As the most influential film critic in the United States today, Roger not only has his own column in the Chicago Sun, but also is ahead of the times, creating his own personal film review website.

Generally speaking, though, Roger writes a brief op-ed for the Chicago Sun-Sun, giving readers a first-hand look at critics' reactions to newly released films; On the other hand, as a freshly attempted site, updates lag far behind, with Roger sifting through movies that deserve a review - either big hits or big hits, and after careful consideration, writing a detailed review and then updating it on his personal website.

This time, Roger unexpectedly took the lead in publishing a detailed review on his personal website at 10 a.m. on December 3, and such an abnormal behavior instantly attracted the attention of all the media.

"How to choose between good and evil, everyone seems to say, the choice of the former, this is a simple question; But in Strello's films, it seems that this choice is forever full of doubts.

The calm and slow camera is like a shark gliding on the sea surface in the middle of the night, the dangerous atmosphere in the silence is terrifying, and the danger is full of danger but no clues can be found, only panic and panic, the seemingly loose but tense atmosphere fills every corner of the picture, like a shadow throughout the entire viewing process, just like a ghost invisible in the passenger seat. That's the overall impression I made of the movie 'Kill with a Knife', but it's clear that there's much more to the surprise than that.

Generally speaking, commercial genre films tend to opt for a standard three-act structure, with a beginning, body, and ending. But before the film even begins, the first two acts have already taken place, and the whole film is about the third act, and such a new and bold structure also presents a serious challenge - because it makes the main story very thin and the conflict very difficult to create.

'Murder with a Knife' tells a very simple story, Vincent is a professional killer who needs to kill five targets on this night, he chooses a taxi as a means of transportation to complete his mission, and as fate would have it, Max becomes his driver.

Faced with such a serious challenge, Strello once again made a bold choice, skipping the thrilling scenes of the mission and the template routine of individual heroism, and chose to use the confrontation between Vincent and Max throughout the 'Act III', taking this commercial genre film to a whole new level.

The choice of Vincent and Max, Strello is undoubtedly well thought out, and the script from his own pen brings another novelty in terms of character setting, Vincent represents evil, but Max is not a representative of justice - prosecutor Anne represents justice, and Max represents the neutral between good and evil, and at the same time, the general public of society.

Vincent seems to be a typical criminal, cold-blooded, cruel, violent, and terrifying. He made killing his job, he could kill a life when he was talking and laughing, and he played the role of a good friend with a bouquet of flowers on his hands, and he defended himself with the tragedy of 'Rwanda', telling the story of killing as if it were just an ordinary means of making a living.

Anne is the enforcer of social standards, just, firm, wise, and strong. Even in the face of the great pressure of the lawsuit, she is not willing to relax at all, and her tense nerves demand herself to the highest standards, working day and night, only hoping to be able to achieve justice through the correct legal means, which is not only a job, but also a cause and an obligation.

But the interesting thing is that the vicious Vincent is a child abandoned by society, the death of his mother, his father's alcoholism, and the abandonment of the foster care system stifle the humanity in his character little by little, and the loneliness and fragility between the eyebrows tear open the flaws at the last moment; Anne, a hero, is a self-centered elite who feels good about herself and has a touch of pride, but when it comes to real crises - even the 'supporters' led by the Los Angeles Police Department are always late, misjudged, and simply unable to help.

Justice is not the justice of the imagination, and evil is not evil in the traditional sense. This is the first hint of the script.

Max is a neutral ordinary person, conservative, timid, well-mannered, and cautious. He cherished his dreams, but he never dared to realize them, just chattered on his lips, looked for all kinds of excuses, and then stuck to his post - silently spending his life, envying others on the one hand, and fearing to make changes on the other hand, and in the end he could only blame himself, others, and society. Mediocrity, that's Max's characteristic, but he becomes a key figure in the direction of the story.

It is not the hero who plays the so-called 'hero', which is the second hint of the script.

The film does not focus on the entanglement and confrontation between justice and evil, but instead puts justice and evil into a narrow closed space with separation and neutrality, testing human nature and torturing society.

