Watched a film called "Death of a Unicorn". Frankly, I don't quite get the
moral of the story, if there is any. The plot looked simply like greedy people
got what they deserved.
But the film did make me remember a story that I heard when I was in school -
The Unicorn in the Garden.
It took me quite a while back then to figure out what was going on. I might
still be wrong. The much younger me kept thinking why the husband told the
police that he didn't see a unicorn despite he was the one telling his wife
about it. Completely missed the point of the story.
I think it will just further embarrass myself, but the story made me think for
quite some time. The innocent me was really thinking if the man indeed saw a
unicorn. I was also surprised when the man replied the police and let his wife
be took away.
Doesn't it sound like truth just doesn't matter? The man might or might not
actually witnessed a unicorn in his garden, it just did't matter. The police
and the psychiatrist both had their presumptions, and the man just caught it,
said some wise words, get to the consensus, job done.
It reminds me the hardest when watching trials in courtrooms. The reason of
having terms like intention, reasonable doubts, is probably the proof that
sometimes nobody would ever know what actually happened. Sometimes suspects
had long stories to share, explaining how the incident happened, only to find
out that the judge had just been paying attention for clues that make them
believe a suspect had broken law, but not to find the truth.
By the end of the film, the father and daughter were arrested because no one
would believe that some angry unicorns rampaged and killed a whole family.
Then the unicorns decided to ram the police car into the lake, helping both of
them to escape. One more charge to go!
