"Windtalkers" is the highlight of Hong Kong director John Woo's entry into Hollywood. Not to mention the number of tanks, the number of aircraft deployed, and the number of cameras and films used, the plot design of this movie alone doomed it to a disastrous defeat.
I got the D version last week, and I had high hopes for this heavy blow from Director Woo. Because before that, "Saving Private Ryan" gave people a refreshing feeling about war movies, but then the situation started high and ended low. "Pearl Harbor" was nothing special except for the war scenes of more than ten minutes; "Black Hawk Down" was almost the favorite documentary of military fans from beginning to end. After watching a group of mediocre people on Huashan Mountain with black tigers digging out their hearts and white cranes spreading their wings for a whole spring, I eagerly look forward to Director Woo's "a sword coming from the west (Hong Kong is west of the United States), flying fairies from the sky."
As a blockbuster with a lot of investment, the story line of "Windtalkers" is quite bad, which is not conducive to the development of John Woo's technique at all. I believe that one of the important reasons for choosing John Woo as the director is that the "hero films" he shot have deeply moving portrayals of the great friendship between men. For example, in "Hard Boiled", the friendship between men can only be described as "crying". After watching the film, one can only yearn for such men and such friends. It just so happens that "Windtalkers" tells such a story.
The only minor problem is that in the plot setting, there are two pairs of men in "Windtalkers". This is just a minor problem, but the consequences it causes are fatal. Let's first look at "Pearl Harbor". There is a love triangle in "Pearl Harbor", and the triangle relationship appears in the form of an open line, which means that "Pearl Harbor" will never become "Casablanca". Because in a war film, to clearly explain a triangle relationship, not only a lot of saliva is wasted, but also the audience's attention and patience, as well as the intensity of the depiction of the war scene.
The situation in "Windtalkers" is even worse, with two pairs of men stealing the show. We can be sure that if it were in a novel, this method of echoing two by two would have achieved good results. However, in a movie of more than an hour, the role is evenly divided among four people, and the result is disastrous. Who is the protagonist? Can the protagonist be given enough time to perform? Nicolas Cage is undoubtedly the protagonist of this film, but in him, apart from showing a morbid war syndrome, his person is vague. The development of his friendship with his Indian comrade is not fully expressed, which makes his death suspicious and lacks the power to shock people.
The Indian comrade is a code keeper, and Cage's task is to protect him and kill him when he is likely to be captured by the Japanese. This point itself is very tense. If this set of relationships can be well expressed, the film will be successful. However, another set of similar relationships also appears in the film, and there is no contrast or difference, which is tantamount to empty talk. This causes waste, and the plot becomes not compact at all, and it is boring to write here and there.
At the end of the film, Cage falls to the ground in pain, and the blood bubble on his chest bursts. I said to my friend, "'The Bund', I'm going to France." My friend laughed, and we quickly turned off the camera and decided to forget about this movie as soon as possible.
Account not verified