Leaving aside the protagonist's theory of justice. We're like watching two third-party teams play. Watch the movie with less emotion.
The Commonwealth believes it can make people's lives better, even by unnatural means (spraying a drug into the air). Such measures in the film lead to chaos. If, if if, there are no such tragic consequences. The whole society is really gentle and there is no strife. Is this good or bad? Is it a progress or a retrogression for the society to have the will of the masses be represented by a few people?
The homeless represent the opposite of the Commonwealth. They believe that the public has the right to know, and insist on disseminating information so that the people have the right to choose. What is a limit to the opening of people's wisdom? If, just if, the government's mistakes are discovered by the public, causing riots. So, should such a mistake be covered up? Can homeless people make decisions on behalf of the public?
I have no idea.
Growing up to such a large age and having little experience, reading often even if I know what it is, I don’t know why. I can't figure out a lot of questions, please give me some advice.
View more about Serenity reviews
