On the evening of April 14, the Hong Kong Film Awards were officially announced. Tony Leung won the Best Actor award for "Goldenfinger". In addition, the film also won awards for Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects, and Best Sound Effects. To say that "Goldfinger" swept the Academy Awards is 60% correct.
Why is it said to be 60% correct? If a movie is really good, it can not only win the best actor and actress, but also the best director and best picture. Among the more important awards, "Goldfinger" only won the best actor award. This is more of a consolation prize. Obviously, the judges of the Hong Kong Film Awards can also see the problems with "Goldfinger".
After "Goldfinger" "swept" the Academy Awards, many fans raised questions, thinking that this movie is a typical bad movie and should not win so many awards. Tony Leung won the Best Actor award for this movie, which was also questioned by many fans. These doubts are obviously reasonable. Of course, "Goldfinger" cannot be regarded as a masterpiece, but can only be regarded as a passable work. The film has a score of 6.1 on Douban, which is relatively fair.
The movie "Goldfinger" tells the story of how financial speculators used the stock market to make trouble, how to build tall buildings, and how to collapse them. This movie, compared to Wong Kar-Wai's TV series "花", has the same effect. Whether it is the movie "Goldfinger" or the TV series "Flowers", they are actually old themes in Hong Kong dramas and Hong Kong movies, just stock market-like things, reviving corpses and bringing back souls, without much innovation.
Whether it is Zhuang Wenqiang's "Goldfinger" or Wong Kar-wai's "Flowers", the problem lies in the fact that the story content cannot solve three problems. These three questions are, what, why, and how. Both "Goldfinger" and "Flowers" are careless on key issues and lack the ability to create in depth. Let’s take a look at these three questions. What is
. In movies and plays, what are the specific stories of the protagonists riding the waves or making waves in the stock market? This requires a lot of detail to conflict. Moreover, these details require logical rationality. Neither Zhuang Wenqiang nor Wong Kar-wai can do it in terms of logical details and rationality. The two of them will just copy the "Stock Storm" formula of Hong Kong dramas and films.
why. Why can these people make trouble? This is a question that almost all "Stock Storm" film and television dramas need to answer. Both Zhuang Wenqiang's "Goldfinger" and Wong Kar-wai's "Flowers" lack the ability to answer this question. Moreover, everyone will find that this question cannot be circumvented in this type of film and television dramas, so they all use a perfunctory approach to answer it. In fact, this is a typical use of routines to answer this question, and then to blur the question. How about
. In the stock market, how can we avoid characters like villains and illegal behaviors? In "Goldfinger", Andy Lau's character was created, and this character was used to capture Tony Leung's character. However, when we delved into the behavioral motivations of Andy Lau's character, we found that this character could no longer stand and had become a god instead of a human being. This is actually a far-fetched logic. For this type of film and television drama, as long as the audience and fans follow the logic of the creator, they can immediately discover the novice level of the creator.
Regarding the movie "Goldfinger", the most intuitive problem presented to movie fans is that the narrative rhythm is poor and a lot of content cannot be unfolded. In fact, this kind of story should be presented in the form of a TV series. The story volume of TV series is larger and can have more time for logical development. Whether the creator has logic or not, whether his logical ability is strong or weak, can be shown through the TV series. For a similar example, "Horse" is a half-good drama. The first half of it is about how the villain hero gets rich. He Yi's process is basically logical.
To ask for logic from film and television dramas is to force the creators to conduct in-depth investigations, collect stories in depth, and find the rationality between sections, instead of just fooling around when encountering unreasonable areas. "Goldfinger" and "Flowers" and other "stock market" film and television dramas actually lack the ability to create in depth, and they just fool around when they need logical support. Therefore, they cannot solve the three questions of "what, why and how". If these three problems cannot be solved, this type of film and television drama will be superficial and of no value.
In fact, Zhuang Wenqiang's "Goldfinger" and Zhang Yimou's " as solid as a rock " have a lot, especially in terms of far-fetched logic. Both films are stories about good guys catching bad guys. Of course, one thing that Zhuang Wenqiang's "Goldfinger" is slightly better than Zhang Yimou's "Sturdy as a Rock" is that Zhuang Wenqiang's "Goldfinger" at least has the consciousness to answer "what, why and how", although the answer is very poor. Zhang Yimou's "Sturdy as a Rock" directly refused to answer these three questions and went straight to arrest - How does the villain played by Yu Hewei work from the bottom of the pole to quickly become a tycoon? Without answering this question, the film is worthless.
Zhang Yimou's "Solid as a Rock" has a Douban score of 6.0. Apparently, fans are logical. When it comes to the creation of film and television dramas, nowadays, there is no room for being careless. Some young movie fans asked me how to improve their aesthetics. This thing is simple, just study the content of logic first, and then follow the logic of film and television dramas. Once you learn logic, you will laugh out loud when faced with bad movies like "Goldfinger" and "Rock Solid." (Text/Ma Qingyun)
