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.
树欲静而风不止，山雨欲来风满楼！或许真如影片所表达的，张伯伦用自己的出丑替后来的丘吉尔争取到了几分胜算也一定。片中德国外交官的立场转变显得有些突兀，另外，“元首”的演员外形实在让人非常出戏。
对于历史题材来说，情节各种插曲真的很难让人有惊醒动魄的代入感......
本片改编自罗伯特·哈里斯的国际畅销书。1938 年的秋天，欧洲正处于战争的边缘。阿道夫·希特勒准备入侵捷克斯洛伐克，内维尔·张伯伦政府拼命寻求和平解决方案。眼见局势升温，英国公务员休·莱格特和德国外交官保罗·冯·哈特曼前往慕尼黑参加紧急会议。随着谈判开始，这两位老友发现自己落入了政治诡计布下的巨网，正面临异常的危险。在全世界的注视下，战争能否避免？如果可以，需要付出什么代价？
还算值得一看吧，能把这么一段已经公认无趣的历史拍的如谍战大片一样有声有色扣人心弦，特别是能和当下的俄欧争端、台海局势有直接的对照呼应。
很俗气，也可能是丘吉尔力挽狂澜成为一种认知，很难把二战的结局和张伯伦的绥靖扯上关联。
故事把那个年代的人可能会经历的所有历史事件都套到了两位男主身上，还有模板式的人物设定和关键节点抉择，这编剧大概是看了几百本二战耽美同人吧，怎么能融合的这么丝滑？
对不起，危机边缘我还是嗑到一口，两个小年轻之间张力十足。吸一口烟憋着等你一起吐是什么深沉的爱（bushi
框架在那里，怎么填都可以，就看导演聪不聪明了，两位男主的互动简直怀疑是导演故意用来让观众忽视剧本bug的
典型的为表现主题，瞎凑各种大俗烂、想当然、不合理、不严谨桥段。
小酒店的重逢；
保罗最后没开枪的剧情，逻辑上没立住。影片最后字幕标注张伯伦之死，竟有些唏嘘和悲凉。
一战战壕到二战前夕，前线小兵到首相秘书，George MacKay特快专递情报信件的标志性场景「荞麦跑」现已正式列入影史。严肃正剧的定位注定除了集齐优秀演员，重现昨日以讽喻当下政治的些微意义之外，对如今世界仅剩「道德说教」。工整乏味的导演手法使其无法跳出纪录片语法的阴影，即使借助原著在课本事件的空白间隙里穿针虚构，惊悚氛围和人物塑造的表现依然毫无新招，趣味寥寥。当片尾字幕亮出，影片用意更是昭然若揭：给被单一主流叙事方向盖棺定论为绥靖罪人的张伯伦一次重新建构，但也因此过度干涉引导的意图，电影彻底失去影像的独立性沦为教学和创作两边不搭的尴尬产物。无数细节渗入明显来自刻意制造平行以作今日代言的后见之明，也让主线关于无法选择生存时代的立场相左无名人物的「抉择」变得虚浮，同窗走向陌路的设计亦全是老调。
介于真实历史和虚构故事之间，真的挺一般的，除了出色的卡司。可能是因为主角组是虚构人物，又不能改动历史事实，很多桥段显得很刻意。比如：为什么要在到处都是党卫队的酒吧密谋？为什么党卫队的可以进英国外交人员的房间？另外，最后的字幕说的仿佛是因为英国的绥靖政策最终打败了希特勒一样，真的不是洗白么？
就个人而言
慕尼黑协议被洗白为为了准备和德国战争准备拖时间的策略了？
影片结束的字幕把电影的格局拉低了。读过电影梗概以后我还在问自己为啥要看这么一部片子，其实细想，人类应该每年都得出几部二战题材的电影，直到下次世界大战之后才会停下吧
另一角度的历史观，当然还是必不可免的政治正确
绥靖主义，很小就学到的这一词汇，现在才知道这就等同于“要和平不要战争”
三星半 拍历史的部分其实普普通通 大概这段历史大家都学过又有原著所以导演无法更进一步描写 但选角真的很合适 架不住两个主演之间的化学反应 那时年少 你梦见夏天 和我在深蓝色的夜里起舞 后来明白再热烈的爱恨也不过时代里的一粒沙 两个人年轻人的选择和家国情怀比历史部分鲜活多了
LD说：“也许这就是人类在面对重大历史灾难前的无奈。我们无从知道历史背后的真相，但小说为我们提供了一个可能的视角，这就够了。”
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
