美国电影传染影评
去时光网或者豆瓣看看啊 全是各种影评
❷ 美国电影传染病毒开始自残
行尸走肉就是典列
❸ 一个美国电影，讲的是病毒传播。
传染病 Contagion (2011)
又名: 世纪战疫(港) / 全境扩散(台) / 传染
❹ 对美国电影《红字》的影评
海丝特·白兰因犯了通奸罪受到加尔文教派权力机构的惩罚， 胸前佩戴着标志通奸的红色“A”字站在古老的枷刑台上示众。她的手中抱着这个罪孽的证据：一个出生仅数月的婴儿。在人们无情的注视下，她拒绝了年轻牧师阿瑟·丁梅斯代尔提出的忏悔并供出同犯的要求。受过惩罚后，海丝特在城外远离人群的一间小茅屋里住了下来。她以作针线活维生，并细心地照料着她的女儿——珠儿。这时，海斯特的丈夫来到了美国。他满怀仇恨地改名为罗杰·奇林沃思，以医生的身份暗中察访与海丝特通奸的同犯。很快七年过去了。珠儿已成长为一个美丽可爱的小姑娘。而海丝特因为不断热心接济和帮助别人，最终赢得了人们的尊敬，使胸前那本来代表耻辱的红字变成了美好善良德行的象征。 而经过多年的窥探， 罗杰也认定了“道德伟大”的丁梅斯代尔牧师就是那个隐藏的同犯。于是他千方百计地接近牧师， 旁敲侧击，冷嘲热讽，不停地在精神上对牧师进行折磨。海丝特为了使丁梅斯代尔逃离丈夫的阴影，决心带着女儿和他一起逃走，但却被罗杰发现，计划失败了。而对罗杰的恐惧和自己隐瞒罪责的煎熬使丁梅斯代尔的健康每况愈下。终于在离开尘世前夕，他在全体教众的面前，他挽着海丝特和他们的女儿珠儿登上了枷刑台，用以生命为代价的深切忏悔换取了道德上的新生。
《红字》，世界文学名著，美国作家霍桑极富争议的作品，曾被屡次搬上银幕，本文所介绍的版本，是1995年罗兰·约菲导演的《红字》。影片本名《The Scarlet Letter》，又译《真爱一生》或《红色禁恋》，故事讲述了一个凄美动人的婚外情故事。丈夫的失踪，造成一个女人与牧师的相爱。肚子的隆起，暴露了女人的奸情，她为自己的“罪孽”遭受囚禁，然而她拒绝说出情夫的名字。婴儿的降生，成了她罪恶的“铁证”，她的胸前被戴上象征不贞洁和耻辱的红色标志“A”。然而，女人独自带着孩子的种种善举，改变着人们对她的认识，也改变着红色标志“A”的本意。丈夫的归来，却打破了这种局面，他查出了妻子的奸夫，开始疯狂报复。故事结果，纷争平息，牧师最终站出，携女人和他们的孩子，离开了居住地。《红字》，一个令人回味无穷的、名片演绎名著的经典故事。
❺ 找一部电影的影评。
卡桑德拉大桥
英语译名：Cassandra Crossing
德语译名：Treffpunkt Todesbrücke
中文译名：卡桑德拉大桥 别名《飞越夺命桥》
类型： 惊悚 / 剧情
上映日期： 1976
国家地区： 意英德三国合拍
两名国际恐怖分子闯进了日内瓦的国际卫生组织总部，欲实施恐怖袭击，受到了保安人员的迎头阻击，其中一名罪犯被击毙，追捕过程中，警员不小心将实验品病毒给打碎溅到另一名罪犯身上。两名歹徒感染病菌。一名被当场被擒。不久腐烂而死。另一名恐怖分子窜到一列开往斯特哥尔摩的火车上，车上快乐的旅客们还不知道自己随时都可以被细菌所染。
这种病毒染得非常快，很快整个火车上许多人都给传染上了这种病毒，国际警局为这种病毒不传染给其他人，对火车进行控制，并要将其开到卡桑德拉大桥给毁掉……
此列车不许在任何车站停留。引起人们骚动。车上的科学家通过自己实验方法使许多人解除了病毒，可是上级却不相信他，最后科学家只有用自己的方法进行解决，列车上的人们与细菌研究人员发生冲突，人们纷纷拿起武器。年青的女作家与其丈夫被卷入战火中。研究组织为接下火车上被染者。必须要通过不能承受该火车重量的“卡桑德拉大桥”。灾难出现了，火车脱轨，大桥爆炸，细菌通过空气在扩散.....
