爱丽丝蒸发奇案

两百万 　　 100分钟 　　 三个演员 　　 两个场景 　　 一部电影 爱情值多少钱？爱情换来的200万到底属于谁=紧张激烈跌宕起伏猜得着开头猜不到结局猜得到结局猜不到过程的100分钟=一共才三位演员而且大多数场景是两个人对手飙戏=一间密室一见空置的仓库完成了所有的情节的需要=一部情节紧凑张弛有力导演牵着观众鼻子走的新锐电影。 　　 爱丽丝的失踪 　　 演员太少了，使得三个人个个出彩，但是比较于爱丽丝的惊恐绝望大叫，小V的深藏不露凶残蛮横，丹尼才是整个电影里最为纠结最为出戏的那个角色。男猪柔弱忧郁的眼神让老段想起了一级恐惧里的诺顿，碰巧长相上也酷似后来大红大紫的诺帅哥，但是比起诺顿的处女作里面略带本色的演出，这部小电影里男猪承担了更多的责任，他是这出戏的始作俑者，将对立的绑架者和被绑架者之间有机的联系起来，说通俗一点就是是脚踏两只船，而他自己感觉还在岸上。 　　 这部电影对于情节的推敲已经到了令人发指的地步，由于它简单的布景和一条线的故事，导演组势必在细节的处理上给足了力。就像一张白纸上下围棋，一黑一白貌似一览无余，然而却毫无规律可言。而影片最大的优势就是因为其对剧情的一再推敲，使得剧情的发展根本不具有可预见性，从而将可观赏性推到了极致。当电影开始，观众已经上了导演的过山车，没有时间和精力去恐惧和害怕，剩下的只是对这种快感的沉迷不能自拔。 　　 片中涉及了两种爱情，同性也好异性也好，都不是显得那么纯洁和无私，200万就可以将什么信任爱情践踏的一无是处，剩下的只是相互利用，相互欺骗，相互伤害。丹尼无辜的眼神温存的话语，让你在他的世界里犹豫不决，恐怕连他自己也没有准备好 当事情朝着好多方向去的时候，你会发现压根就没有方向。 　　 影片最后响起了优雅的音乐，天空依然蔚蓝，一切仍未改变。

The first and third features from English filmmaker J Blakeson, who most certainly has a partiality for dark and queer characters. TDoAC is a three-person hostage thriller shot on a shoestring, in the mode of William Wyler’s THE COLLECTOR (1965), only more ascetic and messier.

The titular Alice Creed (Arterton) is a rich daddy’s girl, who is kidnapped by two ex-convicts Danny (Compston) and Vic (Marsan), things would go peachy for everyone had it not been the fact that Danny is Alice’s ex-boyfriend, and once this cardinal information is divulged, the whole shebang veers to murkier waters as viewers cannot ascertain who among the three would be the victor, each one seems to an unknown quantity.

The craft on show is adroit, the opening wordless sequences are neat and bracing shot and edited, they smooth the way for audience to gear up for what it is coming - a typical hostage situation set in a single, drab location, where a voluptuous Arterton has to undergo some roughhousing, being gagged, tied, undressed (the usual suspects of S&M fantasy), redressed, and later choked and slapped, but most humiliating of it all, urinating to a bedpan in front of two masked kidnappers.

Well, Blakeson does not actually go to extremes on the path to a torture porn, instead he manipulates various plot twists in a canny way that each time, when a character achieves some sort leverage, the table will be turned in a trice. Also, the fluidity of sexuality plays a major part in the double-cross/counter-double-cross gamesmanship, can sweet nothings soften the gun barrel pointing at your face? Twice out of three you might not luck out.

The long and short of it, TDoAC is an absorbing debut feature mines brilliantly into its meager resource and the outstanding performances from its three players. Can a cowing Eddie Marsan transform himself into a meek lover? You must see for yourself; whereas Martin Compston portrays Danny’s bisexual oscillation with adequacy and Arterton goes for broke in her birthday suit, when all is said and done, countering to what its title alludes to, “disappearance” could be a blessing in disguise.

