第一篇:克萊默夫婦的影評(píng)或者觀后感doc
Kramer vs.Kramer Today I watched a good movie Kramer vs.Kramer in our class, which I had watched it in my dormitory before.I loved this movie very much.Kramer vs.Kramer was a film about a divorced couple dealing with their family, career and child.The hero of Kramer vs.Kramer was Ted.The heroine was his wife Joanna.They had a lovely child named Billy.Kramer worked as an advertisement clerk in a company to support his family.He was very busy in his work and has little communication with his wife and son.Joanna was a housewife.She didn’t have a job and what she did everyday was to do the housework and took care of their son.Joanna once had a job, but after she got married, she quit her job.Without Kramer’s any care about her inner thought, Joanna felt very upset about her present life.One day, Joanna couldn’t stand her lifestyle any more.So, she turned Ted for help, but Ted refused to listen to her.Though she loved Billy very much, she leaved away alone.Since then, Ted’s life has fall into a mess suddenly.As he couldn’t deal well with both his career and his son, he was always blamed by his boss.Fortunately, his neighbor often came to help him.Through many things, the love between Ted and Billy was very deep and firm.One year later, Joanna came back and
demanded to take her son away and Joanna won the right to breed her son in the court.But at last, Joanna gave the right back to Ted.I thought it was a happy ending.In this movie, there were some scenes that moved me most.Ted often took Billy out to play, but one day Billy fell off a jungle gym and had a severe accident.Ted picked up Billy and rushed to a nearby hospital.Here, we can see Ted’s anxieties of and worries about his son.In the court, Ted said, “I’d like to know......what law says a woman is a better parent simply by virtue of her sex? I’ve had time to think about what makes a good parent.It has to do with constancy.It has to do with patience......listening to him......or pretending to listen when you can't anymore.It has to do with love like she was saying.I don't know where it says a woman has a corner on that market......that a man has any less of those emotions than a woman.Billy has a home with me.I've made it the best I could.It's not perfect.I'm not a perfect parent.Sometimes I don't have enough patience and I forget that he's a little kid.But