Choosing him as the protagonist of [lord of war] is obviously more appropriate-I mean, as an arms dealer, if you blame him or the business circle for the outbreak of all wars, it is one-sided, no Sane. Anyone who has studied politics knows that the occurrence of any event is composed of internal and external factors. Internal factors determine external factors and external factors act on internal factors.
Even like the Yuri portrayed by cage in the film, she was disdainful and abandoned by her family, followed by the police over and over again, finding fault, and even watching her blood relatives usher in a cruel death in front of them, but they still couldn't be hated. At least I can't hate it. This has nothing to do with the face of the cage. The key point is that he himself said that the arms trade can always exist, thanks to the countless black hands behind him, whether visible or invisible. He fulfills their interests, of course, in a certain day. The same will become their victims.
Everything is not surprising. So you can see the bloody and blatant slaughter of African tribes in the film, and the instigators behind them don’t have to worry about being treated the same in their lifetimes. I always felt that it was a metaphor. We think that Africa is poor and backward enough, so there is no legal system and democracy there, so it is the most natural place to be taken for granted, but on the other hand, think about it, which country in the world dares to say that it can Be 100% legal? Or democracy? Or just? Taking a step back, as Yuri's brother vitaly has seen with his own eyes, even if there is no large-scale arms supply, those who have been insulted and damaged will definitely be able to escape the clutches of oppression? No, it can't. Without guns, they still have knives; without bullets, they still have clubs, and the top ten tortures of the Ming Dynasty in China are living genius inventions that do not require any modern equipment. These are not reasons.
Of course, of course, this does not mean that I am trying to excuse a group of arms dealers headed by Yuri. On the one hand, they themselves are victims, and on the other hand, they have indeed acted as lackeys for high-level stakeholders. Yuri's tragedy lies in the fact that he clearly knows the ultimate trend of his own destiny, but he has no ability to get rid of it. The fate of the betrayal of the family is inevitable, but is there any possibility of redemption? The answer is: no.
When Vitaly asked him to terminate the sale, Yuri faced life concerns. Of course, he couldn’t be guilty of dealing with a group of real terrorists. Therefore Vitaly fell into the rain of guns and bullets gloriously, but meaninglessly; he was found in African officials. At his time, he could also refuse and indeed refused, but the ghost messenger still embarked on the road of arms. Would he not know the consequences of not looking back? Wouldn't he know that this would lead to the disintegration of the family? Of course he was very clear, but he couldn't help himself. Many people classify it as yuri's weak nature or incapable of temptation. I think it is too simple and typified. He is a man who "has no special skills except for selling arms." He is a man who always tries to protect himself. He is like the thousands of faces we see on the street every day. He hopes to bring his beloved. What the woman wants, he is a businessman. That's it. So in the end, his personal ending was already the greatest punishment for everything he did. Can you say that his release from prison was a kind of luck? You can't laugh or be happy at all.
What is really hateful and hateful is the group of politicians behind him who hide their faces, may still be in power, and speak of benevolence, justice and morality. This is like the subtitles at the end of the film that are thought-provoking: the world's largest arms exporter is the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China; and these five countries are at the same time the five permanent members of the United Nations organized for peace. Maybe you can say, how can peacekeeping be done without weapons? The question is, are weapons and military power really the only way to maintain peace? Should we talk about "peacekeeping" while cleaning up the mess while facing a land bombed into ruins?
Isn't this full of irony in itself?
View more about Lord of War reviews
