Wisdom teeth removed, wounds and ulcers. After watching the movie "Hunting", the pain in my body dissipated, and I felt that the surrounding space was suffocated.
I seldom write comments, my writing is not good, sorry for that.
I have three questions about the video
First: Why is the principal in the film so convinced of the child's words, and then brings his own emotions to ferment the incident, is he responsible or venting?
Second: Why do the parents of the little girl not only believe what she said was lewd, but also do not believe that she later admitted that she was lying, is it preconceived or wants to shirk responsibility?
Third: Why did the law acquit him, people still don't want to believe him, and finally when everyone thought it was over, the shot did start the incident again, is the law useful or human nature useful? What was the purpose of that shot?
With these three questions in mind, I will start my personal conjecture as follows (there are ghosts and gods in Rashomon, their words don’t have to be taken seriously. Just look at them)
The first doubt and conjecture: For the disgusting behavior of the headmaster when he heard the little girl describe the "obscene process" (language is much more abstract than images, and it needs to be concretized to the extent of disgusting, and there needs to be some kind of memory association)
There is also an unusual fear in the face of the male protagonist's questioning (in the film, the male protagonist talks to her, she chooses to run away and growl hysterically, as if she is the little girl who was molested and saw the person who hurt her)
It is not difficult to make the conjecture that "the principal may have been violated when he was a child", so he is so sensitive to this kind of thing, and even in an irrational situation, he will induce the little girl with preconceived notions, and at that time the little girl She has become herself, and she wants to find her own justice.
Conjecture of the second question: "I knew you were lying in the blink of an eye" This is a line that Dad said to the little girl in the film, in a tone that I see through you. It can be seen that adults don't pay much attention to what children say, and why did they choose to believe it later? I think it should be due to responsibility. If they don't believe what the little girl said, then they will suffer deeply if the incident happens. Deep self-blame and possibly additional blame from other families is beyond their control. The only controllable thing is to assume that what the little girl said is true. (another prisoner's dilemma)
Their logic will become the most simple words of children, to convince themselves to believe the words of children. Even though they may have never paid attention to the reasons why children lie, just as they feel that children are lying, they just think that they can always determine whether what children say is true or false, regardless of the reasons and the truth.
According to this logic and not wanting to bear the terrible consequences, I chose to ignore the truth of the matter and transfer the pressure of the matter to other places with a package of justice, and finally fermented to be convinced of it.
The third doubtful conjecture: The judge in the second half of the film acquitted the male protagonist, but the conclusion given by the law, a serious tool that constitutes a social subject, is not enough to clear up people’s misunderstandings, so what is the meaning of the existence of the law? Is it right? It is ambiguous to say that the status of the law in people's hearts. If you want the law to protect yourself, you don't want to believe in the law. If you follow this logic, then the law is governed by human nature rather than reason.
There is no absolutely righteous person or absolutely evil person in the world, and this society is all-encompassing and intertwined with each other. The chain reaction is layered upon layers. Every problem may come from the same source, but the development route is different ( Can refer to "Theism") may eventually return to the same location and spread again and again.
One of the conjectures that led to such a big concept is that I want to explain that after the last shot was missed, the gunman paused and turned to leave. I think the shot here is not for the protagonist, but for everyone. Every human being in this world wants to warn us that each of us is a part of this world, an indispensable part, anything you do will have an impact on the world, and no one can stay out of it, Only by putting everyone together in this way, rather than looking at the problem on the opposite side of the good and the bad, can we truly follow the facts and protect the rights and interests of everyone. (Can't help but sigh, this seems to be an ideal country again)
Summary: Often, after an avalanche, no snowflake says they are responsible, and if things go on like this, we will be hunted by nature! There is no second shot at the end of the film, which means hope, the hope contained in the sins of human nature!
View more about The Hunt reviews
