风的传人

爱情片美国1960

主演:斯宾塞·屈塞,弗雷德里克·马奇,吉恩·凯利,迪克·约克

导演:斯坦利·克雷默

播放地址

 剧照

风的传人 剧照 NO.1风的传人 剧照 NO.2风的传人 剧照 NO.3风的传人 剧照 NO.4风的传人 剧照 NO.5风的传人 剧照 NO.6风的传人 剧照 NO.13风的传人 剧照 NO.14风的传人 剧照 NO.15风的传人 剧照 NO.16风的传人 剧照 NO.17风的传人 剧照 NO.18风的传人 剧照 NO.19风的传人 剧照 NO.20
更新时间:2024-04-11 05:31

详细剧情

根据1925年真实案件“猴子审判”(也称“斯科普斯案”)改编。一名美国高中生物老师因在课堂教授进化论,被州政府起诉。案件轰动整个美国,教会势力前来小镇声援,教授、科学家等另一阵线也来支持,加上媒体的持续报道,令小镇顿时热闹起来。   政治家马修·哈里森·布拉迪(弗雷德里克·马奇饰演)代表控方出庭,辩方律师则由著名律师亨利·德鲁蒙德(斯宾塞·屈塞饰演)代表。审讯期间,两人针锋相对,渐渐成为一场关于进化论与创世纪、科学与宗教的世纪大辩论。   片名取自圣经箴言书 11:29 “扰害己家的,必承受清风”。

 长篇影评

 1 ) 现在看它和以后的人们看我们,你说的风是什么风

一切都是套路,可为什么还会意犹未尽?虽是要跨入VR的时代的风口年(起码是2016年大众普遍的认识),可花2个小时看老套好莱坞模式的黑白电影,读一个故事代入一段历史,丰富个体的体验,最终满足求知欲才是目的。
如今看来的好莱坞旧模式,戏剧化的定格表现,夸张的接吻POSE和看了N遍的固定经典出场镜头多多少少会有年代代入感,少些新鲜感。节奏如此之快的当代,没有2、3秒一切的快镜头,没有摇臂拉移的眩晕,更没有视觉震撼的特效,票房几乎就没有了保证。一个小镇,几个房间,一个法庭和一堆汗流浃背却卖力演出的演员是硬件的全部,当然精彩的辩论和布局足以弥补大部分,形与神的一同支起了整个故事。不得不说让我想起《十二怒汉》,同样的低成本制作(道具和视觉效果方面),同样的夏天,同样的戏剧化房间,同样的精彩辩论,同样的少数派的成功引领了最终剧本走向和胜利。
以如今的观念去理解过去的观念并不是件容易的事情,推回到1920年代,正确与错误也只能留给后人也就是我们来评判(或者留给三体人)。千年来对宗教坚守,造成了盲目的排外,一千个读者有一千个哈姆雷特,可偏偏一个出众的哈没雷特一狂热,往往将剩余九百多个哈没雷特变成由头羊带领的羊群,无意间陷入自我服务偏见中,丧失了自我深入思考的意志,再不停的自我印证,或许要比这些步骤还简单,只是单单不喜欢异己者。也许这与人本身的自我保护设置有关,群体性动物服从大多数,服从权力者,从身到心。幸好还有人站在另一面改变航行的方向。当然还有12名从狂热群众中选出来的最终并没有那么狂热的陪审团,是他们最终敲定了最终的判决。
为了增加戏剧化效果,主导观众情感变化,影片有特意丑化宗教一方,特意加大了他们的盲目和声势浩大,而教师一方的队伍则是善良、理性又处于弱势。高潮在几场不同的针锋相对中,辩论从输赢到对错再扭转焦点到自由意志,演员的激烈与敬业程度,让我甚至担心在36度的高温中白发老人会激动到晕倒。可最打动人的心弦,让你不再成为旁观者的高潮在哪里呢?我想也许是恐惧。进步是我们最大的骄傲,工业革命,科学的发展,某种程度上我们都是功利主义者,奔跑追求最大的幸福的路上,追求着进步,自由,富强,民主,平等就先不算在内。可若是倒退?倒退到黑暗之前?倒退到战争、苦痛、限制的过去?这个恐惧会不会让你停下来思考一下?
对与错从来都是站在主观角度上的,也并不是声音大的就是正确答案。达尔文演化论到今天已经毋庸置疑的成了真理,群体性狂热也已经被群体性前进所取代。今天我们热烈的欢迎新理论新知识,迭代与矛盾共存,日新月异的前进是我们共同繁荣的基石。同性恋翻身成了时尚,不同的信仰得以休战共存,一神论的宗教到底最终的敌人是科学还是其他的宗教?宗教孕育出了科学,但《圣经》那些详细的记载又让它漏洞百出,不如我大《论语》那简短的篇幅容易任意打扮。
影片的结尾,那位捍卫自由思想与科学的老者独自一人拿着bible的身影,让在表面上看起来科学的胜利下,又罩着一层更引人深思的矛盾。牛顿投入上帝的怀抱,宗教孕育发展了科学,达尔文犹豫了几十年才发表进化论。历史会重复,可自由意志的存在最大限度的减少了这个可能,螺旋上升的世界才是我们骄傲的基础。昨日的问题与今日不同,但如果今日我们所有的信以为真都岌岌可危会如何?我们会否成为盲目的大众?盲目的自信到一叶障目?我想每个人或多或少的都在做,狂热、盲目、仇恨异己者、团结内群体、自我服务偏见、自我验证、归因错误。。。有些我们不会,有些总会不由自主。那时候,我们需要这样一场辩论,需要这样一场风。

