At the end, the central crossroads Fukuyama stood, looked up .... should be directed moral justice will go from here .
In fact, the director of the entire film has shown all directions of justice, criminals, defense lawyers, prosecutors, judges, juries... The directors have demonstrated through various characters in the contests between the various functions of the judiciary. Unfortunately, the entire film The rhythm is too slow and depressing, so the audience may not be able to feel and sort out the context.
Thirty years ago, the murderer Misumi was arrested for his crimes. The judge at the time was the character played by Hashizumi Ko (defense lawyer Fukuyama's father). He attributed Misumi's crimes to the fault of the times and asked the question "Why do people commit crimes?" His point of view is that whether a person will commit a crime is determined from an early age, which may be similar to our "three-year-old sees old". He blames himself to the point that if he didn’t open up his internet at that time, there would be no such murder 30 years later. It’s not difficult to see from it. Fukuyama’s father, the judge at the time, felt that a man with a "killing" gene hidden in his heart, the first time he committed a crime, no matter what the reason, he should not be forgiven. Twice...
But Fukuyama disagrees with his father's point of view. 30 years ago, Misumi sent a card to his father. The wicked person would not send a card to the judge, but the answer was given later: Misumi said that he had followed the card when he sent it. The suggestion of the defense lawyer Shijin... From the lawyer's point of view, this can be done to a certain extent to strive for a lighter sentence. The director here tries to portray the image of a defense lawyer, just like Fukuyama's character attorney Shigemori, he didn't care much about the truth of the case from the beginning, but what kind of "story" can help the defendant get the lightest punishment.
In the law firm of Chongsheng, during a regular case discussion, colleagues chatted, and some people said: "It is also a murder. If the victim is at fault or has been ill, then the offender will appear less heinous and will win to a large extent. Light sentence ", in other words, if the victim is not a good person, then it feels like he deserves to be killed, and the murderer feels like walking for the heavens. So far, the director actually raised questions to the audience a little bit... one by one.
Regarding the problem of Misumi's changing confession time and time again, at the beginning of the film, I thought this should be a cunning criminal who had already had a criminal record and went to commit crimes. Every time I saw a lawyer, I was so calm and talked and laughed occasionally... He must be a good psychological quality. It's dead perverted. But slowly advancing the plot, I slowly understood the director's intention: Misumi is just a carrier, and the tug-of-war of judicial power is all visually demonstrated through him .
Thirty years ago, the defense lawyer suggested that he send the card, and he did so... Thirty years later, he became more familiar with the judicial process. Knowing that the victim’s daughter Sakie would testify in court, he would inevitably have to say that he had suffered. The fact that the victim (the biological father) sexually assaulted... Misumi felt that it would humiliate her again. In order to protect her from telling her about the sexual assault, Misumi suddenly changed her confession and insisted that she did not kill! The court suddenly became confused, because all the evidence that Misumi was guilty was only his own confession. Now the confession is suddenly retracted, and the prosecutor said that according to the procedure, a retrial is required. But suddenly someone didn't know what to say in the prosecution's Ergen, and the prosecutor suddenly followed the old judge's will and did not retry the sentence of "robbing and killing" before Misumi.
Although I don’t understand the working procedures of the legal court, I can’t help but feel that they also have their own “working space”. They don’t care too much about the truth. They just want to put this one quickly The case is over, and the work is over quickly.
The victim was the factory manager who hired him. Although there are usually problems of labor exploitation such as wage deductions, but to take a step back, the victim still gave Misumi a job after all. He should be grateful. Make dirty money: The monthly fraud of flour and the sexual assault of one's own daughter are simply inferior. When I learned this from a conversation with Misumi, he returned to the law firm, and even Fukuyama, who was a defense lawyer, suddenly lost control and threw up the file angrily: his father deserved to be killed if he did this... (It's quite unprofessional) However, the director handles it this way, I think it is very wonderful, it just conveys that whether it is the judge, the prosecutor, the defense lawyer... Although their positions are different, everyone is a living person and has emotions.
For Misumi, he didn’t care much about how the court judged him. Suddenly saying that he did not kill was just to prevent the witness Sakie from telling the unbearable past. For him, the goal has been achieved, and most of his psychology knows that the court will not change. According to the verdict, Misumi has more self-salvation in it, just like his own self-reported at last, he said that as long as he has his own place, there will be harm and misfortune. He should not be born, and he can think of even if he is already in prison, To save an innocent person, he feels that he is still useful... (seeing this, I suddenly thought of Osamu Dazai).
I don’t know why the score of this film is not high. In my opinion, it is a great film. Actually, I didn’t plan to write a film review. It’s too heavy. If you treat it as a criminal reasoning film, you will lose. The director wants to show the weak part of a criminal's heart. Why do people commit crimes? Is every prisoner heinous? Is justice really as fair as its scale icon? Are some people born to determine the fate of others? ....
Too many such problems hit us.
Regarding the truth, every viewer has a version in their hearts. My version is that Misumi and the victim's daughter Sakie committed a joint crime, and Misumi wanted to protect her, and took care of it alone. The big empty birdcage at Misumi’s house was found when Fukuyama went to the house to find clues. Misumi said that the bird was buried in the backyard when it died. The small gravel was placed in the shape of a cross. It’s not a bird. It turns out that several birds died together... Misumi’s explanation was that he felt that they could not survive in the outside world if they let them go... Finally, he revealed that he had let go of a canary. The director here has a metaphor that someone is at large, right? Sakie is the one who let go.
END
View more about The Third Murder reviews
