Mike once made up the discovery of great copper ore veins, and also made up such absurd theories as earthquake theory. Why didn't such a professional liar run away with money in the end, but obediently gave Matthew a check, and even deliberately attached a contract? If all this is Matthew and Mike's plan, then I ask you why you acquiesce that Mike can keep the promise of 55%?
It would be a pity if your focus of watching the movie is to help the fbi solve the case, "based on real events, but not expressed according to real events"
It shouldn't be the original intention to watch high-rated movies that are not suspenseful.
Please consider one question: You have a partner who can cooperate with you to deceive the world and calculate to this point. When you give everything, when the plot makes him disappear from the world, can you really get money in the end when you have nothing at this time? Should there be this expectation?
He had nothing, and it was his wife who opened the door after all.
He sat stupidly at the table, not knowing what to think in his mind.
At this time, the lady handed some letters, and he rummaged through the letter from Mike that he expected to see. Then came the movie highlight: a check for $82 million and that tattered contract: Proving them all wrong, 55 cents.
If you still insist at this moment that they cheated everyone together, then the director of this film can be said to have made it in vain, or just make a documentary, because the truth is that this is a movie, and it is something injected into the director's soul. The director borrowed such a real event to express something at the end of the film.
If you bring yourself into the character of Matthew, and face such a great gift, you will recall the sentence that Indonesia said when McConaughey suffered from severe dysentery: Don't let me die with nothing. I can't help but sigh, after all the hardships, the party will always be. At this time, the director did not arrange for Matthew to burst into tears, because it would show the screenwriter's sidelines, and at the same time, the values of the film may be a little questionable. Because if you really accept this moving with Matthew, it means you have accepted the fact of passive deception. But 82 million is not a small amount, it really made Matthew in such a situation hesitate.
The End of the Movie: What's Up? asked the lady. Nothing, Matthew back.
Borrowing from the People's Daily commentary: The director borrowed the image of Matthew, half from the facts and half with his own understanding and interpretation, to confess his sigh to the lost generation and the losers in the struggle. From the beginning to the end, this character is complex and distinct, there is respect in the hateful, and there is a sigh in the pitiful middle. Matthew also portrayed this character very attractively, and such a performance comes from his understanding of the character's bones.
It may be that Matthew's almost pleading words planted a seed in the heart of the big liar Mike. In the end, such a wonderful story bloomed, which made everyone happy and applauded.
View more about Gold reviews
