It is against this background that even the heroine of the movie said in an interview, "I have never seen such a character image of a nun on the screen. Although Helen's story is unavoidable, it shows great love." It is the complexity of the death penalty issue that makes Susan Sarandon's acting skills to the fullest and makes her a statuette. As a country with a tradition of the death penalty, whether it is the United States or China, the word "tradition" is closely integrated with the legitimacy of the death penalty, so that the death penalty has become a matter of course. But obviously, everyone does not understand what tradition is. Stealing a pound or a piece of mulberry leaf can be sentenced to death. It is also one of the long traditions. Although this seems to embarrass both those who support the death penalty and those who oppose it: the abolition of the death penalty depends on the likes and dislikes of the public rather than some profound moral foundation.
But disputes are still necessary. Without disputes, we cannot recognize exactly what we support and oppose. The priest gave the old covenant blood for blood, and the nun gave the new covenant forgiveness and sanctification. The sheriff said: The Bible says an eye for an eye, and the nun said that death is a punishment for adultery, prostitution, homosexuality, harassment of the Holy Land, blasphemy, and disrespect of parents. Religious traditions are the same as our severe punishment traditions, and their foundations have long been dispelled. The view of the father of the slain young woman is that Matthew, who killed the two young men, was a beast. Although it may seem emotional, this view has roots in both the West and China. When a person uses violence to harm other members of society, he is no longer a member of society. He pushes himself into a primitive state of nature by his actions. He is an enemy of society and loses his qualifications as a person. In China, Mo Zi said that killing thieves is not killing people. If at the time of the murder, the murderer was driven by a beastly passion and lost human reason and can still be recognized, then once the murderer is arrested, his state of passion and inhuman attributes disappear. Excluding the murderers from society now seems to not be recognized by most people. More complicated is yet to come. There are constant disputes over the confirmation of the facts and execution of the death penalty. There is no doubt about the existence of unjust, false and wrong cases. Even if it’s not an unjust, false or wrong case, as the tax lawyer defending Matthew in the movie said: If Matthew has more money, he can hire many big lawyers, first-class investigators, ballistics experts, and psychologists, comprehensive The ideal jury (the parties can challenge the choice of the jury to form a jury that is beneficial to them). The other accomplice in this case is just so exempt from the death penalty. What has nothing to do with the crime is the political inclination and views of the parties involved. Matthew grew up in a slum, and on the one hand he was discriminated against, on the other hand, he discriminated against blacks and supported Nazism. If he had not committed the crime, these things would not bring him punishment or death, but now it makes him "deserve to be executed." If he had a media image consultant, he wouldn't regret "I really shouldn't be so nonsense." On the other hand, the death penalty has evolved from beheading and burial alive to electric chair, shooting and then injection. However, these changes have concealed the essence of the problem. We are willing to improve the pain before death but turn a blind eye to death, a major problem that eliminates human existence. If Matthew is a poor man, commits crimes under coercion, and repents, the moral problem we face is much smaller. However, the power of the film is to directly present the moral problem. He is poor, but he is a racist. Repent until death, and confess the criminal of the crime until death.
Who should die? Isn’t the reason why we attach so much importance to the fact that the victim was killed is because we value life more than other manifestations? That being the case, why should we support the decision to deprive another life? The film did not give an answer, but it successfully caused controversy. It makes us reflect on the moral basis of death penalty and the meaning of death to human beings. People who support the death penalty, please think about the true meaning of death. If there is no answer, please give the death penalty a chance to think about the answer.
View more about Dead Man Walking reviews