When good and evil come at the same time, how do we choose? We should choose justice; But how will we choose? We will choose ourselves.

When Max realizes that Vincent is a professional killer, his first instinct is to turn away, and even asks Vincent to find another driver several times. This can be read as the instinct to survive, but at the same time it can also be read as the instinct/ability to escape - he is trying to escape, from the opportunity to enforce justice, from the responsibility to fight evil. This is not condemning Max's actions, but rather stating the incomparably simple truth: when faced with a choice, we always choose ourselves.

This is also the reason why hero manga and hero movies are so popular? We long for someone to save us, not to save ourselves, and not to do justice ourselves—because we don't have superpowers.

Because it is difficult to protect himself, he can only choose to escape; Because it is difficult to fight, you can only choose to avoid it; Because life is hard, I can only swallow my anger; Because the dream is far away, I can only imprison myself...... Because there is no time, because there is no energy, because of family bonds, because of financial difficulties, because of the pressure of life...... There are many, many 'becauses' in life. This is not only Max's choice, but also the choice of most people in social life.

And then what?

Because the danger is imminent, it can only be justified in defense; Because the body is involuntarily, it can only harm others and benefit oneself; Because of the social reality, it can only meet the high and step on the low; Because dreams are great, they can only sacrifice others......

And then what?

Because the day is uncertain, so you can only exchange your life for your life; Because he is desperate, he can only die in the world; Because interests are paramount, conscience can only be abandoned; Because they can't eat, they can only eat human flesh raw......

This is precisely the core focus of the confrontation between Vincent and Max, Vincent puts a high-sounding reason on his murder - people die every day in the world, even if they don't kill him, others will kill them, anyway, just a stranger dies; What's more, it is not he who bears the sin of killing like a sea of blood in this world, but those forces that provoke wars.

But behind the truth is only profit, or just emptiness. This is a 'why', not a 'why';

This is the third hint of the script.

It reminds me of 'City of God', which is an excellent film, without a doubt. In that film, Strello once explored a very profound and realistic topic: what is evil, and what leads to evil?

But 'City of God' doesn't give an answer, just leave it to the audience to think about, and this time, he explores it further in 'Killing with a Knife', but he still doesn't give an answer, we ignore not only a City of God, but also a Los Angeles, and an unrealistic space between Los Angeles and the City of God.

Of course, in the entanglement between Vincent and Max, Max follows the drive of inner morality, chooses justice, and confronts evil - this is the only positive value orientation of the whole film that conforms to the commercial genre film, but interestingly, the end of the movie once again brings surprises.

It is not the victory of good over evil, nor the death of justice and evil, but the destruction of both neutrality and evil, and the faint light of justice is imprisoned in the prison of light and shadow, where there is no past or future in sight.

On the surface, this seems to be a confirmation of the exit of Ah Pao in the ending of the 'City of God', even if it is dark, but in fact, it is completely different from the 'City of God', because the justice that survived rushes into the unknown - in the absence of witness support, the case has no chance of winning, and all the investigations are back to the www.biquge.info of the Pen Fun Pavilion, and all the dead are just a tool and an innocent person.

From this point of view, evil seems to have triumphed.

Combined with the three hints of the script, and then recalling the fragments of the film, the several dialogues between the two characters, Vincent and Max, are meaningful and thought-provoking, not only showing the struggle and confusion of neutral characters in the face of crisis, but also bringing out a poignant truth: in the face of egoism and profit, people's values are extremely fragile, and the change from good to evil is only a matter of an eye.

Choosing to escape because of fear, choosing indifference because of self-preservation, choosing alienation because of loneliness, so the relationship between people begins to gradually become distant and cold, which makes everyone seem to find a suitable reason for sinning, and the line between good and evil begins to blur, so ...... What's next?

Because of the crime, so the crime?

This brings us back to the original question, 'How do we choose between good and evil?' Or did we really make the right choice?

From 'City of God' to 'Murder by the Sword', Strello explores a deep and important real social question, and then leaves a question mark for us to ponder. The shock and reflection that burst out from the depths of the soul will not disappear with the end of the film, on the contrary, it is just beginning. (To be continued.) )