由英国、意大利和德国联合摄制的灾难片《卡桑德拉大桥》，制作于1976
年的《卡桑德拉大桥》早在上世纪80年代初便在我国公映，其后也偶尔在电视台播放，所以观众对它的故事并不陌生。这部20多年前的老片几乎没有今天好莱坞大片惯用的电脑高科技，却照样把剧情拍得扣人心弦，而从中传递出的那种面对病毒的大无畏和对病人的爱心及人道主义精神更给人以震撼，该片的结构几乎成了灾难片的经典模式，还影响了后来的许多影片。
当年《卡》片公映时观众可能只熟悉女主角“詹妮弗”的扮演者索菲亚·罗兰，现在回过头去翻翻主创名单，发现影片阵容是毫不夸张的“豪华大卡斯”：除了索菲亚·罗兰这个意大利“国宝”，导演乔治·潘·考斯马托斯也来自意大利，他的《逃亡雅典娜》、《第一滴血》等作品也是影迷们津津乐道的：男主角“张伯伦大夫”则由英国老牌演员理查·哈里斯担纲，他最新的银幕形象是《哈利·波特》前两集中白胡子的“邓不利多校长”，可惜老爷子去年底去世，所以不妨让我们再从《卡》片中重温他当年的风采；扮演“麦肯奇少校”的波特·兰卡斯特同样不可小觑，他是1960年奥斯卡和金球奖的双料影帝，其他演员如艾娃·嘉德娜、马丁·西恩等也都是欧美影坛的重量级演员；此外别忘了那个演“海利神父”的黑人明星，他就是大名鼎鼎的前美国橄榄球巨星O.J.辛普森。
这些大牌演员的高超演技自然无可挑剔，而该片的配音队伍同样是如假包换的“全明星阵容”，影片完全体现了上海电影译制厂黄金时期的水准：毕克的“张伯伦”，丁建华的“詹妮弗”，富润生的“麦肯奇”，就连配角也都由尚华、赵慎之、施融等担纲，他们的传神演绎为影片如虎添翼，比如“张伯伦”和“詹妮弗”这对欢喜冤家在包厢里的几场斗嘴的戏，那些妙趣横生的台词和尖刻的讥诮简直令人要为两位幕后英雄叫好。所以《卡桑德拉大桥》的拷贝尽管已经陈旧、画面有些磨损，但即使只是闭上眼睛欣赏，你都能体验到一次完美的“电影之旅”。
❻ 美国电影《病毒入侵》观后感
可以说是一部难得的丧尸片。虽然是小成本电影制作，但却达到了很好的惊悚效果回。采用的第一人称视角给人答以最真实的视觉感受。四人营救小队更像是求生之路的感觉。只不过他们的目标却是女主的女儿。
虽说期间还是会有无脑行为但是整个氛围还是让人肾上腺素一直很高亢的。
片中的打斗场面血腥而真实，几次爆头镜头更像是刻意展现给观众以表达画面的真实性！实在是过瘾至极！
不过从狭隘角度看女主实在是太自私，从广义上看却是母爱伟大！但是电影的结尾却有点深沉，压抑，无奈，充满着绝望！
❼ 急求一篇美国电影的影评，不要写的太好，500字的，自己写的，谢谢
现在好象比较时兴将人分为体制内和体制外的人,体制外的人通常有某种优越感,似乎自己的人格才是独立的.可实际上,真正愿意做体制外的人还是很少的,而且是很痛苦的.余杰北大硕士毕业后差一点进了他想进的国家图书馆作一个体制内的人,可由于他写了一些比较反体制的文章,最后还是被迫做了一个体制外的人,一个自由作家,所以他牢骚不断.
