人母诅咒

恐怖片美国2021

主演:艾尔皮迪娅·卡里洛,特诺切·韦尔塔,克里·卡希尔,贝茜·波雷戈,Harlon,卡拉·迪亚茨

导演:内详

播放地址

 剧照

人母诅咒 剧照 NO.1人母诅咒 剧照 NO.2人母诅咒 剧照 NO.3人母诅咒 剧照 NO.4人母诅咒 剧照 NO.5人母诅咒 剧照 NO.6人母诅咒 剧照 NO.13人母诅咒 剧照 NO.14人母诅咒 剧照 NO.15人母诅咒 剧照 NO.16人母诅咒 剧照 NO.17人母诅咒 剧照 NO.18人母诅咒 剧照 NO.19人母诅咒 剧照 NO.20
更新时间:2023-08-16 01:29

详细剧情

A Mexican-American couple expecting their first child relocate to a migrant farming community in 1970's California. When the wife begins to experience strange symptoms and terrifying visions, she tries to determine if it's related to a legendary curse or something more nefarious.

 长篇影评

 1 ) FIFF19丨DAY8《M就是凶手》:一双看上去快瞪爆了的眼球,由社会所造

第19届法罗岛电影节第8个放映日为大家带来《M就是凶手》,下面请看前线在程序结果中快速有力的黑帮和警方的评价了!

果树:

快速而有力。全程能将观众牢牢抓住。

Pincent:

出彩的镜头设计太多了,哪怕只是一个仰角机位、一个拍摄阴影的镜头、一场黑帮开会烟雾缭绕的环境布置、一个凶手出现时橱窗的大型符号..种种细节都令人印象深刻。还有那些声音设计!何时静音以及何时出声,一曲洗脑的哨声和一位看不见只用听的瞎子,似乎都能给本片在声音上的精彩设计进行注解。一双看上去快瞪爆了的眼球,由社会所造,也直勾勾地盯向此时欧洲畸形的社会。

Morning:

弗里茨朗的第一部有声片,他讲这有声作为了主角被表现,庭审的台词戏很有意义,不仅如此,每一次讨论都变成主角,第一次圆桌议案,那个拍法后来被多兰在《双面劳伦斯》里完全的学了去,但他滥用,显得略微无聊。彼得洛的表演相当精彩,他其实做了一个惊悚表演应当更为镇定的震慑力表演,变态的儿童杀手,他用他呈现在黑白影像里的如孩童般的大眼睛令人心生不适。现在看来,唯一美中不足的是,街道场景显得失真,但只是条件所致。

一桶猫:

德国后表现主义电影 弗里茨·朗的第一部有声片 叙事、构图都展现无比的张力 风格突出演技绝佳 运用的艺术手法甚至胜过现在很多作品 对人性的复杂展开了诸多思考

松野空松:

最喜欢两处,一是黑帮和警方的交叉剪辑的讨论会,彼此之间的斗争轻而易举建立起来,但是这种斗争的结果不是由双方直接竞争体现,而是影片第二处高光时刻,非法人员(黑帮)审判罪犯,并由罪犯反过来质问黑帮,因此警方的审判过程已经没有必要,最终的责任还是丢给了受害者们,真的是莫大的讽刺

折射入网:

寻找、追捕过程环环相扣,异常精彩。警察查案时以安全为理由侵犯民众自由和隐私。杀人犯触犯利益才惹得黑道众怒,黑白两道就是强权与利益的代表,电影对比两方开会的场景非常有趣。最后的落点又在私刑与人权上,把电影提上了一个新高度。

Her Majesty:

弗里茨•朗在从表现主义向黑色电影的转变中,电影理念和美学系统的不成熟导致了这部怪胎电影的诞生。观众所感受到的cult感和怪异感其实皆来自于导演对技法掌控不成熟和剧本写作的不完善,而非导演真的有完整的黑色电影美学系统。布列松说:有声电影发明了寂静。在有声电影兴起的初期,导演们皆泛滥地使用寂静和噪音。正如这部电影里,我们能感受到导演对于无声的滥用,让惊悚感大打折扣。最后一段法庭辩护戏或许在那个年代有启发意义,但如今看来其中的“法律能否判不能对自己行为负责之人死刑”和“人民是否对恶人有审判权”两个议题早已有明确答案,没有多加讨论的必要(从人道主义的角度来看这两个问题其实并不需要讨论太久)。其中黑白两道同时开会和角色说话但是观众听不见两个桥段都被刁亦男抄在了《南方车站的聚会》里,而M一人对抗黑白两道的大概念很可能也被刁亦男挪用做了《南》故事的主要框架。

