DS has been banned.
Who is the film responsible for?
Movies are responsible to their creators.
Creators are responsible to investors.
Investors are responsible for the box office.
What is the box office, the box office is money.
Money is the responsibility of the state.
There is no audience involved at all here, so the same reasoning proves that when does a movie need to be responsible to the audience? !
A lot of movies don't want malicious bad reviews.
I agree, bad reviews are okay, but resolutely resist maliciousness.
However, most of the bad reviews are actually well-intentioned.
What? ! Well-meaning bad comments, then I don't even need it!
Okay, then stop talking!
"The Corner of the World" reminds me of "The Politics of Story Design" in a chapter in Robert McKee's "Story".
The article mentioned: "In an ideal world, art and politics have nothing to do with each other. But in reality, they can't be at peace with each other."
This is also the most controversial part of "Corner of the World". The topic of the film's crusade against reflection on domestic war crimes even exceeds the quality of the film itself.
From Da Cong's point of view, the quality of the movie is divided into high and low.
Political leanings are left and right.
If you distinguish up and down and left and right, everyone can be clearer.
But "Story" said that up and down, left and right are like a real three-dimensional world. There's no way to really differentiate.
So the director of "Corner of the World" played a good card. Trembling to the top.
That's what he really wanted.
If everyone is so active in discussing the anti-war attitude of "Corner of the World", why not spend some time thinking about whether domestic directors can use this way of thinking to make such a movie one day, and also stimulate Japan?
Stop filming "Tear Devils by Hand", it's not advanced.
View more about In This Corner of the World reviews