This is a very interesting setting, a bit like a real-life killing game, I thought it would be a good fight of wits. But the result was disappointing. This was not a reasoning question, but a memory question. In the end, the problem was solved by slowly recovering memory.
What’s interesting is that when several people are guessing their identities, they tend to believe that they are good people and accuse the other person of being bad. “You say you’re not a criminal, don’t act like a criminal”. However, in the circumstances at the time, it was obvious that the bad guys were in a more favorable situation. They only had to wait for their accomplices to come back and divide the money, while the good guys faced desperate lives. Ordinarily, at this time, the bad guys should have more psychological advantages. I hope that I am a bad guy to be more rational. The line should be like this: "You are a good guy, and you look like a good guy." I think the actions of the people in the play just show the screenwriter’s good desire for people to still uphold justice in critical situations.
Another thing that I don’t understand is that after the memory is restored, and after knowing his identity, the criminal chooses to cooperate with good people to deal with the upcoming accomplices. This is probably hard to explain as a temporary conscience discovery, but just the effect of the Stockholm effect. .
from my blog:
http://my.donews.com/bingblog/2007/01/24/pSmaywXtLDNGpZQsSTofKsUPpAqPITiYMvZk/
View more about Unknown reviews
