No sex. No nudity.
A man and a woman talk about their past affair/relationship. Later, the wife talks to her husband about his affair.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


We all know that the rule of law in the United States is quite developed, but we see that Americans are still constantly reflecting: in the final analysis, how does law and civilization balance the ugliness of the world? At least those who write scripts and invest in making films in the United States are willing to make efforts and spend money on this. The films made are not only good-looking, but also thought-provoking. Our domestic filmmakers either have no depth or ability, or both depth and ability have been castrated.

Gavin beneck is a partner in a wall street law firm. It is estimated that his status is gradually rising because he married the daughter of his old partner. White people are rich, successful and have superior social status, but they believe in the law in their heart and abide by the law in their actions.

Suddenly one day, he was in trouble.

Sitting on the stone bench at the door of the company, he reflected: during the day, he escaped after a car crash, lied to his boss, hired hackers to wash away the credit history of strangers, bankrupt them, made a fake fire alarm, found that he helped his boss defraud millions of dollars from a charity foundation, and was seriously considering whether to forge legal documents… This reflection stems from his inner belief in the law, Therefore, when he intentionally or unintentionally does the above-mentioned things that violate the law and inner belief, he should seek the answer in his heart, resolutely refuse to loosen his hands holding the law, and slide down to a safe and comfortable place.

But at this time, her mature, calm and accident wife appeared. His wife carried out a highly skilled ideological work on him.

First of all, the wife threw out her father and Gavin’s father-in-law, who had been having an affair for 20 years. His wife knew that Gavin had an affair, but Gavin didn’t know whether his wife knew it, so Gavin’s mood was immediately suppressed.

The wife went on to say that in fact, the mother knew it long ago, but decided to accept it. In addition to love, it is more based on the following logic: since the husband’s job (lawyer) is to dig the way of deception, and it is the money brought by this way of deception that satisfies the luxurious life he enjoys, isn’t it hypocritical to accuse the husband of deception at home?

From this, we can at least see that the American mother is logical, and she can see the profound logical paradox. And logic is something that most Chinese people cannot do. We are still at the stage of talking about the big picture and doing the Bureau. We can often enjoy the fruits of deception and accuse others of deception without knowing our hypocrisy.

But this does not excuse the mother. She gave up hypocrisy, but she can’t give up deception.

There was a turning point in the conversation. Gavin seized the opportunity and asked: do you think the law is cheating?

The wife asked calmly: what do you think the law is? At your and my father’s level, the law is a vicious scuffle. The person who founded this law firm can make this law firm invincible and understand how the world plays. That is, if you still want to live like a model, you have to steal it! You are not a professor of medieval English. You can stand aloof from the world and tell people about morality. You are a wall street lawyer. If something happens, you have to resist me! Listen to me, I just lost a document. Adjust the page number and reprint that document, and then combine it with the signature page of another document. It will become a new signed document.

To be honest, this matter is not a matter at all in China. No one will think that this matter needs hesitation, thinking and entanglement. Isn’t it just forging a document? Or forge an existing document. Isn’t it just that the contents of the document are somewhat immoral, and they deceive others to sign it when the old man is unconscious? Is that a matter?

The wife finally took back her pocket and stabbed her first: didn’t you also have an affair! You also cheat! What can’t you do? Then apply honey: you love me, I love you, I am willing to stand by you in times of crisis, let me help you! (implication: it’s right to listen to me! You can’t listen to me if you don’t want to!)

The wife’s ideological work of moving with emotion and knowing with “benefit” is still on the road, including foreshadowing, unveiling, beating the head, and getting to the point, that is, taking one foot and pulling another. The original text of the dialogue is as follows:

(W=wife,G=Gavin)

W: Did you know that my father has had a mistress for 20 years?

G: No.

W: Don’t lie!

G: I didn’t know it was 20 years.

W: My mother knew about it.

G: Why didn’t she leave him?

W: Because she loved him so much. And she decided it’d be hypocritical to leave a man for cheating at home when the expensive life she enjoys so much was paid for by a man whose job was based on finding ways to cheat.