 2 ) 台词 Dictation

You cannot administrate a wicked law impartially.
You can only destroy, you can only punish. And I warn you that a wicked law like a plague destroys everyone it touches, whether its followers or its defiers.

If you take a law as Revolution and you make it a crime to teach it in the public schools. Tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools. And tomorrow you may make it a crime to read about it. And soon you may ban books and newspapers. And then you may turn Catholics against Protestants, and Protestants against Protestants. And try to force your own religion upon the mind of the man. If you can do one, you can do the other. Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy and needs feeded. And soon your honor, with banners flying and with drums beating, we will be marching backward, backward! To the glorious ages of that 16 century, when bigots burned the man who dare bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind.



Call Brady as a witness:
Is it possible that something is holy to the celebrated agnostic?
Yes
The individual human mind
In a child's power to master the multiplication table, there is more sanctity than all your shouted out "Amens" "Holy holy" and
An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral.
And the advance of man's knowledge is a greater miracle than all the sticks turned into snakes and the parting of the waters.
But now are we to forgo all those progress b/c now Mr. Brady frightens us with a fable?
Gentlemen, progress has never been a bargain. You have to pay for it.
Sometimes I think there is a man who sits behind a counter and says "all right, you can have a telephone, but you lose privacy and the charms of distance. " "Madam, you may vote, but as a price you lose the right to retreat behind the powder puff or your petty coat.""Mr. you may conquer the air, but the birds will lose their wonder. And the clouds will smell of gasoline. "
Darwin took us forward to a hill top, from where we could look back and see the way where we came
But for this insight and for this knowledge, we must abandon our faith in the pleasant poetry of Genesis.

Brady: We must not abandon faith. Faith is the most important thing.

Then why did God plead us the power to think? Mr. Brady why did you deny? The one faculty the man raises above the other creatures of the Earth? The power of his brain to reason. What other is to be pride of? The elephant is larger, the horse is stronger, the butterfly is far more beautiful, the mosquito was more prolific. Even a simple sponge is more durable. Or does a sponge think?


It is sad we don't all have your positive knowledge of what is right and wrong, Mr. Brady.
….
 
The Bible is a book, it is a good book, but it is not the only book.

God tells Brady what is good. To be against Brady is to be against God.

 3 ) 翻译进度表

共2796行台词,最早2010年有翻译打算

2010年12月25日 0039/2796
2012年12月30日 0536/2796
2013年01月18日 0607/2796
看到有翻译的字幕了,弃坑了。

未完待续……

 4 ) 扰害己家的,必承受清风 --《风的传人》

片名:《Inherit the Wind》(《风的传人》) 年代:1960年 国家:美国 导演:Stanley Kramer(斯坦利•克雷默) 主演:Spencer Tracy(斯宾塞•屈塞);Fredric March(弗雷德里克•马奇);Gene Kelly(吉恩•凯利);Dick York(迪克•约克)