However, in I CARE A LOT, a Rosamund Pike’s feminist vehicle, Blakeson’s irony and sarcasm goes pitch black. Pike plays a ruthless con woman Marla Grayson, who operates a company legally acquiring the guardianship of elderly people through a duplicitous scheme (often assisted by unscrupulous doctors and inane judges), so their assets are completely at her disposal (though on the face of it, the juridical procedures feel rather facile).

Her gravy train hits a snag when she milks a wrong cow, Jennifer Peterson (a nonplussed then fuming Wiest is always a corker), the apparently perfect candidate, affluent, childless, all alone in the world, actually has a formable friend at court, the Russian mafia boss Roman Lunyov (Dinklage). So when the gloves are off, it is Marla and her girlfriend Fran (González) versus the murderous gangsters, do they have a chance? Or, shall we care?

The answer is yes and no, the ineptitude of Roman’s riffraff is astonishingly shocking (what can you say? they botch not one but two cases of snuffing a defenseless, unconscious woman!), and Marla is depicted as an amoral overachiever, a stony-faced ballbuster, a totally unregenerate bitch (not a scintilla of remorse can be traced on her face), ergo, that really puts audience off from empathizing with her, save for the pungent disgust towards the American Dream she is spoiling for.

If its paint-by-number predator/prey dichotomy sounds trite, its David and Goliath tale seems incredulous and oversimplified, what saves I CARE A LOT from heading to the abyss is Pike. Tricked out in fetching attire and unflappable towards any threats shot at her from the other sex, her Marla is “Amazing Amy” with a vengeance and irrefragably batting for the other team (her affection for Fran is genuine, a viewer might second-guess Marla’s unspecified backstory, how her reprehensible carapace could be the outgrowth of the malefic influence inflicted by the world at large, and Fran’s female warmth becomes her only safe haven). Even in the absence of cordial redeeming feats, it is still riveting to watch Pike’s Marla in action, her fearlessness is both scary and inspiring, you hate her guts but also crave for her guts (or maybe just a part of) ambivalence is here to stay.

At last, Blakeson plumps for poetic justice to put paid to Marla’s unstoppable ascension (can it be construed as a veiled pro-gun testimony? In the United States, the only way for a poor, miserable guy to seek justice from a powerful woman is to use anti-personnel weaponry, how reassuring!), but it feels bathetic, unlike Martin Scorsese’s THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013), Blakeson doesn’t know how to dream up a proper coda for a repulsive character, he settles for the safest exit strategy, since everything in I CARE A LOT is Manichaean.

Elsewhere, a debonair Messina lights up the screen as an unethical, soigné lawyer who tries and fails to railroad Marla into dancing to his tunes; Dinklage is always an atypical screen magnet, here his surly temperament is a good match with Pike’s posh sharpness. From TDoAC to I CARE A LOT, the production design goes from drab to hip, Marc Canham’s hypnotic electronic buzz swells and intensifies, but Blakeson’s script and imagination seems to be impeded by a bigger scale and more handsome budget, is it the downside of the money monster?

referential entries: William Wyler’s THE COLLECTOR (1965, 8.0/10); Martin Scorsese’s THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013, 8.0/10).

Title: The Disappearance of Alice Creed

Year: 2009

Country: UK

Language: English

Genre: Crime, Thriller

Director/Screenwriter: J Blakeson

Music: Marc Canham

Cinematography: Philipp Blaubach

Editing: Mark Eckersley

Cast:

Gemma Arterton

Martin Compston

Eddie Marsan

Rating: 6.9/10

Title: I Care a Lot

Year: 2020

Country: USA, UK

Language: English

Genre: Comedy, Crime, Thriller

Director/Screenwriter: J Blakeson

Music: Marc Canham

Cinematography: Doug Emmett

Editing: Mark Eckersley

Cast:

Rosamund Pike

Peter Dinklage

Eiza González

Dianne Wiest

Chris Messina

Isiah Whitlock Jr.

