When two people who do not have independent criminal personalities cooperate, a third personality is derived, which has both motive and action to kill. Even when events were unexpected and choices began to falter, the force of the impulse made him do what he expected. This has nothing to do with the victim's personality. As the perpetrator, Perry, before the plan was disrupted, was just unconsciously making preparations, tying the victim like an animal and turning a deaf ear to their words. But when the accident happened, his emotions were suddenly hit by a sense of absurdity, and hallucinations appeared, causing him to lose control in the mania. In a normal state, he was just a dull, immature child, remembering his treasure map. There is no relationship between the perpetrator and the victim, because they are in two worlds, and when the two conflict, only one can obey the rules. It's clear that the docile, herbivorous Clutter family is inevitably the underdog. This can be said to be a series of murders that can only happen by coincidence, but it happened so naturally.
It's interesting to me that Perry, when he's sane, hates people who can't control themselves the most. This is the trauma of his childhood shadows. He rejected this personality, but unknowingly inherited it. Loss of control makes him anxious, and anxiety makes him more out of control. Without a strong external influence, it is difficult to get out of this vicious circle. In the film, of course not.
The case itself is absurdly interesting, like one of the Darwin Prize works. The seemingly inexplicable murder for no reason is actually just a stupid crime, but it can cause great reactions from people. Because of its seemingly random surface, it creates a panic that everyone can be victimized. It exudes an anti-religious air that shakes faith. So only the elimination of the perpetrators can provide an explanation for the belief. Although this will not prevent similar incidents from happening again.
For a thing that has no meaning, it may be a temporary psychological comfort to assign a meaning to it. The hard part is not to define it subjectively; to admit it, and to keep the doubts.
View more about In Cold Blood reviews
