split影评（谁能给我一篇电影《钢琴师》的英语评论或者介绍，急！）

本文目录

• 谁能给我一篇电影《钢琴师》的英语评论或者介绍，急！
• 求《指环王》英语影评
• 影评《诡老》：24小时内老了50岁！在日光浴下的骇人真相究竟是什么
• 哈利波特7的英文影评
• 求一篇英语影评，最好是最近的英语电影，大概在50词左右，单词难度最好在初一

谁能给我一篇电影《钢琴师》的英语评论或者介绍，急！

The Pianist Movie ReviewThe Pianist, Roman Polanksi’s harrowing depiction of survival in war torn Warsaw is now out to own on DVD. The director reached deep into his own past to deliver the true story of Wladyslaw Szpilman, a Jewish pianist of some repute who is forced to eek out an existence amidst the events of The Second World War, where the fear of death at the hands of Poland’s Nazi occupiers was always close at hand. Szpilman’s story in many ways mirrors Polanski’s own tale. His mother was sent to her death at Auschwitz, and he wandered the Polish countryside alone passing from family to family until being reunited with his Jewish father, who survived the concentration camps, after the war ended. No director could be better placed to do justice to Szpilman’s unique story. The film won the Palme D’or at Cannes last year and further acclaim at the Academy Awards in 2003, picking up the accolades for best picture, best actor for Adrien Brody who plays Szpilman, and most unexpectedly for Polanski himself. Despite measures in place to prevent the diminutive Pole from setting foot on US soil due to alleged sex crimes committed in the late seventies, Polanski picked up the award through the time honoured proxy of a video message! After a successful cinematic run on both sides of the Atlantic the film has been given the customary DVD treatment. Padded out with a range of extras and one particularly interesting documentary about the historical background to the story, where Polanski reveals his own methods of surviving the Polish occupation. Polanski’s most personal film by far in terms of its content, The Pianist re-evaluates the directors’ pre-occupation with the darker recesses of the human soul explored throughout his career, often in elaborately macabre ways. A sinister yet plainly demarcated force of evil is an ever present in Polanski’s films. Whether it is the elderly couple from Rosemary’s Baby who conspire on behalf of the Devil himself, John Houston’s Noah Cross the wealthy land developer in Chinatown, or the shadowy kidnappers who quietly steal Harrison Ford’s wife in Frantic. The central character is continually terrorised and tested in the face of overpowering evil, which, once ultimately unmasked appears to reside closer to home than is often comfortable to reconcile. Wadyslaw Szpilman, a local celebrity famed for his recitals on the city radio station, treats the German invasion of Poland with the same quiet unease and vigilance as his family and friends. The relatively peaceful early days of the occupation, coupled with news that Great Britain and France have declared war on Germany, buoy the Szpilman’s hope that all will soon be resolved without too much blood letting. Swiftly Polanski pulls the rug out from beneath the Szpilmans, unravelling their comfortable family lifestyle, with a steady current of persecution, turning to humiliation and then outright debasement. After being segregated into the Warsaw Ghettos and closed off from the rest of the city, Polanski exposes man’s survival instinct in all its brutal rawness. Individual episodes that scour the depths of human depravity, showing Jews turning on one another for money and scraps of food are handled in Polanski’s customarily matter-of-fact style. After his family are transported to the death camps, Szpilman is forced to exist alone in deserted and ruined buildings, at the mercy of sympathisers and under the constant threat of capture. From a collective depiction of the Jewish struggle in the first half of the war the story gradually becomes more sharply focused upon Szpilman himself. Within the sweeping historical context of the first hour of the film Wladyslaw exists within the family unit, trying desperately to stay as such. After his family is split asunder, an historical sweep turns to penetrating character study, ingrained with palpable moments of suspense. Gone are the overcrowded streets of the ghettos full of dead bodies rotting in the sunshine; Adrien Brody’s quiet, waif like presence absorbs the majority of the screen time. Outliving everyone, Szpilman soon begins to reassert his sense of self despite such a raw existence. He re-establishes contact with the life he once knew through old friends who harbour him in relative safety and by maintaining his meticulous love of music. In one of the most arresting scenes in the film we see Szpilman miming the piano with his hands hovering over the keys in order to not make a sound and be detected. Polanski pares down the story to one mans plight in the midst of 6 million others and it works resoundingly well. Soon we begin to believe that Szpilman is the only human being left in a devastated Warsaw, held completely at the mercy of outside forces, his loneliness and desperation is acutely observed. From the street-fighting between Polish resistance fighters and the Nazi’s observed from afar, to the tank shells and bombs that rip through his makeshift home, Szpilman’s fate becomes tensely poised with Polanski milking each scene for all its worth so that even in the absence of any notable dialogue or music to enhance the action, it becomes impossible to take your eyes from the screen. Intensely moving, even on the small screen, The Pianist is a rewarding watch, tinged with the deeply personal input of a mercurial director who emphasises readily with the characters and their plight. Polanski has poured a little bit of himself into this one (and you sense that it’s much more than just his substantial filmmaking talents) but instead of getting too personal he maintains his distance. Never seeking to over-elaborate on the emotion, Polanski chooses to keep things fundamentally austere. As a result the integrity of the story is undiminished.我是在国外的一个影评网站摘过来的，只是希望对你能有点帮助。

