At the beginning of the film, the male protagonist was given a clip of on-site investigation. At the end of the clip, the male protagonist's face immediately dropped after the broadcast. And when the boss was dismissed because of his opinion, and he absently participated in the date with the heroine, the heroine asked the hero to stare at her warmly, and then the hero immediately put on affectionate eyes. These two fragments seem to foreshadow something.
My confusion started after the male lead's friend died.
When the male protagonist received the news of his partner's death, the director did not give the male protagonist a trace of sadness. On the contrary, when the male protagonist defends himself in court again after his partner's death, the heavy music and the male protagonist's clenched brows, as well as the slightly tense conversation between the male protagonist and the female protagonist in prison, all show that he values his own More so than his partner who died for his evidence. It's like at the end of the film, the heroine said to the hero: Do you think your life is more valuable than hers?
So the male protagonist copied a lot of his award-winning work (that video), so the male protagonist kept nagging his partner about the news award they wanted to win, so even if he forged evidence and went to jail, he had to expose him clearly Prosecutor forgery with little evidence to prove.
My second confusion is why the male protagonist can so firmly believe that the prosecutor is falsifying evidence when there is no evidence, or even just conjecture.
At the end of the film, the heroine is sitting on the bed watching the news. When the picture of the murder victim related to the hero comes out, the heroine's expression slowly becomes solemn, although the victim's picture almost flashes by, But the atmosphere seems to be saying that the case is not over yet.
At that moment, I seemed to understand why the male protagonist firmly believed that the prosecutor was falsifying evidence.
Because the male protagonist is actually doing the same thing as the prosecutor, he and the prosecutor belong to the same group of people.
In order to gain fame and fortune, the male protagonist forged the award-winning video at that time and fabricated the news that the protagonist in the video died.
The male protagonist did not really want to expose the corruption of the local bureaucrats for the masses, nor did he really want to clear the grievances of people who were innocently wronged by the prosecutors and sentenced to death.
The male protagonist set up a game of killing two birds with one stone.
The third confusion is that in the game field, the male protagonist said to his partner: We have to wait for a suitable murder case, about the death of a drug addict or a female J, and there must be some information at the scene, such as a footprint. These words are undoubtedly highly coincident with subsequent cases.
Where in the world did such a coincidence come from.
Like prosecutors and sheriffs trying to erase people and evidence against them, the male protagonist also erased women who might reveal his evidence, and used his partner and girlfriend to clear him of criminal suspicion.
Some people may say that under the pressure of long-term blackmail, the male lead's nerve will be like a string, and it will break when stretched. So the male protagonist did not kill the other party out of his own will.
However, after the incident, the male protagonist calmly got up and opened the door for his partner, and when he explained his foot injury, everything revealed the male protagonist's calmness. And two days after the incident, like someone completely unrelated to the case, he was planning a video of him forging evidence.
He has already done a good job of erasing the insider of the fake award-winning video, and relying on this incident to expose the prosecutor's forgery of evidence, and then exposing the prosecutor to elucidate his real crime. This is not just a two-bird-one-stone strategy, it is simply three birds with one stone.
His purpose from beginning to end was for himself at all, and he only saw his own interests and values in his eyes, so he did not shed a single tear, not even a trace of remorse, for the death of his friend.
He would rather kill than see the possibility that the other party might ruin his life.
——He asked the hostess: Do I have any other options?
——The heroine asked back: Do you think your life is more valuable than hers, is that so?
So the male protagonist told the female protagonist with his actual actions. When the female protagonist lowered her head to clean up, the male protagonist grabbed the female protagonist. The eyes at that time and the director's soundtrack made it easy to believe that if it was possible, the male protagonist would Choose to kill the heroine to save herself.
View more about Beyond a Reasonable Doubt reviews
