Maybe I like movies like spy detectives, but this movie still makes me want someone to discuss the things that I don’t understand and don’t understand. Too many clues, what to think of what to say.
1. Why didn't I see that my son's bride was killed by Edward. In my opinion, it was the Soviet spy who saw that Edward refused to trade national interests with his son's safety. In desperation, killing his son would not give him an accident and blow, so he killed his son's wife and brought him more great psychological trauma. The protagonist may regret stopping his son from entering the CIA at this time.
2. The protagonist of this scene is a good shepherd, mainly from the distrust, temptation, threats, the environment of the spy and the importance and influence of the decision-making exposed in the process of tracking down the spy to reflect the difficulty of Edward's battle. For example, the cunning and old Soviet spy was hidden until the end; even the general who appointed him to create the CIA (De Niro) betrayed the country for a long time, accepting black money and depositing huge sums of money in Swiss banks; after hearing this news, his trust in his father was somewhat disintegrated , I couldn't help reading my father's last words. It turned out that my father had really betrayed the organization. My father's hope that they would live a simple life was not fulfilled, but he was innocent of the country after all. Burning the suicide note can see a trace of his relief.
3. Because some people in the film look similar, some parts are incomprehensible. For example, the person who is always said to be his brother held different positions and used different identities at different times. I never figured out this guy.
4. There is one detail. He objected to someone wearing a ring. I thought it was to remind the other party that he should not reveal his marital status when he was doing espionage work, so as not to bring disaster to the family. But later I received a severed finger wearing a ring, whether the person was killed according to the order, or whether the finger was severed to show his sincerity, I do not understand.
5. Not long after he arrived in London, someone said that he liked chocolate. In fact, he laid the groundwork for the person and method of giving money to the general. I think this person is like his brother-in-law, and the face makes me very confused and not sure. If my guess is correct, his brother-in-law was finally promoted to a high position in the intelligence organization in peacetime, and he proudly handed over the counterintelligence organization to Edward in charge. It is estimated that only Edward knew in his heart the fact that his joint general was treasonous.
6. Finally, it's not clear why sound analysis is so important to track down spies? In what city did that room matter so much? Why did he, as the boss, come to the scene to investigate? When I wrote this, I suddenly realized that in fact, all this was a trap set by the Soviet spy who called him mother, aiming to use the video tape as an introduction to tell him that his son had done something sentenced to the state (or leaked state secrets), thereby threatening He traded his son with national security. In the end, finding that he was too loyal to be effective, he killed his daughter-in-law. At this point, I am even more convinced that Edward did not kill his daughter-in-law. Because he was at the wedding scene, he solemnly told his son "your wife..." that he had acknowledged his son's wedding.
If there is any mystery to clarify or where I misunderstand, please point out and share.
View more about The Good Shepherd reviews
