Let's talk about the movie itself first. The first "Twelve Angry Men" was a classic filmed by American director Sidney Lumet in 1957, followed by two remakes in 1997 and 2007, and what's more, a TV series. What I watched was the version of the 2007 Russians with the Chechen war as the background. The profound historical and national factors made the film's idea stand out, and it will inevitably lead to more thinking. The Chechen War was two wars that broke out in the 1990s. On the one hand, after being conquered, Chechnya suffered from an iron-fisted high-handed policy and sought independence. However, it is located at the chokepoint of the Caucasus. Russia has always regarded Chechnya as an important national policy. Hundred years of grievances, deep hatred in the sea of blood.
The Chechen boy was charged with the murder of his adoptive father. Life is in their hands, death is on their minds. Why twelve? What if it was a six-on-six stalemate? Personal speculation is that this is a religious setting. Aren't the twelve disciples of Jesus exactly twelve? Does a great movie need hundreds of millions of dollars? Or, is it just the accumulation of capital, the accumulation of stars? "Twelve Angry Men", a primary school gym, twelve people, a table, a discussion. . . I remember a "Sniper Phone Booth" where the protagonist performed the entire movie in a small phone booth. This type of plot is the real soul of a great movie.
Law, means order, means coercive force, means binding force. The law is the tool of the ruling class and maintains the normal and stable operation of the country. The law is not merciful? Law is nothing but human affection? Everyone must have their own opinion. I think it is necessary to have the law, but also the love. greedy? No, I think it is possible to find a balance to deal with Fa and emotion. The sanctity of the law, the purity of the law, and the supremacy of the law lie in the fact that the law is not expensive, and treats it equally. It's not that they can't punish the doctor or the common people. Taking history as a mirror, a country is governed by people. Although there are wise rulers and strong ministers, most of them are mediocre or even incompetent and absurd, and cannot last for a long time. Relying on the legal system, we can establish a country that will last forever, continue to be strong and prosperous, and grow out of the world. However, the law is decided by people, and the case is tried by people. How can the law get rid of a love word? According to my humble opinion, it is more reasonable to keep in mind the lenient administration and simplified punishment when determining the law, and keep in mind that the law shall prevail when enforcing the law. The law is too strict, that is, fiercer than a tiger, as if there was a law in the pre-Qin period: abandoning ashes in the Tao is to cut off the nose. The self-governing state of Qin, Duke Xiao of Qin appointed Shangjun to reform, from facing the prestige of the six kingdoms in Shandong, he became the most powerful country in the Warring States Period. The most profound reform is the only reason, and law-abiding and protecting the law are regarded as the standard. It is a pity that seeking change and saving plans is the foundation of the world. In troubled times, heavy codes are used. In the later period of China's unification, the laws did not keep pace with the times, and they missed the benevolent government under the premise of Lu Buwei's not bad laws. Of course, today our country does not need to consider how to practice the law is nothing more than human feelings. The disadvantage today is that there are too many human feelings, and too many flies and dogs are tarnishing the word of the law. What China needs today is how to learn from Hong Kong in general, transparently enforce the law, supervise law enforcement, and improve the law. It's difficult, but with the efforts of generations, I believe it will eventually make a difference.
Back in the movie, all the evidence points to the Chechen boy as the murderer. Twelve people also have personal affairs. As soon as they enter the gym, they are ready to show their hands to vote and sentence them to death. I thought it was over. At 11:1, a gentleman asked everyone not to play child's play, it was about human life, and we voted again. Followed by a show of hands again and again, more and more doubts surfaced, pointing to framing. Everyone expresses their own opinions. In my opinion, this is not only upholding the sanctity of the law, but also defending their own dignity. Twelve people have their own stories and lives. With this trial, various social problems in Russia have been exposed one by one. People's sense of responsibility has been awakened, and the reasoning and even the case have been repeated over and over again, leaving behind the narrow prejudice against Chechnya. Because only justice, only truth, is what needs to be considered.
I've always wondered that among the twelve, the teller was the most calm and composed, and always supported the guilt of the Chechen boys. Does he have deep prejudices? Until the end, when everything was cleared up, he actually knew the boy was innocent early in the morning! He saw the flaw from the very beginning! But he chose to send the boy to prison. Why? Because he has a deeper consideration, if the boy is innocent, the Caucasian character will definitely make him look for the murderer outside, but only temporarily in prison can he live longer. But after the Chechen boy went to prison, who came to collect evidence for him and slowly rehabilitate it? The eleven people who had voted not guilty all felt that they had found the truth and fulfilled their responsibilities, and had no intention of devoting time and energy to this matter. The tellers were obviously more thoughtful and mature. In the end, it was decided to acquit the Chechen boys and leave one by one. But the teller found the boy and adopted him.
Open the window and let the bird choose whether to fly out of the window, knowing that the ice and snow outside the window will kill it. Ask yourself, am I going to be as accountable to the Chechen boys as the teller? No, I won't, I may continue to care about him, but I can't be like a teller.
"Twelve Angry Men" made me see the warm side of human nature.
View more about 12 reviews