I'm there.We eat breakfast and he talks to me and then we go to school.At night we have dinner together and we talk and I read to him and.....And we built a life together and we love each other.” Here, we can see that through Ted’s hard efforts, he changed his idea and took good care of his son.And he acknowledged his mistakes when Joanna stayed with him.He loved his son very much and expressed indirectly that he didn’t want
to separate with his son.What’s more, we also could know that Ted became a good father from just only a family-provider.In our reality, people should have more communications with each other and solve the problems in time.We should also treat the right women’s and men’s correctly.It is unfair to say woman is a better parent merely because of her sex.A man also has the right to love his child and his emotion is no less than a woman’s.And women also have rights to work, to take the most use of their capabilities.
第二篇:《克萊默夫婦》觀后感
《克萊默夫婦》觀后感
——婚姻之我見
《克萊默夫婦》的影片分類屬于一部親情片、愛情片,但是我更喜歡把它歸為社會(huì)片一類。第52屆奧斯卡的大贏家囊獲了5項(xiàng)桂冠,可謂是紅極一時(shí),當(dāng)然那個(gè)年代離我們90后來說可算是遙遠(yuǎn)的,現(xiàn)在把老片重看并不會(huì)減退影片本身的價(jià)值,反而會(huì)給年輕人更多的思考空間。
我喜歡看社會(huì)片,能反應(yīng)社會(huì)某一方面特點(diǎn)的影片,因?yàn)槿松嬖谏鐣?huì)之中,不可能做到所謂的出世勢必會(huì)受社會(huì)影響,與其讓社會(huì)給強(qiáng)加給你社會(huì)價(jià)值還不如自己主動(dòng)去了解這個(gè)社會(huì)的價(jià)值是什么?言歸正傳,克萊默夫婦講述了由于父母對(duì)于家庭和孩子有著不同的價(jià)值觀,導(dǎo)致了母親喬安娜的離開,父親不得不獨(dú)自照顧幼子,在這期間父親和孩子之間的情感愈加深厚,而與此同時(shí)母親回來希望將孩子帶走,最后父親與母親因?yàn)楹⒆颖O(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)的問題對(duì)簿公堂,母親勝訴,但是母親最終還是放棄了監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)。
在電影中有幾處是值得我們思考的,第一,夫妻雙方對(duì)于家庭的不同價(jià)值取向,在電影中父親在婚后承擔(dān)著家庭的重?fù)?dān),維持整個(gè)家庭的生計(jì),母親是一名全職太太,原本看似沒有問題,但是問題的癥結(jié)在于,母親并不愿意做一名全職太太,她有她自己宏大的職業(yè)構(gòu)想,她作為一名全職太太完全是因?yàn)檫w就家庭,由此夫妻之間就產(chǎn)生一系列后續(xù)問題。其實(shí)在我看來,婚姻的前提之一就是“求同存異”若不能找到共同點(diǎn),并且處理好不同點(diǎn),婚姻將很難維持長久,結(jié)婚前雙方應(yīng)該對(duì)于婚后家庭生活和各自職業(yè)選擇有明確的溝通和交流,但是其中一方的妥協(xié)幾乎是必然的,問題在于妥協(xié)的一方是愿意的,而且重要的是真的愿意這么做,婚姻是雙方的,一加一并不都等于二,可能大于二也可能小于零。良好的溝通是家庭成員緊密聯(lián)系的前提,才能使家庭的最大效應(yīng)得到發(fā)揮。
第二,如果第一點(diǎn)是影片中反應(yīng)出的負(fù)面影響的話,那么顯然第二點(diǎn)是正面的是積極的,影片中當(dāng)母親離開了這個(gè)家庭,父親之后便身兼二角,又是母親又是父親,甚至因?yàn)槊β档墓ぷ骱图彝リP(guān)系并未處理好而丟掉了原本的工作,但是在這過程中父愛的偉大得以彰顯,其實(shí)當(dāng)母親離開父親完全可以不承擔(dān)母親的職責(zé),繼續(xù)做他的“父親”一心工作養(yǎng)家,孩子可以交給父母、保姆或者讓其自立,但是主人公沒有采取上述的行為,他決心親自帶孩子,并且給與他和其他孩子相同的家庭之愛。不知道他是在彌補(bǔ)之前對(duì)于孩子的虧欠還是真的是父愛的慫恿,但是最終他還是做出了我認(rèn)為正確的決定。我覺得婚姻是一份責(zé)任,既然選擇了
