When the Mayflower, carrying the first group of Puritans fleeing from England, landed on the North American continent, the strict and conservative style of the Puritans spread throughout the land. The so-called sneak into the night with the wind, moisturizing things silently. When a certain spirit has penetrated into the texture of culture, you will find traces of this spirit on all appearances. Can you believe it? History is the birthplace of the true butterfly effect. A butterfly flapping its wings among the Mayflower's puritans determines what mainstream Hollywood narrative will be in "Sixteen Blocks" nearly 400 years from now.
Betrayal: Judas or Paul?
There are two people in the Bible who are very similar in experience and diametrically opposed in moral evaluation. One is Judas, the other is Paul. Judas is arguably the most famous traitor in history. Originally a disciple of Jesus, for the sake of gold coins, with a kiss as a sign, Jesus was caught, and it was a representative of betraying the Lord and asking for glory. Paul, on the other hand, is the representative of the so-called abandonment of darkness. Paul's name was "Saul", and he was a Pharisee who was in the camp of the enemy of Jesus. "Acts" records that once when the Pharisees killed Christians, he sat on the side to help everyone look at their clothes, and was a typical "accomplice". But when he went to Damascus with documents that were unfavorable to Christians, he met Jesus who appeared to him like a miracle. Since then, he has undergone a 180-degree transformation, from a staunch anti-Christian to a staunch Christian, to a disciple of Jesus. And became the greatest missionary ever. One of these two people has since become notorious, and the other has been famous for eternity since then. But "betrayal" is all "betrayal". The only difference is that Christianity finally defeated all opposing forces and became the controller of the right to speak, which caused the huge difference in the historical evaluation of the two.
Let's talk about "Sixteen Blocks". The film deals with an apparent "betrayal". But is this "betrayal" a "Judas" betrayal or a "Pauline" betrayal? At first glance, this is a "Paul"-style "betrayal" by Police Officer Jack. Although it was only at the end of the confrontation between Jack and the "bad police officer" Frank that it was clear that Jack was also a member of Frank's gang, and Eddie's report was also very detrimental to Jack himself, but the film has been constantly prompting from the beginning, such as in the In the bar, Frank told Jack that the police officer Eddie wanted to report was "not as strict as you and me, and will definitely recruit a lot of people". In Jack's sister's apartment, Constable Bob tells Jack to "do what you've been doing". These all imply that Jack's behavior this time is not only "upholding justice", but also "betrayal", a "betrayal" of the community of interests that has been advancing and retreating together. When finally Jack stumbled into the courtroom and handed the recording to the black prosecutor MacDonald, he finally completed his transformation from "Pharisee" to "Christian".
But actually. Jack had another "betrayal" experience. That was his betrayal from being a "good cop" to the "bad cop" of Frank's gang. This betrayal occurred many years before the film began, and was not directly reflected in the film, but served as the background of the film throughout. Because of Jack's transition from being a "bad cop" at the beginning of the film, it is difficult for the audience to notice his previous transition from good to pregnant. It goes without saying that this transformation is a "Judas" betrayal, a betrayal of the "conscience," "duty," and "honor" that mainstream ideology encourages and recognizes. Jack wasn't "bad" to begin with, Jack was "bad".
From this point of view, the old Jack played by Bruce experienced two betrayals, the first time was "Judas" style, and the second time was "Paul" style. The praise and criticism of the two betrayals are self-evident and reflected in Jack's state after the two betrayals. At the beginning of the film, Jack is already in a "Judas" style betrayal. At this point, the film hints at Jack's depravity in various aspects through a series of details. He is a small role in the police station that no one pays attention to. His job is to look at the scene before the forensic doctor goes to the murder scene, and only find him when he can't find anyone else. He failed the exam, forgot the time for the make-up exam, and only went to the training ground twice in four years. He was lonely, tired, lethargic, and without friends. More importantly, he drank heavily. Alcoholism is considered a serious sin in Christianity, and alcoholism often signifies that a person has become spiritually depraved. In the film, "wine" is a more important symbolic prop. Jack was drinking alone while watching the show, with a bottle hidden in a drawer in the office. The incident on the way to escort Eddie also happened because he went to the small shop to buy wine. Wine, a symbol of his upside-down worldview and all the "bad" paths he has traveled before. When he shot the gunman who attacked Eddie, the wine he had just bought fell to the ground and shattered; when Frank handed him a bottle of wine in the bar and told him not to interfere in Eddie's business, when he went home to sleep, he The wine was put on the table. Even in the last birthday party, he did not drink again. Reject alcohol, reject the same way of life in the past, and break with Frank. The separation of wine and wine in the film is the beginning and symbol of his "Pauline" betrayal. After the "Paul-style" abandonment, Frank has entered a completely different lifestyle, surrounded by family and friends on his birthday, and Eddie who is far away in Seattle sending him cakes. Why is it so different? Because Jack is invested in the mainstream American ideology that has the right to speak. Although the government is cancerous, it is generally fair and clear.
The question is, why hide the "Judas" style of betrayal and show the "Pauline" style? It's not just a matter of movie timing that the narrative hides the first "Judas" betrayal. In Western culture, "Judas" betrayal is always a disgrace that tends to hide. And if there's only one person in the world who won't be saved, it's Judas. Therefore, what the audience cannot accept is the transformation of Judas to Paul. Paul's evil behavior at the beginning was out of an involuntary environment, and the hero of the old Jifu should be the same. And, if Judas can turn into Paul, does that mean Paul can turn into Judas too? Of course, this is an impermissible assumption.
Another problem is that Jack's motive for the "Judas" betrayal is self-evident, material interests. But Jack's motive for the "Paul" betrayal is very unclear. Eddie, a black chap with a heavy accent, can't be Jesus. So what is Jack's transformation for? Desperate for your current way of life? unclear. The ideal is immortal? Unrecognizable. Watching Addison give birth to mercy? Don't sacrifice yourself. Unhappy with the Frank gang? There is no reason. When Eddie asks why Jack wants to save him, Jack just smiles and cuts to the next scene. In "A World Without Thieves", in order to find a motive for the female thief Wang Li to abandon the dark, she even arranged for her to get pregnant. The change here undoubtedly seems too sudden. It seems to be transformed for the sake of transformation, for the sake of defending Paul, and directly betrayal without the appearance of Jesus, which has a heavier "betrayal" color.
Betrayal is always betrayal, the only difference is who has the right to speak. "People can change", yes, people will betray. Hollywood, it turned out to be a prophecy.
View more about 16 Blocks reviews
