To be honest, when I first watched this film, I was very puzzled about the ending: is the kind female nurse blackened? So I went online to look for movie reviews, especially the director's own statement, but what I found were similar, saying that it was a political fable, about the rotten upper class being replaced by a new immigrant with lofty morals. EXCUSE ME?
The logical gap here is too big. First of all, what the hell is wrong with the unworthy descendants of the big family, other than Captain America killing the housekeeper? A son in charge of a publishing house just wants to sell the old man's book for film and television adaptation rights, a daughter is even more innocent - she did nothing wrong, but her husband cheated; there is also an Internet celebrity daughter-in-law, morally flawed and stained : She deceived the old man for double alimony... With all these things, they deserve to be deprived of their inheritance rights? In other words, the question that really bothers me is: So their old man intends to deprive them of their inheritance rights? Of course, the film establishes a saying that they should be left to fight for themselves. Okay... I can barely say what you said makes sense, but if you change the Chinese context, can everyone see this situation more clearly: Isn't this the way Su Daqiang gave all his property and wealth to the nanny before he got dementia? out? Why is it that we are old and confused here, and it is very wise to replace it with a foreign grandfather?
If social meaning is added, it will be even more ridiculous: when is social wealth distributed according to morality? Not only is it never in reality, nor should it be in theory: the distribution of social wealth should be accomplished by the market economy and social deployment. According to the approach of this film, a redistribution of social resources is carried out directly based on morality, regardless of economic laws: the local tyrants are divided, the land is divided, and the money and houses of the rich are directly taken away and handed over to illegal immigrants.
If "Knives Out" is really such an idea, then it is too far from "Parasite", and it is as naive as a dream.
However, the end of the film is very intriguing: the female nurse asked Uncle 007: This family, I should help them, right? The uncle pouted, expressing that he didn't think they were a good match, but also said that I know you are a kind person, and no matter what I say, I know you will still follow your heart. In addition, the female nurse also said to the girl of the same age in the family before: she will not be left without tuition, so everyone thought: in the end, she would either give up the inheritance, or at least give part of the inheritance back to the family - after all, this money It didn't belong to her. Yes, she does work hard, but don't tell me her work is worth so much. However, the female nurse at the end walked onto the balcony, looked down at the now penniless family, took a sip of coffee, and the cup read: MY HOUSE, MY RULES, MY COFFEE.
I really can't interpret this ending as a fairy tale reunion - the good guys get everything and the bad guys lose everything. Not to mention if she's that good, at least they're not that bad. The most important thing is that, from the grammar point of view of a movie, the last stroke is the key point! As a suspense film, this is the final twist! Don't forget the title of the film is KNIVES OUT: KNIVES, plural, there are knives in the film one after another, and this is the last and the most important one!
So, even if the director didn't admit it, I still think that the heroine finally turned black. The bottom-level illegal immigrants who are infinitely idealized by leftists' "political correctness" will "snap their knives out" once they have the opportunity to rise to power.
View more about Knives Out reviews
