For Younger, played by Michael Sheen, my guess at the beginning was wrong. His purpose was not as pure as I imagined, but it was enough to be a powerful driving force for him in the subsequent contest. H, played by Samuel L. Jackson, and his wife, represent another kind of person who treats the world with hateful eyes and mentality after suffering, and never shows mercy when watching or personally abusing them. Female agent Brody leads the audience into this secret world as a bystander with a public mentality. The fluctuations in her emotions also represent the psychology of a considerable part of the audience.
The entire film is a contest between these three forces. In the process, the situation is constantly pushed to a dead end, and the parties are forced to readjust more than once from a state that is almost out of control. It can be said that there is no winner in this matter in the end, but it does move forward according to the ideas of one of the parties. After watching this film, you can come to the conclusion that even brutal torture to extract confessions has limited effect. You can destroy the terrorists' spiritual defense line, but you cannot defend the security of society. Therefore, it is not advisable to cover up the solution of the fundamental problem with the advanced method of torture, which is what the film wants to tell us.
Can torture really fail to achieve its purpose? not necessarily. You must know that whether it is H or Agent Brody in the film, their purpose is pure, that is, to solve the problem, find the nuclear bomb, and maintain the personal safety of citizens. But if the problem is not so serious, all they want to get out of Younger's mouth is the name of an accomplice. If the confession is successful, Younger randomly names a person, and they use the same method to find another person to recognize. The purpose is not good. If it is achieved, won't the work performance be added points?
Combining the three results of extorting confessions by torture: 1. The suspect could not bear to admit defeat, and to tell the truth, the problem was solved but violated the law and morality; 2. The suspect could not stand the nonsense, the police were deceived, time wasted, the problem was not solved or even worsened; 3. The suspect could not stand the nonsense, but the police still carried out the nonsense knowingly, which achieved the purpose of the police but caused the problem to worsen. The premise of these three cases is that "the suspect can't stand it", but what is the result? It is not difficult to see that torture to extort confessions is a sign of justice, but often leads to the evil side, or in many cases the motive itself is evil. Therefore, this kind of behavior is difficult to work, and it is even more difficult to eliminate it. Only the sound of supervision and balance can reduce the occurrence of similar situations, and movies can be regarded as one of the methods of supervision and reflection.
View more about Unthinkable reviews
