If you can handle the length of 2 hours and 30 minutes, it should make up a lot of content.
First of all, it is clear that before going to the execution ground, Liz recalled the scene of her first time on stage in a sailor suit, and yes, she was in the scene, and she wanted to perform. Perhaps she planned to make a flashy confession at the execution ground and then complete the curtain call. But there was no audience. This disrupted her plan. The one-hour probation she won made her have to change her strategy and tell the detective the truth, hoping to use the detective to give her a chance to perform a curtain call. But knowing that the detective won't come again, she knew she had screwed up, and said to the executioner, "I'm not just a poisoner, only one person performed a performance in narcissism. It seems that the performance must continue, "here we are again" .
As mentioned earlier, the positive effect of suspense films makes the film more enjoyable. There is no standard answer, and everyone argues about various endings and meanings.
But there is still a biggest bug here. Who wrote the words on the book on September 24? This book is very important. It wrote about a murder 70 years ago. The commonality between that murder and this one is that the murder took place in the same place. That place, which is a holy place for Murderers fans, is occupied by a family of five tailors, which is the motivation for the massacre at the beginning of the film. However, books cannot be borrowed from the reading room, and everyone who comes has to register. The detective is looking for clues based on such a logical point, but in the end, he prevaricates with a "no one knows who or when reading it". , a woman goes to the reading room, no one notices? Perhaps it is explained that registration is not mandatory, so it would be absurd for the detective to use this as a clue to target 4 people. This bug may have been forced by the screenwriter in order to promote the development of the plot. Of course, this book inspired the heroine, but I wonder which killer would scribble and doodle his own murder blueprint on a public book in the reading room before killing someone.
On the negative side, suspense films will inevitably hide the relationship between characters, making the place that should be explored suppressed.
In the first pair of characters, the heroine uses the detective. She never only regards the detective as the only audience, but her ambitions are not so small. Then the detective's inner drama is missing. What is his motive? He sympathized with the heroine at the beginning, and at the end he remained silent. The lack of explanation made it impossible to exaggerate. The second pair of characters, the need for suspense may make the relationship between the heroine and her husband incomprehensible. The husband was initially cast as the murderer. After the truth was revealed, the role collapsed. He said that he no longer felt at home. When it was safe, what were his true thoughts at that time, maybe he just gave up on himself and felt that his future was ruined. If that's all there is to it, the characters will look thin. The heroine should have a very successful career and money before marriage, but is it really because of such a script that she will take three months off the film? What is the purpose of marriage. Is it love? It's possible, but what happened to her when she was a child must have made her resist family life, and later it became a marriage. So it seems that it is really for such a script, suspending the film for three months, the greater the expectation, the greater the damage. can also explain.
The third pair of relationships, whether Leno and the heroine conspired or inherited, can't be seen at all when looking back. This wasted a great opportunity for the film to add depth and connotation. The character of Leno should be put to good use. He is the only one who has not checked his handwriting. I think the director wanted to do something at first, but in the end, it seems that the handwriting has nothing to do with him. I feel that if Leno is dealing with Ritz's spiritual disciple, and imagine a man hanging himself to achieve his most sensational gig, then Ritz's previous gig is a failure and no one is watching. Here the disciples are required to inherit the will. If the last scene is increased by 20 minutes, the hanging of the female No. 2 will be arranged as fate, and the resurrection will be arranged to re-achieve Ritz. It's creepy just thinking about it. Of course, in this case, a better foreshadowing needs to be done ahead. From the book that Liz and Leno shared to the drama "Tragic Knot", it must be filled with content and mapped with reality. If it was done like this, it would be a 6 star movie.
View more about The Limehouse Golem reviews
