As the protagonist of the event, Dreyfus also accounted for one-half of the poster, but the actual appearance and role in the event were very few. Until he was exiled to Devil's Island, I still I naively thought he was the protagonist, but later learned that the "I" in "I Complaint" was not exactly the victim of this incident. This "I" spoke through the Dreyfus incident. I thought the accusation was racial discrimination, but I didn't expect that the accusation was a corrupt and incompetent bureaucracy. This incident is also the most interesting point in this film that I find most interesting is that Picard, the protagonist who is accused of being racist, especially likes to add small details, such as Picard as Dreyfus's military school teacher once gave him The low score, and the fact that the two of them rarely get along, including the last subtitle, that the two have never met since then, continue to convey this delicate relationship between the two. Polanski's pen and ink on Picard's human shortcomings is what feels most real to me. In the end, Picard still hopes that Dreyfus will not accept the pardon, because he wants to rectify the unjust case from beginning to end, just to create a military and government that he should have in his mind, in order to eradicate those who are not living in the military. as a waste. As for whether the protagonist of the unjust case is a Jew who is discriminatory against himself or someone else, that is not the point at all. But as he said, there was no Dreyfus, and no later him. When Picard thinks he has achieved the reforms he wants, Dreyfus makes a well-founded "complaint" (the eight years Picard's absence counts as a military rank, but the five years Dreyfus is imprisoned Not counted), this time it was the "I accuse" made by the real victim himself, but Picard was "powerless". Doesn't he know it's reasonable? Just like when he encountered this case, he could also choose to "do nothing", but he chose to sue, so it just depends on whether the matter touches his bottom line. But Dreyfus did not have the right to "accuse", because of his Jewish identity, he was not on an equal footing with others from birth.
If Picard wasn't racist, if he supported equal rights, everything would have been different. Had there not been a group of intellectuals like Zola, the Dreyfus incident would not have happened. So what is related to all this, is it the development process of the whole society or the education issue? This inevitably reminds me of what Lu Xun said about national character. These intellectuals undoubtedly showed a part of the national character of France during that period, proving that this environment can indeed breed such a national. Therefore, national character is really important. Often progressive reforms are initiated by a few people. Their common feature is that they all have a certain firm belief in their hearts, they are not easily influenced by the outside world, and they are not easy to become a mob. Instead, they have to take the lead in making the masses Awaken. But if all the citizens of a country are rabble, and there are no more sane people, then they will lose their freedom and human rights, and I think the most important thing, kindness.
View more about An Officer and a Spy reviews
