Movies like "The Invisible Guest" are still very scarce in the domestic market.
Coupled with the gimmick of Li Yi returning to business after several consecutive literary films, "The Invisible Guest" once again reproduced the former style of the Big Devil in terms of box office.
Although the box office of one billion in the first week cannot be compared with his peak box office, such an achievement is enough to make people raise eyebrows. Before this, domestic suspense and reasoning films had such achievements. It can be said that the film has more or less added other elements, either action and gunfights, or comedy, etc. There are really only a handful of films like this that purely peel off the cocoon to solve the case.
The movie does not include too many other elements, such as love, comedy, etc., like other similar movies, but only various details and various reversals.
So after it was released, it was quickly praised by countless movie fans.
Of course, what extends is more "excessive" interpretation. In fact, when interpreting a film, especially a relatively popular film, it can be said that over-interpretation has become the norm.
Even in many cases, the director or screenwriter may not have intended this, but in the eyes of the audience, countless possibilities can be interpreted.
And once a movie begins to be over-interpreted in various ways, it actually proves the excellence of the movie.
"The Invisible Guest" has undoubtedly begun to show such signs.
The previous detailed interpretations did not affect the audience's viewing experience. On the contrary, many viewers who had watched it once saw those interpretations and re-entered the theater to watch it again with purpose.
What's interesting is that "The Invisible Guest" didn't force people to watch it a second time because they couldn't understand the plot the first time. It was because they clearly understood it, but didn't fully understand it, so they watched it a second time. Brush, three brushes.
According to the latest excavations provided by fans, "The Invisible Guest" is called the King of Reversals by many fans.
They used the film's many perspectives and clues to create 4 major twists and 5 endings, including 43 minor twists!
Anyway, it feels very outrageous. After all, a movie only lasts two hours from beginning to end, and the result is that there are so many twists and turns.
Logically speaking, in fact, a movie like "The Invisible Guest" is not too flashy, nor does it say that it wants to force the audience to have any philosophical thoughts. The case in the movie is not a complicated and confusing case like a serial murder case, but As a result, it was still explored by many people from various angles.
The old film man is the main film critic of UP. What he particularly likes to do is to interpret some popular movies from various incredible angles.
Although it was an over-interpretation, he was always able to justify himself, which made him stand out quickly and gain many fans.
Because his interpretation can often bring different feelings to many netizens.
This time, as a grandmother, of course he will not let go of the most popular films such as "The Invisible Guest".
But there are many people who interpret this movie, so from what perspective should we interpret it? How to find another way?
"Is the so-called truth of "The Invisible Guest" really the truth?"
This is the direction of the old filmmaker.
“Since the movie focuses on the King of Reversals, veteran filmmakers couldn’t help but think more about it, why isn’t there a bigger twist?
First of all, what we call the truth, yes, the male protagonist did admit the fact that he committed murder, but what about the reality? What's the process like?
Is it possible that this so-called truth is not actually the truth shown in the movie?
Is Laura really the woman with a tortured conscience?
Are there any other possibilities?
In the opinion of veteran filmmakers, there is!
Why did Laura find out because of her conscience instead of actually blackmailing the male protagonist?
After all, the male protagonist is a rich man, and Laura is just a photographer. The relationship between the two is worthy of scrutiny. They are not a real normal relationship between men and women. Both of them have families, and Laura has a husband. , Chen De'an has a wife.
Looking at the case itself, many people know about the whole thing. In fact, even if the police were called directly at the time, in fact, it would not constitute a crime. It would be an accident at most, although the male protagonist and Laura are indeed fully responsible! Just losing money.
So here comes the question. Let’s look at the male protagonist’s decision. I personally don’t think there is any problem with him making such a decision, because he is an extremely conceited person, so even if this does not constitute a crime, it is definitely a violation of his It will have a big impact.
So, he did that, and there was nothing wrong with it! What an egoist!
But what about Laura? In fact, she had not committed any crime before that, and even if she turned herself in later, there would definitely be no serious consequences.
So the question is, is Laura really the person that Lawyer Goodman analyzed?
