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
原形应该是圣经里的何西阿吧。人若不借着祂就不能重生，就无法体会爱
荷兰弟的声音挺可爱，节奏不是很紧，适合下班放松一下
没玩过游戏。电影本身就是标准的好莱坞流水线商业片，四平八稳没啥惊喜，剧本也很套路，和二三十年前的寻宝/冒险故事没差。所有人都跟过家家似的。圣家堂很美。荷兰弟都长到需要别人演他小时候的地步了，有点…hmmm感觉怪怪的。我总觉得他还是个kid，不管干什么都像装成熟大人的高中生，让人忍不住想撸一把他的头毛说句how cute然后自己该干嘛干嘛
两星半吧，期待太高了导致看的时候有点失望。本以为会是个爽片结果看得我煎熬，节奏太差了，明明是第一部但是人物人设交代的不清楚，情节什么的感觉也很牵强
也不怪她做的一切种种。父亲不认她，母亲很年轻的时候就去世了。留下了她一个人求生活。她对任何人都没有安全感。唯有爱，拯救治愈了她。
几个动作戏的设计还是不错的，其他各个环节都透着敷衍。
emm 游戏剧情掐掉中间主要部分留开头和结尾我也属实没想到
很好看，很不错，男主很帅！
毫无期待只想看个普通爱情故事，谁知道剧情信息量这么大的嘛？咱就是说，俩小时讲的电影讲得东西有点多，服装和音乐可这爱情…属实讲的莫名其妙…
看完了，但是完全不推荐，放在10-15年前还可以，放在当下就是纯纯用来浪费观众时间的。由于游戏和电影的体量差异问题，改编是这类电影最大的问题，本片主要人物动机交代的过于敷衍，主要角色的性格塑造模式化严重、流于表面。细节处理是槽点过多，游戏里不合理的细节，电影中几乎没有改进。除非你是神海IP的死忠粉，就是想看看效果，否则——别看。
没玩过游戏。电影本身就是标准的好莱坞流水线商业片，四平八稳没啥惊喜，剧本也很套路，和二三十年前的寻宝/冒险故事没差。所有人都跟过家家似的。圣家堂很美。荷兰弟都长到需要别人演他小时候的地步了，有点…hmmm感觉怪怪的。我总觉得他还是个kid，不管干什么都像装成熟大人的高中生，让人忍不住想撸一把他的头毛说句how cute然后自己该干嘛干嘛
1.5
大半夜被感动得不行…
几个动作戏的设计还是不错的，其他各个环节都透着敷衍。
……
好久没到影院观影了，IMAX效果不错。片头playstation的 logo小激动一下，。去之前就对剧情没报太大期望，反正就是米花片，爽就完了。话说回来，其实“神海”游戏何尝不是如此？没有剧情的风光探险游戏。
hmmmm 整个片子都有一种廉价感… 选荷兰弟是一个大败笔。nathan话痨的人设近年过于普遍，结果跟小蜘蛛没差了
冲着荷兰弟看的，电影院旁边有家泡芙店，看完后吃了个泡芙，然后和朋友分享了吃到这家店的泡芙很开心，完全没兴趣分享看了这个电影诶…
NO GOD ! PLEASE NO!一部电影能居然把所有角色，无论正派反派，都塑造的毫无魅力。而且任意两两组合，都不来电！感觉大家只是甲方乙方的关系，一点都不熟！一点都没有火花！Jesus 为什么要把一艘船吊起来飞？两个女性角色，一个看不出野心就是坏坏坏，一个不给个理由就是反复背叛。似乎有点厌女，但是实际上男性角色也没啥高光。希望荷兰弟不要再和矮个大叔纠结身高差了。
感觉电影很想突出救赎的主题，但有些用力过猛，表现的有些牵强
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