子夜无人:

整个追凶过程槽点很多,但一头一尾拍得实在漂亮。开场铺垫案件发生的前奏,是从一群小孩把凶杀编成童谣玩耍、然后到皮球拍打的布告上呈现的案件报道、以及凶手登场后映在报纸上的阴影,一气呵成就把凶案链条上所有的环节都刻画了出来,犯罪者的有恃无恐和待宰羔羊般没有危机意识的孩童世界之间构成极强张力的二元对立;而结尾的私人法庭上,真正审判的不是罪犯,而是信任度已然跌破谷底的公权力,当手无寸铁的群众集体举起双手的那一刻,谁才是真正被混淆了面目、也失去了面目的受害者?

苍山古井空对月:

有张力的情节都是无配乐的,用安静的气氛制造张力,用口哨声反映凶手的内心波动。凶手欲行凶失败,站在商店前,后景是店里的上下摆动的箭头和旋转的圆盘,很有意思的隐喻。一些剪辑的手法用得不错,比如警察和帮派分别讨论如何抓住凶手的平行剪辑,以及帮派头子和警察头子说话时的动作匹配剪辑。 最后是帮派抓住了凶手,并且由帮派进行审判,也许是反映了那个时候大众对于警察的不信任。这场审判戏也探讨了程序正义和结果正义该如何选择。除此之外本片也算是比较早的表现心理犯罪的影片。

