So in the development of the whole plot, the audience, like the scientists in the film, has almost no difficulty in accepting Zhao Qiao's theory, that is, he is a primitive man who is thousands of years old. The film's progression thus became a medium for Zhao Qiao (who was actually the screenwriter behind it) to express his personal opinions on anthropology, biology, history, and religious history. As a science fiction movie, this film actually attaches more importance to "fantasy" and rarely has scientific reasoning. If we follow the logical deduction method since Plato, we can only start from the axiom of "self-evident" and draw conclusions through rigorous logic; On the contrary, in this film, the "factual evidence" that the screenwriter arbitrarily adds can make the story more complete, but it has lost its "scientificity". This is also the source of the dramatic tension and contradictions that I think the storyline of this film has lost its dramatic tension and conflict, so that it is difficult for the audience to feel the sense of bringing in the story.

This kind of plot setting also makes most of the film's responses to the questions about Zhao Qiao's life story appeal to two types of interpretations, the first is to personalize history and make stories more credible; The second is to legitimize Zhao Qiao's actions by comparing them with the experiences of ordinary people. And these two types of explanations are also the subjective interpretation of the screenwriter, and there is no logic at all.

Regarding the first type of example, for example, when Zhao Qiao just revealed that he was a primitive person, he talked about how he once competed with Liu Bei for the world, of course, he would also worry about whether he could complete this task and whether he would fail and be slaughtered in the end. None of these stories are answering the question of "whether Zhao Qiao is a primitive man", but only a possible corollary of the premise that "Zhao Qiao is a primitive man". They are all a means of making historical events more credible by personalizing them.

Examples of the second category are even more abundant. For example, when asked how Zhao Qiao remembered thousands of years ago when ordinary people couldn't even remember things when they were children. Zhao Qiao explains by analogy with human memories of childhood: his memories of thousands of years ago are similar to ordinary people's memories of childhood, but they are fragmentary. When questioned, the geography of the earth has not changed. Why Zhao Qiao didn't remember his birthplace, Zhao Qiao drew an analogy with ordinary people who couldn't remember the terrain around their childhood residence and concluded that "people can't return to their hometown." Because my hometown is no longer there." (This is reminiscent of Heraclitus' observation that one cannot step into the same river twice.) ）

And when we examine the seemingly self-justifying story itself more closely, we can find that the content of the story does not escape the scope of knowledge that human beings already have. It is difficult to call this film a "science fiction movie", because the only creative fact in the whole film is the premise that Zhao Qiao lived for 14,000 years, and the rest is explained by the knowledge of human beings in biology, archaeology, anthropology, history, religion, and psychology;

When we consider how little human knowledge is, we can't help but feel that the worldview in the film is too narrow, and we even have to doubt the lack of imagination of the screenwriter. When we watch science fiction movies, we often expect to get a different perspective on the universe, but in this film, we regret to find that we have only obtained a highly personal, subjective and subjective interpretation of human knowledge.

The whole story (if it can be counted as a story) is more like the screenwriter's preaching about personal philosophical reflections and subjective value orientations. If it's a movie of any other genre, that's fine. But as a science fiction movie, this kind of preaching is inevitably offensive.

The discussion at the beginning of the film is to find biological support for Zhao Qiao, a Paleolithic man (there is no difference in anatomy between Paleolithic and modern people, and there is no difference in IQ, etc.), which implies that the author believes in evolutionary theory;

However, from Zhao Qiao's discussion of whether there is a god later, we know that Zhao Qiao does not believe in any existing religious theories, but does not rule out the possibility of a god. Evolution, which has not been rigorously proven by science, and theology, which cannot be scientifically proven, are equally theories of "possibility" that explain the world, and the screenwriter fails to convince us why we should choose the former over the latter.

In this regard, the screenwriter's judgment is very personal. Even arbitrary. From the screenwriter's references to Heraclitus' early dialectical theory and evolutionary theory, it is not difficult to imagine that the screenwriter himself may be a liberal with a slight materialist atheistic thought. But if the screenwriter does not inculcate personal beliefs convincingly, it is easy to arouse suspicion and disgust from any mind with the ability to think independently.

The most important theoretical subversion in the film is the "interpretation" of Christian theory. It's even more personal.

So after watching the film, if those minds with independent thinking ability have not been confused by the professional words like dropping a bookbag in the film, it is difficult to get the shock similar to after watching science fiction films such as Space Wars. It's more like listening to an unappealing speech.

In contrast to the various comments, none of them is more remarkable than these two discussions.

A clear indication that this is good-looking. A novel point of view, a non-caring attitude. After reading it, it was as if I had listened to a speech that was not very exciting.

Both sides have their own points of view and try to convince each other in their own language, which also brings more people into the discussion.

Just like a debate competition, one is the positive side and the other is the negative side, and the participants in the debate are all the spectators after watching it.

They have their own understanding of the film, and they try to convince each other with their own opinions that they are right.

At the same time, this also made more people pay attention to this movie, because they haven't seen it, so BUPT has the right to speak, and can only silently bury their doubts in the bottom of their hearts.

I hope that after reading it, I can solve the problem in my heart.

But there will be a series of problems after that, and this movie is a polarizing film after all.

After reading it, there will only be two feelings, one is very good and the other is very bad, so they will also participate in this discussion.

And Lin Mu also knew the consequences of this matter continuing to ferment, and he had already thought of a solution.

Aren't the people who participated in the discussion all ordinary viewers? Since they have their own opinions, Lin Mu uses a more professional point of view to make them understand and understand.

This brings us to another matter, awards!

As long as you win an award, then these problems are not a problem, and experts are sometimes very useful. (To be continued.) )