First of all, let's talk about the character of the male protagonist, who is not sociable, fails in reality, has high IQ, is paranoid, and longs for approval. The male protagonist tries to analyze the bomber case from a new perspective of linguistics, but he is not taken seriously because he is soft-spoken.
The two time periods of the first episode are staggered, and the background is very complete. In the pursuit of bombing in 1995 and the conviction in 1997, the male protagonist racked his brains and fought wits with the bomber.
The most exciting part of the second and third episodes is the debate between the male protagonist and the bomber in prison in 1997. The first confrontation was about the age of technology, the constraints of tools on people, and the two perverted and exchanged when this helplessness occurred... This paragraph shows that when the male protagonist is catching the bomber, he has a relationship with the bomber. The concept resonates, so I will go back to the mountains and live in a primitive society, but I am looking forward to describing this part of the scene in more detail in the future. (The male protagonist was defeated in the first round!) Because the male protagonist himself recognized the idea of the bomber, he was internally conflicted. The second time the male protagonist tried to use the collected evidence to persuade the bomber to come to justice, but the bomber counterattacked with the "fruit of the poisonous tree", questioning the male protagonist's strength (the male protagonist's paranoia and inner inferiority were aroused, the male protagonist this time Failed again!) For the third time, the male protagonist tried to control the bomber. He advised the bomber to live rather than die. Only by confessing his guilt can he leave a declaration as legacy, and claiming his innocence in court is actually challenging his authority. As a result, the bomber countered that his release showed the uselessness of the male protagonist's evidence, and the male protagonist lost the value of being called by the FBI. (This time, both losers, a tie!)
The fourth episode is almost all about the capture process in 1995, which is very exciting. I think the rhythm of this episode is very good, and the next episode is going to start the battle of wits in 1995, looking forward to it.
I think the concept of the bomber in this play is mainly to explain the side effects brought by technology and industry, and it is meant to be entertained to death. (Too superficial and needs to be further understood.) But the idea of bombers trying to publish a manifesto to recruit fans and use bombs to try to eliminate industrial society... It really is the conceit of serial killers... In fact, for the third debate, I think The male protagonist is still at the mercy of his inferiority complex. Even if the bomber used his IQ to conquer the jury and was released, the male protagonist at least prevented the occurrence of bomb cases during his detention and reduced casualties. The inner contradiction of the male protagonist is that he feels the loneliness brought about by technology and partially recognizes the bomber, but he also has respect and awe for human life. It is precisely because of the latter that he is not another bomber, not a killer.
(However, is it really not lonely to live in a primitive society by yourself...) It seems that he was abandoned by his wife, children and society as a last resort, not like Thoreau voluntarily and calmly...
Anyway, looking forward to the sequel. Although school has started, I try my best to finish it.
View more about Manhunt reviews
