-
视频
视频
资讯
视频
资讯
Constantly on the hunt and suffering from hallucinations that drive his violent nature, an unnamed man is capturing women and savagely beating them to death. Meanwhile, a woman is luring men into a violent end, by way of her knife. Driven by the same force to make the opposite sex suffer, the killers’ fates intertwine. The two must face off in a battle to the death, in which they are forced to reveal the horrible truth behind their addiction to murder.
“Brutal” takes an interesting approach to its visuals, drawing heavy influence from Western “Grindhouse” films, using a filter to make the footage appear grainy, damaged, and with light and color fluctuations. Unfortunately, the visual styling ends up feeling misguided, as other than applying the filter it does not imitate any other aspects of the “Grindhouse” genre. Despite trying to dirty up the film, it is apparent it was shot on digital. The cinematography is also a step above most “Grindhouse” productions, with Takashi Hirose proving he has talent behind the camera. Exterior shots to those taking place in small spaces are all competently framed, lit, and transition well. The decision to add an effect on top of the work hurts the film’s imagery and even gives a sense of desperation to try to capture a certain type of nostalgia with the audience, instead of relying on its own strengths. It is unfortunate when one creative choice can hurt a production so much.
The story of “Brutal” is simple but effective, it does attempt some sort of social commentary about the violent nature of men and women, but it does not offer enough depth into the subject to justify the amount of violence on display. The film does end on a strong note with an interesting twist, with a reveal that is bound to gross some out, while giving others a chuckle. In spite of its simple nature, those who enjoy films that make them somewhat uncomfortable and enjoy the challenge of getting through some ultra-violence, “Brutal” poses a fun and entertaining challenge in that regard.
这部音乐剧不仅做到了令人难忘的音乐效果，亦在幽默的基础上增添了人性的光辉。
剧本写得很紧凑，演技都不错，真实历史故事很精彩，每个人物的wikipedia page都精彩纷呈啊。Ramsey Clark代理了萨达姆的辩护案。
简洁，精巧，越后面越好看（女机长每一次唱高音我都想哭）
三体爱好者纷纷打出一星。毕竟他们太有人性，缺乏兽性。
雀斑已经演了十几年男学生了！这样言之有物的台词轰炸可以多一点，没有伍迪艾伦式掉书袋引起的那种反感。听聪明人说话，起而为正义抗争，真的燃！
不懂历史，但是作为电影，文学剧本和拍摄手法都相当好啊。因为主要场景是庭审，所以有几处闪回，时空切换的处理方式每次都有新意，比较喜欢的是Fred Hampton被害时的相机快门声串起的两个时空，冷酷的机器声音和活着的人的惊恐，就连起了两个时空。还喜欢Bobby Seales质问Tom Hayden时说的话，你们都有同一个父亲。我太爱Allan Sorkin写的剧了
一部分人看来这部电影揭露了美国之耻，但这部电影也同时揭示了美国何以为美国，美国何以伟大—蓬勃有力的公民社会，不同意见交锋牵扯，公民享有意见表达渠道，关键时刻可以仰赖的普通人的良知和正义。
在飞机上看完，fly high，get high，这是我2019年疫情前买的最后一张戏票（当然没看成）。狭小的舞台，出色的访谈纪实文本，20年后我们还会感受和相信人的温暖和恐惧嘛。女机长之歌真的动人…
庭审戏是精华，影片的真正魅力却不单单局限于替左派发声，更是对美国司法体制的完美演绎——你首先是一位公民，其次才是人民。
It’s surprising how much has changed and how much hasn’t...想起《辩护人》，但毕竟Sorkinism，文戏更犀利，看报道说真实情况的戏剧性有过之而无不及。
法庭戏➕艾伦·索金的剧本，字幕已经看不过来。全世界都在看：有些人在推翻，有些人在伪装。
一开始比较难进入状态，一旦进入状态就感觉燃起来了。 8/10
“Do you have contempt for your government? (你是否蔑视你的政府)” - "It's nothing compared to the contempt my government has for me.(与我的政府对我的蔑视相比, 我的蔑视不值一提)”
剧本写得很紧凑，演技都不错，真实历史故事很精彩，每个人物的wikipedia page都精彩纷呈啊。Ramsey Clark代理了萨达姆的辩护案。
比之于《茉莉牌局》初登场时的蹑手蹑脚与人物塑造时的缺憾，在角色更多、故事更宏大的挑战面前，Sorkin没有知难而退，而选择了自己更为见长的路数赋予了这堂“历史课”合格的讲述。占大篇幅室内庭审戏的交锋用对白撑满、七英杰各自背后所代表的六十年代平行精神重召时代气氛、当然，还有免不了的选战前“带货”。信息上的丰富以及节奏上的饱满，把这起事件生动地记载了下来（即便有些时候是为了宣讲而宣讲）。我再说一次，正剧模式的Sacha Baron Cohen就是最屌的。
很索金。政治的讲，索金对美国这个制度还是抱有信心的，这大概就是美国特色的四个自信。
三体爱好者纷纷打出一星。毕竟他们太有人性，缺乏兽性。
在911事件20周年之际，让我在喜欢音乐剧后有幸遇见这样一部优秀的作品。根据真实故事改编，几个人不同的变换身份，演绎了这样一群“来自远方的特殊客人”。如果你的生命中突然遭遇这样大的变故，你的生活又会发生怎样的改变呢。温暖，救赎。喜欢女机长的励志故事。百老汇，纽芬兰，奇妙的缘分
This is not only the history but also the world we’re living in.
我以为节奏感处理得恰到好处，尤其相比索金导演的前作成熟了很多。剧本苛责的话缺少一个让我惊喜的rosebud，希望芬奇能在《曼克》里做到。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