G: Is that your opinion on the law?

W: What do you think the law is? … At this level of the game, at my father’s level of the game, at your level of the game.

W: It’s a big, vicious rumble. The people who founded this law firm, and the people who sustain it, understand the way the world works. If you want to continue to live the way we’ve been living…

G: You’d have to steal!

W: I could’ve married an honest man. I could’ve lived with a professor of Middle English, for example. He was a moral man, and had tenure at Princeton.

W: But I didn’t. I married a Wall Street lawyer, which means I married someone who lives in a world where a man comes to the edge of things, he has to commit to staying there, and living there. Can you live there, Gavin? Can you live there with me?

W: You’re not going to do anything stupid like leaving me. You had fantasies, I’m sure, so have I. But we’re married. I knew about Michelle, I knew when it was happening, and I knew when it was finished. And I knew you love me. I love you, too. I’m your wife, and I want to stand beside you. Just let me help you, Gavin, let me help you with this.

Later, Gavin decided to admit to the judge that he induced the other party to sign the property authorization document when Simon Dunn was unconscious. Although he was fooled by the two partners without full knowledge, he got a huge bonus after all. And he would persuade the partners of the two committees to turn themselves in. Their crime will be fraud and they will go to jail. Such silly things are becoming more and more difficult to see in China.

His partner and father-in-law severely educated him on his confession, and this dialogue is also typical in China.

(G=Gavin,F=father-in-law)

F: Come on, where do you think Simon Dunne got his money? You think those factories in Malaysia have day-care centers in them? You want to check the pollution levels of his chemical plants in Mexico, or look at the tax benefits he got from his foundation? This is all a tight rope. You’ve got learn to balance.

G: How can you live like that?

F: I can live with myself, because at the end of the day, I’d think I do more good than harm. What other standard have I got to judge by?

The logic here is familiar to us Chinese. Where do you think Simon Dunne’s money came from? He also opened sweatshops around the world to squeeze workers, pollute the environment and evade taxes. Is it legal? Is it conscientious? Isn’t it cheating? What’s wrong with me cheating him on his money? Why can’t I be at ease? Yes, I have done some bad things, but I know I have done more good things than bad things. That’s enough! This is the standard! You still want to be a saint?

In the end, the world is just an evil scuffle, as recognized by my father-in-law and wife. Violence and deception are the king, survival is the criterion, and unscrupulous means is the only means, As long as they think they have done more good than bad things, they can be at ease (such people will find more good things for themselves. Why bother themselves? They will convince themselves that what they have done is right. Don’t forget, if the lie is repeated a hundred times, they will believe that it is the truth. If they insist on doing bad things, they will also believe that it is a good thing), Or as Gavin believes, there is law and justice, and we should not fake, cheat or frame?

Gavin believed in the latter, but countless events in a day confused him.

For example, Gavin complained to the priest when he nearly collapsed: the world is a shithole, a garbage dump Because my father-in-law got me to screw a good man, a decent man, out of his money, and my wife cheers me on. God likes to put two guys in a paper bag and just let them rip! (these are all reproaches and helplessness against the real world: my father-in-law tricked me to cheat good people’s money, and my wife shouted cheers! The world is not only dirty and ugly, but also full of endless struggles between people. Is this God’s intention?)

It was the childish, ridiculous and bookish candidate boy who suddenly reminded him. The boy who applied for the job just wanted Gavin to say “stay here and don’t go anywhere!” You can wait from day to night. What a hard “dead eye”. In contrast, Ellen, the girl in front, is not only articulate, but also related. Her father is a district attorney in San Francisco. The boy said a lot of ideal words and expressed his faith in the law. Gavin began to appear crazy under strong stimulation, which is actually inner pain.

(G: Gavin. B: the boy.)

G: So why do you want to be a lawyer?

B: Uh, I believe in the law. I believe in order and justice. I believe that people are by nature good. I, I believe that historical forces push us into conflict, and without the law as a buffer between people, we would have a world of vendetta, a world of violence, a world of chaos. (Gavin starts to giggle, laughing loud.) I don’t think it’s funny.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here