婚姻即選擇了承擔(dān)責(zé)任,承擔(dān)對(duì)于另一半的責(zé)任承擔(dān)對(duì)于就家庭、孩子的責(zé)任,若是在這份責(zé)任的重壓下倒下,那么可想而知這個(gè)家庭可能最后走向解體。勇于承擔(dān)責(zé)任對(duì)于家庭和婚姻負(fù)責(zé)才是構(gòu)建和諧家庭的最基本也是最難以做到的要求。
最后一點(diǎn)也是最為重要的一點(diǎn),在影片中也是令人驚訝的一點(diǎn),最后母親喬安娜還是放棄了對(duì)于兒子的監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán),觀眾總會(huì)有自己對(duì)于這一做法的觀點(diǎn),我沒有去了解他人是怎么看待的,在我看來,這完全是因?yàn)槟赣H對(duì)于孩子的愛,顯然當(dāng)時(shí)母親與孩子之間的感情遠(yuǎn)不及與父親,既然如此考慮孩子的未來作為母親她選擇了做出犧牲?;橐鲎鳛榧~帶連接了兩個(gè)沒有血緣關(guān)系的人走到了一起生活,自此他們的孩子、孩子的孩子、他們的后代,都與他們有了血緣關(guān)系,也就是說夫妻之間從狹義上看只有孩子是他們的共同點(diǎn),所以婚姻中孩子的作用是巨大的,夫妻可以感情破裂,形同陌路,但是只有和孩子的關(guān)系是不可能破裂的。在古人看來,婚姻的一大作用就是能接續(xù)后代,可見孩子對(duì)于夫妻雙方的作用相比對(duì)方更為重要。
其實(shí)現(xiàn)在許多年輕人對(duì)于婚姻的看法都有許多曲解,因?yàn)樗麄儾涣私饣橐?,現(xiàn)在流行說婚姻是愛情的墳?zāi)梗抑荒苷f無知!婚姻是愛情達(dá)到了一定程度之后自然的產(chǎn)物,是對(duì)于愛情的新的更高的體現(xiàn)形式,這是順理成章的,為什么會(huì)出現(xiàn)對(duì)于愛情墳?zāi)拐撝惖幕闹囇哉摗Mf這種話的人是對(duì)于婚姻的恐懼,恐懼的是什么?恐懼的是婚姻的責(zé)任,一旦成婚就會(huì)受到婚姻法上諸多條款之限定,也會(huì)受社會(huì)倫理道德規(guī)范之束縛。一個(gè)人對(duì)于婚姻的正確態(tài)度的樹立是一個(gè)人真正走向成熟的標(biāo)志之一。在我看來婚姻的本質(zhì)便是愛與責(zé)任,就像影片中父親泰勒對(duì)于兒子撫養(yǎng)的責(zé)任,母親喬安娜放棄監(jiān)護(hù)權(quán)對(duì)于兒子的愛,這都是父母的愛和應(yīng)負(fù)的責(zé)任,當(dāng)然還有對(duì)于另一半的諸多責(zé)任。
愛構(gòu)成了愛情,有責(zé)任的愛情便成了婚姻。
第三篇:克萊默夫婦觀后感
親愛的,我也愛你
——《克萊默夫婦》之觀后感
***(名稱)
“每一個(gè)幸福的家庭的幸福都是一樣的,而每一個(gè)不幸的家庭,卻有著不同的不幸”。
如每一個(gè)幸福家庭一樣,克萊默一家曾經(jīng)也擁有著幸福,起碼克萊默先生是這樣認(rèn)為的。但直到克萊默夫人突然在一個(gè)晚上吻別了7歲的孩子比利,再向克萊默先生提出了要離開這個(gè)家之后,克萊默先生和他只有7歲的兒子,此刻也如同每一個(gè)不幸的家庭一樣,開始了那不同于人的不幸歷程。
這是克萊默夫人離開的第一個(gè)早上,“有時(shí)候你會(huì)和你的朋友吵架,對(duì)嗎?”,“你會(huì)想單獨(dú)躲到一個(gè)地方去,對(duì)嗎?”,“當(dāng)爸爸和媽媽吵架之后,其中一方想到其他地方??”,在克萊默用了一連串設(shè)問把“其實(shí),媽媽離家出走了”這個(gè)問題解釋給了兒子聽,讓他知道人與人之間總會(huì)有點(diǎn)小摩擦的,這沒什么大不了,折射出另一層愛,就是“親愛的,不要擔(dān)心,媽媽只是和爸爸有一點(diǎn)小問題而已,不是你不乖,要知道媽媽還是一樣愛著你”。不過,對(duì)于一個(gè)男人來說,那么多表達(dá)愛的方式中,最難做到的就是煮頓好飯給孩子吃了,所以,想當(dāng)然的,那個(gè)早上的早餐也許是他兒子吃過最惡心的早餐了。
就這樣,克萊默先生從此就開始了他父代母職的生活了,這一切都來得突然,同時(shí)來得最不是時(shí)候,因?yàn)榇藭r(shí),也正是克萊默的事業(yè)生涯中最為關(guān)鍵的時(shí)刻,影片就以克萊默先生怎樣在“事業(yè)——家庭”之間周旋為線索,帶出了一個(gè)父親如何愛著自己的兒子的故事。
當(dāng)克萊默先生的上司追問到:“你將如何處理比利?”,并說“我得一周7天,一天24小時(shí)完全依賴你,我不能顧及你擔(dān)心孩子流鼻水”的時(shí)候,這無疑是在懷疑克萊默以后的工作表現(xiàn),作為一個(gè)職業(yè)強(qiáng)人克萊默怎么可能對(duì)這種懷疑表示默認(rèn)呢?所以,他當(dāng)即用很肯定的語氣回答道:“你可以一周8天,一天25小時(shí)依賴我,因?yàn)槲也皇且粋€(gè)失敗者?!贝藭r(shí)的克萊默可能還沒有意識(shí)到這樣的承諾到底要付出多少代價(jià),雖然他從不認(rèn)為自己是一個(gè)失敗者,但在這段婚姻里,他已經(jīng)失敗了。在這一階段,觀眾透過影片安排,可以感受到這一階段的克萊默先生還是沒有進(jìn)入準(zhǔn)備完全付出自己的精力去照顧自己深愛的兒子的狀態(tài),甚至感到他還是如同以前,在工作和家人的天平秤之間,更偏向工作,也可稱為“覺悟前階段”。影片用這一階段為后來克萊默先生為了兒子而失去這一份間接破壞了他的婚姻生活的工作做了鋪墊,從而讓觀眾看到一個(gè)工作狂向稱職父親的轉(zhuǎn)變。
