a bloody movie

Brain 2022-04-19 09:01:43

There are two movies about faith, personal opinion, that you must watch. The Shawshank Redemption and The Insider.
A movie I watched a long time ago. However, every now and then I think of it. It may be like the cud of a cow, which can chew it thoroughly. Today, I am alone at home, and I am very bored. I write down my thoughts, which is a knot in my heart.
Adhere to your beliefs and be worthy of your conscience. This is the story told by the hero. This kind of story, it seems, is very bloody and makes people very powerful. At that time, it should be this feeling that was branded in the bottom of my heart. However, the male protagonist was Crown Rusell at the time, his hair was a little messy, his body was slightly fat, and he felt that he was mumbling when he spoke. It is really not the kind of person who can be a big hero, a small person who has his own beliefs. Speaking of this, I also remembered the time I heard them say SH is a SM, a devout Christian, who gave up his position for his own religion, saying that he had no time to think. Ordinary people have the power of ordinary people.

View more about The Insider reviews

Extended Reading
  • Lee 2022-03-24 09:01:39

    I have always disliked political shady films, because I feel that it seems too Hollywood-style wishful thinking in any case, and if you want to find the truth, then the movie is not a good place. But then again, the filming is quite good: the narrative is stable, the emotional point is reasonable, the director is delicate, and the performance is excellent. It is an excellent Hollywood work. Especially Russell Crowe: Uncle's performance here almost kills the beautiful mind, pay attention to eyes and limbs.

  • Peggie 2022-04-21 09:01:48

    One of the few films in the West that exposes interest groups to produce harmful products that endanger public health safety, does not hesitate to deceive people, crack down on those in the know and those exposed, secretly manipulate news and public opinion, and conspiracy to control social life. It is so difficult to accuse tobacco nicotine of harming smokers. ? Is it true that Jeffrey is the only scientist who is engaged in the harm of tobacco, so that tobacco companies can refute the views and conclusions of his scientific research only by digging up Jeffrey's personal privacy on the news and questioning his personal character and credit. Rebut his scientific conclusion as a scientist that nicotine harms smokers' health? This also estimates that the IQ of the people is too low. The two little girls are so beautiful like little angels.

The Insider quotes

  • Jeffrey Wigand: I can't seem to find the criteria to decide. It's too big a decision to make without being resolved in my own mind.

    Lowell Bergman: Maybe things have changed.

    Jeffrey Wigand: What's changed?

    Lowell Bergman: You mean since this morning?

    Jeffrey Wigand: No, I mean since whenever.

  • Mike Wallace: Am I missing something?

    John Harris: What do you mean, Mike?

    Mike Wallace: I mean, he's got a corporate secrecy agreement - give me a break! I mean, this is a public health issue! Like an unsafe airframe on a passenger jet or some company dumping cyanide into the East River, issues like that! He can talk, we can air it! They've got no right to hide behind a "corporate agreement"! Pass the milk.