I think two points are worth mentioning.
First, when Kaverny asked why Sullinger and Whiteman would invest hundreds of millions in the unprofitable missile control system business with China, Kaverny said tactfully whether his purpose was to control the conflict. , but to control the creditor's rights, and to control the creditor's rights is equivalent to owning everything. I don't quite understand what it is all about. that power? money? Or vanity control? The same concept exists in the mind of senior financial control official Scarson. Is all this so-called happier than playing a game of chess quietly with his son? It was only when the bullet hit the heart again that I realized that to live is to have everything.
Ambition can kill people!
Second, when Sullinger interrogated the old man, the old man spoke out the doubts that Sullinger had been puzzled by, and pointed out the solution. And before I said the solution, I felt really confused, this was the first time I had such a feeling that justice could not be proved in a fair way! Is that still justice? No doubt yes, look at those financially controlled bribe-takers, Colombian drug lords? Russian gangsters? Multinational corporations operating in grey and black zones. Justice was before them, but they were powerless. So justice also has a way to compromise, use a deceit, cunning, let them kill each other. I think the writers are helpless to write this way.
The reality is also inseparable from the film.
View more about The International reviews
