The general understanding is that the portrayal of the villain in Latent is very successful, which is completely different from the style of similar domestic film and television works in the past. The character Wu Jingzhong has more universal significance and can even be directly reflected in the real society. In fact, catching the * * * party is just his duty as a senior official of the Secret Service. From a broad moral point of view, this is not wrong, but he has a more secular belief: "Every man for himself, the devil takes the hindmost." Under this benchmark ethics, his official style and leadership style make me feel very understandable, and this character also has considerable affinity in my eyes. This is a man with moral defects but not heinous. He blackmailed Mu Liancheng. He used Mu's traitor status to provide moral relief for himself. He values Yu Zecheng, preferring to act as an umbrella for this possible * * * party spy. He also avoided the "Yellowbird Project" planned by Li Ya later. He knows the situation clearly. As long as he gets out of this predicament, a business confidant and helper is his Yu Zecheng. From this perspective, Xie Ruolin and Wu Jingzhong have the same effect. "Obviously, this is all business." At this point, Xie Ruolin has gone further than Wu Jingzhong. Although this role is inevitably portrayed as a villain, it is indeed a glorious role. War is a continuation of politics. In fact, any dispute between parties and doctrines in history can ultimately be attributed to the dispute of interests, especially the dispute of economic interests. Westerners sold opium in the Qing Dynasty. Hitler started the world war originally to pass on the domestic economic crisis. The ultimate goal of the Gulf War launched by the United States is only to compete for oil ... I believe that as long as there is a suitable bid, everything can be traded, including a firm belief, depending on whether you can find a fulcrum that tilts the earth. Xie Ruolin thinks so, too. A secret agent of the central government abandoned partisan struggle and engaged in intelligence transactions of various forces, which gave me a deeper understanding of the war. In fact, this is the most humanized role in Latency, and it is also the one that can best show the nature of war hidden under the bloody appearance. War is an expensive transaction, which consumes a lot of manpower and material resources and finally gets economic compensation, from land to money to resources to dignity. Instead of this, it is better for everyone to sit together before the war and calculate the winning rate of both sides through accurate strength comparison. It is best to have a quantifiable war formula. Of course, this is difficult to do, because at least in that relatively primitive era of conventional weapons, human initiative has a more decisive role in the victory or defeat of the war, which is the most uncertain factor in the war. It can be said that with the evolution of history and the increasingly rigorous war machine, the role of individuals in the war is getting smaller and smaller, and the war is becoming more and more difficult to fight, because more is the quantifiable comparison of war strength, and the outcome is completely predictable. If a war has no suspense for both sides, what is the need to fight it? Then it's time to negotiate, to surrender, and at best, to bargain.