While the Three-Body Problem movie is being released, there are also various comments about this movie in the media. And interestingly, these comments, are very polarizing.

There is no shortage of media praising him for this film, and in Hollywood, it is never wrong to praise a movie with a high box office.

"The footage is so beautiful that it makes you want to cry, and the process of building an extremely realistic alien civilization is breathtaking." - Los Angeles Times

"The use of special effects is classic, and the structure of the shooting is artistic." -- The Chicago Post

"A film that brings history into the future, with a unique perspective." -- The Wall Street Journal

"From any point of view, it is a magnificent film, a great work as grand as the outside" - "Premiere"

For this movie, many media have given high praise to entertainment. These media have kept an eye on the scene and scale of the filming of this film, so there is a lot of praise for the film.

When a movie is released, when people evaluate the movie, the most important direction of comment is how well the movie is filmed. And in this era, asking how the level of shooting is, in a sense, is also asking how the technology is used. The unprecedented use of special effects has made them affect the development of the movie, and whether they can use special effects well has also become an important basis for judging whether the movie is good. And a science fiction movie must have a large number of special effects shots, how are the special effects used? This is also the most common question for people.

And I have to say, Levy did a great job.

In the past few years, film technology can be said to have developed by leaps and bounds, and in the 90s, the technology that people were still using to shoot movies has become worthless in these years. The development of technology has brought about the development of photography techniques in a bygone era. Shooting with a video camera is almost the only way to shoot a movie, and now, the development of computer technology has changed all that.

The times are changing, and those who can keep up with the times and walk ahead of the times will naturally be able to get praise.

However, these comments are not the whole story, and while there are many media outlets that praise the film, others have praised it. It's not highly rated for it.

"The Three-Body Problem is a very successful scientific report, but it is not a very good movie." - The Guardian

"I can only give 70 points, just passed, a movie took off perfectly, but it stopped abruptly halfway." - Hollywood Newsletter

"Using suspense to fool the audience in science fiction movies can't be considered bad movies, but it's definitely not a good movie." -- The New York Times

The word-of-mouth of the movie has been very polarized at this time, and some people think of it. The three-body problem is very well shot, reflecting the perfect combination of better shooting technology and film, but in the eyes of others, they are not very satisfied with it.

This dissatisfaction. The first is because the old-school Hollywood filmmakers themselves have a visceral antipathy to the technology movement, and the second is because they are dissatisfied with some of the technology in the film, which they are not very happy to see. And then there is it. It is in this movie that some of the starting points of human nature make the media dissatisfied, and at the same time. The end of the movie also made the media feel uncomfortable.

These points are all problems with the movie.

First of all, Levy has never made any real blockbusters in Hollywood. Although his films have been using special effects since the time of Angel Amelie, it is also recognized that he is not very interested in the use of special effects. However, in this film, Levy began to use special effects on a large scale, which also made those critics who had previously praised him a little dissatisfied with his approach.

Old-school filmmakers are not very receptive to these new things, just like the big talk about science in the movies, which they are against.

And, even those scientific parts, they also have a lot of grievances.

In the movie, some sensitive issues are mentioned. For example, it mentions environmental issues, the correctness of genetically modified technology and other issues, which are relatively sensitive topics, and after mentioning these, some media also expressed dissatisfaction with Levy's opinion.

For the modern United States, whether it is environmental protection or genetically modified technology, these are all problems that Americans are facing and are facing. In the movie, it does not reflect a clear attitude towards these things, on the contrary, the movie gives some ideas to the three-body organization of the earth, but it will make people have the idea that 'protecting the environment is a political need', which is also very unwilling to accept for Hollywood people who have always been fond of environmental protection.

What they are more willing to accept is more mainstream thinking.

And if there is anything, it is the core of the ideas involved in this movie.

This part is bigger than the use of special effects.

Purely from a cinematic point of view, this movie is still very successful. Whether it is the shooting technology, the use of physics, throughout, or the rhythm grasp, it can be said that it is very in place, although there are many special effects scenes, but it has little impact on the effect of the movie itself, and the media has not raised too many questions.

