I don't know what the shit about the low-rated movie reviews is about, not as good as Life is Strange, not as good as Twins, not as heavy as Heavy Rain, or even as violent as Detroit: Become Human. Are these movie reviews? No, this is a game evaluation. Some people use game standards to evaluate a movie. They also say that people who watch the movie seriously don't understand it. They say that others haven't seen the world. This is the funniest thing at the end of 2018. Now, the popularity of "Black Mirror" and the sudden bad reviews actually interpret "the forest is big, and there are all kinds of birds".
The fire is so big, where does the fire come from?
First look at the evaluation of Gaozan film review: "Interactive film will not be the future of film."
The sentence itself is nonsense. First of all, let's see whether interactive movies are the future of games. Primary school students who have played games know that it is absolutely impossible to say that. What is the charm of interactive movies as games? Let's recall, whether it is "Life is Strange" or "Heavy Rain", what is your choice? Your choice is to let the characters in the game go on different paths in his plot, to save friends, to solve cases, you are just a player, the character in the game is your Pac-Man, when you play interactive movies The purpose is to feel the charm of butterflies vibrating their wings, and to follow the characters to experience different plots. The game emphasizes the charm of the butterfly effect, which is an important thing for the game.
But if you watch Bandersnatch in the mood to play games, of course you will feel very tired, because your choice does not actually bring about a very dramatic plot, an hour and a half process, often There's a deadend, few options, and the main story isn't exciting, right? After playing a few games, I feel that I have seen this form. Such players are embarrassed to say that others have not seen the world?
So is interactive cinema the future of cinema? Think again, if you don't participate in the selection, if the movie doesn't give you the opportunity to choose, will this movie still be established? "Extraordinary Twins" can be broadcast as a movie without a choice, "Life is Strange" can also be, can "Bandersnatch" be okay? The story itself is related to the choice of the audience. The protagonist of the story is no longer the Pac-Man in the hands of players like Max. The protagonist and the audience officially interacted, and the thinking of this movie was officially established and worked. So "interactive" is not superfluous here, nor is it a so-called gimmick, it is a part of the narrative, like a technique like shaking the camera to make a drunk effect, if you don't feel it, I believe you are watching the movie too much Utilitarian. The conclusion, of course, is that interactive cinema has never been the future, it is a means in itself, without which the whole film would not exist, and there will be no more films that have to use this means in the future.
It's like walking a tightrope in acrobatic performances. Hanging on a tightrope is a means, and walking on a tightrope is good because it's hanging in the air. As a result, a bunch of people who have never seen the world commented: "Hanging is a gimmick." "Hanging is not the future of performing arts." I've never seen the world at first, I've been on a plane three times, and I've been in the air every time." Isn't this a fault?
Please calm down and watch this film as you usually watch Black Mirror. It is really excellent. The form and content complement each other. It explores people's self-consciousness, and the logic is closed from the audience level. Compared with the content of the fourth season It is indeed much better, and I hope Netflix can always be so good to it.
View more about Black Mirror: Bandersnatch reviews