#FIFF19#第8日的场刊将于稍后释出,请大家拭目以待了。

 2 ) M用光分析

1931年的《M就是凶手》是弗里茨朗的第一部有声电影。在德国表现主义与默片时代的深刻影响下,电影在画面造型上颇具形式化特点,同时也因声音的加入具备了写实元素。可以说,本片在审美上介于形式与现实之间,当然这和整个电影史的演进不无关联。同样,本片的灯光也可以用这种眼光去看待,既有着默片时期的灯光特色又倾向于做到自然的灯光效果,戏剧化与写实性的兼并及灵活安置让《M就是凶手》成为弗里茨朗的代表作之一,也成为电影史上的一部优秀作品。 本片从柏林连续发生的小女孩失踪案展开,凶手的逍遥法外让整个城市都陷入压抑之中。警察加强跟踪调查,对社会治安严加把控,使得黑帮都难以忍受巨大压力。于是黑帮和警察两边都全员出动寻找凶手。黑帮的高效率很快在大楼里捉拿到了凶手,并私设公堂进行审判,在即将处死犯人时警察却赶到了现场。 这样一个犯罪悬疑片借以表现主义的手法,运用各种象征隐喻来影射纳粹上台之前的“黑帮”身份,并反映了当时整个政府的低效瘫软的状态。正义与邪恶也只能成为相对的,罪犯来审判罪犯可见社会之混乱。在导演消极的态度下,全片的灯光基本采用硬光,明暗分明,让阴影轮廓尖锐清晰,给人压抑之感。这部电影是在大片场下搭建拍摄的,整个灯光都需要人工设计完成。这也让每个场景的画面造型可塑性更强,更利于用灯光来叙事或营造氛围。 影片的第一个场景就已经显示出灯光的总体格调。侧光制造出鲜明的阴影,从影子可以看出侧面的灯光大概有两个,影子交互重叠并拉长的效果让画面显得阴郁,透露着神秘与消极感,不安的情绪立即涌现出来。之后镜头交代了儿童们的生活环境,引出第一个失踪女孩的家。同样是侧光,屋内的家具阴影锋利清晰,如同一只可怖的猛兽,诡谲不怀好意。这无疑为女孩失踪案以及凶手的神秘形象增添了不小的艺术色彩。 此后凶手第一次出现的形象也靠灯光下的阴影来交代。利用影子作为画面主体进行叙事是默片惯用的手法,在这里弗里茨朗并没有让它显得突兀,而是和整个电影的用光相契合,因为影子的利用贯穿始终。当这一大片可怖的黑影出现时,前面的影子似乎都被赋予了不怀好意的象征,充斥着危险。可以说,弗里茨朗已经深喑灯光运用的连续性和对整体气氛的营造。 在黑帮头目商谈一场中,也出现了影子作为主体的画面。此时的影子具有和凶手影子相似的功能,但又外延出新的意义——凶手似乎不止一个。如此看来,街上人们的身影好像都暗示出这一潜在问题,并将人性割离开来,光明与阴暗的两面性。整个社会也是如此,那么真正的凶手或许应该是每个个体形成的阴暗社会。很显然,这种表现主义的方法将灯光下的影子符号化,隐喻着人的阴暗面。这也是为什么本片多使用低角度的侧光,使得影子异常延展清晰可见。 黑帮会面与警察商讨的室内场景都采用了顶光,首先是出于环境内容的考虑,让两个室内场景具有相似性,产生联想(同时造型与蒙太奇也推进了这一表现)。其次顶光让角色面部更显得阴森抑郁,不仅塑造出焦急苦闷的心情还带有反面形象。这种光照范围较小的顶光,使得人物团体更加聚拢,凸显出团体的身份差别,让黑帮与警察更概念化(群像)。 此外,默片风格的场景打光在影片中的许多街景、建筑场景得以运用。单一的高强度灯光把场景一角照亮,如同舞台的聚光灯,戏剧化极强。出于对剧情上的关键点的强调,“聚光灯”将之放大,告诉观众好戏就在后面。与上述谈到的影子相比较,两者都是形式化的灯光表现,和室内或白天场景相比,稍显差异。但本片打光已经和默片有了很大不同,尽量不让灯光成为画面造型的主题符码,摆脱了过往严重的舞台戏剧感。简洁的灯光语言以及深刻的用意大概才是本片追寻的。 该片的高潮,也就是黑帮乞丐们私下审判凶手的一场。大量的对白以及人物表演是其重点。灯光在此也充当着“聚光灯”的功能,让凶手成为全场最明亮突出的一者。相较于其他众人的形象,暗淡的光线让他们隐身于阴暗之中,负面感随之而来,甚至反而让凶手M显得精神上光亮了许多。社会格局的隐喻已经上升到人性以及罪与罚的问题高度,究竟何为犯罪,谁才是犯人,谁能持有审判的权利等等,都在这一场直接叩问观众内心。当警察赶到现场,众人纷纷举起双手。这里灯光制造出画面的层次感,又具有主体,可以说是非常经典的一个画面了。 但是人工布光很容易产生所谓的穿帮。影片中多出景别转换都出现灯光不匹配的情况。如图,远景时灯光是符合实际内容的,而全景时人物后方出现了灯光,路灯的光源被削弱。不知道是否是灯光师的疏忽。还是说为了突出人物主体与层次感,故意舍弃现实增加后侧的轮廓光。总体而言,不论是疏忽还是有意,这里的灯光都是脱离现实的,仍带有默片时期的遗留风气。 可以说,《M就是凶手》在灯光上的运用是在审美层面上的,并没有仅仅停留在将灯光作为电影的造型元素。这也是弗里茨朗善于营造紧张恐怖气氛的原因之一。而此片在过往默片上跨出一大步,已经显示出其对现实的靠拢。灯光不仅给画面造型锦上添花,更激发出象征隐喻。 我想灯光的使用在默片及早期经典时期电影中非常具有代表性。尤其是在默片时期,造型语言的极致成熟让初生的有声电影几乎都残留着一定过往的技法与审美追求。而突破创新必定会伴随着声音的出现而发生,弗里茨朗就是其中一位。

 3 ) 第一部成功用声音叙事的电影

虽然第一部有声长片是1927年的《爵士乐歌星》,但电影人对当时才刚出现的声音该怎么运用并没有头绪;他们要么将其用作辅助画面叙事/视觉叙事的从属品,要么将其用作title card的替代品——直到1931年《M就是凶手》的出现。这部电影对于声音的运用毫无疑问是开创性的、革命性的,它第一次教会了人们声音如何在电影里独立的叙事,比如:

——用作sound bridge。开头小孩玩游戏画面未出我们就已经听到声音、后面Elsie在路上行走汽车未入画我们就听到了鸣笛声、后来M从小女孩花店走出来时也是人还没入画先听到店的门铃声、最后抓M进人民公审时那个楼梯那里也是声音先到然后看到M被抓的画面。

——用作人物的letimotif。《在山魔王的宫殿里》是M常哼起的歌曲,当这个声音响起时我们就知道是他来了。影片里有一幕,镜头跟拍小女孩(不是Elsie,是她之后第二个出现的女孩)在一个商店看东西时,我们听到了那个标志性的歌曲,再加上镜头逐渐靠近小女孩,这些加起来让我们知道了M在接近小女孩,制造了一种悬疑感。在这种悬疑感的制造上声音起了不可或缺的作用。

