In this film, apart from Louis Koo playing the bad guy, Zheng Zeshi, Andy Lau, and Michael Miu play three different judges respectively. Zeshi's arrogant enforcement of the club's rules
resulted in Louis Koo's failure. This reflects the director's denial of traditional feudal trials. Some people think this is a misunderstanding and cannot be discussed. The traditional feudal patriarchal management style often does not matter whether you want to do something or not, but whether you have broken the rules. There can't be poison in the place. It just can't be done if you can restrain it. It's best if you can't restrain it. Then you will definitely be punished.
The fault may not be yours, but there is no excuse. If you made a violation, you made a violation. You failed to block it. I know you are not God, but I ask you to be God. If you can't do it, I will punish you. Therefore, Louis Koo didn't even dare to defend himself, but just begged for mercy. Because his place is indeed poisonous, whether he is selling it or not, it is poisonous.
It can be said that Louis Koo is not only a victim of the feudal patriarchal management, but also an inheritor of the feudal patriarchal management. I see one respondent said this paragraph is redundant, but he is actually wrong. This paragraph is not redundant. This paragraph is to show that feudal patriarchal management has never been extinct, rather than to show Louis Koo's cruelty. When Andy Lau killed Louis Koo, he was also killed by Louis Koo
The director showed more grief and perhaps a little tragic. My gratitude and sorrow for those knights who prayed for the people. He doesn't care whether the process is reasonable and legal, he just wants the result to be right and just. And this lack of attention to process led to his own untimely death.
It can be said that in this film Andy Lau is truly portrayed according to the traditional image of loyalty, filial piety, benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom and courage. Only this kind of image is in line with our usual expectations for Jianghu knights, the image of Gao Daquan. Miao Qiaowei is alive, but he can't do anything
He has no way to fulfill his responsibilities as a policeman. He cannot safeguard justice and can only mechanically maintain the program process. In the process of maintaining the program, he acts wishfully. Believe that justice will be done one day. However, it is not the judicial process that he trusts that delivers justice, but those who are like Jianghu knights but are identified as criminals by the judicial process.
The daughter would rather beg a stranger than trust her father who is a policeman. I am not trying to discuss whether consequential justice or procedural justice is better. But in terms of this core, "Anti-Drug 2" can be said to surpass the Hong Kong police and gangster films of the past few years in terms of ideological depth. For the first time, it shows possible conflicts in law from a deeper perspective. The procedure was fair, but the result was not. The result is just, but the procedure is not.
Louis Koo can apply for police protection, which is procedural justice, but the police have to protect a big drug dealer. This result is not just. Andy Lau killed a big drug dealer, which was a just result. However, without a trial and failing to show the trial process to the public, he only relied on personal violent means. This process does not comply with procedural justice.
From the perspective of the production of the work, Anti-Drug 2 is indeed not top-notch, whether it is narrative, shooting, or graphics, it is not outstanding in all aspects, but the comparison between the two sets makes It is ideologically superior to previous police and gangster films. Of course, I’m not trying to brag about how awesome this movie is, but in terms of filmmaking, I have to say it’s not that great. There are great deficiencies in the arrangement of the plot, plot logic, rationality, etc., but it is indeed worth watching.