All the viewers who entered the protagonist's life finally ushered in a small emotional climax in the calm and restrained whole film, and finally waited for the test results, which proved that pollution is associated with six major diseases: kidney cancer, ** cancer, thyroid disease, preeclampsia, high cholesterol, and ulcerative colitis, and 3,535 people have been infected so far.

At the end, the protagonist returns to the courtroom, and the protagonist also regains his confidence and begins to re-embark on the road to justice for the victims, case by case.

At the end of the film, it was finally explained with subtitles that DuPont compensated all 3,535 cases with $670.7 million!

In Ding Cheng's view, the protagonist is a non-mainstream lawyer, and he can also be said to be a deviant. In most elite social situations, it seems somewhat out of place.

Slightly slumped, with a relatively sluggish speech and a slightly wooden demeanor, he does not look like a lawyer who makes an impassioned statement in defense of big business, as if he is always at odds with this white-dominated world of capital.

The boss rated him as a particularly outstanding lawyer, very intelligent, energetic, tenacious and doing his research very, very thoroughly.

When DuPont sent half a century of relevant materials to the basement in order to make things difficult for him, he was not conquered by the huge amount of information, but began to organize and archive the information in an orderly manner.

What impresses Ding Cheng very much about this work is that it creates many conflicts, not only at the level of character relationships, but also with the inner conflicts of the characters.

When the West Virginia farmer finds himself, he must face an extremely severe test. He knew in his heart that he had studied environmental law because he felt that environmental law seemed to have a real visible impact on society, and that you could change something by practicing it.

When you get this case, the decision to make is very difficult, because if you choose to give up, your conscience will be condemned for the rest of your life. But if he chooses to help, then it is impossible to get any more jobs given to him by any other chemical company.

To a certain extent, the two are sympathetic, they are both somewhat out of touch with the society around them, some out of place, and some mavericks. Choices are all suicidal in a sense, one that kills one's career, one that kills one's social life.

One has a high school diploma and the other has a doctor of law, but at some point in their lives, they both find that justice is unreliable, the federal government is unreliable, and the seemingly fair judicial system is unreliable.

In order to make their voices heard, they are the only ones who can be relied on.

Another admirable boss has been secretly supporting the complaint. In such a class, the choice dilemma he faces is no smaller than that of the protagonist.

On the one hand, it is impossible to ignore the negative impact of the company's profits and behaviors on the company's customers, and on the other hand, he has a sense of justice in his bones and feels that he has done the right thing, so he wants to support it.

Therefore, when the results of the test were delayed after the large-scale blood drawing experiment, the protagonist had to be deducted from his salary to put pressure on him on the one hand and balance the company's expenses on the other.

Capitalist society, where no manager can say no to the cash flow statement, brave and just, really soft.

Of course, compared to the choice of the previous three men, perhaps the choice of the wife is the most difficult. I chose to give up my career to become a housewife because the protagonist was promoted, the salary was high, and I felt that I could put more time and energy into taking care of the children.

But when the case was unresolved for a long time, and the funds for the three children to go to school were not necessarily guaranteed, they finally broke out against the husband. She understands the importance of this case to her husband, but as a mother, she cannot sit idly by and watch the future of her children.

When she was admitted to the hospital after a mild stroke caused by the pressure on her husband, she suddenly woke up to the importance of everything he was looking for. When she went toe-to-toe word for word, her love for her husband and support for his career surpassed everything else in her life.

In that scene, Anne Hathaway entered the play like this, which made Ding Chengdu's heart ripple and moved, wave after wave, expanding outward.

I have to say that movies are amazing, people sit in a dark room, face those illusions that they know, but still react with mixed joy and sadness.

In the fictional film or digital world, cinema is artistic, while in the world of our consciousness and emotions, cinema is realistic.

Participant is better at digging into the archetypal stories behind major social events and presenting them to the audience in a way that is closer to reality.

The structure of the work is also very American-style personal heroism, and in Ding Cheng's eyes, the propaganda of American-style heroism is also a strategy in itself. Through the shaping of this culture of individual heroism, it is possible to stimulate the individual's sense of responsibility for the society and the collective, and at the same time, it can also give the individual the illusion that he can win any battle on his own.

From the perspective of human history, the discovery of America is not Columbus's canoe alone, and the storming of the Bastille is not a certain strong citizen.

It is by organizing around a certain belief that human beings are invincible. The Revolutionary War was not fought by Washington alone, and the Civil War was not ended by Lincoln alone.

Therefore, this kind of cultural shaping of individual heroism may be more able to achieve social stability, inspire individuals with a sense of heroism, let individuals realize their maximum potential, and in some aspects, promote change or expose ugliness, so as to promote social evolution. Compared to large-scale mass movements, this is the least costly and effective way to do so.

The opposite of the individual hero is the collectivist culture, which is effective most of the time for social stability, allowing people to blend into the vast sea of people, not to get ahead, not to make mistakes. But it is also possible that people will become aware of the power of the collective, and use it to incite greater social change after awakening.

At the same time, collectivist culture is even less effective in promoting social change. The credit is collective, but the contribution is individual, and people tend to become discouraged when they can't see how much impact their efforts can have on the final result. If the individual is small, then what is the use of my efforts?

Therefore, if film is used as a tool for ideological shaping, there is no doubt that individual heroism is superior to collectivism in most aspects.

In many films, the hero often encounters the same dilemma, being ostracized, encouraged, or even discouraged by disagreement with the public opinion on certain issues.

Many heroes of realism do not have super long wisdom and extraordinary physical fitness, all they have to do is to fight against the inertial thinking of the public, assert themselves under the pressure of mainstream culture and public opinion, and ultimately change the view of the world.

Behind this, there is actually an interesting question - what is the truth?

If you answer without thinking, the truth is what really happened. But many times, many things, we are not the parties to, we are not present, and the truth we know may be the oral accounts of others, the investigation of journalists, or the official statements.

There are many versions of the "truth" of any event, and most of the time, the version that is most accepted by the people becomes the ultimate "truth", and the reality is often ignored.

DuPont knew about the dangers of emitted chemicals for a long time, but the information was locked inside the company, and that's a truth.

From the regulatory authorities to the public, everyone believed that the emissions were harmless, which was the truth of society at that time.

We can't look at it with the attitude of Zhuge Liang at the time, if we put ourselves in their shoes, how much courage and effort it would take to challenge the truth of this society at that time.