《肖申克的救赎》里面,那个图书管理员老布在被囚禁了大半生以后终于获得了自由,然而他在自由的世界中却不知所措,无时无刻不想回到那个剥夺他自由却让他习惯了的肖申克监狱,最后他终于上吊自杀了.于是,摩根•弗里曼演的阿瑞就发表了他对institutionalization(体制化)这个词的见解,他将监狱说成一个体制化的场所,他说:一开始你恨它,它剥夺了你的自由;接着你会慢慢的习惯它,熟悉它;最后你会离不开它,离开它你将象老布一样不知所措.
相信我们中间的许多人,尤其是体制内的已经工作过许多年的人都很有感触.我们所在的那个叫做"单位"的地方又何尝不是一个体制化的地方?何尝不是一个监狱?
大部分的人就象老布,最终在这个体制化中沉沦了下去; 有些人就象阿瑞,差一点沉沦了下去,可是命运对他不薄,他结识了安迪这样的朋友,最后终于获得了自由,肉体的以及内心的自由; 只有极少数的人才象安迪那样，他有着坚强的意志和对自由的不死的向往，凭着自己的毅力和智慧，不仅在监狱中做了许多别人不可能做成的事情，为狱友们挣啤酒，为狱吏们们报税，建设监狱图书馆；最终他逃出了监狱，并将那个穷凶极恶的典狱长告翻，过上了自由的生活…….
其实，人生的过程就是一个摆脱体制化的过程，这个体制化不仅仅是我们身处的那个“单位”，更是我们内心里面无数的“监狱”。
❽ 不知道是不是美国电影，讲一个旅行团掉进一个窟洞里，细菌传染
恐怖废墟来
艾米和斯黛西是从小源一起长大的好朋友，两人计划在假期的时候来一场墨西哥之旅，于是她们带上了各自的男朋友，4个人结伴而行，也方便互相照顾。途中，艾米等人遇到了来自于德国的马蒂亚斯以及他的朋友迪米特里，他们这次来的目的与游玩无关，而是为了寻找马蒂亚斯失踪的弟弟。
禁不住马蒂亚斯的苦苦哀求，艾米、斯黛西等人决定与他一起寻找，于是他们远离了人来人往的高速公路，一头扎进了墨西哥一处颇为偏远、荒凉的丛林地带，并在这里发现了一处巨大的废墟。然而就在众人啧啧称奇的时候，当地的玛雅部落发现了他们并且发出了警告，一行人没有理解警告不得已进入了废墟中，他们没有意识到一种围绕着废墟生存的食人爬藤正在蠢蠢欲动。在上面他们发现了马蒂亚斯失踪的弟弟的尸体，并且从废墟深处传来了令人不安的手机铃响，四个人为了拿到手机不得不冒险下去，不知道这些因为看到可口的食物而兴奋异常的植物慢慢形成了包围圈，伺机发起进攻，争取一招毙命……
❾ 求经典美国电影影评，最好是英文版的，中文也行，一个电影最好有多个影评 发776900490，非常感谢了
网上资源很多的，列举两个~
《肖申克的救赎》的英文影评 版本二邮件发给你
Though adapted from a Stephen King novella, "The Shawshank Redemption" has more to do with a man's internal demons than the kind that routinely rise up from overgrown graveyards. Like "Stand by Me," it's not a typical story from the horror King. Instead, it's a devoutly old-fashioned, spiritually uplifting prison drama about two lifers who must break their emotional shackles before they can finally become free men.
Set in a spooky old penitentiary with turrets and towers, the movie manages to be true to its Big House origins while incorporating such horrific mainstays as the clanking of chains and the creaking of the walls. There's even a raven that roosts in the prison library, where he is cared for by a darling old trusty (James Whitmore). For the most part, however, the movie expands upon cliches that date back to James Cagney's prison portraits梩he twisted warden (Bob Gunton) and the sadistic guard (Clancy Brown).