I don't think so, why can't she be a femme fatale? She actually can be!
However, the difference is that she is not a murderer, but she can use this matter to blackmail the male protagonist!
Let’s look at the truth of the movie. It’s about Laura deciding to tell the truth and surrender, but she doesn’t have the confidence to convince the male protagonist, but she still has some illusions and a backup plan.
However, the difference is that she is not a murderer, but she can use this matter to blackmail the male protagonist!
Let’s look at the truth of the movie. It’s about Laura deciding to tell the truth and surrender, but she doesn’t have the confidence to convince the male protagonist, but she still has some illusions and a backup plan.
One is to book a hotel room in the name of the male protagonist, and the other is to use his mobile phone to set up scheduled text messages to be sent to the male protagonist. Through these two methods, the male protagonist is completely tied to this incident, thereby forcing the male protagonist to tell the truth and surrender.
But is there another possibility? Is she actually using this method to plot more?
Is it possible that the extortion amount is nothing more than a cover-up? Her original intention was not to get the male protagonist to surrender, but she just wanted to push him into a desperate situation so that he would have to succumb to her?
As for her telling the victim's parents, is it possible that she was just increasing her leverage?
Furthermore, that photo was photoshopped, but is there a possibility that the photo was photoshopped, but what was photoshopped was the figure in the mirror?
Is it possible that the victim's mother was at the scene?
So much so that she has been waiting for them to get into trouble, so that they could have a chance to avenge their son?
Is this possible? The old movie maker thinks it’s possible!
The name of the film is "The Invisible Guest", so in the male protagonist's room, after the female lawyer arrives, there is actually another invisible guest who arrives, which is the boy's mother.
In the secret room of the murder, what was discussed over and over again was to figure out the invisible guest who attacked the male protagonist and killed Laura.
There are as many customers as there are reversals for such customers!
Finally, the ending of the movie gives us the feeling that the male protagonist confessed the fact of his murder, but what is the reality? Will he really be convicted?
Not necessarily?
First of all, pretending to be a lawyer is not allowed by law. Can the evidence obtained through this method be used as evidence in court?
Another thing, if you know the place where the body was dumped, even if you retrieve the body, don't forget that Laura's bracelet is in the car.
The scenes in the movie here are close-ups, so can the hero's lawyer completely use this as evidence that Laura is the murderer? And Laura is dead, with no evidence of death.
Of course, in the film itself, the truth is that time can defeat money, and it also shows the father's persistence and the mother's greatness!
But the two people just told two stories. One was a story made up by the male protagonist to protect himself. He attributed all the crimes to the dead people and he was a victim. The other was a revengeful mother who wanted to vent her grievances. Attributing all crimes to living people must make them suffer and punish in order to feel relieved.
Finally, when the male protagonist saw the real Goodman standing at the door, he laughed helplessly, as if his crime was irreversible. Is this really the case?
At the beginning of the film, there is surveillance footage of the fake Goodman entering the elevator, the bug she left behind, the pocket watch with fingerprints, etc., and she took away the map markers and the entire conversation recording. Is this naive to think that the conclusion is sealed? ? No, do you still remember why the deceased and Laura’s husband were both bank employees? Is there any hidden secret in it? Is Laura really that innocent? Does she have a clear conscience, or is she also a femme fatale? Wait, wait, if analyzed from these aspects, will the ending be more intriguing?
Some people may say that the old movie man is talking nonsense.
But in fact, the old film man has evidence to support this statement.
First, let’s analyze the color of the movie. The room where the male protagonist and Laura had their first conflict. It is also the beginning of the story, because in this room, the woman was killed and the man was identified as the murderer by the police. But the hero refused to admit guilt and insisted that a third person was in the room. It was the man who knocked him unconscious and killed the woman. We don’t know who is telling the truth at this time. But looking at this room, except for some faint yellow wall lamps and the unknown white light between the protagonists, it is all green. A large area of green is not only green, but also dark green. Only the venom is so dark green, with green in the black, so does this mean that there are dangers and lies in this room, and a poisonous snake spraying venom will appear out of nowhere.
