In which movie (TV series) did a child take off his pants and be beaten by PP?

Although the overall atmosphere of "Looking Beautiful" is a bit weird, the performance of the two young actors is quite good. Although "Looking Beautiful" is performed by children, it is by no means "for children". This film can be said to be China's children's version of Flying Over the Madhouse. If you realize this, it won't be too difficult to understand.

Technology: there are not many hard injuries, but also advantages.

It should be said that Bird is one of the more mature directors in China. "Looking Beautiful" is quite "foreign" in photography, music and editing, and there is basically no common "hard injury" directed by China. Clothing and props not only conform to the atmosphere of the times shown in the film, but also set off the overall atmosphere, and the visual effect is not shabby and ugly.

The narrative of this film is relatively clear. Fang Qiangqiang's process from "not being a good boy" to "tasting the sweetness of a bad boy" to "going bad completely" presents a clear context and a sense of hierarchy. Unfortunately, the sense of rhythm is not good, but it is already a positive teaching material in domestic films.

We can see the skill of director Bird from many nuances.

There is a long-standing problem in China's films: lack of sense of space. For example, in Xu's Me and Dad, the main location of the story is two rooms and a street, but the audience just can't figure out where it is. The "small fragment" is so, but the "big fragment" is not much better-how many viewers can clearly explain the positional relationship between the "hall", "birdcage", "screen" and "execution ground" in The Promise?

In Looking Beautiful, this problem has been solved quite well. The relationship between classrooms, toilets, bedrooms, playgrounds and the park outside the kindergarten and the hospital is quite clearly explained, which is particularly commendable considering that the film was not filmed in one place.

"It looks beautiful" not only has few "hard injuries", but also has several "really good" places. For example, the scene of a child's "riot" in kindergarten lasted for several minutes, and dozens of scenes were very beautiful. I don't know if there are many naked children crawling from all directions to attack Mr. Li's bedroom, but it will definitely leave a deep impression on people.

There are several such "big plays", and many "small plays" are also quite wonderful. The little actors performed very well. The protagonist "Fang Qiangqiang" looks like Rainbow, and his two "little lovers" Southern Yan and Beiyan are also quite eye-catching. In the process of the author's watching, the laughter of the audience is always constant, which shows that the film is quite friendly to the audience.

Subject matter: deliberately instilling, causing trouble to people.

On the whole, "it looks beautiful" looks really beautiful. If China's directors have the ability to control technology like Bird, then China's films may become better. However, movies are not only technology, but also many other things, which is why people always feel "not so beautiful" when they look beautiful.

Ironically, although the director seems to be deeply dissatisfied with the "traditional education" in a certain period, he is unconsciously "poisoned" by this education, and the concept of "theme first" in primary school students' composition has been thoroughly implemented in this film.

Although Wang Shuo's original novel Looks Beautiful lacks narrative skills and sense of rhythm, it makes a rare exploration on the richness of details, which makes people wonder how Wang Shuo can remember so many things. However, this film is single and rigid.

The film instills the director's "central idea" from beginning to end-uniform and meticulous education is really terrible.

This indoctrination technique is too deliberate. A large number of "anti-No.1" teacher Li's face close-ups and strange music that have not changed from beginning to end symbolically express the "meaning" to be expressed in the film.

This result is two completely opposite negative effects.

For experienced audiences, it is easy for them to see through the director's good intentions, and then they will get tired of this repetitive lack of change, because they know that a good movie should be rich, and seemingly irrelevant or even contradictory details will not hurt the theme, but will make the theme deeper and more convincing.

For the ordinary audience, this extreme "theme first" goes beyond the needs of the film "telling stories", making the ordinary audience feel "unfriendly" and confused-what is this film about? Kindergartens are different from madhouses. After all, it is a place that will leave good memories. The lack of rich colors will make the ordinary audience feel too strange, which will hinder the understanding and recognition of the theme-those children are so cute, but why is the music so strange?

As for the "open" and "desperate" endings of the film, it was a failure. Flying over the madhouse gave the audience a hopeful ending, but it looked beautiful and seemed unwilling to copy it, deliberately wanting a "bald tail."

Bird made an old mistake directed by China here-they didn't want to "copy" the classic Hollywood model, so they "deliberately didn't copy", but it seemed awkward and abrupt. For this ending, experienced viewers and ordinary viewers can reach a * * * understanding: Why do we have to "ban" us at the end?

Generally speaking, the shortcomings of looking beautiful are obvious, which may not only damage the box office of this movie with box office potential, but also make many professionals ignore some of its advantages, but in fact, more attempts should be made.