a good mood and come to write after watching~
Sometimes I feel that the movie is too wonderful to describe. With your eyes fixed on the monitor, your mind can be both rewarding and relaxing. The siren in your head goes off when you catch some real-world problem from the movie. What really excites me about this film is that it sets a backdrop for the currently under-reported euthanasia issue that has been brought to the forefront, coupled with Al Pacino's scalpel-like precision, making a movie It looks like a documentary, and the performance of the actors can even be said to be introverted. In fact, it is full of weight, and it is easy to achieve the effect of making the audience think and anger. At least for me, this movie has a lot of stamina.
We often call those who struggle with reality and ultimately lose as "idiots" or "idealists". It's heartbreaking to see Dr. Jack defend himself in court with a syllogism that seems comical. There is no doubt that he has a noble personality, is sober and wise, and his last attempt is to perform euthanasia in person, so as to hype himself to attract public attention, so as to obtain the opportunity to defend the legalization of euthanasia in the eyes of countless people. His thoughts may be more exaggerated than this. With his self-confidence, that court trial was his ticket to invite everyone to witness the legalization of euthanasia.
He only blindly extended and evolved logically, defending the proposition that euthanasia must be legalized. But he may be so focused on his ideals and the needs of his patients that he forgets to look around. Since this activity is to be legalized, it means that it is a public utility that can be carried out from now on, not just for a certain person to do such work without hindrance. The public trusts his judgment and medical ethics, but after the legalization of euthanasia, what about other executors who emerged out of thin air? There is no guarantee that they are worthy of the role.
To carry out such work, the requirements for character and wisdom are very strict. In Plato's Utopia, the philosopher is considered the most suitable king because he loves wisdom. The legalization of euthanasia that Dr. Jack cares about also invisibly imposes a high threshold like "a philosopher can be a king". This proposal makes it impossible to start. The "everyone chooses to die independently" he preaches can only happen in an impossible scenario where the executors are all wise. He made up an ideal country where we could safely euthanize.
If the expectation of operability is extended, it will not take long to reach a dead end. We can't hope that all practitioners are wise, so we try to formulate a norm and a judgment standard. Here comes the question, is this standard that actually says "it's been judged that you can die, but you don't want to die", is it humane? Obviously no, it seriously deviates from the original intention and purpose.
I don't want to see the day when euthanasia is legalized. I don't want the end of my life to be any less safe.
View more about You Don't Know Jack reviews
