Seeking the film review of the film "Witness of the Whole People". Urgent! Urgent! Urgent!

I have always felt that there is no real legal drama in the mainland. Friends strongly recommend the new film "Witness of the Whole People". Weibo's propaganda also claimed that the film created a new image of mainland prosecutors on the screen. After reading it, I think it's better to name it "Dog Blood Family Ethics blockbuster". If it is professional, where this film is spreading the positive energy of the prosecutor, it is simply a "high-end black" that is darker than KTV, the deputy inspector of Shanxi. In addition to the black prosecutor, the film was also hacked by judges, lawyers, police and journalists. Wei's only image is actually Lin Tai, a wealthy businessman played by Sun. The following table details:

Stories usually have structural support. In all fairness, although the narrative structure of Witness to the Whole People is old-fashioned, it is smooth and light, advancing the story from three perspectives: prosecutor, lawyer and father, and revealing the truth layer by layer. The core stage where the three perspectives can be unfolded is in the court. If this structure is to hold water, it must be based on a full scene, which is exactly the weakest point of this film. The screenwriter may not know the procedure, or have too much wishful thinking about the trial in China, or go to the courts in the common law system. In the end, the trial drama became a mixed bag.

It is rare in any court in the world that all kinds of equipment in the court are randomly patted and flashing. Let's just say that it is a beautiful vision for the screenwriter to start the trial. When prosecutors and lawyers cross-examine defendants and witnesses, they are full of unknown addresses. In reality, a similar situation is not without it. Prosecutors do not take the initiative to avoid, after all, it is not a statutory avoidance plot. The judge asked some irrelevant questions or just, there are some judges who have poor ability to control the trial.

The question is, is the criminal law of the assistant beauty prosecutor taught by the law teacher? First, I said two false accusations of commercial fraud and financial fraud, and then I said that these are not crimes. If it's just civil fraud, why didn't your procuratorate prosecute you? Yu Nan plays a lawyer who claims to be the first-line barrister in China. When he came up, he said that the defendant in this case must be convicted. He has only two advantages: young and single. Then he deployed his men to engage in sensational tactics: hiring the water army to post posts, creating online public opinion, and instigating other lawyers to choke first, then shed tears, and then shed tears. Instead of this, it is better to arrange for the female assistant to faint in court. If this is the image representative of the best lawyer, it is a shame for Tian Wenchang and Li Guifang.

In addition, in the last court scene, the defendant may be sentenced to death for the alleged crime, but the lawyer did not appear in court. How does this court sit? As for the lawyer ethics involved in the play, it is even more confusing. Whether the female lawyer wants to cheat the female defendant or intends to cheat her father is unknown.

Tao Tong, the tough prosecutor played by Aaron Kwok, spent 17 years in the black material of Lin Tai. Both prosecutions failed because of insufficient evidence. This result either shows that the child's ability to integrate evidence is not enough, or that Lin Tai is innocent and difficult to convict. In short, the children's prosecutor is so persistent and bitter, at least from the existing circumstances, it is difficult to explain. On the contrary, it is suspected of persecuting private entrepreneurs and cannot arouse the audience. In addition, judging from the plot of "cheating" behind, Lin Tai's "evil" side is really not shown, at least, the character image is not full enough.

In fact, although the cases in the play are simple, there are indeed articles to do. For example, from the prosecution evidence shown at the beginning of the film, the evidence to prove the defendant Lin guilty is not sufficient (the video does not show the real murderer, and other evidence is mainly hearsay evidence). Whether the charge is intentional homicide, intentional injury or negligent death can be further scrutinized. If female lawyers pay more attention, it is not impossible to have an accident. Who knows why she started and decided to get 15 years? If the plot arranges female lawyers to start with the evidence, attack the prosecution's evidence chain, launch an attack, and then defend the guilty and innocent, felony and misdemeanor, a wonderful story can be held up from the beginning. Of course, the film also explains that the lawyer planned to take the emotional route from the beginning and then answered the phone before attacking the prosecution witness.

In terms of prosecution and defense skills, both lawyers in the first instance and prosecutors in the second instance crush the defendant, all of which use verbal skills to defeat the other party's spiritual defense and win by the other party's out-of-control admission or mistakes, which is almost impossible in a real court, and it is not a real litigation skill. Besides, police and forensic doctors don't eat for nothing. Even by the defendant's own admission, there must be a big difference between the wound on the back of the head caused by the strong impact of the car and the wound caused by directly pressing the head on the nail. Even if Lin Tai admits to murder, it is inconsistent with the autopsy report and the situation at the scene, and he cannot be convicted.

The biggest flaw in this film is the lifeline of legal drama or mystery drama: logic. There are several plots in this film that cannot be logically justified. For example, why did Lin Tai give the forged video to the lawyer? How did he count that female lawyers posted more than 2 million copies and gave the video to the prosecutor? Isn't it more convenient and effective for people to send it directly to the prosecutor? How did the sub-inspector fake the scene?

Of course, from a layman's point of view, this film is sincere. Directors and photographers work hard, and so do actors. If we can make more efforts in structure, logic and professionalism, it may become the first court in China. Finally, Yu Nan's iconic expression often makes people play "The Expendables 2", suspecting that she will suddenly tear off her suit, take out two AK47 and rob the prison car in court.