关于电影观后感的作文英语版的【一】
从表现手段上来看，《我不是潘金莲》不能算是一部纯粹而又工整的荒诞喜剧，它里面夹杂了太多非荒诞性的元素，加之其中诗意的抒情性反而把观众引向矛盾的体验中，让影片引发了众多争议。然而，新的尝试总是振奋人心的，谁又知道这颗石子会激起怎样的波痕?
《我不是潘金莲》和《比利·林恩的中场战事》两部片子几乎在中国内地的同一时期上映，两位导演都在技术和视觉上做出了一些新的尝试。虽说圆形画幅在世界电影史上已经不是第一次出现，但不管怎样，冯小刚导演仍旧在中国电影的土壤里埋下了新的种子。两部大胆创新的电影也让我们嗅到了不一样的气息，关于电影，未来还有无限可能。
之所以想要拿出《比利·林恩》来比较，并不只是因为技术的革新。电影工业固然要依靠技术的支撑，但优秀的导演总会把技术用在“点”上。《我不是潘金莲》和《比利·林恩》所采用的两种不同的技术，恰好为观众带来了两种截然相反的观影视角。不同于《比利·林恩》浸入式的观影，《我不是潘金莲》采用的圆形画幅恰好把观众置于一种隔岸观火的“窥探”地位。这种隔岸观火的心情，就像古时的人们在戏台下看戏子们唱戏一样。观众在这里既是看客，又是判官，电影里的人物，也比往常更像故事中的人物。这和导演在电影中不断加入旁白营造间离感在本质上是一个意思。所以说，技术本身就传达出了使用者的意图，优秀的导演会驾驭技术，将技术完美地贴合在故事的肉体之上，塑造出不一样的影片气质。
从这个角度上来看，冯小刚和李安都是会驾驭技术的导演。李安的故事是从比利的视角展开，需要的就是观众感同身受的“浸入”，而冯小刚的故事内核是一出荒诞剧，需要的就是抽离，一种理性和冷静。圆形画幅的意义并不只是带给我们画面构图的诗意美，更无时无刻地把观众置于这“看客”的地位。从这种意义上来说，观众是注定不能在情感上理解李雪莲的，视觉上的变化带来了视角的转变，视角的转变把我们逼到冷酷无情的境地，这种冷酷和冷静让我们看着人物的痛苦发笑(当然这是和故事情节相辅相成的，荒诞之感也油然而生。
这大概也是影片的一些片段让人感到格格不入的原因。李雪莲，在故事的一开始，就完美地展现了她作为一个“法盲”的执着。其实她所求的就是两个字：“情”和“理”。只不过这个“理”，不是法理，而是她心中的道理。这放在现代的法制社会，很容易就会演变成蛮不讲理。毕竟法官、当地官员所生活的世界，不是李雪莲的“情理”世界。然而影片并不只是想讲这个妇人的执着和“情理”，她就像一颗蛮不讲理的石子被投入潭水之中，让隐藏在潭水之下的“怪力乱神”以各种荒诞的方式浮出水面。用“蛮不讲理”引出这个社会真正的阴暗面，引出一个逻辑看似正常，其实却处处充斥着虚伪、冷漠的“官”的世界，才是这个故事荒诞感的核心来源。
但是，一些展现李雪莲细腻内心世界的镜头和表演，也在不断地提醒观众，李雪莲是值得同情的、是悲苦的。但这些抒情的甚至有些悲凉的信息，掺杂在荒诞的情节和产生间离感的画框之中，让观众不免会感到一丝困惑。因为视角的转换让我们不自觉地被置于一个冷酷无情的地位，在这种涵义下，观众对角色的态度更倾向于“一视同仁”——我们在情感上，是不和这些人物站在一起的。于是在这个时候冒出的抒情镜头，就难以让观众感同身受。
所以从表现手段上来看，《我不是潘金莲》不能算是一部纯粹而又工整的荒诞喜剧，它里面夹杂了太多非荒诞性的元素，其中诗意的抒情性反而把观众引向矛盾的体验中，让影片引发了众多争议。然而，新的尝试总是振奋人心的，谁又知道这颗石子会激起怎样的波痕?
