I saw another film related to the African National massacre.

Unlike the topic of the interpreter, Hotel Rwanda focuses on the massacre itself. I think it is not easy to move the history of this decade to the screen. Unlike Schindler's List, the slaughter in Rwanda did not originate from extreme fanaticism, nor was it provoked by Western countries symbolic of high civilization, so in the eyes of many people, this is the past, and there is no such thing to mention again. What's more, at that time, many countries were reluctant to send troops to intervene, because there was no such thing. If we were to render history with a commemorative gesture, it would be a bit of a false sense.

However, since there is a director who can reproduce this incident with a human introspection mentality, it is always a good thing. Although only the benefits are eternal, we believe that people's pursuit of humanistic care and the degree of practice will be correspondingly improved as the progress of civilization advances. The film has played a boost here.

From an artistic point of view, Hotel Rwanda is average, but it does not affect its nominations for three Oscar Awards, because its historical significance has exceeded its artistic nature-this is my comment on it.

Other stills