 1925美国田纳西州通过了一项法律,禁止任何公立学校的教师否认《圣经》中神创论,禁止讲授人类是从低等动物逐渐进化而来的理论,有着传统宗教信仰的田纳西州居民都对此深表赞同。
在本州的小镇中学,伯莱特姆•凯茨公然向法律挑战,在生物课上向学生讲授进化论。镇上的地方检察官为了遏制这样的思潮,特地请来曾三次竞选美国总统的原教旨主义者马修•哈里森•布拉迪起诉凯茨,而伯莱特姆的辩护律师则是著名的无神论者亨利•德鲁蒙德。
彼时进化论在美国已经成为大多数人的共识,本案的起诉顿时在美国引起轰动。成群结队的基督教徒奔赴小镇,以见证对于伯莱特姆的审判,同时无数记者也涌向小镇,以观摩法律大幅倒退下的审判。
在法庭上,马修认为打赢这场官司易如反掌,伯莱特姆就像刀殂下鱼肉,只有任人宰割的份了。当牧师的女儿伯莱特姆的未婚妻站在证人席上,被马修叫嚣承认伯莱特姆是一个不可知论者的时候,他就知道对伯莱特姆的末日审判已经拉下帷幕,在这个民风保守的小镇上,如果某个人是不可知论者,那么这个人就像魔鬼一样不相容于他们的世界。
与马修的春风得意刚好相反,亨利却在每一轮较量中都遭受挫折。亨利承认伯莱特姆确实讲授了进化论,并传召科学家和神学论者证明,进化论和《圣经》中创世的故事并不相悖。遗憾的是法官裁定他们的证词与本案无关,万般无奈之下的亨利要求让马修作为《圣经》专家出庭作证。马修欣然同意,认为这不过又是一次向大众宣讲《圣经》的大好机会。亨利和马修的质证都集中在一些令人难以置信的故事本身,马修坚持认为《圣经》里的每一句话都无比真实,字字真理,甚至不惜否认地球围绕太阳转动的事实。但亨利终于抓住机会,迫使马修承认创世纪的第一日可能有会比24小时长,因为太阳直到第4天才被创造出来,所以无从测量“一日”的长度。亨利由此推论《圣经》所记载的第一天,有可能长达数百万年,甚至长得没有尽头。由于这一致命性的质问,让马修最终不得不承认《圣经》有不依照字面理解的可能性,因此,认为进化论与《圣经》并不冲突的观点就应该被接受。
然而这场精彩的辩论并未能改变陪审团的认知,他们依然认定伯莱特姆有罪,为避免小镇成为全国的笑柄,法官决定只对伯莱特姆处以一百美元的罚金。
作为一部拍摄于20世纪中期的黑白影片,呈现的是“创世论”和“进化论”的冲突,这样的冲突在今天看来是可笑的,“进化论”已成为大众公认的事实。但是在历史上真实发生事件的又是如何呢?在真实的“斯科普斯猴子案”,案件的起因是全美公民自由联盟向反对进化论的法律宣战,全美自由联盟刊登广告招募自愿违反法律的教师,斯科普斯是一名刚毕业的大学生,只是一名代课的生物老师,他主动请缨,以身试法,也因此被逮捕。由于美国各州有权决定什么是可以在公立学校传授的内容,田纳西州最高法院赞成反进化论,驳回了关于该法律违反了田纳西州宪法中关于州政府应该“珍惜科学”这一项规定的抗辩。但是,法院以一个技术性理由,推翻了斯科普斯案的定罪依据:田纳西州法律要求,超过50美元的罚金必须由陪审团而不是由法官来判定。法院非正式地向检方建议撤销此案,因为斯科普斯早已搬离田纳西州。此案的结果令美国公民自由联盟感到失望,因为此案不接受进一步的上诉。反进化论法律直到1967年之前,还在田纳西州存在并有效,而斯科普斯是因该法律被起诉的唯一人。
全美公民自由联盟希望该案的诉讼引起社会的广泛关注,并通过司法程序上诉至最高法院,以求裁定该法案因违宪而无效,具有鲜明的“挑战恶法”的意味。这是一场以反对宗教侵入立法为表面,以捍卫宪法赋予的学术言论自由为核心的斗争。对于这场审判的意义,正如片中亨利律师的一段经典辩护词:“”一切恶法,就如同瘟疫一样,能够摧毁每一个人,无论是它的反对者还是它的马前卒。如果你能把在公立学校讲授进化论的行为裁定为一项犯罪,不久以后在私立学校讲授进化论的行为也会成为犯罪,然后阅读进化论也会成为罪行。如果针对进化论来立法禁止,随后你就可以连阅读进化论都禁绝掉,然后你可以禁止办报出书,然后还可以尝试将你自己的宗教强加到所有人的身心之上,如果你可以做到其中一点,你完全就可以做到另一点。”
时至今日,进化论应如何在公立学校讲授这样的话题依然如1925年时一样存在争议。学校董事会继续在为讲授进化论的事争吵:是将进化论作为科学事实讲授,还是仅仅将其作为一种理论来讲授?是否应在讲授进化论的同时讲授智慧涉及论?
欢迎关注法律电影公众号“大抵浮生如梦”

