Fool fortune-telling fragment

Excuse me, who can analyze the movie Fool?

Use your hands completely! ! ~ ~ ~ Please comment! ~~

Personal guess, welcome different opinions!

Let's talk about the reason I guess:

1, with plot. Finally, it can be clearly seen that some time before the protagonist Park Doo-wan saw the scene of the second murder case in that year, someone came back to watch it. who is it? I knew it was a crime scene then. Judging from the credits in the opening credits, only the protagonist Park Doo-wan and another policeman Zhao know about it. Of course, those kids and the killer. It was after that that Xu Taiyin from Seoul came to this town. You can hear from the little girl's words that the people who came to the crime scene before were very ordinary, very ordinary. However, after the amputation, Zhao can't be said to be an ordinary person. Zhao's return to the crime scene can be ruled out. The little girl said that the man did something at the crime scene before revisiting his old place. That inference can be guided. The murderer must have come here to see it!

2. It can be seen from 1 that the murderer is not as handsome as the fool said, but what the little girl said is very ordinary (after all, the little girl was still very young, which has nothing to do with this matter, and she didn't know the people of that year. Her words are highly credible! It can be seen from here that the fool lied! The handsome suspects that the protagonists finally decided to shoot were automatically excluded!

As can be seen from the film, the fool is definitely the witness of the murder. When the last two protagonists showed the photos to the fool, the fool suddenly said that he had pushed him into the fire when he was a child. It can be understood that the burn on the fool's face comes from this. What a coincidence! Fool's father's business is burning charcoal. Besides, it is impossible for a fool to come into contact with the handsome young murderer identified by the protagonists as children. It can be inferred from the memory fragments of the fool at that time that when the fool recalls the murderer's face from the photo, he can't help thinking about his father and the injury on his face. It can be understood that the fool's father is a murderer, and the fool must have deliberately lied because he didn't want to tell his father. Some answers in a fool's memory are chaotic, but don't forget that he will always be a fool, and only those with deep memories will be clear.

When the fool was caught in a foreign country, the case was restored and the charges were confirmed, the fool's father was very excited and said that the fool was innocent. This can be understood as a fool's father does not believe that his child has done such a thing, but this explanation is very painful. After all, individuals will be surprised and suspicious when they hear this news, instead of decisively denying the innocence of fools at the first time. After all, a fool is still a fool, and everything makes sense. Just like sleeping anywhere, what normal people can't understand is normal for fools. The second explanation is that the fool's father always knew that the fool was not the murderer, because he knew who the murderer was, and that was the fool's father himself!

We are now back to the shabby hut on the hill behind the school. The hostess of the house played a lucky man who was raped by a murderer but didn't die in the film, several years ago. Although it seems useless to the development of the case, think about it, it is impossible for the director to shoot this paragraph for no reason. Judging from the murderer's modus operandi, none of the victims were spared. It is far-fetched to explain just because a person didn't see his face. Moreover, if the murderer started committing crimes several years ago, judging from the time and methods of several victims in the film, it is inevitable that the murderer will fail to commit a crime once and then indulge in it for several years and then come back. This means that the hostess also lied. Then you can connect the woman with the murderer! It can be seen from her performance that the hostess is very afraid of the murderer. (There is no need to entangle this point, and it is impossible for the film to arrange something irrelevant to the case. The hostess also said that she was afraid of being seen, which proved that she had contact with the murderer! This can be inferred from the fact that there are men's clothes on the clothesline outside the house From this perspective, the hostess has been in a state of fear for several years and may be found at any time. What she said was even watery, and what she said was a lie. As far as her appearance is concerned, it is impossible to dare to tell the details of the murderer. Besides, the police haven't done any psychological counseling, so it's unreasonable to say so decisively! The fool's mother never appeared in the film. Does this mean that the hostess has something to do with the identity of the fool's mother? Or both are the same person!

From the above analysis, everything is impossible, and there is only one murderer left, that is, stupid father! ! ! ~~~