How should I put it, in fact, I think the practice of martyrdom by the hero and heroine is biased. It's as if one person clearly didn't intend to commit a crime, but the other party framed him, forced her, abused him, etc. to force him to commit a crime. How can you say this? Is it really just a matter of law? The Governor's rhetorical question is very good, please point out the innocent people who can really prove it. OK, the male lead died innocently, but he did it voluntarily. How could it be counted as killing the wrong person. It is meaningless to say that the thief shouts to catch the thief.
Of course, the film is full of tension, full of plot, and Kevin's acting skills are impeccable, allowing me to see the extension of the seven deadly sins. The reversal of the ending is also very good, and it is foreseeable, but there is no time to think about it, because there is no urine point in the whole process. The plot and performances are full marks, the idea is. The benevolent sees benevolence, deduct a little bit.
View more about
The Life of David Gale reviews