The 7.22 bombing in Norway explores the similarities and differences between the rule of law and the rule of state. Let me see the director's control in dealing with the combination of terror and politics. In my opinion, the law is an important means to restrain people from committing crimes. In the series 1 of "The Great Qin Empire", Shang Yang made me realize the conditions for convicting crimes according to the law, and that the law does not punish one's heart. This is the formation of what I believe to be the first law to regulate the exercise of sin.
I have always believed that people have a degree of sin, and they are often in a romantic and fantasy environment and cannot escape. And whenever I watch the dazzling news, my sense of responsibility forces me to jump out of the romantic environment I imagined. At this time, my heart is extremely conflicted. I struggled to think about the extremes of both, so that I couldn't jump out of the extremes of the two I conceived. I don't know if they are extreme.
I remember a line from the trial judge in the film, "The court is looking out for Norway's best interests". The best interest after a terrorist incident is the security of the place where the people are located, and allowing the planners and actors to admit their crimes and admit their mistakes to the people, so as to restrict terrorist actions for political purposes.
National governance, the best interests of the country as envisioned by the trial judge. The rule of law is a peaceful exchange between the plaintiff and the defendant. This layer is more based on the expression of human nature. The court has reason to let the two sides talk to verify the civilization of the people of the country.
The dialogue between the extreme rightists and the rightists in the film is enough to give the extreme rightists a sense of political frustration. Another layer of frustration for the far-right is that he is "alone". In the end, he got nothing. Defense lawyers defended him for professional and human rights reasons, and after the defense was completed, the lawyers expressed their views. Is this treatment of defense lawyers too idealistic? In addition to being a lawyer or a father, the director of this dilemma does not want to delve into it. Therefore, the ideal level of the film is higher than the reality normality constructed by its audiovisual.
I like this sense of contradiction.
View more about 22 July reviews