求《指环王》英语影评

Saying that this film starts where `Two Towers’ left off is somewhat misleading, for the film starts a great distance from the walls of Helm’s Deep. `Return of the King’ opens with a flashback of Smeagol (Andy Serkis) obtaining the one ring of power and an origin of his deterioration into the creature Gollum. This opening recaptures an emphasis that was somewhat lost within the epic battles of `Two Towers,’ at that’s the ring. The first installment, `The Fellowship of the Ring,’ provided heaps of exposition on the ring’s importance and influence, and in `Return of the King,’ we see it pay off, big time.After the armies of Isengard have been defeated due to an allegiance between Theoden (Bernard Hill), the king of Rohan, and the elves, the main threat to middle earth is now concentrated in the kingdom of Mordor, controlled by the dark lord Sauron. Sauron has turned his eye towards the realm of Gondor, the last free kingdom of men, and the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellan) must warn Denethor (John Noble), Steward of Gondor of the impending attack, while Aragorn (Viggo Mortenson), heir to the throne of Gondor, and Theoden gather men to aid against the armies of Mordor. The dark lord Sauron needs only to regain the one ring of power to conquer all of middle earth, and two hobbits, Frodo (Elijah Wood) the ring-bearer and Sam (Sean Astin), must continue their journey, directed by Gollum, to Mount Doom, the only place where the ring can be destroyed. Got all that? If not, you need to bone up on your `Lord of the Rings’ before expecting to follow this film.Since all three epics were filmed simultaneously, each individually has the feel of being part of a larger picture - except for this one. `The Return of the King’ is just too big, the most epic of a set of epic films. Now that director Peter Jackson has brilliantly constructed the characters and plotlines throughout the first two films, he puts them to use.All of the characters have their best moments within this film. The pair of mischievous hobbits, Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), are no longer the tree ornaments they were from `Two Towers,’ but are split-up, and take their characters in completely new directions. Aragorn, played with an unmatched sense of honor by Viggo Mortenson, is about to meet his destiny as the future king of all men, while Andy Serkis continues his expert portrayal of Gollum (Serkis’ provided not only the voice of Gollum, but also assisted during production by acting out the scenes of the computer-generated character with his fellow actors).However, the real acting triumph of the film is Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins. He continues his descent into corruption with an incredible talent that many could not pull off. Wood’s performance is so critical to the film because it determines the ring’s power to corrupt, which, needless to say, is absolute.The first two films established Jackson as an incredible visionary, shooting vast landscapes from his native New Zealand. With `Return of the King,’ Jackson really gets a chance to show off. With, hands down, the most beautiful visuals of the trilogy, Jackson makes `Return of the King’ a gorgeous feast for the eyes, while never resorting to McG level over-the-topness. Jackson stays very grounded in his characters, not letting the effects tell the story, but only assist the wonderful dialogue and characters. Think of `Return’ as a mix of `Fellowship’ and `Two Towers,’ with enough action and character development worthy of ending a film event of this magnitude.The bottom line, fans of the films will not be disappointed. Hardcore Tolkien lovers might be upset by plot changes and interpretations made by Jackson and the other writers, however, it is unrealistic to expect a completely true adaptation of the novels, being that film is an entirely different medium. Despite the alterations, Jackson consistently stays true to the major themes and ideas from the original text, while adding some of the finest filmmaking ever put to screen. `The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King’ is one of the most finely tuned and cinematically perfect films ever made. Not only the best of the trilogy, but a crowning achievement in epic filmmaking.给你找了个三部写到一起的，你要是想要三部分开的就在问题补充里说一下，没时间给你翻译了啊

