Generally speaking, in addition to plotting, excellent film and television works must also have a profound core. This kernel can convey positive value to people and is thought-provoking.
However, there are always some geeky works that like to do the opposite. , such as Netflix's first self-produced drama that year.
, a work that takes a different approach, has basically seriously broken the three views, and it is not enough to describe it. The desire of human nature, the indifference of rights, and the greed of capital are fully expressed in this.
Its name is "House of Cards".
House of cards, literally, is a house built of cards.
- It is accurate, and you must be careful in building it and no mistakes are allowed, otherwise all your previous efforts will be wasted
- It is fragile. Even if it is successfully built, it only requires a little external force, and it may collapse
- It is beautiful. Just imagine such an accurate and fragile house, how can it not look beautiful
This house is called power.
The drama "House of Cards" tells the daily life of a group of people in the power field in Washington, D.C. The protagonist is a congressman Frank played by Kevin Spacey .
People film and television dramas with political themes are generally rarely seen. Because the topic is too sensitive. "House of Cards" was not only filmed, but also filmed very aggressively, challenging the audience's cognitive bottom line along the way. How extreme is this excessive
? Let’s take to see the plot of the collapse of three views in "House of Cards".
(Let’s use the two battles in the first season to illustrate)
Secretary of State’s counterattack
- black materials. forced a member of Congress to become a pawn by getting black materials.
- concocts perjury. uses chess pieces to concoct perjury to attack competitors.
- manipulates public opinion. uses reporter lovers (maybe more suitable to call pets) to manipulate public opinion and force allies to take over.
Education Act reform tug-of-war
Compared with the subsequent vice presidential battle, the battle of bill reform is the core of this season.Compared to the tough battle, only chess pieces were sacrificed, this battle exposed the darkness of the bottom three views this season.
This tug-of-war has three turning points:
- leaked confidential files. In order to gain the dominance of the reform, leaked confidential documents to the public and then made the original leader a scapegoat.
- drives tigers and swallows wolfs. In order for the bill to pass the parliament, it will provoke the confrontation between the No. 1 boss and the No. 2 boss, and the fisherman will benefit.
- bitter meat sensational. In order to resolve the social conflicts brought about by the bill, it took the initiative to brew public events and package its own identity as a victim. The methods used by Frank the most are the last one.
In the plot, the Education Reform Act touched on the interests of teachers, leading to a strike demonstration by teachers. Frank knew that this was bound to happen, and he didn't stop it.
Because blocking means compromise, concession, and failure.
He would never allow this, so he thought of a countermeasure early:
That is, lets subordinates pay attention to student casualties during the teacher strike. And the place where it happens cannot be too far away, it must be around.
As expected, Frank finally used the casualties to successfully force the strike to stop.
But here, I don’t want to show how wise the protagonist is, just wants to lament how bloody this countermeasure is.
I saw some netizens commented: One general succeeded and ten thousand bones
How light is it said, killing and decisive, and it has a kind of demeanor of those who achieve great things without taking care of the details.
But, is this view really correct?
Is this idea really correct to achieve yourself by sacrificing others?
I don't think so.Or from a high-dimensional level, there is nothing wrong with this sentence.
Because it reaches that level, it has nothing to do with right or wrong.
But I am just an ordinary person, and I can't look at this issue from a high point.
It is true that in today's pragmatism, Frank's unscrupulous behavior to achieve his goals can resonate with some people. But I believe that the core of the high-scoring American drama that has collapsed in three views but has received a lot of praise from is far from being so superficial.
I guess on the one hand, it wants to tell us that reality is not that beautiful, perhaps full of conspiracy, calculation, and exchange;
But on the other hand, it also hopes that is just seen and heard from the plot, not learned in life, use it.
People with high IQ are admirable, but the evil of high IQ is also more pure.
Last mention, for office workers, the rowing machine in the play is really good.