由第一個(gè)階段向第二階段的過渡,是以父與子之間一場爆發(fā)性的爭吵為分界線。在這場爭吵之前,父子兩人已經(jīng)有了不同程度的分歧,包括克萊默先生因?yàn)楸壤恍⌒膶⑺墓ぷ饔?jì)劃書弄濕了,而很粗魯?shù)貙⒈壤?zé)備了一次。其后在比利收到了母親的來信時(shí),被告知媽媽不會(huì)再回來的時(shí)候,克萊默先生在此時(shí)沒能給予比利最及時(shí)的安慰,而是冷冷、尷尬收?qǐng)?。最不幸的是,在比利明白媽媽已?jīng)離開之后,克萊默先生卻因?yàn)楣露鴽]按時(shí)去接小比利下課,讓比利再次感受到失去媽媽的痛苦。所以,這一場為第二階段拉開帷幕的爭吵,顯然也是不可避免的,而爭吵的導(dǎo)火索只是緣于小比利實(shí)在受不了老爸那種糟糕到不行的晚餐,發(fā)脾氣地要吃雪糕,克萊默卻不允許,警告無效之后,采取了一再粗魯?shù)貙⒖摁[著的小比利抱回房間,讓他反省的方式,這種蠻不講理的方式恰恰只能激化矛盾的發(fā)生。這一次,父子倆是在克萊默夫人離開后,第一次如此爆發(fā)性地爭吵,而也正是這樣的一次沖突,讓彼此沖破表面的平靜,進(jìn)而能更深一層的向?qū)Ψ教拱鬃约旱男慕Y(jié)。也就在這一次,克萊默在冷靜之后,帶著歉意、很坦誠的對(duì)自己的兒子說:“我會(huì)和你一起,你沒那么容易甩掉我”,這句話一說出來,必定將這位父親的形象升華到了另一個(gè)程度,從話語中,觀眾能體會(huì)到這位父親的責(zé)任心的強(qiáng)大和對(duì)自己孩子的難以擬比的安全感。在一切都已經(jīng)解釋清楚之后,我們看到了克萊默用父親才有的有力的深深的把兒子抱緊,久久地,給小比利傳達(dá)著那完全屬于他父愛,似乎想用這份愛來彌補(bǔ)小比利已經(jīng)久違的母愛。最后,在臨睡前的道別時(shí),小比利說:“好好睡,別讓臭蟲咬了,我愛你”,這時(shí)的克萊默回頭定眼的望著可愛的小比利,將心中的父愛都深沉地變換成了四個(gè)字“我也愛你”,這一聲的愛,意味深長,頗有重量。在這里,你看到了是兩個(gè)男人,互相默默地,潛意識(shí)地給對(duì)方一種愛的彌補(bǔ),小比利將“別讓臭蟲咬了”這一句他媽媽常對(duì)他說的話,反過來說給了他深愛的父親聽,傳達(dá)出了小比利想要安慰失去妻子的父親。而克萊默在回應(yīng)小比利的“我愛你”時(shí),也同樣像他媽媽以往一樣,“我也愛你”,努力讓小比利能感受到母愛的存在。這時(shí)期的克萊默已經(jīng)是清楚的知道只有自己的兒子才是真的最值得愛護(hù)的,心理上也達(dá)到了一種愛的覺悟,我們將這一階段稱為“覺悟階段”,也是第二個(gè)階段。
影片在第二個(gè)階段,落得筆墨最多,也最為傳神。主要通過了小比利的意外受傷一事來表達(dá),從而使得那份父愛得到了再一次高潮般的升華。在小比利在鐵架掉下來摔得滿臉血水的時(shí)候,克萊默本能地抱著兒子一路向醫(yī)院狂奔,全程都用力的大手環(huán)抱著受傷的小比利,不顧路上來往風(fēng)馳的汽車,只是一個(gè)目的——把孩子送到治療的地方,而影片特意安排了,在狂奔的整個(gè)過程,路口上的車都為這位父親停了下來,似乎是一種愛的力量,似乎是一種父愛的無形保護(hù)罩在將一切阻礙都排擠出去。當(dāng)?shù)竭_(dá)醫(yī)院之后,克萊默情緒緊張,卻一個(gè)勁兒得不停地告訴小比利,他父親的存在,他父親是永遠(yuǎn)陪在他的左右,尤其當(dāng)小比利要縫針的時(shí)候,作為父親的他,雙手緊緊的穩(wěn)住小比利的頭,雙唇祈禱式長吻著已經(jīng)驚慌失措,強(qiáng)忍著和他年齡不相符的疼痛感的小比利。與其同時(shí),觀眾看到的是,一個(gè)大男人的額頭緊貼著另外一個(gè)小男人的額頭,父親用這種特別的方式陪著兒子度過兒子人生中第一個(gè)傷痛的時(shí)刻;用這種深厚的方式告訴兒子如何堅(jiān)強(qiáng)地熬過痛苦。影片充分帶動(dòng)了觀眾的情緒,全劇就在這時(shí)刻,把讓觀眾為小比利的傷感到揪心,一致把這些擔(dān)憂,灌注到父親這個(gè)形象上,通過父親對(duì)小比利的全力救助和安慰時(shí)的語言、動(dòng)作等來回應(yīng)、抒發(fā)觀眾這些不安同情的情緒,同時(shí)也把一個(gè)父親對(duì)孩子的愛高度濃縮在這一場景,生動(dòng)有力地將影片的主題中心傳達(dá)出來。
最后,第三階段也就是克萊默這種愛的覺醒的全力表達(dá)階段,他終于將每一份情感都為小比利所灌輸了。包括在失去工作之后,為了能獲得小比利的撫養(yǎng)權(quán)而不得不在圣誕節(jié)的前24小時(shí)內(nèi)找到了另一份工作,可以說沒如果沒有小比利這一動(dòng)力,一般人是無法做得到的,但這位父親為了兒子,他做到了。另外,在爭取撫養(yǎng)權(quán)打官司的時(shí)候,也同樣是竭盡全力的做出了他最大的能耐,盡管到了最后他還是無法通過法律途徑來讓小比利不離開自己的身邊,但在觀眾的心中,難道還沒有一個(gè)屬于自己法律裁定嗎?
