After watching Zhang Yimou's " Article 20 ", I dare to say that is the movie that will have the greatest and longest impact during the Spring Festival in 2024. Why does say this? Let’s look at the plot first.
There are three stories in "Article 20". The three stories seem to be unrelated and independent, but in fact they are inextricably linked.
Wang Yongqiang's Defense Against Murder Case
Wang Yongqiang and his wife Hao Xiuping are both deaf-mute. They have a daughter who is also deaf-mute. However, their daughter's deafness is not congenital, and the doctor said there are treatments.
In order to treat his daughter's illness, Wang Yongqiang borrowed money from everywhere, but finally couldn't borrow any money, so Wang Yongqiang borrowed a loan from Liu Wenjing, a fellow villager, at a high interest rate.
The money was borrowed, but Wang Yongqiang was unable to repay it.
So Liu Wenjing locked Wang Yongqiang outside the house with an iron chain, and he assaulted Hao Xiuping inside the house. Liu Wenjing also offered to use this to repay the debt. He could pay off the debt of 200 yuan by violating Hao Xiuping once, and Wang Yongqiang would pay an additional 100 yuan as a janitor.
Faced with such an insult, Wang Yongqiang broke out and he and Liu Wenjing struggled with each other. Seeing Liu Wenjing going to the car to get a knife, Wang Yongqiang became scared. He took the scissors and stabbed Liu Wenjing 26 times.
Liu Wenjing is dead, so did Wang Yongqiang intentionally hurt others, was it self-defense, or was it excessive defense? This is the main issue that Article 20 wants to discuss.
Zhang Guisheng bravely committed the crime
Bus driver Zhang Guisheng saw two gangsters bullying a girl and decisively stepped forward to stop them, but was beaten by the gangsters. During the counterattack, Zhang Guisheng broke a gangster's head with a fire extinguisher.
In the end, Zhang Guisheng lost his job and was sentenced to three years in prison.
At the beginning of the film, Han Ming dismantled the case of Zhang Guisheng's courageous act of justice. Han Ming made it clear which step was a brave act of justice, which step was a fight, and which step was intentional injury.
This is actually a foreshadowing for Wang Yongqiang's defense and anti-murder case. Just like what Han Ming said to Lu Lingling at the end of the film with a bunch of past cases, in the past, cases like Wang Yongqiang's case were all judged to be intentional injury.
But are all past judgments correct? Except Lu Lingling, everyone else thought it was right.
Campus Bullying Case
Han Ming's son Han Yuchen saw his classmates being bullied by others, so he took action, but in the end he beat his classmates.
What is even more ironic is that Han Yuchen was later retaliated and beaten up by a gangster. Han Yuchen was obviously the victim, but he was unable to call the police because he was beaten too lightly.
Han Ming said here that the four people were beaten so lightly. It seemed funny, but in fact it was ironic.
The school bullying case involving Han Yuchen is actually an example. It is used to prove that the law is not always perfect, and there are also flaws and omissions.
The death of Zhang Guisheng and the injustice suffered by his son made Han Ming shaken in his judgment of the past, which led to Han Ming's words at the end of the film.
It was these words that made "Article 20" a god. This is a subversive film that not only redefines what legitimate defense is, but also redefines what the law is.
As the ancient Greek philosopher Plato said in "The Laws", the basic intention of laws is to make citizens as happy as possible .
At the end of "Article 20", Han Ming also said "If we can't bring her hope, then what qualifications do we have to wear this dress? Have you ever thought about it: What we are handling is not a case, but a Human life! Where does the authority of the law come from? Isn’t it the simplest emotional expectation of the common people!"
After "Article 20" was released, netizens gave the film a lot of praise, and many of them thought it was A good movie that speaks for the common people.
In real life, there are many kind people, but some bad cases prevent them from being kind, such as helping an old man who has fallen. It's not that they don't want to, they just don't dare.
Just like Zhang Guisheng and Han Yuchen in the film, what's wrong with them helping others? Is the law's judgment of Zhang Guisheng fair?
If there are problems with the formulation of the law itself, how can citizens be happy?
As Han Ming said, "5-year-old Juanjuan and the daughter of my client just now are all minors. They will grow up and enter the society. So have we ever thought about what we are going to do?" What kind of world has been handed over to them?"
Some netizens couldn't help but praise after watching "Article 20" that Zhang Yimou really dared to take pictures.
But if you think about it carefully, did Zhang Yimou dare to take the photo, or did the relevant departments allow him to do so?
Looking closer, one of the production companies of "Article 20" is the Film and Television Center of the Supreme People's Procuratorate.
So, the release of "Article 20" is an attitude, determination and change. Compared to the movie itself, "Article 20" has a far-reaching significance. You say, right?