Director Frank Darabont, who apprenticed on B-scripts ("The Fly II") and TV movies ("Buried Alive"), manages to fashion an improbable new pattern from the same old material in his remarkable debut. While he deals with the grimmest aspects of prison life (sadistic guards, gang rapes and befouled food), Darabont is chiefly interested in the 20-year friendship that sustains Andy (Tim Robbins) and Red (Morgan Freeman) .
The movie opens in 1947 as Andy, a prominent New England banker, is on trial for murdering his wife and her lover. Not only did he have a motive, but he had the opportunity梙is footprints were found at the scene of the crime梐nd he had a weapon of the caliber used in the shootings. He insists that he is innocent, but the jury finds him guilty. Sentenced to life twice over, Andy is shipped to the maximum-security state prison at Shawshank, Maine. An introverted loner with an interest in reading, chess and rock carving, Andy doesn't make himself many friends until Red, a 30-year-veteran of the system, decides to take him under his wing.
Things begin to change for the better when Andy finds a way to use his skills and ecation to benefit his fellow felons. When he overhears the guard captain complaining about losing most of an inheritance to taxes, he offers to trade his advice for three beers for each of the men who are working with him that day tarring the roof.
His reputation as a financial adviser spreads, and soon he is doing the taxes for all the guards and running the warden's outside scams. This leads to a position in the tiny prison library, which Andy graally expands into the best ecational facility of its kind in the area. It takes him six years to do it, but Andy never gives up hope.
It is hope that allows the self-proclaimed innocent man to survive what may or may not be an unjust imprisonment. And hope is his gift to his friend Red, who no longer even tries to impress the parole board at his hearings. He's become "institutionalized," he explains to Andy, and would be a "nobody" on the outside.
Red's gift to Andy is absolution when he finally confesses his true sins. Whether or not he pulled the trigger, Andy blames himself for causing his wife's death; his redemption comes as he learns to give of himself over the course of this marvelously acted and directed film.
Robbins gives a performance that evolves with beautiful clarity from starchy banker to warm and loving friend. Freeman is sure to gain his third Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Red. He also reads the film's lovely narration, much of it drawn verbatim from King's 1982 novella.
A detailed portrait of the routine of cellblock life, "The Shawshank Redemption" might change a few minds about the usefulness of incarceration in terms of rehabilitation. Mostly, though, it reminds us of that we all hold the keys to our own prisons.
《楚门的世界》英文影评The Truman Show'' is founded on an enormous secret that all of the studio's advertising has been determined to reveal. I didn't know the secret when I saw the film, and was able to enjoy the little doubts and wonderings that the filmmakers so carefully planted. If by some good chance you do not know the secret, read no further.
Those fortunate audience members (I trust they have all left the room?) will be able to appreciate the meticulous way director Peter Weir and writer Andrew Niccol have constructed a jigsaw plot around their central character, who doesn't suspect that he's living his entire life on live television. Yes, he lives in an improbably ideal world, but I fell for that: I assumed the movie was taking a sitcom view of life, in which neighbors greet each other over white picket fences, and Ozzie and Harriet are real people.
Actually, it's Seaside, a planned community on the Gulf Coast near Tampa. Called Seahaven in the movie, it looks like a nice place to live. Certainly Truman Burbank (Jim Carrey) doesn't know anything else. You accept the world you're given, the filmmakers suggest; more thoughtful viewers will get the buried message, which is that we accept almost everything in our lives without examining it very closely. When was the last time you reflected on how really odd a tree looks? Truman works as a sales executive at an insurance company, is happily married to Meryl (Laura Linney), and doesn't find it suspicious that she describes household procts in the language of TV commercials. He is happy, in a way, but an uneasiness gnaws away at him. Something is missing, and he thinks perhaps he might find it in Fiji, where Lauren (Natascha McElhone), the only woman he really loved, allegedly has moved with her family.
Why did she leave so quickly? Perhaps because she was not a safe bet for Truman's world: The actress who played her (named Sylvia) developed real feeling and pity for Truman, and felt he should know the truth about his existence. Meryl, on the other hand, is a reliable pro (which raises the question, unanswered, of their sex life).
