First of all, let’s talk about the good things, and the most important thing is of course our female audience’s favorite "As long as you give up men, you can become stronger!!! You can even learn to fly!!!" This part is! Half of my feelings are added here (manual dog head)! Then there are a few clips, such as the handsome athletic sports at the beginning, the pure female heroism education, and the final parting "I can't say goodbye". There are indeed pokings, while remembering to kill suddenly. I learned how to fly, although it's a bit funny, but I still like it! The process of Barbara's little blackening is also reasonable (although it turns out to be a leopard in the end that makes people look awkward? Why do you suddenly grow a tail!). Gal Gadot is beautiful, of course! (Although it would be better if she poses less poses when she fights??)

Okay, I’ve worked hard and finished talking about the advantages. There are too many. .

1. The most important thing is of course the unclear and untenable theme!

I won’t talk about the various logic of Wishing Stone’s own plot bugs (the bugs are really too obvious and I think it’s a low-level waste of time to complain), and I think it’s not important, but what does this story mean? Can one not ask for too much? Can't get something for nothing? Can't indulge in the ideal world? Tell the truth of an ancient fairy tale in two and a half hours? That old woman made a lot of wishes and ended up in nothing. There are countless copies of the story? Then the final entanglement is whether to give up the wish? exo me? If you don’t vomit first, you can give up your wish by saying a word to the sky. (If you really want to be more serious, the contract with the devil says that if you repent and repent? This pa slot is too lazy to vomit), even if you give up wishing Dependence, should also be written with the same ink. At the same time, you should not give up your yearning for your good wishes. How should you achieve what you want through hard work down-to-earth, is this complete? For example, Barbara gave up her desire to become Diana. Fine, she woke up, but if she finally found her own confidence and charm by herself, wouldn't it be more meaningful?

To be reasonable, I have always sympathized with Barbara. When I first appeared on the stage, I felt a little bit like Amy. I have always sympathized with her "growth". I was expecting her to give up her wish until the end, and suddenly realized that the key to becoming more attractive after the success of her previous wish is actually her inner strength and self-confidence (the Sorcerer’s Stone did not make her change her face!), even looking forward to it. In the end, she was able to have a reconciled conversation with Diana, so that both parties have real growth. In this case, I would like to applaud the female director's real concern for the growth of women. But nothing, just gave up dimly. I understand that the director wants to say that people cannot have unlimited desires and people have to pay for their desires, but the solution to this is not to persuade people to give up their desires, right? You can tell her not to be greedy, but can't you also tell her that you can get better on your own? Is it wrong for Barbara to want to be stronger and more attractive?

I spent two and a half hours telling people not to be greedy, but I didn't describe how to satisfy my desires correctly for a minute. Looking at Diana’s final preaching, it’s actually saying that you have to accept and be satisfied, not that you want to be innocent, but you have to work hard on the ground. The two points are still fundamentally different. At least I don’t agree with this part. . You, a goddess, told the grass folks that you want to love and let go. You are now living in an ideal world. Are you empathetic and convincing? Barbara is right. You are arrogant and you don't understand the pain of ordinary people. You still think that destroying bad people is saving the world. This kind of savior's compassion seems to be fine at first glance, but the more you think about it, the more you feel that you cannot agree. In the end, the whole world keeps coming and going. I made a mistake. The plot of giving up my wish is not moving in my opinion, but it is funny and sad.

2. It's still a matter of the theme. In addition to being untenable, there is another point that is mixed and far-fetched. When you talk about desire, you want to. Does this have anything to do with the truth that Diana has been talking about?

Looking back on the heroism education in the first act, the elders told Little Diana that you can’t lie and you must be honest to succeed. blabla, OK, there is the opposition of lying vs. truth, no problem. However, the main story has always been talking about the scheming desire, the opposition of obtaining vs. the cost, the opposition of the realization of a beautiful one-sided wish vs the cruel consequences, and even the opposition of hope vs. despair. These are all completely true. There are two things.

Then it seems that the screenwriter feels that he is running off the track, and from time to time he puts one or two words like "lie" in his preaching lines. Can this be broken back? Obviously not working! Word games are not played like this. So on the other hand, it also made the very cool scene at the beginning seem meaningless, and didn't think that dreaming back to the girlhood would help her make any choices later.

Then there is another opposition that saves with love vs. destroys with violence. This is repeated many times in Diana's fighting style. The meaning of saving the world with love has also appeared from time to time from the first part to here (because after all Be a heroine, it must have the characteristics of a heroine!), but this has nothing to do with the previous two oppositions! The result of this all being mixed together can only weaken all themes.