故事的結(jié)局也許是最耐人尋味的,獲得撫養(yǎng)權(quán)的母親因?yàn)椴幌胱屝”壤x開真正屬于自己的家,黯然地決定放棄這一權(quán)利,但這只是母親的選擇,那小比利呢?影片沒有告訴我們,只是留給觀眾一個(gè)母親的身影,還有代表父愛的眼神??
第四篇:克萊默夫婦影評(píng)1
這是一部極其普通的電影,普通得像電影臺(tái)平素晚上最愛播放的美國不知名電影。內(nèi)容也很簡單——一個(gè)平凡的父親因?yàn)槠拮拥碾x去不得不面對(duì)家庭與事業(yè)的壓力,而妻子回來后又與她爭起了孩子的撫養(yǎng)權(quán)。這又是一部極其眩目的電影,它曾獲九項(xiàng)奧斯卡提名,奪得最佳影片、最佳導(dǎo)演、最佳男主角、最佳女配角、最佳劇本五項(xiàng)大獎(jiǎng)。
一部有明星卻是低成本小制作的家庭情節(jié)劇以五項(xiàng)均相當(dāng)有分量的奧斯卡獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)打敗了科波拉的《現(xiàn)代啟示錄》成為當(dāng)屆奧斯卡的最大贏家。很多人都將《克萊默夫婦》的成功歸因于美國觀眾已不再愿意重視越戰(zhàn)帶來的傷痛,而急需這樣一部溫情的片子來撫慰心靈,從而忽略了其藝術(shù)性。這樣的論調(diào)是有失公正的,仔細(xì)分析《克萊默夫婦》,會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)它在電影敘事上的精致可以說是新好萊塢發(fā)展到此時(shí)的一個(gè)集大成的表現(xiàn)。而四位主要演員精妙的演出更是為電影錦上添花。
本片反映出七十年代美國出現(xiàn)的單親家庭以及由此引起的種種問題,題材嚴(yán)肅但處理不失幽默筆觸,演員表演非常到位,極其自然。耶魯戲劇高材生斯特里普親自改寫了法庭戲的臺(tái)詞,使得霍夫曼極為不滿,認(rèn)為她搶風(fēng)頭。
影片反映了美國社會(huì)中一個(gè)相當(dāng)普遍的問題:家庭婚姻問題。個(gè)人的理想、事業(yè)與家庭生活之間的矛盾導(dǎo)致了夫婦沖突和家庭離異的悲劇。這在當(dāng)時(shí)的美國具有深厚的現(xiàn)實(shí)基礎(chǔ)。同時(shí)影片還涉及到了西方社會(huì)中的一個(gè)十分敏感的問題:婦女解放問題。在影片的深層含義上,導(dǎo)演對(duì)男女兩性的關(guān)系如何調(diào)整、如何實(shí)現(xiàn)以及婦女應(yīng)如何保衛(wèi)自己的獨(dú)立個(gè)性和追求生活意義等問題作了深入的探討,這也是影片的意義之所在。
《克萊默夫婦》中三個(gè)大人可以說都是有缺點(diǎn)的,并且都在故事的發(fā)展中,在觀眾的注目中逐漸發(fā)生著改變。編劇尼古拉斯·卡贊說,“你要讓每個(gè)人物都去學(xué)習(xí)新的東西??”。在故事的開始,父親泰德不關(guān)心家庭生活,忽視老婆的感受,甚至都不知道兒子上幾年級(jí),以養(yǎng)家為托辭處處擺出一副他在為整個(gè)家庭付出所有,而老婆居然情緒不穩(wěn),拋夫棄子而去;母親喬安娜軟弱,不自信,與丈夫溝通有障礙卻一直在躲避,終于不可遏制地爆發(fā)時(shí)顯得情緒化甚至不負(fù)責(zé)任;而離婚女人瑪格麗特,可以被看作是一個(gè)假女權(quán)主義,她的堅(jiān)強(qiáng)背后其實(shí)也是柔弱和需要關(guān)愛的。在這樣一個(gè)故事里沒有一個(gè)人是完美的,所有人物都是在經(jīng)歷中學(xué)習(xí),豐富人格。
好萊塢的商業(yè)電影無論是什么類型,基本遵循的編劇指南是不變的,概括起來就是“一部電影的主要人物應(yīng)該追求重要的目標(biāo),并且面對(duì)令人生畏的障礙。沖突應(yīng)當(dāng)持續(xù)不斷,貫穿在整部電影以及每一場景中。行動(dòng)必須要與因果鏈條緊密關(guān)聯(lián)。主要事件必須予以預(yù)示,但又不能明顯到觀眾能夠做出預(yù)測的程度。張力應(yīng)當(dāng)在影片進(jìn)城來凸現(xiàn),直至高潮出現(xiàn),所有的問題都得到解決?!比绻f前一段的建制是建立觀眾對(duì)主人公的認(rèn)同感,那么接下來要布置的所有障礙都會(huì)刺激到觀眾的神經(jīng),使觀眾感同身受。所以從此開始一直到法庭開庭之前的劇情,就是在積蓄所有的障礙,讓主人公的境遇到最慘。這已經(jīng)是好萊塢最常用的手段了。先是比利的意外摔傷,有經(jīng)驗(yàn)的觀眾一定能夠感到不安,這不會(huì)是一次簡單的摔傷,會(huì)給之后主人公的主要行動(dòng)目的——奪回?fù)狃B(yǎng)權(quán)造成阻礙,雖然在此刻行動(dòng)目的還沒有揭示。但緊接著夫婦二人的見面將一切行動(dòng)目的呈上桌面,影片從此刻開始醞釀提速,這是一個(gè)積累的過程,因?yàn)樽詈蠓ㄍ徟械母叱睂⒁赃@一段作為最重要的基礎(chǔ)。泰德丟掉了工作,這意味著失去了官司取勝的一切可能,于是一天之內(nèi)找到工作,還是在圣誕節(jié)的前一個(gè)禮拜五。這形成了這一大段戲里的一個(gè)小高潮。