影评《诡老》：24小时内老了50岁！在日光浴下的骇人真相究竟是什么

故事描述一个家庭前往热带地带度假时，发现他们才刚在夏日海滩放松了几个小时，竟然就迅速衰老，在一天内过完他们的一生。

　　导演奈沙马兰新作品《诡老》改编自法国作家皮耶奥斯卡李维与瑞士图画小说家弗雷德里克彼得斯创作的图像小说《沙堡》，这部从预告释出就很让人期待的悬疑惊悚电影，总算在台湾上映。同样在上映首日就到离家最近的戏院买了早场票入场，果不其然的依旧是一个人包场，不过我觉得这样反而更有感觉，但不晓得是否因为观影前期望过大，所以看完之后反而觉得很空虚。

　　不想说《诡老》好看的都在预告片里，可确实得当不过两分钟的预告片被拉长至近两小时，里头的那些片段带给人的诡异感、惊悚感都被跟着稀释，剧情也没有想象中的紧凑，甚至还有些为了彷佛鬼打墙般的情节感到枯燥乏味，几次暗示观众沙滩与渡假村的关联性也在最后得到证明，神秘现象和人体实验的结合是猜想得到的组合，这不意外的发展让《诡老》更显虚有其表。

　什么事对你最重要？”，本来无关紧要的小事成了最重要的大事、本来最重要的大事反而成了无所谓的小事，那些情感、情绪或者是其他东西，都会因为时间的流逝而有所改变，常常之所以不愿放下、继续执着的原因，是认为时间还很多、多到你可以慢慢耗，过去不也有这样的例子？和好友吵架到不愿意原谅对方，双方都在等着对方先低头道歉，想着反正总有一天对方一定会示好，就这样固执着、直到对方因为生病、意外过世了，才感到深深的后悔，后悔没有早一点和好、没有早一点说出心里话...。

　　导演奈沙马兰便是把这样的时间猛力压缩，把人的一生限制在了一天过完，逼使人们深感时间流逝之迅速，进而去思考受限于时间之内的种种对于自己而言，什么才是最值得用余生梭哈的？然而最终呈现出来的结果是，《诡老》空有很好的概念，实行力却没有很好，几乎感受不到导演奈沙马兰试图从这样一部电影中传达给观众的讯息，整部电影只有最后大概半小时、剩主角一家四口还活着的时候，盖和普莉丝特两人的谈话比较令人有感，即使是结婚多年的夫妻，之间还是会有很多不能说、不知道怎么说出口的话，积累到最后选择分开一次痛快，但当看着孩子们慢慢长大、自己老了、脸上皱纹多了，好多话终于能不用憋在心里了，为什么会走到想分开的原因也忘了，只剩放在对方身上的感情还在。

