The murder case of "Murder on the Orient Express" is the best example of all the villains. Except for Doctor Polo, the conductor, the remaining 12 people in the car each have their own purposes, because they want to avenge the same person for the death of their loved ones. Under one person's organization, everyone has a killer.
The particularity of this case lies in three points: First, the identity of the deceased is the murderer who once kidnapped and killed the little girl, but he escaped legal punishment, killing one person directly and four people indirectly. Therefore, whether from a legal or moral level, he is a "murderer" who should be punished, which is different from the identity of the deceased in some homicides.
Second, the murderer is not one person, but many people, as many as all villains. If you dig deeper, everyone is connected to the five dead people, and everyone is responsible for his death. This is really bold in a suspense drama. I thought it was just a point where everyone had doubts, but I didn't expect everyone to stab a knife once. There has always been a hint at the front of the film, "a fair trial of 12 people".
Third, the setting of the ending, this ending did not choose the traditional ending of catching the murderer, because the number of crimes was too large, and although the motive was for revenge, this enemy committed a heinous crime, and escaped the punishment of the law and became a wealthy businessman. So it's hard to choose whether to expose the 12 accomplices. Are they the murderer or are they the jury of justice to punish the murderer who escaped punishment? This is open-ended, and every viewer can think. There is no right or wrong in this matter, there is only a standpoint. Different standpoints lead to different conclusions. Poirot explained two murder processes at the end, one is the mafia who wants to be believed to assassinate and escape from the carriage, and the second is that all the villains are the truth, and finally the train conductor decided to show the world the first one. In the process, maybe such a story ending is a good ending for everyone.
Before I wrote a film review, I saw a comment from a person in the short review. He said that he did not agree with Polo's process of judging cases by imagination, and there was no factual basis at all. I don't agree with what that person said, reading Agatha Christie's novels, Pormapoel is the way to judge the case, in that age when the technology was not developed, there was no way to pass the high-tech judgment, only the suspect's confession , nuanced evidence, and imaginative reasoning. This is natural reasoning, which is based on logic-oriented reasoning and understanding, focusing on thrilling and bizarre plots and intriguing tricks, not realism. Maybe everyone's preferences are different, some people like social genre reasoning, some people like natural reasoning, I will always like a chubby little Belgian old man with a stylish mustache, well-dressed clothes and shiny patent leather shoes. Cleanliness, gather everyone together at the last moment and speak out your reasoning slowly but forcefully. In my heart, this little old man will always be a classic!
View more about Murder on the Orient Express reviews
