After watching the whole film, I have a few scattered thoughts or questions.
1. Media distortion. We mainly receive information from the outside world through the media. I used to think that the news released by the official media and official organizations was true, reliable and scientific. But from the guide dog to the "continuous fishing" in this film, I overturned my previous perception. Ninety-nine percent of the world's reports are promoting "plastic bans" without telling the public that the best thing to do is to protect fish. When it comes to ocean protection, all the messages that surround us weave a lie. 2. There is no place in the world that is close to utopia. I used to think that non-profit organizations, especially those engaged in activities such as protecting human rights and protecting the environment, were the closest thing to a utopia in the world. It may be an exaggeration to say this, but I really feel that the work these organizations do is noble, and they are working for the benefit of all humanity. However, those authoritative organizations related to marine protection that appeared in this film, for the sake of profit, even colluded with the murderers who destroyed the marine ecology. While they were shouting slogans and doing some hilarious actions, they indulged the murderer and made trouble with them. One of the interviewees who appeared in the film was originally a member of the organization. He joined the organization with a beautiful vision, but found this disgusting truth and finally chose to leave. This caused me to think. I was thinking that if a person has the ideal of serving the people and all mankind, then as he continues to forge ahead towards this goal, he will know more and more about his field. We assume that this person's ideal is also to protect the ocean, then he may find that what was originally related to the quality of citizens has become a matter related to a whole complex chain of interests. And actually protecting the ocean is just as dangerous as stopping the drug trade. Then, can I think a little bit divergently: Do all the realizations of the "sublime" ideals as I define them have to contend with the unfathomable network of vested interests in the end? If so, then I offer my deepest respects to the unsung heroes who persevered in these causes.
3. I now know that I am protecting the ocean by not eating fish, but will I really stop eating fish in the future? If I eat fish later, am I an accomplice in harming the ocean? I'm torturing myself, I'm afraid I'm an advocate of hypocrisy.
4. Is the fish in the river edible?
5. No one can do everything, but everyone can do something. When I saw the second half of this film, I was already a little desperate. Is it really possible to protect the ocean and prohibit commercial fishing? Thanks to the last scientist who gave me encouragement, the realization of every lofty ideal starts from a small individual.
6. Strong support for plant meat!
View more about Seaspiracy reviews
