A most pleasingly atmospheric rendition of the tale, noirishly photographed and moodily set, this is the version which probably would have delighted Conan Doyle the most. There is one important plot change which enables the beautiful Alice Brandt to enjoy both a larger role and a more intriguing part in the proceedings. This change also builds up the parts of Dr Mortimer and Lord Charles, yet at the same time provides a nice introduction to the is-he-sinister or is-he-a-good-guy Barrymore, deftly played here by Fritz Rasp.
Despite the sting of its well-developed story, the spellbindingly atmospheric direction and the engrossing performances delivered by the entire cast, many fans may find this version somewhat disappointing. For at least three reasons: As in the novel, the part played in the narrative by Sherlock Holmes, though vital, is minimal. And in this version, not only has no attempt been made to enlarge his role, if anything both writer and director do their best to minimize it. Holmes does not even make his entrance for half-an-hour, and when he does finally appear, he has his back to the camera. It is Fritz Odemar, as Dr Watson, who receives the more favorable camera angles. And there is a purpose in this. It is Watson, not Holmes, who figures as the main protagonist of The Hound of the Baskervilles. For the bulk of the narrative, Holmes disappears. It is Watson and Lord Henry (Peter Voss) who take up the running. The movie is almost over, before Holmes closes in on the villain. And even so, this is not the obsessed, self-important Holmes we are accustomed to see taking charge. Another problem is that the title hound itself does not figure a great deal in the action, a downgrading which will undoubtedly rate as another major disappointment for fans. And finally, it could be argued that the script gives too much attention to Conan Doyle's red herring, the escaped convict, and not enough to the real villain.
This said, it must surely be admitted by all, that Odemar's interpretation of Watson—intelligent, charming, level-headed, courageous and resourceful—is much closer to Conan Doyle's conception than either the bungling, inveterately stupid Nigel Bruce or the self-effacing Ian Fleming.
One other player deserves special mention: Erich Ponto (Dr Winkel in The Third Man) who seems exactly right for Stapleton. A difficult part, superbly played.
- JohnHowardReid, imdb
对于印度来说，这种题材也算难得吧，但是两个半小时的MV加全是刻板印象的闹剧，谁受得了…
承继诅咒录像带的传统梗，来了个诅咒版《你的名字。》，可是演得假了点，拍得也是（虽然有分析佬解释主角本身作假的真正意图，是蛮有新意的，包括最后视觉残像那块小设计；最后的自白彰显了人性懦弱自私的本质，一个我弱我霉我有理的坏人形象确实够讨厌的），中间还企图用“感人”亲情“迷惑众”人。女主的意图，逻辑走向的呈现是混乱和矛盾的，这一点剪辑和台词都有问题，剧本问题更大一些，不少废台词还有散不去的说教意味。这种类似病毒营销、我称之为诅咒式营销的脚本差点想再减一星，毕竟这个玩法不新，塑造的恶人形象又不恶得彻底，你说难不难受。
印度视角的同志电影，形婚同志婚后各玩各，最后出柜后也能皆大欢喜。
蛮有信心在三十岁之前out
对印度的les和gay两个群体都给予了关注。细节很感人，歌很好听。希望相爱的人都有相爱的机会。
在一个压力很大的环境下，敢于向家人表达自己的身份，同性恋不是把病，那并不恶心。最后的游行很震撼
影片涉及了挺多在现实中要面对的问题，结局的走向表达了一种人人都能得偿所愿的期望。
男主的妈妈，女主的爸爸，可能生命中，会有那么一个人，我们只要她/他的支持就好。
电影后半段，被男方母亲知道真相后，双方都无比的难过，因为这个秘密再也守不住，合家欢的结尾也算是圆了很多人的梦。
男主和律师男友真的好好看身材好好尤其律师穿正装
两对有情人的遇见到触碰氛围烘托的不错。大圆满结局固然好，但太过于完美了。
唉，印度，望而却步啊让我
在B站看了预告后去看了正片，某高分网站上的译名是《永结同心》，怪不得在豆瓣怎么找都没找到。谈回电影本身，电影的设定非常出彩，围绕着印度禁忌的homo话题，男女主形婚过程也充满着喜剧色彩，但是剧情的发展不如我预期的精彩，感觉到了后面就有种流水账的叙事感，结尾也不算很强。最让我遗憾的是没能看到男女主之间的情感升温（没有要掰直他俩的意思，只是觉得男女主之间的友情和亲情刻画太少了，明明是主角），然后两人各自的同性伴侣设定其实也不算好。总之看在题材和音乐的份上打个三星吧。
男主因为前任开始健身，有一个在读工商硕士的现任，但明显Hold不住…
啊啊啊啊啊那个rim那个演员好喜欢好喜欢好喜欢姐姐超市我
宽容度满分，情节无新意节奏缓慢，剧情从一小时以后就变连续剧。不过可以公映，也反映了当地的文明进程吧
3.5吧，玩得还是很早期的同志问题讨论，只是放在了印度这个宗教国家显得比较出挑。
近期看的印度电影都是选材直戳社会痛点，但呈现失去控制与克制，走向闹剧风格，比起电影像电视剧，缺乏质感。
ps.印式歌舞虽然可能有点尬，但是五颜六色载歌载舞，欢乐是真的欢乐，这样的文化这样的电影才是真正值得输出也真正乐于被他人接受的啊。
密恐片倒是够分量，恐怖片？没感觉。可能因为本来就不会被吓到，所以就只是觉得画面恶心而已。也可能是这种纪录片式手法看腻了，也可能是科技发达了这里面的看起来还是太异世界太遥远了，没代入感。反而好多槽点。耐受力强但是有密恐的还是别看了，没意思。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
