Somewhere in the remote region, the war ends. In the midst of ruined cities and houses in the streets, in rural hamlets, everywhere where people still live, are children who have lost their homes and parents. Abandoned, hungry, and in rags, defenseless and humiliated, they wander through the world. Hunger drives them. Little streams of orphans merge into a river which rushes forward and submerges everything in its path. The children do not know any feeling; they know only the world of their enemies. They fight, steal, struggle for a mouthful of food, and violence is merely a means to get it. A gang led by Cahoun finds a refuge in an abandoned castle and encounters an old composer who has voluntarily retired into solitude from a world of hatred, treason, and crime. How can they find a common ground, how can they become mutual friends? The castle becomes their hiding place but possibly it will also be their first home which they may organize and must defend. But even for this, the price will be very high.
To this simple story, the journalist, writer, poet, scriptwriter, movie director, and film theoretician Béla Balázs applied many years of experience. He and the director Géza Radványi created a work which opened a new postwar chapter in Hungarian film. Surprisingly, this film has not lost any of its impact over the years, especially on a profound philosophical level. That is to say, it is not merely a movie about war; it is not important in what location and in what period of time it takes place. It is a story outside of time about the joyless fate of children who pay dearly for the cruel war games of adults.
At the time it was premiered, the movie was enthusiastically received by the critics. The main roles were taken by streetwise boys of a children's group who created their roles improvisationally in close contact with a few professional actors, and in the children's acting their own fresh experience of war's turmoil appears to be reflected. At the same time, their performance fits admirably into the mosaic of a very complex movie language. Balázs's influence revealed itself, above all, in the introductory sequences: an air raid on an amusement park, seen in a montage of dramatic situations evoking the last spasms of war, where, undoubtedly, we discern the influence of classical Soviet cinematography. Shooting, the boy's escape, the locomotive's wheels, the shadows of soldiers with submachine guns, the sound of a whistle—the images are linked together in abrupt sequences in which varying shots and expressive sharp sounds are emphasized. A perfectly planned screenplay avoided all elements of sentimentality, time-worn stereotypes of wronged children, romanticism and cheap simplification. The authors succeeded in bridging the perilous dramatic abyss of the metamorphosis of a children's community. Their telling of the story (the scene of pillaging, the assault on the castle, etc) independently introduced some neorealist elements which, at that time, were being propagated in Italy by De Sica, Rossellini, and other film artists. The rebukes of contemporary critics, who called attention to "formalism for its own sake" have been forgotten. The masterly art of cameraman Barnabás Hegyi gives vitality to the poetic images. His angle shots of the children, his composition of scenes in the castle interior, are a living document of the times, and underline the atmosphere and the characters of the protagonists. The success of the picture was also enhanced by the musical art of composer Dénes Buday who, in tense situations, inserted the theme of the Marseilaise into the movie's structure, as a motive of community unification, as an expression of friendship and the possibility of understanding.
Valahol Europaban is the first significant postwar Hungarian film. It originated in a relaxed atmosphere, replete with joy and euphoria, and it includes these elements in order to demonstrate the strength of humanism, tolerance, and friendship. It represents a general condemnation of war anywhere in the world, in any form.
一个我将永远离你而去 另一个我则一直陪在你身边
/chy/与心爱的人在一起是难以面对死亡的
里面的场景非常高级，有种未来的感觉，题材蛮有现实主义的意义，然而故事对我而言太无趣。
感觉男主并不是有钱人，但也能负担得起这个费用？这项科技相当于女娲造人一样，科学家担当了上帝的角色，希望这种有悖伦理的技术永远不要面世。
太太太慢了，看了都想睡觉。奥卡菲娜被骂黑人文化挪用是真的有原因，台词一股Rap味，整个人格格不入。
中间真的有很触动得嗲，继承意志，另一个身体和记忆的*我*代替我去爱这个世界我在乎的，真的又破碎又无解，这才是另外的梦。
5. 死去便死去，至少做好告别。余下的，也只能渡过。
摄影好棒，配乐也很优秀。这些猜想终有一天会变成现实，有人接受不了，有人坦然面对一切。世事无常。只是在家庭成员的知情权上，是否有必要真正达成一致。
生命并不只是表象部分，科学也拷贝不了人的“精要”
如果有一天我也要这样离去，我可能也会如此选择
不是节奏慢就细腻，不是有一两个好点子就不空洞，比如此片，跟白水一样
8.5
在我眼前随风而逝
Technology allowing people to take away 「The pain is all I have of him」.「I love you. Always have. And always will.」
好看，值得推荐。情节4，表演5，画面5，寓意4，尿点2 = 20/25，80分电影
他家人如果知道真相后会心碎死。永远不知道真相才可以
今时今日如果再单纯讲述克隆人是独立个体——即便带着原型的全部记忆——已毫无新意，于是本片将这一并不新鲜的设定嫁接到了个体为家庭奉献的美国中产核心价值观上，拍出了新意。
一个得病将要去世的人，克隆了一个自己，让他代表自己继续照顾自己的家人。从此独自一人抱着所有痛苦而死去～
一种平稳的自我安慰的伤感情绪。用克隆人强设定，实际上还是通过搭建个人和家庭的关系，理性与情感的结构，拷问人性人情。选或者不选都挺让人难过，想到那句话说，我们供养着这具躯体，因为它保存着记忆。
【3.0】拍得极尽地温柔，但却是一部细思恐极的电影。关于伴侣另一方的知情权和意愿归属，以及克隆体作为独立人的主体意识问题，影片全然站在了男主角的霸权角度看待。模糊伦理问题的具体细节来讲科技的人文关怀，这种粉饰危机视角比《黑镜》的放大危机视角之于生活更恐怖。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
