这部战国篇跟第一部春秋篇简直就没法比！实在是没法看下去！从主题曲到片中插曲，有时候看着看着他这插曲不合时宜的就出来了。故事剧情啰嗦拖沓，儿女情长杜撰太多，这种历史剧需要儿女情长吗？还是杜撰的？看得简直想吐！愤怒的我于是回来翻看了一下导演，又看了看两个导演的作品。只能说专业水平一个天上一个地下。这么好的题材拍成这个垃圾样！这种水平还做了老师，难怪现在的导演水平这么差，原来是废物教废物！

小七那么可爱，和方冷在一次次地接触中获得爱情是最美好的样子，喜欢。无意间看了这部剧，很有霸道总裁范，女主的人设也是很棒，花痴，善良，剧情不注水，很吸引人。小姐姐和方总裁经过千心万苦才在一起，撒花撒花。男二方烈也是个深情的小奶狗，有才，开始和女主是朋友，最后在相处过程中喜欢上女主，最后还和他哥正面刚，偶像剧的套路，男主是女主的，男二是我们大家的，想把方烈带走，一些其他人物的演技和形象也很符合现实了，看着看着就会喜欢上这部剧。

好久没有看到这种让我尬到无法呼吸的剧了。女主钻进轿子是个什么操作啊？男主即使不知道“我朋友”的梗，你看她那吞吞吐吐的样子也知道有问题吧？就你这智商玩毛线宫斗啊？太妃已经见过女二了，你这时候把命批拿出来，是想暴露欺君诛九族呢？还是想把女二坑成天煞孤星？

本来看剧情介绍，预知啥的我有点儿小期待，看了四集我实在撑不下去了，看的我浑身难受。

原文出自《影像之书》官方press kit，此处刊载美版press kit中的译文。

Dear Jean-Luc,

Thank you for your invitation to see The Image Book (...)

You have recreated pictorial matter from various sources and formats. Deformed, re-colorized, enlarged by the grain, and re-framed.

Blocked all seduction of images, text also, stuttering, quavering, interrupted, covered up.

In the constant interruptions, being split between what is represented and the machine of the cinematograph, with its unspooling, its perforations, its decomposition.

Rediscovering discontinuity by digital means.

The beautiful and accurate definition of counterpoint gives a key.

Waves, flames, bombardments, armies, history and the world as a thundering spectacle à la Dovzhenko, or Vidor.

A great symphonic surge. But not to tell as story. Not longer truly ‘cinema’. As per the first reader of Moby Dick (according to Giono):

- This is not a book - No, said Melville.

This is not something to make you popular, in the face of digital, digital that shows all, and nothing behind. (I experienced this on Vigo’s films, and hope to have avoided it in the end).

That’s assuming that what you say is heard. That is what is astonishing in your film. “It is becoming necessary to draw attention,” in fact. But it hasn’t been shown like this; said, occasionally, with Victor Hugo’s “government of wild beasts.”

Marx invented remakes with his Louis-Napoleon. History repeats itself, but here, not as farce. Moral errors get confused with crimes of the States. There are criminals who exist only because of war. Humanity is destroying itself. For years now, war has been everywhere, more and more literally, in the sense of Goya or Joseph de Maistre’s (this is how we explain the presence of the latter). Habituation follows.

To say that The Image Book is an act of courage, that it is unprecedented, is a platitude. But this is the feeling that keeps coming back to me.

It is true, as the young people who write to you in Lundi matin say, that you are the only one who, etc... (They don't know how right they are, I’m curious for them to see this one).

You have always been “in” history, since you consider that that is what cinema should serve.

From Histoire(s) on, this was what it was always about, first and foremost, more than cinephilia telling its little stories (not bad!)

This time the matter itself, is history. In fact you’re not turning away from cinema, it’s simply no longer a dominant love. It is as useful as the printing type case from which Fuller’s illiterate typesetter finds the characters, at top speed.

And you, you keep the character, the hieroglyph of which Eisenstein dreamed. (He too, his three apparitions are magnificent: the owl, the hands on the bible and the Teutonic knight. He wanted to build his cathedral of the Arts, all by himself. His resistance was already that of hope, and his solitude too)

You find all the images in films, and shabby newsreels. It’s only justice. All the better if Ridley Scott serves to fill a printing type case. And to not have turned your back on cinema, the two long shots from Le plaisir suffice, where we see moving bodies, giving a definition of precisely that. Thought evolves through images and sound ("a thought / will come / to be continued"), as in a collage a friend had made using texts from the screen of Histoire(s). It is a bloc, and it is articulated like the five fingers... another one of these things I didn’t understand on paper.

Lastly, even if the re-uses of Histoires are what I am least curious about - one doesn’t change his handwriting - I very much like the idea of immortality through liquid films, from Vertigo to Ruby Gentry by way of The River. And the peaceful moments of a happy Arabia where I see something of Barnet’s joy: sunset, a boat on the glittering sea, the banal corners of the Maghreb playing for the whole of Arabia, the Arabia we have behind our eyes. Again, thank you.

Warm regards,Bernard Eisenschitz (Critic, Historian, Director)

press kit下载：https://4f399d350e4882ff73b9-0f00c87f9e216dcd5acfbe5f7dfb64d7.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/production/documents/Godard%20-%20Image%20Book%20Press%20Kit.pdf