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.
对话没有含金量，较量不精彩，制作水平中下，剧情拖沓。
我惊讶于萨莎·拜伦·科恩能这么正经
艾伦索金式的主旋律正能量。厉害的编剧技巧把复杂的历史事件讲得通俗易懂，虽然情节上设计感很强，但台词的能量搭配演员们的演绎让整个故事看得“爽”。剪辑完全服务于剧情了，看得时候不免会想如果还是斯皮尔伯格拍或者交给大卫芬奇会是怎样一番面貌。又一次标准且优秀的剧本模板。
3.2019年末已入特典版BD。
好莱坞最会写对白的索金拍了部“腔林弹语”的法庭戏，无异于天才的厨子烹饪天上的食材，精致的有些过分，都不带缓儿的。前因后果交互递进，庭里庭外应接不暇，话里话外明枪暗涌。面对不公，没有斗士会孤立无援，因为全世界都在看。这话也代表了好电影该有的威力
What's your price？
8.4分左右。
映衬这段历史的荒诞//
“果蝇的一辈子，周末愉快。”
最后念名字是挺讨巧的处理 但是确实很有煽动性 网飞：记录历史我们是专业的
PS：昨天看“八佰”，今天看这个，我突然觉得中国为什么要宣传反战，中国近现代根本没有对外发起过战争
天地不仁，以万物为刍狗。选角精准，演技在线
Take nothing for granted.
让我们都诚实一点，既然是要借酒杯浇块垒，片尾最主旋律的美国价值就应当退离于法庭之外。因为违法与否，量刑多少，与动机是否出于爱国并无关系，与共和党是否真的总是会选派迂腐可笑的权力单元也没有关系。索金太精明了，他可以点出文化革命与建构派本质上的内在矛盾性，却翻手之间用动机上的共情将左派捆绑在一起。片叶不沾身呀。但身处左右如此对立的当下，我们真的需要你来告诉大家谁更无辜吗？我们在等待一种解决的可能性，一种已知暴力冲突来自随机波动，但势能退潮必须跟随政治手段的理性途径。煽动我没有用，我只会更难过。btw音乐烂爆了。
太好看，节奏紧凑，故事精彩。 想到了发生过的很多事情，抗议永远不会按照每个人预想的那样进行，每个人都不可能每时每刻都冷静，“-你是否蔑视你的政府？-与我的政府对我的蔑视相比, 我的蔑视不值一提。”为什么总是对群众如此严格，对公权力又如此宽容？还有一句台词笑死了，大意是去年夏天我们该不会带领了一万个便衣上街吧。哈哈哈唉。 最后的念名字真给劲。
4.5，为思想和文化倾向的审判，这场审判是由谁挑起的？是我们，我们的血。确实，嬉皮士的出发点是没有错的，可其对美国社会造成的影响和危害，是不能以“我们因思想受审”这种伪命题去一笔带过的，虽然没有反转，片子里仍充斥着那股摇滚和不服输的热烈，就和那所谓“垮掉的一代”殊途同归。
“你们俩认识多久了？”
文本出色，法庭戲劇感重。當有爭執、連珠發砲時，整部電影充滿節奏感；但有些文戲雖然寫得好，剪接的節奏卻跟不上——這問題在片頭，出片名前後兩個sequence最明顯。
此时此刻此地，倒是无需去谈论人作为人 自由说话的权利，不妨更多去考虑，人作为人 去包容不同观点的能力。全世界都在看着呢。
卡司，剪辑，内容俱佳。最喜欢律师，异皮，胖哥和小雀斑互相嘴炮那几段。还有基顿叔依然气场足。原来美国也有政治审判哦，这部芝加哥《七佰》拍的不错。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