好的劇本就是讓一整個(gè)劇本的敘事走向成一個(gè)勺子形,同時(shí)讓每一個(gè)橋段里也有高潮,才能時(shí)時(shí)牽動(dòng)觀眾的情緒。泰德以他的堅(jiān)持和能力在一天之內(nèi)找到工作的喜悅卻被兒子和母親的見面所帶來的憂傷抵消了,緊接著到來的正是全劇的高潮——庭審。在庭審一段,沒有太多的動(dòng)作,大部分是通過言語和眼神交待的,這部分應(yīng)該是劇作很花功夫的,因?yàn)檫@一部分庭審,尤其是泰德的律師發(fā)問的那段應(yīng)當(dāng)說是導(dǎo)演拍此片的社會(huì)意義所在。而在兩場庭審戲的中間,插入的是一段父子倆看似與主題不想關(guān)的閑聊。這段閑聊是和前面比利打翻果汁浸濕父親工作文件的場景相同,以做呼應(yīng),告訴觀眾法庭的決斷會(huì)破壞的將是這樣一對(duì)和諧的父子關(guān)系。
《克萊默夫婦》看似溫和,最后的結(jié)局也是一個(gè)完滿結(jié)局。但導(dǎo)演對(duì)于題材本身的選擇和挖掘就注定了它是引人深思的。電影在流暢的敘事中暗含了女性在婚姻中的情感問題,甚至觸及了在當(dāng)時(shí)仍然敏感得女權(quán)問題。但這些都是故事背后的,并不妨礙普通觀眾隨著電影的預(yù)設(shè)伏線體驗(yàn)劇中的人物情感。也許這也正是一部好的電影的意義所在,展現(xiàn)問題,給觀眾以思考的空間,卻不灌輸式的解決問題,事實(shí)上再好的電影也不可能解決現(xiàn)實(shí)問題。
第五篇:克萊默夫婦 英文影評(píng)
“Kramer vs.Kramer” is the kind of movie which grows on you.It is so well made that you may not be aware at the time how much skill and artistry have gone into it.It is a whole bunch of other movies rolled into one, but it is not derivative.It is definitely singular.It covers old ground with integrity and a high degree of insight.It takes familiar people, familiar situations and then treats them with a mixture of intelligence and art rarely combined on the screen.The movie is about the breakup of a marriage, about two people who drifted apart without knowing it at the time, about their child who is caught in the crossfire, about their friends and--most of all--about characters who grow and change.It is that last aspect of “Kramer vs.Kramer” which make all the other aspects come together in something other than the soap opera the ingredients suggest.The film says much without preaching, is a product of our times without being trendy.Screenwriter-director Robert Benton has managed to strip away everything from the story except what really counts.Nestor Almendros' photography zeros in on people in a way to stress their isolation, their moods.The spare music, bits of Purcell and Vivaldi, add to the atmosphere.Most of all, “Kramer vs.Kramer” is blessed with one of the best casts ever assembled for a movie.Dustin Hoffman plays Ted Kramer, a successful ad agency executive with success-bent workaholic habits.Meryl Streep is Joanna, his wife, whose quiet desperation over her loss of identity and self worth have gone unnoticed by her husband.The movie opens on the isolated image of the sad faced mother saying good night and, as it turns out, goodbye as well to her sleeping son, Billy(Justin Henry).In spite of her action, some sympathy will be with her in the beginning because of her husband's unawareness, his we'll-talk-about-it-tomorrow attitude.