Truman's world is controlled by a TV procer named Christof (Ed Harris), whose control room is high in the artificial dome that provides the sky and horizon of Seahaven. He discusses his programming on talk shows, and dismisses the protests of those (including Sylvia) who believe Truman is the victim of a cruel deception. Meanwhile, the whole world watches Truman's every move, and some viewers even leave the TV on all night, as he sleeps.
The trajectory of the screenplay is more or less inevitable: Truman must graally realize the truth of his environment, and try to escape from it. It's clever the way he's kept on his island by implanted traumas about travel and water. As the story unfolds, however, we're not simply expected to follow it: We're invited to think about the implications. About a world in which modern communications make celebrity possible, and inhuman.
Until fairly recently, the only way you could become really famous was to be royalty, or a writer, actor, preacher or politician--and even then, most people had knowledge of you only through words or printed pictures.
Television, with its insatiable hunger for material, has made celebrities into ``content,'' devouring their lives and secrets. If you think ``The Truman Show'' is an exaggeration, reflect that Princess Diana lived under similar conditions from the day she became engaged to Charles.
Carrey is a surprisingly good choice to play Truman. We catch glimpses of his manic comic persona, just to make us comfortable with his presence in the character, but this is a well-planned performance; Carrey is on the right note as a guy raised to be liked and likable, who decides his life requires more risk and hardship. Like the angels in ``City of Angels,'' he'd like to take his chances.
Ed Harris also finds the right notes as Christof, the TV svengali. He uses the technospeak by which we distance ourselves from the real meanings of our words. (If TV procers ever spoke frankly about what they were really doing, they'd come across like Bulworth.) For Harris, the demands of the show take precedence over any other values, and if you think that's an exaggeration, tell it to the TV news people who broadcast that Los Angeles suicide.
I enjoyed ``The Truman Show'' on its levels of comedy and drama; I liked Truman in the same way I liked Forrest Gump--because he was a good man, honest, and easy to sympathize with.