3. Let alone the poor fighting scenes! (The female heroine's play is not as good as the leopard girl) Wenxi is also very boring! The chemistry between Diana and the hero, I was only poked at the moment of saying goodbye, and at other times. . Do you feel that Diana still loves herself more?

The feeling of love in the first part is more and more real. At that time, Diana knew nothing about the whole world + the beginning of love, and the feeling of going through gunfire with her lover was completely standable. But in this movie, Diana has obviously grown up and matured, and behaves more calmly and ego, but the interaction with her lover is suddenly reduced. I can't say whether this is a problem of acting or of people. But when you think about it, it seems natural that you don’t need too much persuasion for the male super British movie. The heroine is weak and the heroine is crazy to protect her! However, it seems that it will be more difficult for the heroine to establish a good relationship between the heroine and the male. . There will be more tests for the complexity of acting, and there will be many motivational problems. This will not start.

4. Another thing is that 1984 really didn't see why it was 1984. What a waste!

On the one hand, what a desirable atmosphere of the 80s! So many retro elements are available! I watched the title and the opening scenes and started to pre-load the retro disco temperament of the 80s in advance. As a result, in the feature film, no matter from the music or the tone to the entire aura, there is no 80s feel at all. Diana is beautiful but beautiful, too modern? Many sets of clothes are dressed up as white-collar workers in the 21st century, and it feels like you are shooting a fashion demon? ?

On the other hand, if you call yourself 1984, is there a metaphor for 1984? Anyway, I didn't see it at all. If there is no such meaning. . I have to say that I have touched porcelain. . .

The only understanding is to fit the political background of the US-Soviet Cold War nuclear weapons. But when it comes to metaphors or metaphors in this respect, no one can do better than the watchman. And it doesn’t have to be 1984, right?

5. Finally, reflect on whether the so-called feminism in this book has its limitations?

This paragraph was originally said before, but it seems to give everyone a lot of misunderstandings, so that many people come up to see the topic of women indiscriminately. In fact, the topic of gender is not the main slot of this film at all. Here are just some personal thoughts and reflections on this film that I have generated out of my excessive attention and expectations for feminist films. I added it at the end and also added it. Explain, thank you for being afraid.

As mentioned earlier, one of the biggest cool points of this drama for female audiences is that "I can give up the unrealistic fantasy of men giving up love and love in order to become stronger", but first of all, this is already in feminist films. Not new (I saw half whispering to my friends, this is Frozen 3, right?), secondly, if the heroine movie breaks through the limitations of not requiring men, is it another limitation? Another routine?

Hey, but this point may also be harsh. After all, the stories in the world are those routines, right. This point does not constitute a slot, on the contrary, it is some kind of typical story about the growth of the heroine. It's just a bit too typical.

But I have to think about it from another angle. If this is a male super British movie, there is a high probability that the male lead will not give up the silly white sweet female lead? In other words, it is not simply not giving up, because Diana may eventually have to give up the male lead, but at the moment when she chooses to give up in the movie, the most direct motivation is because the desire to return to the male lead weakens her ability. So she gave up the hero in order to make herself stronger again. If it is set to "Don't give up the hero, even if you defeat the big boss world, it will be unbalanced, so you must give up for the world", it is another logic. think about it, friends! If a male hero gives up the heroine and love in order to make himself stronger, will he be sprayed too selfishly? Is there some kind of double standard here? This is not really talking about the film, but a reflection.

One more sentence, the reason why I care about the feminist part of this film is precisely that I was moved by it, and it is also the most important prerequisite for my approval of this film. After all, I also shoot the thighs continuously for this handsome and just female character who saves the world by himself instead of waiting for others to save! In other words, if this film is not a women’s premiere but a men’s premiere, I wouldn’t even have this filter (I guess I wouldn’t even have the enthusiasm for writing so many words!). But if you calm down, I want to say that removing this layer of filter and looking at the grooves of this film should not be ignored. It should assume the higher expectations of everyone.

Finally, one more sentence, my overall impression of this film is, I love female heroes! I love Steve! I will always love the flying female version of Superman! Steve is the perfect lover. The relationship between two people is also mature and rational. Growing up together is an ideal touching love! But the story of the wishing stone is so bad, the director's story is so bad, I really don't think so! Isn't such a bad story worthy of a heroine! ! So those who are more touched by the great love of two people to convince me can stop, they are not the same thing at all.

Okay, I can go to bed after I'm finally refreshed. In any case, rushing to the premiere with friends is a holiday in my opinion, hhhh, I have no regrets, just rushed!