小女孩在商店看东西

——用作描述情绪(这个作用其实不那么创新,但《M》的具体用法还是挺新颖的)。影片中有这么一个scene:M在商店的玻璃前盯着里面的东西。一开始背景音是汽笛声的嘈杂,但当M开始从玻璃上找猎物时(后面通过玻璃反光找到了一个小女孩),背景音就安静了。当他转身准备行动时,背景嘈杂的声音又出现了。这里静音时是代表他已经进入了内心世界,开始专注于找“猎物”;杂音和静音的切换则是他内心在犹豫要不要去杀人。包括M后面到咖啡厅时哼着《在山魔王的宫殿里》,其实也是他内心的挣扎的具象化。(这首歌很欢快,所以本身应该就是M用来逃避杀人的想法用的。)

M在商店前

——用作画外空间(而且画外并非配乐)。人民审判戏那里有很多镜头对准M时的画外声音产生的画外空间,我们听到的人民的各种笑声、嘈杂声、咒骂声等都是。

除了这个最大的亮点之外,影片在打光、阴影和布景等等方面都水平极高。

——打光上沿用德国表现主义电影的low-key lighting,背景很暗人物光影对比度高,营造一种uncanny的气氛

——阴影上比如开头Elsie看通缉令时通缉令上出现的黑影(也是M第一次现身)

——布景则与打光都沿袭德国表现主义,充满了主观情绪。例子比如:开头Elsie的妈妈等她女儿回来时不停大喊女儿名字那个让人不安的空镜头sequence(包括复杂迷离的楼梯、空荡的晾衣屋、皮球、气球等等);结尾的那个M藏身的废弃酿酒厂也是破旧而诡异,呼应了M给人的感觉。

——其他还有很多,比如M刚进人民法庭,狡辩时从屏幕的另一边伸出一只手,有点诡异吓人。

 4 ) Tracing Human Abnormality in Modern Berlin

        Fritz Lang, one of the most celebrated auteurs of Germany's national cinema, lays out a chilling crime story in M(1931). In this provocative motion picture, a search for the cruel child murderer, Beckert, drives the whole city to turmoil. As all members in the city become involved in the search for the criminal, two different forms of human abnormality lurked in the city are exposed: the criminal mentality as well as the conflict between the institutional authority and the general public of which it is in charge. While the search continues, both forms of human abnormality keep growing unchecked; yet, eventually, the citizens identified with such abnormality have to face the catastrophic consequences of their behavior. Through innovative use of sound and provocative editing techniques, Lang points to the city as the foster home of both forms of human abnormality. Furthermore, he invites the audience to question the unforeseen detriments of a city in modernity that all its members eventually have to confront.

        As Lang's first film with sound, Lang ingeniously manipulates this new technology to portray the city as an adoptive home of human abnormality. At the very beginning of the film, before any image appears on screen, the audience first hears a child singing a familiar tune: “Wait, wait just a little while/ then the black man will come after you/ with his little chopper/ he will make mince meat out of you.” According to Todd Herzog, this tune is a homage to the “Haarmann song” that tells the chilling crimes of the notorious serial killer Fritz Haarmann. Herzog believes that this song serves to, “locate M in a specific historical context, the world of the Weimar Republic at the time of the film's release, and to place it in dialogue with that world”(Herzog, “Fritz Lang's M(1931), An Open Case”, P232). Nevertheless, Fritz's use of this song to begin the film allows a different interpretation. As the film begins with the dark screen and the nursery rhyme, an image soon appears in a few seconds. A medium shot locates the source of the sound in the yard of a mietskascerne, where a group of kids are playing and singing. By placing the source of the cruel tune in the mouth of a naïve child, Lang further implies that the modern city has become a sink of iniquity, even for the innocent who have yet to understand the city in which they are situated. The victim of today is just as likely to become the perpetrator in the future.