But the underlying ideas made the movie more than just entertainment. Like ``Gattaca,'' the previous film written by Niccol, it brings into focus the new values that technology is forcing on humanity.
Because we can engineer genetics, because we can telecast real lives--of course we must, right? But are these good things to do? The irony is, the people who will finally answer that question will be the very ones proced by the process.
如果你找不到，还需要的话，欢迎继续联系
❿ 速求一份传染病电影观后感
最爱》这部电影最早进入我的视野还是在它的拍摄初期。那时，在媒体的报道中，它被描述为一部“讲述一群艾滋病人的故事”、“敢于直面真实”的现实主义电影。它的题材让我印象深刻：上世纪90年代，一个贫困村子的农民因集体卖血而导致半条村感染了艾滋病。在死亡和贫困面前，村民的人性逐渐展现，愚昧落后的意识让村里人在面对死亡时显得丑态百出。那时候，电影的名字也不叫《最爱》，而叫《魔术外传》。
刚看到那些报道时，我的脑海里立刻联想起了一些西方电影里的麻风病人形象。他们由于身染恶疾，被迫居住在中世纪城市外的一些洞穴里，禁止与人接触，饱受凄楚与流离之苦，过着生不如死的日子。看完报道后一个下意识的疑问是：在今天喧哗而浮躁的中国电影中，容得下艾滋病人的形象么？有多少人愿意去看这些呢，毕竟把它真实地表现出来，就如同撕裂了社会良知的一道血淋淋的伤疤啊？
这样的疑问一时找不到答案，久而久之，便渐渐淡忘了。
直至《最爱》上映前夕，媒体的宣传已经换了套策略，我一厢情愿当成的“苦难”仿佛也找到了新的卖点——“一部传奇绝恋的故事，讲述身染恶疾的男女主角在绝境中从相怜、相依到相爱，直到用生命证明了爱情的尊严和伟大的悲伤故事。”
这种转变往往暗示着导演需要在艺术和商业，自我表达和迎合观众之间作一种取舍和权衡。从结果看，在一取一舍之间，电影的主题早已四分五裂。
在我看来，《最爱》是莫名其妙的。它把背景放在了一个最富乡土气息的中国农村，村民们讲着方言，有独特的风俗，但就在这样一个地方，却有一个章子怡和一个郭富城，我说的不是商琴琴和赵得意，而就是那两位演员本人。他们以出场，观众立马感到一个是国际女星，一个是港台明星，他们浑身都是他们自己。这样两个人扎眼的存在把这个地方的地气完全打乱了，那个村庄成了一个不伦不类的场所，一个商业演出的舞台。而原先这个舞台是打算留给悲剧和苦难的。
《最爱》究竟是想表现疾病（一群艾滋病人的故事）还是想表现爱情（一部传奇绝恋）？对于这个问题，你或许可以给出一个简单的答案：《最爱》讲述的是两个身患绝症的人的爱情故事，讲述必然来临的死亡和分别给爱情带来的悲剧感，讲述身患疾病的人同样具有追求爱的勇气和权利。如果导演的想法确实和这个答案相一致，倒也具有很大的可行性，至少可以找到不少先例：高端一点的如加西亚•马尔克斯的小说《霍乱时期的爱情》，低端一点的如韩剧中无数段以相爱中的一方罹患白血病去世而告终的爱情。但是这两种例子无不具有以下两个特点：一是它的社会背景色彩相对淡化；二是它把全部重心集中在爱情本身之上。《最爱》从一开始的题材选择，到导演篇幅的表现比重都显示出它有着另外的企图。片中的艾滋病村（尽管在最终上映的片子里只是模糊地把村民的病称为“热病”）并非一个上演空中楼阁般爱情的虚无缥缈所在，它是一个真实的村庄。在《孔雀》和《立春》中顾长卫那种专注于表现生活细节的特点也延续到了《最爱》中。但是，这些原本是优势所在的地方却加重了电影的重心失衡。很难搞懂，在一个真实的罹患艾滋病的村庄，苦难、贫困和死亡压抑得人们喘不过气来，在这样一个现实被黑暗照亮的地方，一对男女的缠绵（尽管是死前的缠绵）有什么重要，值得电影用压倒性的时间进行表现。
仿佛是为了调和现实的苦难和爱情的欢愉之间的不相称，顾长卫有意通过某种风格化手法去弥补。他以往的风格，有影评人称之为“造作”，我的理解是将某种情境、表演或台词极端化，使之完全不自然，以取得戏剧性效果。《最爱》仍旧是“造作”的，但已不完全是出于风格的考虑，商业的因素已变得很重要。拿章子怡出场时穿的那件大红袄袄来说，确实“造作”无比，但我总觉得不如《斗牛》中闫妮穿的那件暗红、褪了色的棉袄来得朴实，尽管它们都是“万黑丛中”的一点红，在突出人物方面的目的是一样的。如果闫妮的棉袄穿在章子怡身上，那影片的格局就会大不一样，观众对片中爱情的接受方式也会很不一样。同样造作的还有电影中人物喜剧色彩浓厚的表演和对话方式。按照常规的理解，顾长卫使人物这样对话和表演，是为了取得一种“笑中带泪”的效果，或者尝试一种喜剧中的悲剧。但鉴于片中关于疾病的痛苦和死亡的虚无的场面是那么短暂，跟喜剧部分完全不相称，整部电影几乎就是一部“准”喜剧，我们几乎可以推论出导演为了商业考虑，已经放弃了最初的表现原则。
《最爱》中最精彩的既不是它在道义方面对现实苦难的关注或者娱乐方面对死亡和爱情的调侃，不是它的故事也不是导演的风格，而是濮存昕和蒋雯丽这两位配角演员的表演。他们再次证明了好演员从来不惜扮丑否定自己的形象，不惜牺牲自己以成全一个真实的角色。他们也再次证明了演员的价值与明星的身份之间并不是完全一致的。
刚从网上看到消息说，《最爱》并不就是《魔术外传》，而只是为了配合上映而推出的一个剪辑版，之后还有有一个两百分钟的导演剪辑版。但愿以后看到导演剪辑版后能解答本文中的疑问，推翻其中的一些结论。aware天 猫