There is no doubt that the level of filming of Levy's films is not bad, but some of the ideas reflected in the film are the questions that people discuss.

One of the most dissatisfying things is the portrayal of human nature in this movie.

In this movie, among the main characters, only one policeman, Renault, can be said to be a positive image. Throughout the story, he is a fairly positive image. The other two people, Paul is too fragile and Suzanne is too dark, and these personalities are also disliked by the media.

Although people like to dig into some of the deeper aspects of human nature in movies, in a commercial movie, what people expect more is love to overcome hate. In Levy's movie, Suzanne was not able to understand her until the end, no one knew her pain, and these exaggerated hatred emotions without mentioning love also made the media a little dissatisfied. Since it's a commercial blockbuster, wouldn't it be better to do it more positively?

However, compared to the last question, these small problems are not a problem.

"It's not a movie at all, it's a big trailer."

The most vicious accusation is such a word. The abrupt end of Three-Body Problem 1 left too much suspense behind, which also made some people think that this electricity cannot be regarded as the end of the performance at all.

However, there are many people who disagree with such a statement. Spider-Man 1 also left the little Green Goblin in it, and the X-Men did not kill Magneto. These people in these movies have also stayed, preparing for the next episode. The three-body problem is almost exterminated for the earth's three-body organization, and it is much better than those who deliberately keep it and don't kill it.

However, this movie is different from those movies after all. Those movies all have original novels or comics, and everyone knows how those stories will develop in the future, but the three-body problem has no follow-up part, and I can't see how the story should develop, which also makes many people think that Levy is deliberately hanging people's appetite.

These negative comments are not uncommon in the media. Levy's films have been highly rated in the past, but this time, there are many people arguing.

"This is the first time for you, right? Shooting a commercial film is different from shooting a literary film, right? Privately, looking at the comments in the media, Clark also asked Levy what he thought, "Is it a little uncomfortable?" ”

"What's wrong with that? Originally, it was a commercial film, and even if it was more than half of the success at the box office, didn't the media also affirm our technological progress? That's enough for me. As for the comments of the media...... Clark, when we didn't mix things up before, we needed the media to speak for us. Now, can some of their bad reviews still affect our status in the hearts of the audience? ”

Levy's rhetorical question made Clark laugh too: Yes, when they have enough reputation, they have a stronger ability to bear it, and a movie with a poor evaluation is nothing.

And, in fact, Levy's mind is even more open than that. Because he knows very well in his heart that in a sense, this is his real first work, and the evaluation is poor, what's abnormal?

In previous movies, no matter how much he changed the internal structure, the external shots, and the core of the story, those movies were all movies in memory as a reference after all. Even incomplete plagiarism is plagiarism, and Levy has not forgotten it.

However, when filming those works, he continued to accumulate experience: he participated in the writing of scripts, from the initial cooperation with Bob, to the adaptation of the script, and then to the writing of the script himself, he accumulated experience step by step; He observes how the film is filmed, and he can not care about other things, but he has always grasped the setting of the shots and the use of special effects, because he knows that these are the fundamentals of the film; He has always been paying attention to the special effects, from the Angel Amelie, to the TV series, to the X-Men, he supervises the progress of the special effects. Through those films, he accumulated enough experience to have this movie - although it was plagiarized in the past, but this work, he really shot his own thing.

It's normal for this movie to be not as good as those plagiarized works - after all, the movies he chose are all classics, and the movies he shot himself are not as good as those What's so surprising? However, he was still happy because the film was at least half of its success. The good box office, coupled with the comments that were not satisfied, but mainly focused on the theme of the film, rather than the film's shooting methods, are enough to show that Levy is at least a successful director.

As a filmmaker, he did not waver his will because of sudden luck, in his heart, he still did not give up the pursuit of movies, and now, he has made his own movies, what is there to dislike about him? (To be continued......)