When watching this film, I always feel awkward. After watching the film reviews, I found that everyone easily accepted the values exported to everyone in the film, that is, "The law protects the poor. Without the protection of the law, the poor will be broken in front of the rich." But have you ever thought about this problem? Does the law protect the rich or the poor? The recognition of private property prevents it from being legally plundered by the rulers. Does it protect the property class or the proletariat? When a society loses law, no order, and falls into chaos. A mayor, a rich man, and a gangster, has the gap between them widened or narrowed? According to logic, there is only one possibility that there will be situations in the film, and that is: in the United States, there are more rich people than poor people. This is the suggestion of the film to everyone, and it seems that everyone has accepted it.
This kind of "the poor are the flowers in the greenhouse" value is accepted by Americans, I will not be surprised. But as those of us who grew up and live in a red country, we, who have been educated and experienced the power of the people since we were young, can actually accept the view that “without the law, the proletariat is a paper tiger in front of the capitalists”, which makes me feel very sorry. . The Human Eradication Day is not an American original. In fact, it has happened in our country a long time ago. However, unlike the once a year in the United States, ours is once a decade. During those turbulent ten years, did the rich kill the poor or the poor kill the rich? Compared to our history, what a luxury and irony what happened in the film! !
View more about
The Purge: Anarchy reviews
