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
#2021bjiff#开头睡了十分钟#还行权当纪录片了
本以为是一个“工作细胞”的故事；另外深影试听效果确实不错，影片内的声音总以为是在我身后；另外以后看大屏一定往后坐，虽然本片字幕很少但依然感觉眼睛不够看。。。
电影想要表达的歌颂母爱啊励志故事啊其实都不如现实生活来的令人深刻，实际发生的一定比呈现出来的更加残忍沉重吧，残奥会冠军已经是出现在公众面前了，那些更普通的残障人士呢，生活究竟是什么样的呢？
2021BJIFF最后一部/@深影 最神奇的体验在于，醒/睡交战过程中思绪迟钝时，沉浸在没有对白、人物断断续续发出没有语义的声音的环境中，在座位上感受到了巨大的恐慌，感觉自己丧失了语言能力🚬 时长规律的固定镜头凝视山野风光和地底洞穴，除美之外，让我有被困住的窒息感。
当一支探险队踏入一座无人洞穴，一位年迈的山民就此逝去。这位山民终日俯瞰山间草甸，宛如关照群山的神祇。探险队测绘洞穴，理性取代了神秘，所以神自然要离开。结尾时雾里的吆喝，正是神明在向群山告别。
全程感叹电影导演之预判神力以及探洞与生命淡逝的蒙太奇之精妙...原来不是纪录片...但还是忍不住太息。
@BJIFF2021 不在影院看很难看不进去，太享受了，却也容易犯困
意外略掉了苏个人从站不起来到走到跑的过程，而把重点更多放在了香港残疾运动员整体面临的困境，格局蛮好的，只是也让每次视角转回个人时显得有点为煽情而猛煽情
2.5/5。开篇煽情过猛了，还没情绪带入呢。残障+民族情怀+荣誉+演技大咖吴君如，能骗观众很多眼泪了。评分影视作品如何不等于观众对运动员的尊敬多少。
【BIFF2021】摄影也太不容易了…洞穴探险与生命尽头的双线文本，不在影院很难沉浸。
【2021 BJIFF】全程基本无台词，两条线索交错挺有意思
2021.9.29 北影节 合生汇寰映真是呕
用光影和变幻的角度来表达情感，空间，时间。最喜欢手电筒照下洞穴里，医生也照进牧羊人的眼睛里的镜头，对比，生命和那些说不清的无限秘密。
很佩服摄影、声音，在如此狭窄空间，完成了很多刁钻角度的拍摄，但是导演要表达什么呢？
不停前探的尽头，未必是想象中的豁然开朗，可能会是戛然而止，生命亦然。
残奥冠军苏桦伟传记🇬🇪
【北影节】4K摄影和杜比全景声的沉浸感太强 再深的洞也会见底 画家在测绘之后将整个洞用画笔封口是神来之笔
关于尽头，时间与造物相会。声光色影皆美，如果不是那么严丝合缝，几乎近于崇高。
探险队员到达尽头，大雾中又重新弥漫逝去之人的乐音。通篇想起洞穴之喻，而这次人类选择探索，观望火光，走入心形的洞口，到达终点时又凝结世间几度轮回。
当一支探险队踏入一座无人洞穴，一位年迈的山民就此逝去。这位山民终日俯瞰山间草甸，宛如关照群山的神祇。探险队测绘洞穴，理性取代了神秘，所以神自然要离开。结尾时雾里的吆喝，正是神明在向群山告别。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
