第一人称第三人称切换的镜头感触和视角，仿佛大制作烧机子的大型游戏，因为过于清晰反而让人有一种无法分辨的感受。这大概就是将来电影发展的趋势吧，浸入式体验和虚拟的真实，到时候电影不会再是一场梦也说不定。
The first person third person switching lens feeling and perspective is like making a big game of burning a machine, because it is too clear, but it makes people have an indistinguishable feeling. This is probably the trend of film development in the future. Immersive experience and virtual reality will not be a dream at that time.
主题对人的探索仿佛是克隆技术一出现就回避不开的难题，同样的基因同样的个体，为什么他就是人是儿子他就是工具。无法做到一视同仁就永远没有公平，那索性最初就不要开始。不然如同打开的潘多拉魔盒，也是冠冕堂皇虚伪正义。
The theme of human exploration seems to be a difficult problem that can not be avoided as soon as the cloning technology appears. For the same gene and the same individual, why he is a man and a son is a tool. If we can't do the same thing, we will never be fair. We simply don't start at first. Otherwise, like the Pandora's box opened, it is also a grand hypocritical justice.
同样，究竟是环境对人塑造更重要还是基因？经历了那么多双胞胎实验，或是无意中形成的野外观察，在心理学教育学中的探讨和争论正如同哲学中唯物和唯心。显然电影中环境并没有改变主角的习性和本心，因为实验开始变量就是错的，假设对方有一个没有爱的童年，但是爱是个主观的不可衡量的变量，所以实验一开始就存在的系统误差并没有导致结果的显著性差异。反派是可悲的，他真的爱他的作品，但他也是危险的，只要他保持对人的区分，那就永远如同一颗定时炸弹，谁也不知下一个被视为工具的会是哪个自己。
Similarly, is the environment more important or the gene? After so many twin experiments, or field observation formed unintentionally, the discussion and debate in psychology pedagogy are just like materialism and idealism in philosophy. Obviously, the environment in the movie does not change the protagonist's habits and intentions, because the starting variable of the experiment is wrong, assuming that the other party has a childhood without love, but love is a subjective and unmeasurable variable, so the systematic error existing at the beginning of the experiment does not lead to significant differences in the results. The villain is sad. He really loves his works, but he is also dangerous. As long as he keeps the distinction between people, it will always be like a time bomb. No one knows who will be the next to be regarded as a tool.
李安用一个简单而稳妥的故事尝试新的技术，虽然还有不足还能看出显而易见的漏洞，但也是一次重要的突破。就如同詹姆斯卡梅隆用泰坦尼克和阿凡达两次拉高电影制作的标杆，新技术的崛起也会是电影一次突破性的革命。
Ang Lee uses a simple and safe story to try new technology. Although there are still shortcomings, obvious loopholes can be seen, but it is also an important breakthrough. Just as James Cameron used Titanic and avatar to pull the benchmark of film production twice, the rise of new technology will also be a breakthrough revolution in film production.
飞起的鸽子被子弹轰时经典的慢动作，蹲在石像后偷窥的视角和头昏骷髅的窥视。新的技术+四平八稳的故事+偶尔引起人兴趣的镜头语言，可以说是李安过于在乎技术的顾此失彼。也可以说是一次不太勇敢的突破尝试。
When the flying pigeon is bombarded by bullets, it is a classic slow motion. It squats behind the stone statue to peep at it from the perspective of peeping and the peeping of the dizzy skull. New technology + smooth Story + occasionally interesting lens language, it can be said that Ang Lee is too concerned about technology. It can also be said that it is not a brave breakthrough attempt.