        Beckert's whistle is a repetition in the film which symbolizes his criminal mentality. Each time when he begins to whistle, the audience witnesses the awakening of the monstrous murderer within him. Thus far, Lang constantly shifts the source of the whistle from on-screen to off-screen; such manipulation of the sound source sheds light on the unlikelihood to locate the specific origin of human abnormality in a modern milieu. In a scene when Beckert stands on the street and looks into a shop-window, the sequence is accompanied with no diegetic sound. All what the audience can see is that Beckert dramatically changes his facial expression when he sees a little girl in the reflection of the shop-window. As the girl walks away, the camera moves out of the shop to the street and captures Beckert staring in the direction that the girl is walking. The audience then hears the diegetic sound of the street traffic, and Beckert's whistle simultaneously joins in as he starts following the girl and walks out of the frame. In the next medium-long shot, the camera tracks the little girl as she walks on the street. The whistle continues in the background; however, Beckert no longer appears on-screen in this tracking shot. While the audience has been led to believe that the whistle comes from Beckert by the previous shot; Lang purposefully leaves the established sound source off-screen in the following shot, which leads the audience to question whether Beckert himself is the source of his abnormality, or if the city is that with which has fostered his brutal crimes.

        Lang further manipulates sound to create off-screen space that contrasts the on-screen image in order to depict another form of human abnormality: the revolt against the political authority. The conflict between the underworld business and the police points to a divergence between the authority and the public, which is previously kept in disguise by a seemingly stable social order. However, as Beckert's crimes disturb the social order and alarm the police, they immediately assume that the criminal must be someone from the underworld, and decide to break the ostensible peace and raid their gathering spots. One night, the police secretly surround one of the underworld's gathering place; in which the entire process is accompanied with no sound. The camera soon moves downstairs into the basement where people in the underworld business gather. As a woman shouts out that the police is here, everyone begins rushing towards the exit to leave the basement. In a medium shot, the camera awaits at the top of the stairs and looks slightly down as everyone starts running towards the camera. Among the frenzied noises, the audience first clearly hears a woman's scream as the policemen yell back at her; yet the entire action takes place upstairs in off-screen space while the shot remains still, featuring the panicking crowds. Soon, the police enter from the lower frame and gradually push the crowds back into the basement for investigation. The image on-screen contrasts the actions taken place in off-screen space; such contrast allows the audience to look beyond the images shown on-screen and picture the entire city, where its underlying instability and human abnormality are close to outbreak due to the police's disruption of a public order that does not solve social problems, but merely hides them unseen.

        Throughout the film, Long constructs several montage sequences which implicitly build cause-and-effect relationships between the modern city and human abnormality. In the beginning of the film, when Elsie's mother becomes worried about Elsie for having not returned home, a medium shot shows Elsie's mother walking towards the window and looking out. When she begins calling out “Elsie”, the image cuts to an aisle shot of the stairwell in the Mietskaserne. As the mother's cry echoes down the stairs, the audience then follows the camera to an empty space where people in the neighbourhood hang their laundry; Elsie is still absent on-screen. The sequence continues as it cuts to a close-up on the lunch table, where Elsie's seat remains empty. The grieving howl of the mother has now ended, yet the sequence did not until the audience are shown with two more shots: Elsie's ball rolling on the grass, and the ballon that the criminal Beckerd bought for Elsie entangled in the electric wires on the city street. In this sequence, Lang juxtaposes the mother's continuous calling for Elsie with discontinuity editing of on-screen images. The audience follows the mother as she searches for Elsie in all public spaces in the city where Elsie can possibly be; yet Elsie's ball and ballon at the end of the sequence tell audience that Elsie must have already been slaughtered by the murderer Beckerd. In this sequence, Lang associates the befalling of Elsie's tragic death with the city itself: the development of the modern metropolis not only enlarges the public space, but also catalyses crime and threat among the citizens.

        In another scene when the minister condemns the police chief on the phone for the police department's incompetence in finding the killer, Lang edits a flashback as the chief explains their difficulty. The editing of this flashback again connotes the unforeseen detriments of a city in modernity. When the chief tells the minister about a white paper bag that they found behind the hedge, a close-up on the paper bag gives the audience a clue that it is a candy wrapper, and the store's name was on the wrapper. Then, the image cuts to a close-up of a map of the city, in which circles and circles are drawn with a pair of compasses in increasing radius. While the search widens, the police interrogates owners of candy stores all over the city. However, all owners shake their heads and cannot remember who had bought the candy for little Elsie. As population increases, the city provides perpetrators the opportunity to disguise their abnormality and let it grow unchecked. The editing of this sequence connects the failure to identify the abnormal with the city itself.

