I don't know much about the law, trials, etc., but isn't the heroine's defense too weak to overturn the case for her father when she grows up? All she did was tell about the last days she spent with her dad as a kid! Of course we all want to believe what she says is true, but what about the evidence? Is the courtroom a storytelling contest? In the end, the judge and jury actually commuted the father's innocence? It makes sense emotionally, but does it make sense logically? (I really sympathize with the lawyer who is arguing with the heroine, who is so emotionally out of control. The opponent who plays cards out of common sense) Let's talk about the "magic" experience that the heroine spent in prison with her father when she was a child. At the beginning, the little girl was stolen from the choir by the inmates. She disappeared for a few days, but the teacher and the school were not found! Don't need to be named? (Okay, just try to convince yourself that the orphanage-style school doesn’t care enough about the children.) The daughter came to accompany her father again through the prison section chief. Everyone knows that, it’s too arrogant, even if the section chief is covering the prison, it’s not you. Open the house!
I feel that the whole movie is the emotional catharsis of a person who is not good at expressing for a long time.
View more about Miracle in Cell No. 7 reviews
