(This is going to be yet another negative post. Usually I am pretty bochap when I disagree about things, but somehow recently I became very particular about and over-reacted to so many things. And that I couldn’t get over it before I expressed my feeling through a blog post.)
This afternoon I re-watched Red Cliff II and I was reminded of what I wanted to write after watching Letters to God last week. In summary: I don’t like Christian (American evangelical?) movies. I guess this is partly because my bad experience with 70×07 (admittedly, I should have given this movie a lot of benefit of doubt since it was an amateur movie) and partly because of my somehow high expectation when I watched a movie. Let me explain the latter.
My definition of a good film is the one who could open new vistas of imagination — without telling you what they are. And Red Cliff II reminds me of such film. It is loaded with symbolical acts and really invites you into the symbolical world of the movie. And naturally it will draw different interpretations and hence the viewers could argue about them over and over again. And, as Ko Tjeli has mentioned so many times, I am basically a Platonic, which means that I likes to draw ideals from external physical forms. So subtle meanings really fit me.
Christian movies, on the other hand, have a tendency exactly opposite of that: they love to preach what they think to be true so that you could believe it as well. Not that the values themselves are wrong, though, but I just don’t think it fits the purpose of a film itself (admittedly, according to my personal preference). I just don’t see the value of being spoon-fed when you watch a movie.