关于电影观后感的作文英语版的【二】
电影《我不是潘金莲》讲述了“一个女刁民的告状故事”，说这个被称为潘金莲的李雪莲为“刁民”，可谓出于“公正立场”——你自己搞假离婚，你老公趁机把你甩了，是自作自受;你要“讨说法”，那是你和你老公的事，关别人何事?你倒好，居然一级一级地上告，把市长、县长、院长一个个拉下马……这在现实中可能吗?可这又似乎处处透着真实。这就是荒诞现实主义的魅力。
用荒诞的外壳装现实的内核，这是四两拨千斤的智慧。从北京到县城，这样的场面多难写?然而一个李雪莲，把上上下下的行政系统都串起来了，并且有了极其生动的呈现。尤为高明的是，电影中的干部没有一个是贪官，都辛辛苦苦、兢兢业业，都想息事宁人、安定团结，然而不断“好心办坏事”，硬是没能准确理解李雪莲的真正用意，于是一次次坐失良机，把她逼上告状之路。
编导真的是把李雪莲当主角来描写吗?未必，她只是一根线，不断拉扯出中国社会的众生相。为了一个“农村妇女”的告状，从政府到法院到警方，动用了多少人力物力，却还是做的无用功，这是为什么?因为所有人都是政绩思维、维稳思维，却唯独不能理解一个简单村妇的简单心思：她只是要一个说法，不是“法律的说法”，而是“人情的说法”，即便受骗认栽也行，但得让她咽下这口气，而现实却是处处跟她作对，让她的恶气越发浓烈。
就是为了这口气，她像当年的秋菊一样上路了，不惜胡搅蛮缠，不惜委身以报，一切为了让那个“前夫畜生”承认假离婚的事实，为达此目的，她要将所有阻拦她揭露真相的拦路石都搬掉。然而最终传来的“前夫车祸身亡”的噩耗，顿时让她失却了方向，告状也就无以为继。
这个戏剧性的细节在影片中被编导进行了深入阐释，他们通过剧中人物问道：如果那个“前夫”没有车祸身亡呢?是不是告状将没完没了?这是一种沉默的点题：在目前机制下，各级干部该怎样准确读解李雪莲的诉求?李雪莲的诉求很大吗?她的心理需求很深奥吗?当法律之路走不通后，难道就没有其他机制可以说服、平衡、舒缓吗?为什么所有人都“读不懂”她是在呼唤人情关怀和寻找心理寄托呢?
社会矛盾是如何发生的?人际关系是如何协调的?公权力是如何运作的?这些都是值得思考的“重大命题”。编导用荒诞的“刁民告状”的套子，将这些重大命题裹进人物塑造和情节推进中，引发观众在笑声中思索，显示了以小博大的高超智慧。这对于长期远离“批判现实主义”传统的中国电影而言，不啻为“补钙之作”，值得点赞。而电影在艺术形式上采用“忽圆、忽方、忽宽屏”的视觉效果，同样是出于审美和推演故事的双重考虑——“月洞”能别具一格地有效展示乡村之美;当场景换成了北京，圆形也就换成了方形;当一切“正常”了，屏幕也正常了。如此一来，这个现实而又荒诞的故事也就有了更具象化的轮廓。
关于电影观后感的作文英语版的【三】
猴哥高1。5米，重85斤，一张帅气的脸框衬托出了他那俊秀的面孔。最重要的是，他还爱卖萌，莫非这就是传说中的“萌上加萌”？
猴哥在跑步方面虽比我差一点，但经过“千锤百炼（参加篮球队的每日5圈）”后，他竟然打破了我引以为傲的50米往返跑11。27秒，跑出了10。89秒的`好成绩，弄得我坐立不安，自己跑神的名号就要被夺走了，可还不知道对方怎么胜的。于是我就不耻下问的去请教猴哥：“你是怎么练的？才短短两周，你就能秒***掉我的记录？吃兴奋药了？”猴哥一脸无辜的说：“没有啊！我只是参加篮球队每天跑上几圈就成这样了。”我还是一脸的不信，猴哥就开始鄙视我这种打破砂锅问到底的“良好精神”。
猴哥不仅跑步好，在篮球方面的造诣也是很高滴。再一次篮球赛中，我们打3对3，我们这边有：身经百“战”的赵昱杰，超神辅助我，以及只是无辜的路过传个球的刘允功。对面的阵容就稍微逊色一点了：一个经过系统训练的大将马汶博，个子高但不会抢篮板的张阔（鄙视他，白长一身肉），以及酱油级人物周奕萧。比赛开始了，我和赵昱杰天衣无缝的配合，连拿8分，打的对面连还手之力都没有。随后，“猴哥”悠哉悠哉的飘过来了，于是，周奕萧被换下，“猴子”上场。他一上场，就连断赵昱杰N+1球，可惜上篮时大部分被我帽掉了，可还是被他抢回2分。我和赵昱杰再次发威，又连续拿到4分，比分变为12：2。现在是我控球，猴哥在防赵昱杰，而张阔和马汶博又围过来，于是我一个三分砸过去，哎呦，一记臭球，球从篮筐上擦下来了。猴哥再次抢球，带球过了赵昱杰，我深知拦不住他，于是就跑到篮下抢篮板。猴哥没进，我将球断下，上篮，猴哥打手，犯规。我再次将球带到篮下，一个倒勾，进了。这时，这个该“千刀万剐”的下课铃响了。于是我们就愉快的以14：2赢得了这场比赛。
对了，猴哥到底是谁呢？他就是我们班著名的沙包君——陈家宝喽！
关于电影观后感的作文英语版的【四】
初恋50 First Dates
What would it feel if I can wake up everyday forgetting what happened for the last whole year?