　　《诡老》一个大问题是，导演奈沙马兰的解释与交代并不完全。虽然有些部分透过众人的经历与猜测、以及过去同样来过这片沙滩的前人所留下来的线索有进行了解释，例如同样都是度半小时如一年，为什么发生在崔特、麦黛丝和凯拉身上的变化会这么快且明显？为什么每当想离开沙滩就会彷佛呼吸困难而陷入昏厥？为什么出现在身体上的伤痕会迅速愈合？为什么后来派翠西亚癫痫症会很久没发作可一发作就是反复发作直到断气？顺着剧情看下来再根据最后面台面上是度假村经理、台面下是进行药物实验的华伦药厂的负责人的说法，是已能让观众理解并且认同部分现象。

　从来到渡假村，盖先在房间桌上看到“华伦药厂”的简介、和普莉丝特为了“某事”起了争执，隔天在吃早餐吃镜头先带到了后面也有戏份的查尔斯一家人，克莉丝朵不断向服务生强调自己患有低钙血症，接着是派翠西亚癫痫症发作，后来到了沙滩经历连串事情后陆续发现众人都有某种疾病缠身，普莉丝特胃长了肿瘤、查尔斯有精神疾病、早先他们来到沙滩的饶舌歌手中型轿车有血友病、和他同行的女子则有渐冻症，不是自己就是伴侣有疾病的巧合，都在他们全是因为参加抽奖活动才来到渡假村后成了一种有关联性的计划，加上画面不时带到有人出现在另一头山上，不难推敲出这一切的真相和疾病、和药有关，很自然而然的就会往“是否这是种研究或实验？”的方向想，所以最后是这样的走向不会太意外，只觉得也算是给了发生在众人身上的诡异经历一个合理的解释。“我只是需要些时间而已。”

　　影评《诡老》：24小时内老了50岁！在日光浴下的骇人真相

　　“我们没有时间了。”

　　尽管刚刚讲到了用药物实验、人体实验来合理化这神秘经历是可以的，但这仅限于剧情上的理解，对于导演奈沙马兰的用意直到看完还是茫然比清楚多，原意是想赋予图像小说《沙堡》更深、更具空间的思考可能，可《诡老》依旧还是成了空有皮囊的悬疑风格作品，未能照自己所想的让电影更有意义性是很可惜的一件事。

