Unlike most suspense films, this film tells us at the beginning of the film, who is the murderer and the modus operandi, the only thing that needs to be speculated is the motive. Three confessions to the truth make us seem to be getting closer to the truth, but in fact we are getting farther and farther from the truth. Even after the film ends, we still don't know what the truth is. But it doesn't matter, this film never discusses the truth, but the appearance of all beings around the truth.
As for Sanyu's motives for changing his testimony several times, I think there are two aspects. One is to protect the president's daughter. He regards the president's daughter as his favorite person, as a substitute for his own daughter, and does not allow people around him to hurt her, so he is actually hostile to the president and the president's wife. The canary he let go was actually a microcosm of the president's daughter. He let her go, but he was worried that she would be lost in this complicated world. The scene where the released canary appeared on the prison window sill actually implied that the president's daughter wanted to shake everything out to save him, but when he took out the food and the canary didn't eat it, it also implied him There was no way to stop the president's daughter desperately trying to save him, so he made up his mind to play the last scene in court. As long as he thinks he didn't kill anyone, the testimony of the president's daughter is meaningless, she doesn't have to be humiliated by it, he can save her again. The second is to complete the ritual of his own death. The tomb of the dead canary and the death site of the president have crosses, and the image of the cross is redemption. Why does he want to redeem himself? He was not sentenced to death for the first murder, spent 30 years in prison, and had an almost complete breakdown in his relationship with his daughter. After being released from prison, he felt that he did not deserve to live in this world. He said it was unfair that people were born without consent. So he needs a ritual, a perfect death ritual to accomplish redemption. As a result, the courtroom has become a performance venue for his death ceremony.
So I quite agree with the understanding of the third-degree murder in the Gaozan film review. The first murder was 36 years ago, the second was to kill the president, and the third was to kill himself.
This line on the court side should be ironic about the judicial system. They don't care about the truth, they care about procedural justice. At the end of the film, the lawyer's confusion at the crossroads is actually like a question. Am I involved in a trial, or a murder?
View more about The Third Murder reviews