 5 ) Fear in the Wind (语境批判)

Throughout history, humans have undergone a constant evolutionary process in regards to ways in which we view the world. The play Inherit The Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee conveys how modern ideologies experience turbulence when first presented. Often times the past has revealed that humans are inherently skeptical and resistant to progressive ideas. The 1950’s, in which the play was written, sets a tone that illustrates how ignorance, loss of power, and fear of uncertainty heightens anxiety and causes the characters in Inherit The Wind to remain stagnant in their views.

Ignorance is the main factor that contributes in further perpetuating any conservative society. Southern states of America have had a track record of being regressive and reluctant to change. Whether it be civil rights laws, laws in regard to sexuality or the banning of evolution being taught in schools, the south has always had a slower progression than Northern states. The setting of the Inherit the Wind is Hillsboro, Tennessee, a small town in southern United States. The five most illiterate cities in the United States are either southern cities or small towns. Small town culture in the 1950s further signifies that people would tend to have conservative and outdated ideologies by living amongst a smaller population. This lack of public knowledge is represented during the play through a conversation between Drummond and Bannister. Drummond asked him if he had ever read the Bible before, and Bannister answered: “Can’t read.” (page 39)Bannister represents ordinary people in southern United States at that time. Therefore, given the understanding that many people were illiterate, a sense of unsafety would result as well. This fear caused by ignorance leaves these uneducated folks vulnerable and incapable of challenging dominant ideologies.

Entertainment is a way to escape from the shadow of war that limits the depth and breadth of thinking. The 1950s was the introduction and popularization for many forms of entertainment. Televisions became a household item, and for the first time in human history is was common for everyone to own a radio. This wide spread entertainment culture is portrayed in Lawrence and Lee’s play. For instance, when people talked about the trial, they commented: “Everyone says it is going to be a show.” In this case, they were unconcerned about the actual truth of the trial. Instead, the people of the town viewed it as a talking point, that would be a source of entertainment. The ignorance caused by a strong focus on entertainment value gradually causes the public to see things from a superficial layer. There is little mention or talk about the evolution theory or of it’s specifics and validity. Thus fear of change is going to be produced by wrapping up in their thought-forms. As a result, people choose to not to think outside of daily life, this will only results the same social status. Due to the special geographical areas of the play and mass entertainment in the 1950s, the sense of unsafety and indifference of truth brings little change to the society.

Christianity is the dominant religion in American society. During the 1950’s Christianity’s influence on the public was powerful, religious leaders were intimidated by deconstruction of power and everyday people suffered from cognitive dissonance.

The fear in real life comes from losing status and power. For example, the authors create the character Brady that fulfills the archetype of William Jenning Bryan in history, Bryan was both a democratic presidential candidate and a fundamentalist. In the powerful years for Christian society during first half of 20th century, it seemed reasonable to say that he could achieve such high position due to their identity as a fundamentalist. Bryan is the expert of a specific and special subject - the Bible, which means once the society does not recognize the Bible any more, the Christian society would collapse. Therefore, teaching the theory of evolution has been banned in American classrooms in Tennessee by the strong supports of Bryan from 1925 to 1967. Based on the image of Bryan, the character Brady whom is developed by the author once said to public: “I am here to defend that which is most precious in the hearts of all the Living Truth of the Scriptures.” (page 20) It is not hard to see that words like “most” and “all” indicated the anxious heart of Brady to maintain the Bible. Both of them believed that as long as people know nothing about the theory of evolution, the Bible is still the only truth in the world and Christians would continue to rule the society.

