One embarrassment in this film is that from the standpoint of all parties involved, they all seem to be doing the right thing, but what ultimately leads to is a personal tragedy. The female reporter Rachel’s attempt to uncover the truth about the CIA seems to be the job of the reporter, and the ambition of the individual involved in it to win the Pulitzer Prize for big news does not seem to be blamed too much. . As for Erica, as a female agent, confidentiality is the rule and duty of this industry. Although agents are a controversial profession, whether they ultimately serve national interests related to the people or related to special interests. Her national interest is quite controversial, but from Erica's perspective, it is also not wrong for her to hide her career as an ordinary housewife. When the secrets of the intelligence agency are revealed, which may cause greater secrets to be leaked, it seems that the prosecutor’s actions to find out the person who leaked the secrets also seems to be in line with the practice. Obviously, from his perspective, if the identity of the agent is It can be leaked without some punishment, and its demonstration effect is terrible for such an important tentacles as the spy department of the national machinery. Therefore, all parties perform their own duties. Those who hide their identities hide their work, those who dig insider persistently dig insiders, and those responsible for maintaining the authority of the country monitor and find all possible loopholes with sharp eyes like an eagle. The collision climax of the film is precisely due to a leak that is cleverly set in this film that seems to be dark and humorous in the end.
Erica’s identity as an agent revealed the incident. As an individual incident, it had nothing to do with the interests of the entire US intelligence system; and Rachel closed her mouth and did not disclose the source of the information. As an individual incident, the incident had nothing to do with the overall rights and interests of the US media. However, the reason why this incident has attracted the attention of the media and the state machinery is precisely the huge impact its demonstration effect may have on the whole. Therefore, the prosecutor must chase Rachel vigorously and only give her a name, even if her family is ruined. The purpose is actually not to make Rachel pay a price, but to use punishment as a means of public announcement to inform the media of the price of any attempt to explore the insider of the intelligence community through government insiders; it is also to inform the internal intelligence department. People, if they try to leak the news, will live in panic of how uneasy they are. Even government departments should take the opportunity to strengthen this deterrence, and use real cases to make the past abstract secrecy preaching show a chilling vividness. In turn, Rachel and the newspaper must be tight-lipped, even if their family is destroyed, the newspaper may face a huge fine. Because even if the source of the information can be exempted from jail, it is the end of her career for Rachel. Who would believe such a reporter? How can she still have a chance to report big news? As for the newspaper behind her, who would dare to provide inside information to a newspaper with such a reporter? To zoom in further, if the media has a Rachel who has revealed the source of information, then it is an uneasy announcement for more potential sources of information: there may be a second, third, and anyone who reveals information again, will May be betrayed by reporters who began to promise him confidentiality. Therefore, this is a deadlock. As the prosecutor of the state apparatus, the prosecutor appears to be relatively strong and more "abominable". The weak Rachel, as the weak, is also a journalist who expresses the voice of restraining the strong government on behalf of the weak. It is even more sympathetic. With limited support, divorced from her husband, and facing the emotional impact of her children’s incomprehension, her persistence is even more admirable. As the title of this film says, truth is supreme, and her experience is a perfect interpretation This true meaning.
However, the emotional sublimation of this film not only shows the value of truth-first, but also shows its price, and even a price that makes people suspect that it will stick to its value. We have seen that when the prosecutor appears vicious and Rachel appears pitiful and respectable, Erica is ignored. All she gets is the media chasing her and the intelligence agencies' continuous investigation of her distrust. And making things difficult, and even the final substantive abandonment, what is more serious is the breakdown of the family, which made her appear so innocent, and she served her country. What she got was that the media and the public ridiculed her value, and the possessed institutions eagerly abandon it, leaving her alone. She is more like a victim of a competition from various forces. The prosecutor and Rachel insisted on what they should stick to, and won the praise of the industry. Only Erica became one under the attack of an extreme right winger. The cold body can be called the most tragic character in the film. The death of Erica can be described as a surprise emotional blow in this film, but the persistence of Rachel and others made a life disappear. Is this out of her ambition or sense of responsibility? Such cross-examination can easily arise in the hearts of the audience, and even Rachel has doubts about this new student. However, this is actually just a gesture of "receiving" the director expresses to the theme, and the final reveal of the mystery allows the theme to be sublimated to the greatest extent and the audience's emotions to be released to the greatest extent.
Who is that information source is the biggest suspense in this film. When we see that for the security of this information source, all parties are paying more and more. When this protracted struggle seems to be invisible to the scene, it is easy to produce urgency. Mood: Who? Who is that information source? At this time, while admiring the audience, Rachel also became the audience’s "enemy" who wanted the truth. In fact, in the "Secret Agent" incident, the media's final report also gave the public at that time more or less similar insights. The embarrassment of the truth but not the truth, this is a rather paradoxical state. The reporter has uncovered part of the truth that the people hope to see, but suppressed another part. This measure is also an unsolved proposition that the media will always weigh in disputes. Fortunately, the director made a balance. Rachel didn't tell the secret in person, but told us the truth in a natural lens with a sense of memory. When seeing the final truth, I believe that the sadness brought about by Erica’s death just produced a sad but touching effect at the end. Rachel’s persistence actually brought Erica as a mother. A protection, I believe she can understand the price in heaven. Regarding the value of truth, idealists and pragmatists, liberals and national interest supremacists will give their own interpretations, but what this film tells us is some individual choices and costs under this social order. It is their choice that maintains the balance of this social order. They will always have conflicts and reconciliations, and promote the operation of a relatively benign social system. Their values and sacrifices should be treated as living individuals, not simple ones. The symbol of the news event goes to bear in mind.
http://hi.baidu.com/doglovecat/blog/item/1475c2effedf833aadafd5df.html
View more about Nothing But the Truth reviews
