I really don't know how this movie got a 7.8.
Is it really because of a cruel ending?
If it was just a little flaw, I could give it a 7, but the flaws in the whole film have completely overshadowed the little bit of excellence at the end. It's worth 5.5 in my opinion.
Seriously, if it wasn't for someone saying that the ending was shocking, I would have given up on this brainless film for the first half hour. It insults my intelligence.
A good movie is definitely not a part that is forcibly strengthened by abandoning everything by deliberate technical means.
Rather, it should be a story worthy of scrutiny composed of full characters. Check out our Infernal Affairs.
However, in this film, the police are weakened to the point of idiots, and the transformation of the characters is not foreshadowed. In the tense and suspenseful atmosphere, every detail maximizes the narrative function, but many details of this film are completely redundant. There are unavoidable injuries everywhere.
Let’s talk about the flaws in the story first:
The corpse case! Such a big case, such a perverted thing, which legal country in the world can ignore such a big case?
How did you find the murderer? Just because a bunch of demonstrators protecting the environment found a head among the demonstrators, and this head also wrote a novel, and the author suspected the author of a novel? Coincidentally, the author is really!
People who demonstrate for the protection of the environment must have the guts to shred their corpses, and do they still use it to shout at the door? Demonstrators have the guts to not kill developers or people who damage the environment. Why would they kill a woman?
The police were so lucky to catch such a perverted murderer. No one cares about the motive for the murder? Victim's relationship? How many sections is a river divided into, how many sections does it take to kill an "innocent" woman? Who thought of this logic? I should say a genius! It's really clever to combine cases that seem to be unrelated but actually have a lot of connections behind them. It's so clever~~~ I want to send a blade to the screenwriter. Investigating this relationship has to be repeatedly emphasized by the prisoner himself, which really makes the police look like idiots.
Besides, the murder weapon, a stick-shaped blunt weapon, caught a lame man, and was looking for the murder weapon in the whole city. Why is no one looking at that crutch? The crutch should be the first suspect weapon that the cripple is most comfortable with? I really feel like I've been insulted to my IQ in this film. In the end, the lame handed out the crutch by himself... This murderous weapon, but can't become direct evidence? Nani? So what's the effort to start with?
Next, let's talk about the professor's hard injury:
As a senior police talent for many years, he has created a very powerful image. What a meticulous and rigorous anatomical expert to be able to find allergens from the spread of J fluid? How much is an expert contributing to the police?
However, in the face of a dismembered corpse, it was subjectively speculated as a human corpse for the first time! It only took 5 minutes for the human set to collapse.
Then, after learning that his daughter was kidnapped, his first reaction was to betray the national security agency! WTF? The bad guys didn't say you had to do it on your own! He immediately took over the task. After all these years of fighting on the front line of police affairs, isn't there a policeman to do me a favor?
If I were a police officer, my first reaction would be to use all my existing resources (police resources) to check my daughter's entry record first, and then to conduct surveillance. Generally, the shortest limited monitoring records can be kept for 7 days, and the records 4 days ago can completely find where the daughter is missing. Instead of going to the prisoner to compromise without saying anything.
Then, the professor found the den of the accomplice. (The body of his own daughter is there.) The professor is beaten by his accomplice. You are a forensic doctor, you have no fighting ability, ok, but the prisoners have been found. You don't rely on the police to quickly arrest and save people, but you are still playing games with the prisoners! ! !
The professor who was beaten began to get a little enlightened and began to blacken and frame her boyfriend. Although the gambler didn't look like a good idea, he really didn't kill anyone. The professor has the brain to frame the deceased boyfriend, but has no brain to save his daughter. Who do you blame for your daughter's death?
Questions in Teaching Actions:
It was the first time that the professor saw the murderer in the whole-process surveillance interrogation room, and the two chatted about kidnapping and threats unscrupulously. However, the police outside just knocked on the door and pulled it down. I didn't even care what the professor said after that. I thought this neglect was intentional, to help the professor in order for the police to discover the professor later, but it didn't. fail.
The professor is pierced by a nail at the murderer's house. Director, try to be poked into your body by such a big nail, try it. The toughness of the clothes, and the instinctive reaction of the human body, there is no strong impact, you can slowly lean against the wall to see if you can insert it. What's the point of encountering this? What a suspense movie! Are you wasting your time doing this in reasoning? fail.
In the same scene, the professor found a hidden cellar that was difficult to open, and took out a scalpel. Scalpel? After stabbing the scalpel that your dog carries with him? Wait, why does he still carry a scalpel with him? Oh, because he's a decipherer. Open the cellar with great effort, guess what you found? That's right, there was nothing, and the scalpel was left on the scene. Such an abnormal tool was only used to be discovered by the new little police flower that the professor had been to the murderer's house. Other people (such as the old policeman who only knows how to swear every day) don't care at all? The whole scene foreshadowed that the professor interfered with the scene and left a pile of evidence. I thought that the professor would be found by the police and wanted and had to go underground to increase the resistance of the action. However, no. All these meticulous arrangements have only one purpose, which is to let the little police flower discover that the professor has been there. It is a typical micro-screenwriting thinking that covers the whole point, ignoring the macro layout of the same overall clue. failure in failure,
Let me mention the murderer again. The murderer's revenge is the driving force that runs through the action, but in the repressed environment, the abnormal psychology (all corpses is broken) is lacking in the performance. Especially at the end, the twisted psychology when the revenge is successful is taken lightly.
The other characters, the silly little rookie police flower just run around out of respect, pure help accomplices, old police officers who only know how to scold people and have no ability, the director's characterization skills are really not good.
The final summary is.
The whole film is really intended to show a result of revenge, forcibly ignoring all logical coherence. In order to increase the difficulty and increase the difficulty, the ability and IQ of the police are deliberately omitted, so that the whole story is completely built in a one-touch isolated and helpless environment. The macro layout is insufficient, the micro expansion is tedious, and it is very dazzling to use hand-held photography and obscure montage techniques.
View more about No Mercy reviews