On the other hand, cognitive dissonance is another factor that inhibits the progress of modern thoughts. Before the 60’s and the 70’s revolution, people in America haven’t yet gone through a social upheaval. As faithful fundamentalists, they have been taught to believe in the Bible from childhood and they reject any opposing views to their faith. The theory of evolution indicates that people evolved from monkeys which conflicts with the Bible which states that God created human beings. Many people who belong to a particular religion have a hard time holding two conflicting thoughts. Brady once mentions “The bible satisfies me, it is enough”, this quote is revealing that religion provides a sense of comfort. Given this understanding, it is easy to comprehend why people become so dismissive to new ideas. Hillsboro finds difficulty in making steps towards change because of the threat that loss of power presents as well as the hold cognitive dissonance has on people’s mind.

Uncertainty fuels ideas of instability and fear, the unknown has always plagued human existence. American society was faced with many challenges in the 1950’s due to the threat of communism. In Inherit The Wind, science is used as a parallel to communism because of the shared newfound concepts they presented.

Science is a subject that is endlessly exploring and discovering the new. For some this represents instability and results in uncertainty. Humanity hadn’t experienced the scientific and technological advancements like the 60’s and 70’s, so people were skeptical about science in the 1950s. Religion is different, everything is written in the Bible with certainty, which provides a sense of safety for people. Brady signifies this faith as he says : “Hopeful, I think is the word. We must look hopeful.” This quote further explains why so many people hold their belief, faith can give them the things for certain that science could not provide.

Moreover, Inherit the Wind mirrors the Red Scare during the Cold War in the 1950s. At that time, the Cold War started and the international situation remained tense and turbulent. American society was suffused with the red scare which was the fear of a rising potential of communism that may subvert and take over United States. Therefore, McCarthyism was born, an ideology rooting off all the communists in America. Then, lots of policies has come out to against the communism. It is interesting to notice that the Red Scare and the play shared different stories but the same ideology: fear of change due to uncertainty. The authors used the present as a reference to write this play, the theory of evolution is referred to Communism, and the supporters of McCarthyism is similar to Brady in the play. In Inherit the Wind, Drummond asked Brady about the theory of evolution :‘Never read it?”, Brady answered: “And I never will.” (page 86) These two concepts works similarly in that people were not familiar with the specifics of communism, however they do not like the sense of uncertainty. By exaggerated propaganda of Communism, sweeping all the communists out of America became a major task at that time. Compared to Inherit the Wind, banning not to teach the theory of evolution is the main motive in the society. The resemblance between communism and science as newfound ways of thinking serve as the reason for why people are so reluctant to move forward.

Humans have a tendency to fear change, this has been proven time and time again throughout the course of history. Inherit the Wind exemplifies this fear and parallels it to American society during the 1950’s. Through it’s irony, and satire Lawrence and Lee express their disapproval of the government’s behavior and the mainstream society. The authors use ignorance, loss of power and uncertainty to demonstrate how people can refuse to evolve and grow. Lack of knowledge is attributed to the Southern town culture and the immense entertainment of the 1950s. Moreover, the fear of religious leaders losing status and spirituality causes the society to maintain rigid. More importantly, the panic induced by a sense of uncertainty mainly comes from rapid scientific development and fear of communism. The author used the play as a reflection of 1950s in order to satirize the present, the closed mind eventually propels a conservative society.

 6 ) 经典台词

我在捍卫他做一个不一样的人的权利。

他们都是朴素的人,贫穷的人。他们非常努力工作,他们总得相信一些美丽的事物。他们在追寻一些比他们现在的所有更加美丽完美的东西,逛着街想找到天堂的路。你为什么想剥夺他们这一切呢?这就是他们仅有的东西了,就好像一个装着希望的圣杯。

对错对于我来说一点意义都没有,但是真理有意义,作为我们前景的方向。我们将一种道德标准置于人类行为之上,这样所有人的所有作为,就用这种独断的对的标准,还有错的标准,来一点一点地进行判断。如果你针对相对论来立法,然后禁止在公立学校里面教授它,随后你就可以禁止在私立学校里面教授它。然后你连阅读进化论都禁止掉,然后你可以禁止办报和出书,然后你可以让天主教徒反对新教徒,还可以让新教徒反对新教徒,然后还可以尝试将你自己的宗教强加在所有人的身心之上。如果你可以做到一点,你完全就可以做到另一点。因为狂热和愚昧是永不止歇的,并且永远饥渴。

那你怎么就这么有胆子来对一样你根本不了解的东西发起一场莫名其妙的圣战?