Then the hero discovered that this was a trap. He and the heroine were leaving, so he put on his coat, a dark green coat. I can't help but say that this is probably a hint from the director. Who do you think that poisonous snake is?
Many people might say that it was the male protagonist. After all, he wore a dark green coat, but here comes the point. The woman died immediately afterwards. But her skirt is also green. We don’t know who is the poisonous snake, or they are both accomplices. Whoever has more green is more vicious.
In fact, what caught my attention the most was Attorney Goodman’s red lips. Not because she's an old woman with red lips. Just because if you pay attention, you will find that she is the only one wearing red lipstick in the entire movie, and it is a very saturated red lipstick. I believe everyone who has watched this movie in the cinema can see the difference. The red lips in the cinema looked like they were about to bleed.
If we don’t talk about anything else, why is she the only one wearing thick red lipstick? The young girls in the movie, the working women, the lovers dating, and even the models on the catwalk don't have such red lipstick. Could it be that it has meaning? Yes, I think it has meaning. When we are in the theater, we will be attracted by this red lip at first sight. So why did the director do this? Because she is a lawyer, she relies on her mouth to make a living, and she can turn the case into another fact by talking. This is what she said at the beginning, I have never lost a lawsuit. And there is a deeper meaning. This mouth is about to tell us a different story, and it is a fact like blood. I hope everyone will know what she said specifically after going to the theater. Moreover, every time she becomes more popular, the story will take a step towards becoming more bloody and cruel. The truth hidden under the dark green was torn apart layer by layer by this mouth.
So the question comes again, can the lawyer’s words be trusted? Also, she's not a real lawyer, so that's another interesting point!
Of course, this may just be the imagination of the veteran filmmaker, just for everyone’s enjoyment! "
In fact, there are all kinds of weirder and more outrageous interpretations.
Because at the end of the movie it was not said that the male protagonist was really brought to justice, this gave many viewers more room for the phenomenon.
Indeed, many people discussed it below.
"The evidence obtained by the victim's parents in this way should be illegal, right? Can it be used in court?
The only thing is that after picking up the car, we might be able to check some fingerprints, leftover items, etc. But I think the male protagonist’s self-confession should not be brought to court. "
"I also feel that the only thing the victim's parents can obtain is the location where their son's body was dumped, right?"
"Conversation recordings cannot be used as key evidence or isolated evidence, but they can be adopted as factual evidence and do not require the consent of the parties involved. Stolen recordings are absolutely fine. Because you have the full right to record and disclose your conversations with others without anyone's consent. , unless a confidentiality agreement or special occupation is signed. However, eavesdropping of non-conversation recordings is not allowed. However, it must be certified by the court that it has not been deleted. It is best to use the original recording and submit the recording equipment. Generally, recording evidence will not be accepted or invalid. Mainly That's what can't be done.
But there is one detail that is awesome. In the end, the old man used tape recording directly instead of electronic recording equipment. This detail is amazing. Such recording evidence can form a chain of evidence with other evidence. Originally, the chain of evidence for the male protagonist's murder of his mistress was complete and irrefutable. With the addition of the hiding place of the body, this recording would not be able to escape if it were brought to court.
One thing worth noting here is, is impersonating a lawyer a form of fraud?
But we must pay attention to the fact that there is no impersonation here. When the male protagonist opened the door, the mother only said, "Who am I? Your lawyer asked me to come." The male protagonist preconceptionally believed that this person was her, and the mother did not produce any forged evidence to prove herself. The key is that this pretender is not a lawyer yet. Pay attention to the plot. This is just a retired lawyer. He is an ordinary person, but he has super abilities and connections. He comes to help the male protagonist lie. Director Dog is so awesome, he thought of everything. As a side note, the details in this film are really carefully crafted. For example, in the phone call between the fake lawyer and the real lawyer, those who are detail-oriented will find it problematic. Why can’t they hear the stranger’s voice? In the movie, the sound of an airplane taking off is drowned out. There was a phone call. "
