An old movie, after downloading (yes, I watched the pirated version, I faced the wall first), it has been lying in the corner of the hard drive. Yesterday, I flipped through the hard drive and saw it, so I opened it and read it. Originally, I wanted to listen to the sound when I was surfing the Internet, but it turned out that I was focused throughout the whole process, and after reading it, I still thought about it for a long time. For a movie that can make people think after watching it, it should be considered a good movie. Popcorn movies will only make people feel good at the time, and there is nothing to touch afterwards. In fact, many movies that make people think are not blockbusters themselves. . . . Pull away. . . . .
When I first watched this movie, I thought it was about moral dilemmas, 1 vs 80, how to choose?
After reading some reviews, combined with the movie, I found that I was wrong. This film is not about moral dilemmas, it is about portraying human nature. . . Everyone has their own position and responsibilities when facing the issue of counter-terrorism, and therefore has their own choices.
The general and the colonel are representatives of the military. In the film, the two of them are portrayed as very determined to carry out their tasks without considering anything else. The general seeks authorization for the attack in the distant office, and the colonel is in the execution room to achieve the target of the attack. Last modified injury assessment data. The two of them did a great job of portraying the military's stance on the matter, and nothing else matters in order to achieve the goal of arresting/eradicating the head of East African terrorists. Whether it's letting agents take extreme risks to infiltrate a terrorist base, or the survival of the little neighbor girl. Life becomes a cold number in front of the task. However, despite the film's portrayal, many viewers will not feel bad about them, and will even want to launch the missile as soon as possible. . .
Ministers, ministers, prime ministers (unshown) are the representatives of politicians, and they think about how to dump the blame after something happens, or how to assume follow-up responsibilities. So the minister grudgingly agreed to the attack until the last minute. After connecting, the foreign secretary stopped the attack and asked to consult the prime minister. The Prime Minister was even more lighthearted, and only gave a light-hearted nonsense-"To complete the task and minimize casualties", and easily threw the pot back to the two cabinet ministers. In order to get rid of the unfavorable political situation, politicians even spent a lot of time contacting the US Secretary of State on the grounds that terrorists are US citizens. Politicians have made countless excuses to blame each other. What they consider is not the lives of the people on the scene, but their own political lives.
Ironically, the U.S. Secretary of State and the legal representative of the U.S. government. They are not the party carrying out the task, so they do not need to bear any consequences, so their position is very firm - attack immediately, if the three terrorists ranked second, fourth and fifth in East Africa are allowed to escape, the president of the United States and the people will be outraged . . .
District Attorneys and Representatives of Legal Counsel represent the law and humanity on the surface, but they are actually politicians on another level. The female prosecutor kept preventing the attack, but in fact she did not have any authority to make decisions. It seemed that she prevented the attack, but the real decision-making was the minister. So at the last minute, the minister gave the order, and her objections had no effect. Her disapproval seemed human on the surface, but her final remarks revealed her true thoughts: If terrorists attack and kill 80 civilians, we will win the propaganda war, and the people will hate terrorists. Conversely, if we kill the little girl, the terrorist wins. . . What she cares about is not her life, but not to bear the follow-up public opinion results and her inner guilt for possibly killing the little girl.
The only people who really care about the girl's life and death are the drone pilots and the agents on the scene.
So the whole movie is portraying human nature, the selfish part of human nature. Selfishness can be to care only about one's own goals and ignore others, or it can be to blame each other for one's own political life. . . . At the same time, it also depicts the beautiful part of human nature. The agent on the mission tried everything for the little girl, and the pilot of the drone delayed the time for the little girl. Even the cold general showed his attitude at the end. , he is not a cold-blooded task executor, he also has his own position and his own great love. . .
This is the film, ostensibly about a predicament, but actually about human nature. . .
View more about Eye in the Sky reviews
