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
细思极恐，剪辑缺陷选择性眼盲，个人五星。(含剧透)
有新点子，氛围营造不错，但有些啰嗦，那些鸡汤式的“母爱宣扬”少一点儿会更好看。
上帝视角在这样的一个以伪纪录片为卖点的电影里显得太过理直气壮，以及过于频繁的视角切换只是把本就羸弱的剧作与情感完全扭成一团，电影表达混沌到根本懒得去琢磨导演的真正意图，只剩一个还算有趣的结尾在支撑。
也是没想过看个恐怖片就是导演纯粹为了恶心别人的。什么恶心拍什么。柯孟融可真棒。
“富强、民主、文明、和谐、自由、平等、公正、法治，爱国、敬业、诚信、友善 ” 伪纪录片加这么多闪回片段和小标题的，会让伪纪录片应该有的沉浸感降低许多，个人感觉没有kubei好看，kubei的观感是爽片属性的。
我觉得之前那几版预告片更有趣些
这不就是一个“不点赞就倒霉”的帖吗？
3.5 最恐怖之处永远是人性最幽暗之处，佛母都不过是向世人展示一位母亲的私心如何迂回最终失败的媒介，最大的逻辑bug就是，如果见过佛母脸的人都挂了，那么我们看到的成片，正如友邻所说，大概就是佛母上传到网上的吧。手持DV的粗糙影像质感确实很适合用来营造这类恐怖故事的真实感。
电影从头到尾一直暗示观众，让你看一个符号，跟着女主一起念咒语 。一开始还说咒语起到祝福作用，结果到电影最后她说对不起，欺骗了你们，其实这个咒语能让陌生人共同分担诅咒。
值得半年的等待，假如不怕，适合一个人看（估计没谁敢）或者两个人一起抱头看。整个故事基本能自圆其说，伪纪录片的镜头把现场感拉足，最后黑佛母揭面，超出了我的想象，有点像欧美恐怖片了《林中小屋》？人啊，千万别上错山进错庙拜错佛！
哎。。。我更加害怕周一的到来和老板喊我的名字，真的，看完后这就是我最直接的感受。
这都拍的什么，学人家拍伪纪录片，能力却不足，气氛都搞不起来你还拍恐怖片，全部内容都在预告片里面了，百来分钟全是各种老套路，这在电影院看气氛还不如国产恐怖片。
除了诅咒的部分有点新意，其它都是拍了多少遍的旧套路，差点看睡过去。。。
就这？？cult片就这？？？凭什么我看个电影还要被诅咒啊！看完疯狂骂脏话
还行吧 勉强四星 还是有蛮多细节值得推敲的
无神论者不觉得被冒犯 只是一个梗而已 可能因为做了妈反而不觉得恐怖 就是那种管你是天王老子 老娘为了娃跟你拼了
是真的恐怖，伪纪录片式华语片让人极具代入感。一个人也要窝在家，熄灯拉窗帘，氛围感不要太好——硬是让我分了三个晚上才敢看完捂( ･⊝･∞)。
整体完成度的感觉挺破碎的，从世界观的搭建到摄影机位的布兵，有少少好料但无好桥。
第四墙俗了？结尾反转盘出一局大棋，看完再回忆通篇真假难辨的母爱共情，这种晦气冲天的第四墙，劳烦多来点。
我不知道打低分的人怎么想的，这是我看过国语里各元素结合最好的了，恐怖画面不多，但气氛营造很好，求求你们了，不要因为是恐怖片，也是国语片就提高标准
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
