*** WARNING: Some spoilers follow...
Don't believe the hype. Film pushes a propaganda that Human Rights activists disrupt police from meting out justice. They are portrayed as cunning, sly folks who connive with criminals and vice versa to deprive the poor common public of justice. A thug involved in the prison riot at the beginning of film demands a human rights activist (NOT a lawyer) in his defence! The activist himself is portrayed as a scheming individual who either sneers or acts bossy in front of police officials. Outside, he rants against the police in front of press with ghoulish aggression, eyes protruding with fictitious rage, leading to our protagonist's young son question (and, if I remember correctly, confront) his father's ethics. I turned off the movie as soon as the ridiculous nonsense started.
This sort of propaganda is typical of oppressive regimes which rely on police excesses and fake charges of terrorism etc. to oppress vulnerable minorities and suppress dissent. In many countries across the world, common people esp. those from vulnerable groups targeted by the dominant community (or political party) live in fear of police rather than respecting them precisely because they abuse the very people they were meant to protect and get away due to institutionalized impunity. NO, an armed police/army is NEVER a victim in an overwhelming majority of cases as being peddled by this film.
I don't know much about this director, but he seems to be a naive person full of jingoistic tendencies. Rather sad, as artists, including those in the movie industry are supposed to be vanguards of free speech/expression and champions of civil rights.
Don't believe the hype. Film pushes a propaganda that Human Rights activists disrupt police from meting out justice. They are portrayed as cunning, sly folks who connive with criminals and vice versa to deprive the poor common public of justice. A thug involved in the prison riot at the beginning of film demands a human rights activist (NOT a lawyer) in his defence! The activist himself is portrayed as a scheming individual who either sneers or acts bossy in front of police officials. Outside, he rants against the police in front of press with ghoulish aggression, eyes protruding with fictitious rage, leading to our protagonist's young son question (and, if I remember correctly, confront) his father's ethics. I turned off the movie as soon as the ridiculous nonsense started.
This sort of propaganda is typical of oppressive regimes which rely on police excesses and fake charges of terrorism etc. to oppress vulnerable minorities and suppress dissent. In many countries across the world, common people esp. those from vulnerable groups targeted by the dominant community (or political party) live in fear of police rather than respecting them precisely because they abuse the very people they were meant to protect and get away due to institutionalized impunity. NO, an armed police/army is NEVER a victim in an overwhelming majority of cases as being peddled by this film.
I don't know much about this director, but he seems to be a naive person full of jingoistic tendencies. Rather sad, as artists, including those in the movie industry are supposed to be vanguards of free speech/expression and champions of civil rights.