exist, and it is slightly shifted. There is nothing wrong with going down to the time and place, and bringing some symbolic meaning to the fall of the capital. Li Ao, who always focuses on research, when he wrote "Fayuan Temple in Beijing", didn't he also take Yuan Shikai, who lived in Fahua Temple, to Fayuan Temple for artistic considerations? The same reason can explain the festival that never happened in the city. These are not big problems.
I think the big problem is not historical fact, but the grasp of history. Why should we look back on this history? It is to understand its causes, pay attention to its process, and dig out deeper connotations - such as motivation. "Nanjing! Nanjing! "Since the whole plot has been basically abandoned, it should be more clear on this issue. Why are we being massacred? Just because of the strength of the enemy? Strong, beat us, we deserve to be slaughtered? We were slaughtered because of the animal nature of the enemy? So since Kadokawa has created such a conscientious character and made the daily life of the Japanese army so "normal", why would these "normal" humans do non-human things? If it is difficult to express philosophical issues in movies, why did everyone choose to raise their guns when even more Chinese soldiers than Japanese patrols were found in the church? Why are so many of us killed, but most of us are obediently killed? Lu Chuan said in the interview that he was very excited and said that he wanted to shoot the city of resistance, but from the perspective of the film, sporadic resistance returned to resistance, and massacres returned to massacres. The two are separated. In fact, if the Yijiangmen match is followed, it can completely explain the above, but the scattered performance makes it difficult to leave satisfactory answers to these questions. Lazy people may end up thinking "the Japanese army is a butcher, the national army is too cowardly, and the people are too numb". Diligent people may also leave an explanation, but if you need explanations to make things clear, why do you need movies?
5. About Lu Chuan
's girlfriend after reading "Nanjing! Nanjing! ", leaving a sentence: Lu Chuan is worthy of respect.
How should I put it, I don't like Lu Chuan very much, and I have reservations about his directorial level, but I agree with her: Lu Chuan is worthy of respect.
I saw a report that Feng Xiaogang is the most crying poor director in the Chinese film industry, and his investment is all from crying. If it's just a joke, I think it's quite appropriate for Lu Chuan to be on this list. He is very talkative, very good at talking, and loves things. Every time he is interviewed, he does not forget to cry about the history of blood and tears, including the exploitation of the script of "Black Hole" when he wrote it. The more you listen, the more you get used to it. This time "Nanjing! Nanjing! "The operation of ", although he is not stupid enough to play moral kidnapping like Gao Qunshu, he still puts on gimmicks everywhere, such as provoking "Rabe's Diary", and in fact, this movie hardly has anything to do with Rabe except the subject matter. Later, he boasted that the box office exceeded 140 million, and he ran naked with Han Sanping. This is somewhat disgusting in a movie that he himself treats with affection. Although I can understand his behavior - this is not a small cost, the investment of 80 million is to speak at the box office - but I am somewhat disdainful of his behavior, and feel that this person is too omnipotent.
But what is worthy of respect for Lu Chuan is that he is not only like this in hype, but also in the treatment of movies. The life-threatening shooting of "Kekexili" has continued to the present "Nanjing!" Nanjing! ". He did not completely give up some attempts in the film because of box office concerns. In the Chinese film industry where he stands and speaks without backache, although his every step is loud, he does have this qualification.
His problem is that a good director, or a qualified director, should not win applause every time by relying on the subject matter and shooting content. "Kekexili" is like this, "Nanjing! Nanjing! " is the same. Desire is valuable, but if the level is not up, it will be forgotten one day.
6. Epilogue
Actually, for this movie, I can still comment more politely. I was so entangled, my heart was very chaotic, and all my brains came out. In fact, what is tangled in my heart is the history. No matter how many shortcomings the film has, I have to admit that the direct impact of the image is much stronger than the statistics printed on paper. From this perspective, "Nanjing! Nanjing! "has been successful.
ps: My suggestion, do not bundle. Someone proposed to watch "Nanjing! Nanjing! ", I think it's a bit deliberate, it depends on personal preference. But can you temporarily turn off your phone while watching a movie? Nothing can be delayed for more than two hours. If this is too difficult, at least turn on the mute. Tonight, the "Shanghai Beach" with Obasan's mobile phone in the back row is driving me crazy. In addition, when Deji watched the movie, it seemed that he had a chance to rely on "Nanjing! Nanjing! "The ticket to buy popcorn discounts, remembering the situation when "Schindler's List" was released in the United States was considered inappropriate to eat popcorn, I felt a little uncomfortable, but it was nothing, by the way.
View more about City of Life and Death reviews
