A brief shot of a fully nude woman in the shower (this is in a non-sexual way and only lasts a second).
A man and woman start to undress each other, sex is implied but not seen.
A woman removes her clothes but only her bare shoulders are visable. She then walks over to a man and starts to unzip his pants. Sex is implied but not seen.
A woman is seen who is pregnant, although her pregnancy isn’t brought up much during the film.
A woman is mentioned to be “on the curse” (her period). she moans in pain and another woman tells the nurses not to let her have any coke because of the cocaine in it.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


A good movie. Get rid of stereotypes, techniques are no longer limited to tradition… All these make the film outstanding. However, before talking about scene arrangement and group, let me point out its shortcomings.

The patterning of plot arrangement, especially the part where No. 67 and Alice go to the host after they are met by the hostess. And Alice’s nervous breakdown.

In terms of shooting, the lens switching in the race (especially for the first time) is ordinary. The rolling at the beginning of the signature was shocking, but it seemed wrong to deal with it as dolly in – in other words, the overall mirror movement was based on traditional skills. It might be better to follow Bresson’s idea of separating sound and painting (after all, the film has a lot of music and sound).

Now let’s talk about the scene layout and group:

Since the use of flashback in the second half has set a sad tone color for the film, the group setting (or design) should be shown in more aspects. However, the result is still at the level of loser Party – there is actually a problem here, that is, how to tell the participants’ past through the dance? In fact, the present determines not only the future, but also the past. In other words, for the film, the statement must be based on the present and the present rather than using memories. Only by fully unfolding the present can we make up for the past… Obviously, for the film, we can’t play back the past of each main character in a flashback way; Flashback should not even be used. Therefore, we have to work hard now (specifically on dialogue). The film has made some efforts here, which should be admitted, but it should also be admitted that the efforts are not enough. In fact, when the film uses group roles to state, it already has no advantage in dialogue. The dialogue of many characters will disperse the power of dialogue. Fortunately, there is also the female leader, who plays a role in series. However, once the focus is on the female leader, the group role becomes redundant and cumbersome. The focus cannot swing back and forth in two places. However, when the focus finally shifted to the female and male owners, the film had to end. Therefore, it seems that the final shooting is very flattering. The crueler ending is to let the woman live.

Group statement must face more complex drama. Therefore, the characters, their actions and their stories should have played a role in enriching the film instrumental Bureau. However, due to the limitation of the dance itself, this richness is very cramped and has no room for extension. So it seems that the original determination of group statements may have become a hidden danger in the pre system. The more you want to say, the less the actual results. On the contrary, many lonely statements based on individuals can fully show the richness contained in the steaming fog by elaborating on a single role. Therefore, the perspective of statement is extremely important and key.

The film used both heart and force in the scene layout. Jane Fonda needs extra points, and several supporting roles also have their own characteristics, except for the big vase of the male master. In fact, the paragraph where No. 67 and Alice are held together is worth exploring, but it is still limited by the traditional “drama plot” – of course, many places are such traditional drama plots – and failed to explore new possibilities. No. 67 separated from the female owner, and finally turned into anger rather than a more profound division. This is a failure!

Finally, the name of the film is very good (it tastes like a good novel). They shoot horses, don’t they.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here