        Lang further implies a cause-and-effect relationship between the city and another form of human abnormality, namely, the public and the institutional authority's revolt against each other. As both the leads of the underworld and the chiefs of the political institutions gather for two separate meetings to discuss their objectives on the case of Beckert, Lang uses cross-cutting to juxtapose both meetings. The heads of the underworld complain about the consistent police raids' harm to their business and decide to find the killer by themselves in order to resurrect their business. As the underworld head waves his hand, the shot cuts to the head of police's same action. The police simultaneously decides to continue their search for Beckert without the help of the public, by organizing more police raids and search among public spaces. While the underworld condemns the police for interfering the underworld's business, the police chief Lohmann also refuses to ask the public for help as he states, “Don't talk to me about the public helping, it disgusts me.” The cross-cutting technique invites the audience to contrast the underworld and the police's conflicting attitudes against each other. Such social conflict is another form of human abnormality that is against the democratic ideal of the Weimar republic.

        As the underworld collaborates with the beggars and has seized Beckerd from the building, together they leave the scene in a hurry. Lang then presents the audience with a montage sequence in which he rewinds the crimes that the underworld has just committed. The audience follows the camera into the room where both watchmen have been knocked out and tied up. Then, the sequence continues with still shots of the forcefully broken office door, the compartment's broken fences, and ends with the hole they have dug on the floor in order to make the crime scene look like a result of burglary. This montage sequence is shown with no sound, leaving the audience in contemplation of the underworld's motive and the destructions their abnormal behaviors have caused. The heads of the underworld are provoked to capture Beckerd not because that they find Beckerd's behavior immoral, but because the underworld's business is interrupted by the police's consistent raids. In turn, they decide to look for Beckerd without collaboration with the police, and purposefully commit a series of crimes in order to achieve their goal. The lack of stability in the city's social order has fostered the formation of the underworld, and the underworld's distrust with the political authority. Yet, their abnormal behaviors will lead them to their final conviction.

        The film ends with the final conviction of both the underworld and the child murderer. The audience should not forget that it is the underworld, despite their unrighteous motives, who has asked for help from the beggars and successfully seized Beckert. Nevertheless, both parties have to eventually face the catastrophic consequences of their abnormal behaviors. The first being the underworld's imprudent disruption of the public order for their own economic benefits, and the second being the brutal crimes that Beckert has committed. Throughout the film, Lang manipulates the sound effects and the editing of the sequences to point to the modern city itself as the very cause of all forms of human abnormality preeminent in it. The diegetic world in the film, which is the Weimar Republic in the 1920s, still echoes the modern milieu in which we live. However we try to trace any form of abnormality that hinders the public order, we are always led back to the society as the cause, without identifying the specific origin. Perhaps, the only way of prevention lies in the hands of the people who make up the society, with self-awareness of their behaviors, and positive objectives to make changes.
 
 
                                      Works Cited
 
Herzog, Todd. "Fritz Lang's M(1931): An Open Case." An Essential Guide to Classic Films of the Era Weimar Cinema. Ed. Noah Isenberg. New York: Columbia University Press, 2009. 291-309. Print.
 
M. Dir. Fritz Lang. Perf. Peter Lorre, Ellen Widmann, Inge Landgut. Criterion Collection, 2004, DVD.
 

 5 ) In the name of the law

#BFI# #Bigscreenclassics# #111mins# 重看。之前看影片感觉到剧本的优秀,再刷后才发现1931年导演那惊人的镜头语言和剪辑能力。

镜头上,各种前推到特写镜头带来的紧张感,情绪消散后拉所营造的抽离感,还有几幕大远景对于男主所处状态的表达,都很恰当地传递了情绪。中间的追逐戏还有一段儿手持摄影… 真的太强了!更强的是长镜头,印象较深是两场,乞讨者的大本营那段儿长镜头,用来阐述乞讨者组织的纪律性,并且最后的上移借墙面转场也非常惊艳,随后又是利用窗框的构图,前推直接越过玻璃达到画面上的无缝衔接顺联剧情,最喜欢的一组镜头!后面还有对“众生”的审判时仰拍的长镜头,当然大量的脸部特写镜头下德国表现主义所影响的人物带来的夸张的表情被更加夸张的放大,带来的张力也是很强的。审判时俯拍镜头滑过那一排排人物的脸,搭配上头顶灯的效果让整个安静的环境带有极强的压迫感。还有几次空镜也都契合对白的从画面上或回顾或填补了细节。

光影上,印象最深的就是开场那段“M“未露脸的黑影犯罪了,也在结尾处男主的自述中有呼应。其次是最后有黑帮老大们(各司其职非常有趣)代表的“权力”起立对于“M”的审判,黑影也是有很强的指代性。