　　《诡老》本身娱乐性也因不少随着剧情冒出的问号，还有被暧昧处理掉、不如预期中冲击的画面影响而降低不少，种种原因都让《诡老》处在一个不上不下，相当尴尬的位置。

哈利波特7的英文影评

The Harry Potter series is one of the most faithful I have ever seen, and each film brings something new. Whenever a new film comes out, there is always a certain criticism that a book fan will mention because of certain information or details left out of the film adaptation. Being the final book in the famous wizard series, this would always be the hardest book to adapt, so I was very relieved when it was announced that it would be split into two parts. Some might see this as an attempt to cash in money, but I honestly do not believe it was for that reason. The filmmakers care about this story, and being the finale, they care about adding in character development before the big action-packed finale. So after seeing Part 1, I have the obligation not just to judge it as a film adaptation but also as a film.The opening of the film is perfect for the type of tone it is trying to set. Showing us each of the home lives of the three leads and just how difficult the future will be is a hard fact to behold. The action scenes in the film are pretty impressive, but not overly done and they do not take you out of the real story. David Yates and Steve Kloves have set Part 1 as a character film with action in it, not the other way around. And so it is with the rest of the film. Last Year’s Half-Blood Prince proved to me that Yates was the best director that this series ever had. He understands mood and the challenges that the three leads are going through. Part 1 is able to capitalize on that.Each new Harry Potter film is deemed as ’darker’ than the previous, and that may be true, but it is not just about how sinister things on screen appear to be. The magical world is at a time where danger lurks around everywhere. We certainly are able to see this on screen, but the real power and the real confrontation as to just how dangerous the world is right now is brought by the quiet moments in the film. Many have said that the middle section of the film, when the three leads begin their camp out, is what weakens the pace. I was surprised by how much this was not true when I watched it. If anything, this section is much needed. It is also powerful because the three leads are able to hold their own very well. Over the years, they have matured and grown as actors, and at this point no one else could do what they are doing. There are certain scenes in the film that, while definitely subtle, are completely powerful and strengthen the characters and express the way they are feeling in a sense of loss. An example is the dance scene between Harry and Hermione, which I thought was perfectly acted by both, especially Watson.Emma Watson has been the most inconsistent throughout the series. She was good as a little kid in the first two, good as a growing teen in the 3rd film, over-dramatic in Goblet of Fire, OK in Order of the Phoenix, and it wasn’t until Half-Blood Prince when you could see she was really starting to shine. Well, here she does. While Radcliffe and Grint are very good, there is something electrifying about Watson. People have raved a lot about her performance, and while at times one is cautious not to overpraise a performance, she deserves it. She does not have scenes where in script it would seem as if she has to do something incredible. This is what makes her stand-out in this film. Starting from her first scene in the film, in a very sad and tragic scene in her home, we see her pain and her sadness over to what she has to do. She only has two words that she speaks in this scene, but her facial expressions say it all. She conveys the same powerful subtle expressions throughout the film. There is also another scene involving her and Helena Bonham Carter that she has been praised about, and this was a disappointment. Not that Watson wasn’t great, because she certainly was, much more than what was probably required from her, but the scene only lingered on her for short seconds and then it cut away. We could hear Watson’s incredible suffering, but I just wish it could have lingered more on her, to feel even more of what she and others like her really have to go through. Watson is incredibly effective and subtle in this film, and for the first time, she gave the best performance in a Harry Potter film, a feat that none of the three leads have ever achieved.A real stand-out of the last HP film, Half Blood Prince, was the cinematography, and while I am not sure whether Part 1 was better shot than that one, it was still pretty impressive. Of course, that is no surprise. The music score also stood-out for me. While it is true that it is not as loud, or even as recurring, as the scores of the last Harry Potter films as in it is not present in a lot of the film, it was still effective. I really hope it gets some nominations. Ultimately, the film was everything I could hope for, and not any major flaws really appeared. The ending I also thought was a good way to end Part 1, contrary to the opinions of most. This was a very effective, carefully paced, and superb beginning to the end.

求一篇英语影评，最好是最近的英语电影，大概在50词左右，单词难度最好在初一

Movie review: ’Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows — Part 1’Much of the plot of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" involves the attempt to find and destroy a series of Horcruxes, and if you haven’t a clue about what they are or why they’re important, you might as well stay home.There is something different, however, about this Potter movie, and that is the words "Part 1" that end the title. Understandably distraught about "Hallows" being the last of the phenomenally popular J.K. Rowling novels, Warner Bros. has split the final effort into two films and is likely kicking itself for not having thought of that with the earlier books.You don’t make $5.7 billion in theatrical revenue, however, by being cavalier about your source material and the watchword for the "Potter" series in general, and this film in particular, is making the audience feel like it’s in safe hands.Though adventurous filmmakers like Alfonso Cuarón have made "Potter" films, David Yates, who directed the two previous epics as well as both installments of "Deathly Hallows," is not one of them.Capable and dependable, he can be counted on to make solid albeit unsurprising films that believe in connecting the dots rather than creating risky excitement. When studio president Alan Horn said his priority for the series was treating the books "respectfully," he wasn’t kidding.Being respectful also means making sure you have quality people behind the camera (Steve Kloves has written almost all the screenplays and the new cinematographer is Oscar-nominated "Girl With a Pearl Earring" veteran Eduardo Serra) as well as top acting talent in front of it. Even if you don’t always have enough for them to do.In fact, the Potter films are so loaded down with the best of British performers that Bill Nighy, who was added to the cast this time along with Rhys Ifans, wasn’t really kidding when he commented, "For a while, I thought I would be the only English actor of a certain age who wasn’t in a ’Harry Potter’ film."哈利波特的 你删删改改就行了