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
毫无亮点啊，两位女主之间也是毫无火花呀。练接吻都很干。
特儿好帅啊。特儿好帅啊。内特也好可爱啊。除此之外，不知道这部有什么可取之处。
导演视听、表演、音乐审美都在线，难得能在中国院线看到一部各方面没雷点也不尬的青春片。但另一方面，人物和冲突的类型化又力道不够，过于平淡，除了结尾实在是有些燃点不足。
这个宗教元素，总是给我一种古装内核套了个当代皮的错觉。
一般般吧 不甜也不刀 很平淡 看完感受就是：远离邪教！！
比其他姬片尺度小很多，但这却是最让我有感觉的电影了
emmmmmmmm看完只有emmmmmm的想法
圣经上偷偷触摸的指尖、厕所里让人心动的背后抱、浴缸中为爱接受的洗礼，终究敌不过现实，宗教对人性的压抑堪比封建礼教。
运镜、剪辑、演员演技、配乐都是满分的存在，以宗教为切入感十分流畅不出戏，甚至里面的一些细节拍的如此之好是欧美人的女性影片中很少见的细腻感。可惜，结尾画蛇添足了，直接悲剧收场会更好，那种完全相信宗教抑制人欲的可怕体现的淋漓尽致。
从片尾Marike的状态来看，婚姻和生育，尤其是生育，对人在身体和精神上的摧残真是太大了。
指尖的触碰和流连，来自背后的拥抱，落在颈间的吻……小细节总是很打动人。宗教笼罩之下的爱向来很难有好的结局，有时候真是痛恨这些人类自己制造出来的枷锁，但我还是愿意相信最后是he，她们会一起离开那里，去看意大利小镇的钟楼上长出的橡树。
行吧 小小年纪爱一场！是你要选择结婚生子的 可惜了眼镜女！颜值是不错
特儿好帅啊。特儿好帅啊。内特也好可爱啊。除此之外，不知道这部有什么可取之处。
一直在回响着“我们不是只有现在吗/现在不是可以相爱吗”，但是宗教背景下的同性爱情还是太难了，结尾让我emmmm
可以当做违命前传，中间部分挺甜的，结局猝不及防
3.5 Jaime掉进了一个荒谬的故事里，荒谬的故事里人人讲着另一个更荒谬的故事，是集体主义对个人的侵犯 是偶像崇拜的高潮。
究竟为什么2022年了还要拍这种压抑的，隐忍的女同性恋爱情…身为一个姬佬，在我眼里，这两个人真的一点火花都没有。女同性恋什么时候能换个形象出现在大屏幕上？
当信仰与爱冲突，很难不成悲剧。节奏有点问题，但摄影很美，比起两人但爱情加拿大的浅滩更让我难忘，那可能就是marik想要的天堂吧。西蒙长得像高配荷兰弟
青春就该有青春的样子，跟阳刚or阴柔的刻板印象有关系吗？我们每个人都该经历一个傻逼和流汗的夏天，这样很多年后才能不留遗憾。给三星是因为对日版“五个扑水的少年”印象太深了，犹记得妻夫木聪的迷你小泳裤，性感到王炸！
皱着眉头看着她用自己的方法煮东西，尝一口后嫌弃地说不该加牛奶，她却什么也不听：我不管就要这样。在厕所从背后抱住，真的很有张力啊，我想谈恋爱了。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