Lucy in the movie “50 First Dates” told me this feeling. Every morning when she woke up, she only rememberred the Sunday of last year which was her father’s birthday, also the date she had the car accident which made her only keep memory before Sunday, so she always felt happy living the same habit as what she did on Sunday a year ago with the kind set-up by her father and brother. After meeting Hey, she could only remember who he was on the same day. But after one night, he became a stranger to her. She couldn’t even recognize he was the one she used to date and love everyday. Hey tried his best to give her a new different meeting every day so as to win her smile and regain their “First Date”. Hey made her tapes every morning to help her remember what happened the day before and the last whole year. Lucy thus felt grateful with all she had when she woke up everyday. On the same day, she always had the same deep gratitude to face Hey with her sweet smile. What a beautiful feeling it is to always feel thanksgiving and to always
appreciate each other’s effort. A touching story between a memory lost woman and a devoted man taught all of us, normal people, the essence of love. When two people can thank each other for their devotion everyday like what they did for each other on first date, love can forever be refreshed and energetic. On Lucy’s side, people with memory will ask for more than yesterday and become critical of their partners day by day, while people without memory will feel grateful for their life and the people around them everyday.
In the movie, when one day Lucy decided to break up with Hey to let him rebuild his life by burning all their diaries and tapes, I cried for Hey’s broken heart. For her, it was just one day feeling. For him, it was long-term affection and connection. It was easier for her than him to give up their love. On Hey’s side, people with memory will always remember the past happiness and
treasure it for the rest of their life, while people without memory will easily give up at the end of the same day.
What a ruthless feeling it is to end a relationship just after one minute thought. People with fragile mind would easily ruin a long-term relationship no matter what reason they have. The torture between Lucy and Hey tells us the fatal factor to do harm to intimacy between a couple is their fragile mind of
balancing emotion and reason. Thus most of couple lose their trust for each other after experiencing this weakly testing broke-up.
飓风Taken
What is the right relationship between the father and the daughter? There is no certain answer. But the love of Brain's to his daughter must be one of the best ones.
His daughter, a young pretty 17-year-old girl was kidnapped during a tour in Paris. Brain got the news and hurried to France to take his daughter. He found that the gangsters that kidnapped his daughter were connected with an old friend which made him exetreme angry. He finally found the place where was holding an auction selling young virgins and broke in successfully taking his daughter away.
No matter how hard and stressful the situation was, and how dangerous things he faced, he never went back just because of the greatest love of a simple father. In the movie, we are all moved not only his actions of kindness, but also his insistance and the greatest of all- a father's love.
魔术师THE ILLUSIONIST FACTS
When word of the famed Eisenheim's (Ed Norton illusions reaches Crown Prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell, the ruler attends one of the magician's shows in order to debunk the performance. But when the prince's intended, Sophie von Teschen (Jessica Biel, assists the magician onstage, Eisenheim and Sophie recognize each other from their childhoods, and pretty soon they're totally hot for each other. As the clandestine romance continues, the prince's best cop (Paul Giamatti is charged with exposing Eisenheim, even while the magician gains a devoted and vocal public following. Before long, Sophie turns up dead, and the logical suspect is Eisenheim himself.
一线声机"Cellular" has the setup for a solid straight-ahead thriller: A kidnap victim who does not know where she is being held phones a total stranger who must then stay connected on his cell phone to find her before she is killed. Joel Schumacher scored earlier with a similarly phone-themed Larry Cohen story, "Phone Booth." As executed by tone-deaf director David R. Ellis, however, "Cellular" becomes an unintentionally hilarious cousin to Brian de Palma's "Raising Cain" and "Snake Eyes."
Ellis seems to have unwittingly spliced together two different films with
mismatched tones: Kim Basinger as the kidnapee and Jason Statham as the kidnapper occupy the deadly-serious, straight-to-video thriller half, while Chris Evans as the rescuer and William H. Macy as a police officer seem to be in a "Saturday Night Live"-alum action comedy. Nowhere else is the disjointedness in tone more apparent than when Basinger and Evans's performances are placed side-by-side during their conversations: The scenes keep cutting between an overwrought Basinger wringing out every drop of melodrama, while a blissfully inept Evans seems to be channeling a cross between Chris Kattan/Jimmy Fallon and Ben Affleck/Keanu Reeves.
Meanwhile, Ellis pulls out tricks intended to generate thrills and surprises. He throws in out-of-nowhere "shocks," a la "Final Destination"; he throws in
flashbacks; he throws in a gun-blazing Macy in Jerry Bruckheimer action-hero slo-mo; and yet, Ellis has no handle on staging any of them competently. Case in point: "Cellular" is the proud owner of one of the most ineptly scored chase sequences ever, as if Ellis simply heard a snippet of the song's lyrics ("...where you gonna run to?" literally and paid no attention to the inappropriateness of the accompanying music (which just bop, bop, bops along. (The song is even reprised during the closing credits, which itself is misbegotten in conception.
And yet, for all of its failures as art, "Cellular" is always entertaining for those very same faults
