I enjoyed the process of watching it, neither did I patiently explain the basic scientific common sense to others when I watched "Another Dimension Killing Array", "Terrorist Cruise" or something like the loneliness of begging for defeat (tsk tsk), nor was it as complete as the next-door couple. I couldn't understand half of the performance, so I mumbled and walked away. Instead, he desperately remembers, understands, and ponders in a bunch of half-understood theorems and theories, and at the same time pays attention to the plot. At the same time that I felt that my book was not enough, I became interested in mathematics for the first time (of course, it was just an interest for those who always failed mathematics). In addition, I once again deeply understood why all kinds of scholars are up-to-date and mathematics after becoming immortals, and if life time permits, they are all crazy. Understand the various madness of Newton's research theology Tesla.
The most impressive are two statements. The first is that the truth cannot be discovered, but can only be demonstrated through clues reasoning (this is easy to understand, the theoretical basis of criminal justice). Different conclusions, in fact, can be said to be all conclusions, which are both true and false. Just like the sequence 2, 4, 8, the next number can be 16 (the rule of the first power, the second power, the third power of 2), or 32 (2×4=8, 4×8=32), the movie It said that it might be more than 7,000, but I really don't know how to calculate it. But in fact any number can be made, but the process of argumentation may be more complicated. For the sequence, these answers are all correct, just like for the murder case, all kinds of conclusions are based on the basis - the violin girl is the beneficiary of course the most suspect; the protagonist is most in line with the profile analysis conclusion given by criminal psychology (Is it called a profile?); According to the usual detective novels, the most sanctimonious old man is also one of the most suspect. It may even be deduced that I killed it by some other argument. But there is only one conclusion that can be called "truth" in a real murder case, although this truth cannot be discovered, and even the real murderer cannot be found (A is like killing B, hacking him to death while B is asleep, but In fact, B was poisoned by C at that time. This kind of object recognition error is common in criminal law cases).
It's just that there are some strange and blunt places in the plot, but I think Oxford is a magical place in the whole film. Any nurse driver who plays the violin has various connections with immortal scholars. In-depth exchange of opinions on the issue of "the relationship between the universe", maybe a street sweeper can point out the mistakes of your life like the cleaning aunt behind the programmer. In such a place, what happens to whoever you meet does not count in the plot. far-fetched. PS British teachers, is Oxford really that scary? Sister Juan, don't look around, just ask you.
View more about The Oxford Murders reviews