>From there on the film becomes the story of a growing father-son relationship.In a series of short, sometimes funny, often poignant scenes, the two learn to cope with life and with each other.There is a gradual transition from awkwardness to harmony, from independence to mutual dependence.Ted Kramer changes from ad man to father, and as priorities shift, his career goes down the drain.There are wonderful father-son scenes--confrontation, fun and sadness.One particularly moving moment occurs when the father assures his son that the boy's mother did not leave because of dislike for the boy, but that it was his, the father's fault.When Joanna Kramer re-enters the movie two-thirds of the way through to claim her son, sympathy will have shifted entirely to the father.The ensuing court battle has its moments of nastiness, but there are indications--a look, a half phrase--of a lingering affection and respect if not love.Benton presents it as a no-win situation, inflicts no one with a villain label.The ending may seem contrived, an attempt to make everyone happy.But it is also an ending which goes full circle with its image of sadness and frustration.Hoffman has never been better.All the nuances are there--cockiness, anger, worry, determination, sadness--without giving the impression of overacting.Meryl Streep, in a brief role, once again shows what a skillful actress can do.There are few performers who can express pain and joy with a look, a glance the way she can.Jane Alexander is perfect as the neighbor with affection for both parties.Howard Duff as the attorney manages to let you know that he's a high priced lawyer even before he mentions his fee.But it is young Justin Henry who Is the miracle of the movie.His mood, his actions and reactions, his laughter, his tears are right for every scene.He gives the impression that the camera was eavesdropping on real life.It's possible that “Kramer vs.Kramer” will evoke reactions colored by the sex and/or experiences of each particular viewer.But I can think of no other of the growing group of movies about marital relationships which treats each of the parties with greater objectivity, with fewer attempts at setting up a good vs.evil situation.