剪辑上,最精彩的莫过于警察和黑帮讨论时的交叉剪辑,带有极强的讽刺性,

人物上,实际上各个人物是被弱化了,更多的是一种指代性。片中对人物也提前做了铺垫,然最后审判来的时候观众可以“更好的”参与到事件中,以字体推断的病态心理和借由镜子反射到小女孩时压抑不住的情绪为最后的审判做了一个很好的铺垫。而警察,黑帮(尤其是黑帮老大背后那“芸芸众生“)就更加直白了。M被“烙上”印记后的几次被拍肩非常逗趣,从被标记,到被指认,到被辩护,到被法律带走。

 6 ) 哨声依旧

M
1.悬念,铺陈人物2.悬赏单上的影子3.口哨声4.谁是凶手?5.人心浮动6.场景都极设计感7.无声音的一段8.对体制执行者的不满9.人心惶惶10.镜头角度很独特11.反射镜里的神魂颠倒12.背上的M13.快镜头14.兴师动众15.长镜头平摇16.瞎子发现真相17.民间审判18.我们就是你的权利19.我在追逐着我自己20.强迫性杀手21.以法律之名,以百姓之名22.举手投降23.德国表现主义

 短评

黑白构图的张力,无声与画面的急速运作的对比,轻快口哨和极端反人性行径的并行不悖,空镜头与人物戏剧性夸张表演的穿插。电影在那个有声片刚诞生不久的年代,可以承载太多的艺术手法和社会诘问。如同富士康员工跳楼事件,个体背负社会病是流行于每一个年代的瘟疫。

7分钟前
  • 小岩菽
  • 推荐

淘到DVD了哈哈

10分钟前
  • 亵渎电影
  • 推荐

德国表现主义电影向美国黑色电影转变时期的牛逼片子,而且就我目前的阅历来说,它好过所有的德国表现主义电影以及八成的(另两成我没看而已)美国黑色电影,这当中的差距,是巨大的

12分钟前
  • 左胸上的吸盘
  • 力荐

观感很奇怪的一部电影,就像无声和有声的结合,无配乐仅有图像来烘托情节,前段闷的要死,中段的剪辑很棒,结尾升华主题的对峙是点睛之笔,全片的悬疑点布置出众(说的就是那个口哨!), 对杀手的人物刻画很深刻(选角!)。(问题:那封信是谁写的?)

15分钟前
  • TWY
  • 推荐

解读一部经典电影就要联系当时的环境,读过福柯的《规训与惩罚》《癫狂与文明》可能对电影中欧洲的法律体系有所了解。其实就剧情来说这部电影很是粗糙,不过最后的审判意味伸长。人权,自由,权利,精神病一系列中世纪的产物柔和起来,这才是这部戏的精髓。

18分钟前
  • 乔大路
  • 推荐

【B+】第一次看德国表现主义电影,不负盛名。在许多方面的想法都远远领先于同时代其他影片(尤其是对声音和光的运用),只是毕竟是先行者,已如今眼光再看有些地方还是显得生涩,比如那个平行剪辑,很生硬。

23分钟前
  • 掉线
  • 推荐

群众大会真牛啊

25分钟前
  • 小米=qdmimi
  • 推荐

8论底层人民群众社会活动的重要性人民法庭所代表的民声与法庭所代表的正义 情感与理智的对决 谁才是真正的正义30年代就拍出如此前卫的社会题材作品 完爆如今各种院线商业流水线粗制滥造品结尾人民法庭的大法官与激起的群众又或是集体主义兴起的预言与写照

27分钟前
  • 東郷柏
  • 推荐

B+/ 大半部散点透视无主角剧本,结尾审判似黑化生之欲;超低仰角俯角,移魂般长镜空镜,阴影与光的博弈; 心理音效恐惧感仿佛真空。无论文本还是影像都有新的尝试,昭示着尼伯龙根大都会的默片时代之后似乎稚嫩却更有生命力的弗里茨 · 朗。万万没想到喜剧效果这么出众。可作最近网络话题镜鉴。

29分钟前
  • 寒枝雀静
  • 推荐

近乎完美,扣一星最后的伪庭审,当民粹已然发展到人人相疑,社会不安时,是无法产生如此模式化的场景的。东方快车式也许更加契合

31分钟前
  • Ada的B计划
  • 推荐

除对白和口哨声外其他声音基本无,更别提扣人心魄的配乐了,但作为一部1931的有声片,如此足矣。有趣的地方在民众对警察(政府威权)的不信任(妓女朝警察啐口水),以及黑道擒获凶手的设定,加上最后私设法庭和真正的法庭审判对比,如此种种真是大胆的讽刺。口哨声很瘆人。

