This is a movie released in 2019. Directed by Polanski. After watching this film, I specially watched the 1937 version of the film "Zola Biography" which was related to the plot of the film. The film describes a famous case in France at the end of the 19th century. French intelligence intercepted a letter addressed to the German embassy in France concerning a serious secrecy-related incident. After checking the handwriting, it was determined that it was written by the Jewish officer Dreyfus. As a result, Dreyfus was arrested, expelled from the army and exiled. Lieutenant Colonel Picault, the newly appointed director of the Bureau of Statistics of the Intelligence Department, discovered the suspicious points in the case and found that the leaker was someone else. Obviously, this was an unjust case. So Picault reported the entire process to his superiors and demanded a retrial of Dreyfus. But this request was thwarted by his superiors, who transferred him and placed him under surveillance. Due to Picault's military status, it was inconvenient for him to disclose this matter to the society, and he had to turn to Zola, a famous French writer at that time. Zola wrote quickly and wrote the famous article "I accuse", which shook the whole of France. Allowing Dreyfus to retrial and ultimately rehabilitate Zhaoxue.
After watching the movie, I thought of a question: Why is it so difficult to rehabilitate an uncomplicated case? I think there are two reasons for this. One was the anti-Semitic wave that permeated Europe at that time. This anti-Semitism has a long history, with cultural, religious and economic reasons. But in all fairness, among the Jews there were the Venetian merchants and Einsteins; there were villains and greedy people, and there were more good people. In any case, Jews are just like us. But a hundred years ago, people's thinking was different from ours now, or the idea of modern civilization was not in the minds of Europeans at that time, and even Lieutenant Colonel Picault, who presided over justice, despised Jews. He once said to Dreyfus: "If you're asking me if I appreciate Jews? My answer is 'no.' If you're implying that I'm biased, I promise I don't, never have." Although the idea may not be so correct now, but at the time, it was already very advanced, avant-garde and very alternative. In the minds of most people, the so-called freedom, equality and justice are only for white people. In the film, based on an incomplete chain of evidence, a Jewish officer was designated as a spy, perhaps to cater to the populist thinking of the people at that time. As the character in the film said: "The Romans threw Christians to lions, we threw Jews. This is our progress." It was this so-called "progress" that paved the way for the subsequent slaughter of Jews by the Nazis. The burning of Zola's works by the people described in the film is also the beginning of Hitler's Crystal Night. To this kind of barbaric and ignorant anti-intellectual behavior, the government not only does not stop it, but instead caters to and incites it. So, those elites who advocated total Westernization in the past or now can see that Western civilization is just like that.
Another reason is the honor of the military. Or call it the face of the army. In the film, Lieutenant Colonel Picault and his superior, General Guns, have a conversation about the Dreyfus case, transcribed below:
Picault: I'm asking for a retrial of Dreyfus.
Guns: Retrial? Are you crazy?
Picault: Is that unbelievable?
Gons: Of course, everyone would want to know how the mistake was made, and they would have access to secret documents, which is unthinkable.
Picault: Why?
Gons: That would embarrass us. I really don't understand you, we know what you think about the Jewish people. Why would you care if a Jew is imprisoned on a desert island.
Picault: He's innocent.
Guns: Oh, you're so sentimental. Little Lamb, Kitten and Dreyfus, they are all innocent.
Picault: You make it sound like I care about him, but it doesn't. I'd rather he be guilty. But the truth is that Esthaji is a traitor.
Gons: Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. If you don't say it, no one will know.
Picault: That's bad advice. Am I taking this secret to the grave?
Goons: Of course. This is the duty of a soldier. I have nothing to talk about. Forget about Dreyfus. This is an order!
As can be seen from the above dialogue, in order to make the military less "embarrassing", they can falsify evidence, frame an innocent person, destroy a family, and even let go of a true traitor. All of this is for the honor of the military. Anyone with a little common sense knows that the honor of the army comes from the heroic fighting on the battlefield, from the spirit of bravery and not afraid of death. Instead of ignoring the truth for fear of exposing the ugly. From this, another movie "West Point Revealed" came to mind. The American general sacrificed his daughter to maintain the honor of the army. It is conceivable that such false conceptions of honor abound in the West. In the film, we also see the army from top to bottom trying to cover up the truth, falsifying evidence, constantly wearing Picot's shoes, and even lying in court. Celebrities with a sense of justice like Zola were also dubbed "traitors", forcing him to go into exile. The reason why they can be so unashamed and plausible is exactly what John Adams said: Power always thinks that it has a great soul. When it violates its own laws, it thinks it is doing the will of God.
In the military, obeying orders is naturally a duty. However, once you encounter a big right or wrong thing, as a soldier, you should also have your own thinking. At least not to do evil with it. It is very interesting to portray a character like Major Henry in the film. He was involved in forging evidence and walking lies. He said: "They are in power and we can only carry out orders. I don't know if Dreyfus is innocent or not, and I don't care. If you ask me to kill, I will. Then you tell me I killed the wrong person, I'm heartbroken, but it's not my fault. This is the army." What can we say to such a cold-blooded man? In fact, executing orders is just a shield for people like him to shirk their responsibilities. They often use "execution orders" to cover up their pursuit of fame and fortune and their inner despicableness. In response, Picault shot back and said, "Maybe it's your army, but it's definitely not mine." In the end, Henry took his own life in the struggle to enforce the order and maintain justice.
Some of the details in the film are good. Under the surveillance of the secret police, Lieutenant Colonel Picault returned to his residence in Paris. The room had been searched in a mess. In the mess, he turned on the piano and played Saint-Saëns' "The Swan". Lonely, helpless, angry, and more of a state of mind that is out of the mud and not stained in the sound of the piano.
Picault was questioned by his boss for sticking to the facts. Faced with the unreasonable entanglement, Picault slapped the table and walked away. At this time we saw that the general's moustache trembled and trembled again. Sounds like an excellent performance by a clown.
Maybe the director Polanski has added his own emotions to the film, but I've never been interested in such gossip and metaphors, let alone.
My rating: 7.0.
View more about An Officer and a Spy reviews