Damian Young

Nicholas Logan

Alicia Witt

Macon Blair

Celeste Oliva

Rating: 6.4/10

《爱丽丝的失踪》 个人观影随笔，欢迎理性讨论，不喜勿喷 电影的反转实在是太劲爆了，就像在看一部反转神剧，每次反转都是一个小喘气，而且电影应该是一个成本不高的小制作，因为反反复复的就只有两个场景三个人，连爱丽丝的爸爸和警察都没有出现，有时候电影的质量跟制作不一定成正比，小成本也可以拍出大电影，大制作也会出烂片，总体来说，这是一部合格的犯罪惊悚片，演员的演技和故事的逻辑性都很好，除了小胡子绑匪跟小鲜肉绑匪激吻的那一刻，我有点凌乱，其他还好，还好，囧！

电影里的人物关系有同性恋，异性恋和双性恋，我看短评有人说这种概率比彗星撞地球的概率还小，我笑了，hhhhhh，在腐国，这样的概率可能真的不算小，虽然我很震惊两位主角突如其来的激吻，可是一想到前几年英国的那些新闻，就回过神来，需要接受这里的剧情反转不难，只要看看相关新闻，就懂了，开个玩笑

另外我想说，电影的评分虽然不高，但是整个电影的可看性还是不错的，我分析，主要原因除了狗血反转之外，可能是电影所传达的思想不够深刻，只是一个戏剧化的犯罪故事，对于人性的复杂性并没有特别深入的表现，最后女主坐在车上给了两次镜头，先是回顾了一下绑架的场景和烧掉的作案汽车，接着再次回到了女主的身上，我猜测导演并不满意这个结局，所以赶紧开车走人(狗头护体)，So这是讲了一个什么故事呢？告诉我们，不要乱搞男男，男女关系吗？

如果硬要给这部电影加上一些思考，我想猜疑链是最好的解释，当超过两个人开始做一件坏事的时候，这个猜疑链就一定存在，信任是人和人相处共事的基础，即使这种信任是建立在友情亲情或是爱情之上，也必然为先，我们来看，小胡子绑匪一开始挖的洞原来是用来埋葬小鲜肉的，而小鲜肉绑匪又瞒着小胡子他跟人质的关系，人质在知道真相后仍然拿枪想干掉男友，在反杀失败后还挑拨他俩的关系，反正就是你不信任我，我不信任你，相爱相杀，乱成了一锅粥.

PS.小胡子绑匪原来就是《Still Life》里的社区送葬者埃迪·马森，只能说他戏路太宽了，什么角色都能演得入木三分(你看他俩接吻的时候多投入)，演什么像什么，很颠覆，这种颠覆就像看西恩潘的表演，你能想象《神秘河》里的社会人就是《我是山姆》里的低智商父亲吗？他们做到了，期待更多好作品~

吻得太逼真

看到这，有点凌乱

台词讲究，没有废话。

人物性格鲜明，但都很现实。

爱丽丝前男友丹尼和狱中新结实男友维奇，在爱丽丝毫不知情下绑架了她，因为她的有钱爸爸。

有意思的是，反转并不在丹尼计划之内，爱丽丝挣脱后，被枪口所指的丹尼不得不拉拢前女友，说服她扮演人质。

爱丽丝也不是傻白甜，在一次体液交流后，顺利拿到电话报警。却被维奇发现（此处有些生硬），无奈之下也撒了一个谎，丹尼只是利用维奇。

维奇先发制人，丹尼虽中一枪却侥幸逃脱，维奇最终死在丹尼枪下。

临死之即，维奇将手铐钥匙给了爱丽丝，逃出的爱丽丝找到了路边轿车内做着美梦死去的丹尼（流血过多）。

爱丽丝则在痛哭一场后，拿着钱失踪了。

所以，在绑架这种高危、高紧张状态下，缺乏信任实在可怕。

人性的趋利，不考虑别人损失，很容易造成冲突。