The director tried to use a film to interpret human nature. He wants to express too much. The undesirable consequence caused is ambiguous, there is no distinction between right and wrong, but it also implies the shadow of good and evil. now it's right. So what the director wanted to express came out. Is it not. Human nature is so ambiguous. When the director does not understand what he is expressing, when he is unable to tell, when he still has to insist on what he says and can persist, this ambiguous product succeeds. Because of the ambiguity, it looks like human nature, that bit of persistence and helplessness, that bit of good and evil, that bit of selfishness and viciousness, and that bit of latent unscrupulous means for survival. Like everyone, the audience loves to watch and is willing to think. I really doubt that someone can draw conclusions about human nature by watching the film. Good and evil are inconclusive, and it is a great success to exchange for a sigh. Even that sigh was superficial. I saw Dave's tragedy, saw his insensitive life and the gratitude before death, and tears fell. That's it, I'm at a loss if I go further.
View more about Mystic River reviews
