gmsmith-4

I'll admit I only watched the first 20 minutes to half an hour. It was just getting sillier and sillier. Production quality and acting was great. It comes across a a very high budget movie. But when you have an obvious high budget why not actually employ writers that can function at a higher level than a five year old. That is really the level of the story for as much as I watched of it. I can quite understand why Hollywood is flirting with the idea of replacing script writers with chat gpt. If this is the acceptable level of script writing for a high budget movie, you might as well save the money on script writers and just have an ai write something slightly believable. It would be an improvement.

They chose a completely unsympathetic individual as the example, which was unfortunate, I don't think anyone would come away thinking he deserved a lesser sentence. But the DA saying that plea deals are a warping of justice is quite right. When a justice system rewards and even promotes pleas of guilt, whether true or not, it stops being a justice system. You're guilty, make a plea deal and get half the time. You're innocent, still plea deal. Like the prosecutor said, you're rolling the dice otherwise. A legal system really shouldn't be comparable to a game of chance, a casino. But the prosecutor gave away his own understanding, that it can, is. Finding the truth is less important than expediency.