The truth is not afraid to prove

Kasey 2022-04-03 08:01:01

It's a biographical film, and I thought I'd swipe through it drowsily. But first of all, when the female professor Deborah mentioned that there is no historical photo or video to prove the "dts", I was intrigued. Then the "historian" who denied the "ncdts" incident also filed a defamation lawsuit against the female professor, which made me very curious about the final result. Then there are the fast and dense lines that have been holding my attention. So, I'm actually watching this biographical movie seriously now.

1. 20 minutes into the film, the female teacher went to the UK to find a lawyer. This attorney is a team working together to fight the case. But what he said to the female professor when he was handling this case moved me very much. Because according to the routine, the defendant will definitely look for the relevant Jews to appear in court to refute the Owen who denied the dts. But lawyers were reluctant to see the denier arguing loudly with Jewish witnesses in public. It would be very hurtful, insulting, etc. to the Jews, and he would never agree to it. He said very fast, "I won't allow it, I won't allow it..." The voice was not loud, but it was super charming and powerful.

2. Auschwitz in the mist, where the fast and bright tones of the film suddenly become dull and silent. A large area of ​​misty open space, in the vast land, only a few dim street lamps. The neatly arranged camps merge with the gray earth. The sun is not sure whether it is separated by thick clouds or fog, so the picture here is cold and gloomy. Thousands of worn-out shoes, glasses, handbags and other items were piled up in the camp.

Biographical films also let us face the cruelty of human nature once again by shooting on the spot. The Germans destroyed Crematorium 2 twice a week before the end of the war to destroy evidence of what they had done.

3. The smoothness of the first day and the twists and turns of the second day after the court session made the conflict of this film cadence and frustration. Deborah's forbearance in court and the arguments with the lawyers team after the court also formed a sharp contrast.

Finally, I feel that the team of lawyers that Deborah found in the film is really good. Not only is the cooperation value infinitely charming, but the debaters and supporters are all brilliant. Some of the lines of defense lawyers are very moving. "I feel terribly terrified in my heart if I were to be ordered to do some of the things we saw today. I would agree too, because of weakness. The world is full of cowards, and I've always had this jittery feeling." Yes, only when people feel that they are still cowardly and weak will they be in awe of the world.

btw: The diary was locked when I was taking notes on watching movies. The reason is unknown, so I changed some of the words into pinyin initials. I don't know if they can pass. But such a good movie deserves more people to watch. Because they are such a matter of course, they have been verified through a lot of investigations. This is what we should learn from moving towards democracy.

View more about Denial reviews

Extended Reading
  • Kamille 2022-04-05 09:01:07

    There is a kind of story that is a discussion of opinions, a contest of intelligence, and a professional competence and strength. The second brush found that it is all about the heroine's emotionality to promote the narrative, but the stereotyped flattening of the heroine is not good-looking

  • Conrad 2022-04-05 09:01:07

    I thought it would be complicated to understand, but I didn't expect it to be very simple and easy to understand, the calculation was accurate, and the rhythm was great. At first, the heroine was insulted and substituted into her emotions, from distrust to trust, and her emotional development was stable. Everyone represents a standpoint, whether it is rational, emotional, or popular prejudice, there is a very intense chemical conflict. The character selection is also great. One star less because the final twist wasn't dramatic enough, but the biography is what it is.

Denial quotes

  • Richard Rampton: My lord, during this trial, we have heard from Professor Evans and others of at least 25 major falsifications of history. Well, says Mr. Irving, "all historians make mistakes." But there is a difference between negligence, which is random in its effect, and a deliberateness, which is far more one-sided. All Mr. Irving's little fictions, all his tweaks of the evidence all tend in the same direction: the exculpation of Adolf Hitler. He is, to use an analogy, like the waiter who always gives the wrong change. If he is honest, we may expect sometimes his mistakes to favor the customers, sometimes himself. But Mr. Irving is the dishonest waiter. All his mistakes work in his favor. How far, if at all, Mr. Irving's Antisemitism is the cause of his Hitler apology, or vice versa, is unimportant. Whether they are taken together or individually, it is clear that they have led him to prostitute his reputation as a serious historian in favor of a bogus rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler and the dissemination of virulent Antisemitic propaganda.

  • Sir Charles Gray: Yes, this is a question I have to ask you, Mr. Rampton.

    Richard Rampton: Yes, by all means, my lord.

    Sir Charles Gray: My question is this: If somebody is antisemitic, antisemitic and extremist, he is perfectly capable of being honestly antisemitic, yes? He's holding those views and expressing those views because they are indeed his views.

    Richard Rampton: Well, yes.

    Sir Charles Gray: And so it seems to me, if it comes down to it, that the antisemitism is a completely separate allegation and has precious little bearing on your broader charge that he has manipulated the data?

    Richard Rampton: No, no, my lord. The whole endeavor of the defense has been to prove that the two are connected.

    Sir Charles Gray: But he might believe what he is saying. That is the point. That is why it is so important.

    Richard Rampton: My lord, if we know that Mr. Irving is an anti-Semite, and if we know there is no historical justification for Holocaust denial, then surely it is no great stretch to see that the two are connected.

    Sir Charles Gray: Yes. Thank you. Carry on.

    Deborah Lipstadt: What the fuck just happened? Anthony, what just happened?