[The truth is here, very important]

Kennith 2022-03-26 09:01:10

Truth First (2008)
8.3
2008 / United States / Mystery Drama / Rod Larry / Kate Beckinsale Matt Dillon

After watching the video, I had some doubts. In fact, when the video was halfway through, I probably guessed that the informer was the daughter of the person whose identity was exposed to the CIA. In order to find the answer, I continued to watch the movie.

The viewing is over

In the end, in order to verify whether my judgment is logical, I carefully read the film reviews, but the ending was disappointing. Film critics who may have seen the film did not get the point where the film really emphasizes.

First of all, it goes without saying that journalist Miss Armstrong Rachel seeks to increase visibility and credibility within the industry. Started writing the dark side of the government's follow-up to the assassination, which was then published on major platforms (The Sun, etc.). The impact of this report on society was so wide that it shook the so-called "liberal democracy" so deeply that the government was caught off guard.

Note that Rachel's starting point at this time is to pursue the "name" and "profit" of the company and the individual. In order to receive the highest honor for journalists - Pulitzer (Pulitzer Prize) for it.

However, what I never expected was that as the incident continued to escalate and ferment, this matter became no longer so simple. Rachel is arrested for concealing her identity as a traitor. At this time, Rachel did not expose the whistleblower because the whistleblower was just a child. If it were exposed, then Rachel would lose her credibility in the industry and the whole society (that is, people would not believe that children can tell the state secrets) thing), once the credibility is lost, the Pulitzer (Pulitzer) will be impossible to talk about...

Point1. Rachel is selfish at this time.

At the same time, Erica. Erica (who has been exposed to CIA status) is shot and killed by a stranger in a trance.

Note that at this point reporter Rachel realizes the complexity of the matter and the fact that Erica has died (irretrievably). Decided to endure prison alone and kept the informer (Erica. Erica's daughter) unintentionally leaking the secret to herself to death, in order to protect Erica's daughter from the burden of her own growing up. The fact that her fault led to the killing of the mother (i.e. the child's psychological shadow or psychological baggage), Rachel did this because she is a mother herself, and can empathize with how important the child's mental health is as she grows up. At the same time, it is also to fulfill Rachel's promise to the whistleblower (Erica's daughter) in the car.

Point2. At this time, Rachel is selfless

View more about Nothing But the Truth reviews

Extended Reading
  • Maeve 2022-04-24 07:01:17

    How can such a source come out...if I start to think that Rachel is the party of objective justice and this ending makes me tangled...

  • Jamison 2022-04-24 07:01:17

    Two women, one was questioned by the boss in the cemetery, the other endured torment in the prison... The old lawyer said that one does charity, is respected, and lives well, but the number of people who can finally attend his funeral depends on the weather

Nothing But the Truth quotes

  • Ray Armstrong: [staring at his wife's new story] You made the top page!

  • Alan Burnside: [In front of the Supreme Court] In 1972 in Branzburg v. Hayes this Court ruled against the right of reporters to withhold the names of their sources before a grand jury, and it gave the power to the Government to imprison those reporters who did. It was a 5-4 decision, close. In his dissent in Branzburg, Justice Stewart said, 'As the years pass, power of Government becomes more and more pervasive. Those in power,' he said, 'whatever their politics, want only to perpetuate it, and the people are the victims.' Well, the years have passed, and that power is pervasive. Mrs. Armstrong could have buckled to the demands of the Government; she could've abandoned her promise of confidentiality; she could've simply gone home to her family. But to do so, would mean that no source would ever speak to her again, and no source would ever speak to her newspaper again. And then tomorrow when we lock up journalists from other newspapers we'll make those publications irrelevant as well, and thus we'll make the First Amendment irrelevant. And then how will we know if a President has covered up crimes or if an army officer has condoned torture? We as a nation will no longer be able to hold those in power accountable to those whom they have power over. And what then is the nature of Government when it has no fear of accountability? We should shudder at the thought. Imprisoning journalists? That's for other countries; that's for countries who fear their citizens - not countries that cherish and protect them. Some time ago, I began to feel the personal, human pressure on Rachel Armstrong and I told her that I was there to represent her and not her principle. And it was not until I met her that I realized that with great people there's no difference between principle and the person.