I never write reviews, but after watching this film I feel obliged to.
The plot and the skill of the actors in playing their parts is unquestionable, and of a high standard.
The underlying problem lies with what Carl Lee did, and the (non-existent) connection of his actions to racial discourse.
The main problem of the film is the idea of the complete connection and equality between "not being guilty" and "I would have done it too if I were in his place". It seems that there is equality between the two things, but no! A family man, with 3 children and a wife who doesn't work, decides to take justice into his own hands? Good (many would have done it too, After what happened). But you cannot EXPECT to be considered innocent. Have you decided that prison time for your daughter's molesters isn't enough and you have to kill them? Fine, but you accept as a consequence that you too will go to prison too, and not be able to look after your family.
For me personally, I do not place the molestation of a child and premeditated murder at the same level of severity (because Carl Lee's murder is, in fact, a premeditated murder), but this does not mean that I think it is appropriate for someone who kills somebody else to be excused.
Moreovee, the film, obviously, puts it in the context of racism, when in fact it is not. The question, at the end of the film, "what if she had been white"? The director leaves the answer pending. Well, I'll give it to you. The correct answer would have been: the white father of a white girl would probably have done the same as the black Carl Lee did, and would have rightfully gone to jail for what he did, regardless of the skin color.
The absurd thing seems to be the inversion of racism, which the film instead wants: that is, that he, since he and his family are black and unjustly victims of racial acts by some sick white animal, is justified for the acts he carried out. Just no.
The plot and the skill of the actors in playing their parts is unquestionable, and of a high standard.
The underlying problem lies with what Carl Lee did, and the (non-existent) connection of his actions to racial discourse.
The main problem of the film is the idea of the complete connection and equality between "not being guilty" and "I would have done it too if I were in his place". It seems that there is equality between the two things, but no! A family man, with 3 children and a wife who doesn't work, decides to take justice into his own hands? Good (many would have done it too, After what happened). But you cannot EXPECT to be considered innocent. Have you decided that prison time for your daughter's molesters isn't enough and you have to kill them? Fine, but you accept as a consequence that you too will go to prison too, and not be able to look after your family.
For me personally, I do not place the molestation of a child and premeditated murder at the same level of severity (because Carl Lee's murder is, in fact, a premeditated murder), but this does not mean that I think it is appropriate for someone who kills somebody else to be excused.
Moreovee, the film, obviously, puts it in the context of racism, when in fact it is not. The question, at the end of the film, "what if she had been white"? The director leaves the answer pending. Well, I'll give it to you. The correct answer would have been: the white father of a white girl would probably have done the same as the black Carl Lee did, and would have rightfully gone to jail for what he did, regardless of the skin color.
The absurd thing seems to be the inversion of racism, which the film instead wants: that is, that he, since he and his family are black and unjustly victims of racial acts by some sick white animal, is justified for the acts he carried out. Just no.