Before giving a low score, please ask yourself: Do you understand?

In the comic Liar Game, there is a plot in which the protagonist wants to let his teammates test the opponent and make clichés, but he chooses the most honest and lacking girl in the team to go straight, which leads to the concept of a so-called Tension Reduction. This psychological effect points out that people are more likely to make mistakes when they are slack. For example, when they pass the driver's license test in an item they are not good at, they make mistakes in an item they are good at when they are excited; they will leave their pen in the examination room after the test. It's all mistakes made by cutting the strings of tension. So Naokai Kanzaki comes in handy in this situation, because she has no scheming and looks weak, and opponents will put down their vigilance when they see it, and thus have a better chance of leaking in communication.

I personally agree with it, because I have made mistakes a few times before leaving get off work, which really annoyed me. After understanding this theory, I was a little relieved. At the same time, it also made me feel uncomfortable when watching this movie. As for confusion.

On the premise that the above concept is established, looking at this "brake", we can immediately understand what the film is talking about.

In short, the story is that a group of terrorists kidnapped a special agent Jeremy, using all means to hope to get out of the presidential sanctuary.

But there is a twist here, that is, Jeremy is a very good agent, and he will not say that he killed him, killed his family. Therefore, after using various "conventional" methods to no avail, the terrorists tried the above-mentioned "Tension Reduction" method, hoping to use the insurmountable weakness of the human mind to find a little opportunity in a comfortable environment. Of course, in the end, Jeremy was exposed, this flaw was caught, the terrorists succeeded, and Jeremy died pitifully.

The core of the whole film is like this, a novel cliché trap, and the rest are minutiae. So I see that everyone is wondering whether the reversal is blunt or not, which is a misunderstanding of the point; some people say why it takes so much trouble, and this is not understood... The film is about such a new trick, and it takes a lot of trouble. It is an inevitable premise, and of course the premise cannot be removed, otherwise it will become a cliché?

Let’s analyze the following mainstream criticisms:
1. Reversing for the sake of reversing is too rigid
This second reversal actually has its rationality, because the entire technique must be based on the tension-elimination scenario of the first reversal in order to be effective. The whole process is like this: build tension - tension reduction (one reversal) - success formula (second reversal). In the same vein, one with two sides, one is indispensable.

2. There is a contradiction in this reversal
"Since it is a real terrorist, why not use a more direct threat?" I saw someone comment like this.
I'm afraid the judges don't know, this film is using direct threats 95% of the time. It just doesn't work. So... people with this kind of thinking need to improve their logical thinking ability.

Some critics of the film with the second reversal are angry because they can't guess the reversal, and they feel that they can't hold on to their face, and they are angry and give bad reviews. Hmm...I sincerely hope that you don't belong to this type of audience ^ _ ^


PS. In fact, I have been searching for a long time and have not found the source and specific definition of this psychological concept... um, but I firmly believe that it is true, no Just found it.

View more about Brake reviews