34分钟前
  • Derridager
  • 推荐

原来,他只是个卖萌大师。中间有一段很惊艳的平行硬切剪辑,瞬间明朗了两个势力、一个目标的局势;想不到在全民哄笑那一刻燃了;最后的辩论虽然升华了高度,但也同时削弱了快感;那支口哨的旋律,忘不得。配乐贫乏、完全依靠影像推进的原味悬疑片,这是黑色艺术品。

37分钟前
  • Ocap
  • 推荐

看到底下那么多装逼的评论,心情就像M突然发现身后被标记了白字时那样,好惊悚好害怕!!!!!瞪!!!!!

42分钟前
  • Irgendwann
  • 力荐

M逃进阁楼那一段特别精彩!彼得·洛长得果然猥琐!演个绑架小姑娘的变态杀手太合适了!1931年的这部电影现在看来还是有些琐碎冗长!翻拍的话应该不错!

44分钟前
  • 隐遁
  • 还行

印象最深的是 他说“你们要是杀了我 你们就是冷血谋杀!” 群众听到后笑了起来;他说“我要求把自己交给警察!” 群众也笑了起来;他说“我要求把自己交给民主陪审团!” 群众还是笑了起来。群众没有兴趣也觉得没有必要听他说些什么 这不重要 “让他死”就是大家坐在这里的目的。M是凶手 而乱审判的群众也是凶手——从个人观点来看 某些罪犯——就如M 单单交给法律来处理是难解自己的心头恨 就应该让他受折磨——但民主审判又不能当主流 如何让法律和民主完美结合这才是国家最最重要的治国之道 最后在法律和人情里留了一个做选择的悬念 大概就是这个意思吧。

47分钟前
  • 黄悦_
  • 还行

传说中的德国表现主义力作。这种片子放在现在的天朝完胜那些大片。最后的辩论进入了人权、制度和法律的思辨,而他们的概念完全是基于人性的角度,这是人权的思考。前半部的悬疑解惑,后面的基层社会的私设法庭,凶手的经典口哨还有夸张的表情和肢体。经典!8.6

51分钟前
  • 巴喆
  • 推荐

每次看德国电影都忍不住往政治隐喻上想,德国真是一个牛逼的国家啊。影史上第一部讲连环杀人的电影,却比后来的那些要高明得多。黑社会审犯人那一段是我觉得电影最好看的一段,“难道把你交给警察送进监狱,让国家养你一辈子?”,警察搜寻许久无果最后由盲人找到了线索,这真是个无比讽刺的故事。

52分钟前
  • 凉水
  • 力荐

黑社会对杀人犯的人道和法律审判是很有意思的。真正的执法机构是无能的,但是一个罪犯又有什么权利来说另外一个罪犯是不可饶恕的?尤其是,这个杀人犯在倾述自己的心理病态时,听众席上的若干观众还默默的点着头。终究,这个社会的罪恶似乎是没有出路的,因此才有最后一幕的,父母们应该看好自己的孩子。虽然这最后一句台词真的出现得很突兀和莫名其妙,像是匆忙之间添上去用来过关的。如果没有执法机构的审判和最后母亲的画面,我想这部片子要好得多。

55分钟前
  • 思阳
  • 还行

弗里茨·朗十分大胆地让一位罪恶滔天的凶犯在大银幕前为自己辩解,凶犯与群众的关系变得十分微妙;朗用一个社会新闻进行了一次政治反思,这是1931年的魏玛德国;按照克拉考尔的观点,M同样预示了纳粹德国的崛起。马克·费罗更认为结局中女人的警告表明朗和他当时的女友Thea von Harbou(后加入纳粹)对魏玛共和国民主的不信任,流露出两人的意识形态(cf.Cinéma et Histoire, 1977)。从以微观的社会事件对社会制度进行宏观的分析角度来看,朗无疑是影史的先驱。

56分钟前
  • 阿茶
  • 推荐

开场利用影子铺设惊悚氛围、人人自危的紧张空气,与明暗双线并行的抓捕过程构成高反差对比,制造出不少萌点;空无一人的街道,M惊恐的表情,口哨的运用,堪称经典;对连环杀手的心理描摹,以及对法律制度的揶揄,都具有前瞻性。

59分钟前
  • 欢乐分裂
  • 推荐

返回首页返回顶部

Copyright © 2023 All Rights Reserved