是你背叛了你自己,你把我的丈夫看成了一个圣徒,所以他的一言一行都必须是争确的,现在你又把他看成了一个恶魔,他的一言一行都是邪恶的,其实我的丈夫两者都不是,他只是一个人,他也会犯错误。

 短评

bravo!第一次看金句如此密集的电影,句句是金句,每个对话拿出去都可以当电影门面被营销号发长截图的那种

6分钟前
  • pissoff
  • 力荐

美式魔幻现实主义,马奇和屈塞庭审斗法实属精彩

9分钟前
  • 黑特-007
  • 力荐

自持为正义与科学之化身的[乘风继影]代表了美国左派身上一切叫人反感的东西。他们是如此好为人师,以致要把双方写得如此一黑一白,费尽心机誓要把正确一方塑造为真理路上的殉难者,直到最后一秒才试图做出meta姿态。抛开一切套路不谈,影片最大的问题在于法律争论焦点的偏差。辩论的焦点明明应该是“老师有没有权利教授进化论”,结果最终却演变为宗教与世俗的文化斗争。这部所谓的message film彰显了某些左派人对于权力和“最终解释权”(Deutungshoheit)的执拗渴望。

12分钟前
  • brennteiskalt
  • 较差

8.3最近迷上进化论而看的。根据真实案件改编,科学和宗教的冲突。表演很精彩,法庭辩论戏尤甚,继《控方证人》后看过最精彩的律政戏,很具有思辨性,不过最后一场法庭戏克鲁蒙德律师用进化论对圣经的质疑好像只是点到为止,表达得太精简,没有详细的去驳倒,难以今普通观众理解。结尾的对话更有深意,要科学也要有信仰。“一切恶法,就如同瘟疫一样,能够摧毁每一个人,无论是它的反对者还是它的马前卒。如果你能把在公立学校讲授进化论的行为裁定为一项犯罪,不久以后在私立学校讲授进化论的行为也会成为犯罪,然后阅读进化论也会成为罪行。如果针对进化论来立法禁止,随后你就可以连阅读进化论都禁绝掉,然后你可以禁止办报出书,然后还可以尝试将你自己的宗教强加到所有人的身心之上,如果你可以做到其中一点,你完全就可以做到另一点。”

14分钟前
  • 黑山懒妖
  • 推荐

对信仰的狂热成为愚昧无知的利器。影片就信仰上帝与科学的冲突进行了一场激烈的辩论,但真正引人深思的却并不仅仅如此。重要的是,每个人都拥有思考和表达看法的权利。精彩的法庭辩论戏贯穿全片,情节居然取材真实时间,的确有些匪夷所思~

15分钟前
  • Granite_花花
  • 推荐

不是三大男神的锅,克雷默的场景调度也依旧不俗,只是与如此二元对立的主题与观念表达相比,影片本身的戏剧张力实在是不足称道。

17分钟前
  • 猫日那
  • 还行

从表面上看是宗教的事,但说的更多的是思想独立言论自由。剧中的这条法律今天会残害一个相信达尔文进化论的人,明天就会残害另一个相信其他学说的人,乃至以后出现了新的宗教分支,或新的宗教解释,那在这条法律下就会出现永无止境的相互迫害。在辩护律师请人类学家心理学家考古学家等证人却不被法官允许上庭后,只能退而求其次,证明课堂上法庭上需要有思想言论的自由。这点跟林昭很像,她也许不赞同张元勋的观点,但她跳到桌子上说要允许别人讲话。结尾逆转利用了一点小伎俩,算是从某一方面展现了“若不允许自由思考自由说话,任何人都可能成为牺牲品”。

21分钟前
  • 壹佰伍拾號🥈
  • 力荐

今天你可以禁止不准说,明天可以将某句从圣经划出,之后你就来建造你们自己的教堂,很快就能进化到那个年代,手举火把燃烧异教徒的时代。

23分钟前
  • twopersons
  • 力荐

值得深思的一部电影即使过了那么多年依然如此,人权与神权之争用一场官司其实是远远说不完的,这样的一场法庭辩论也仅仅是抛砖引玉吧。片中三个主角代表着三种观点,仔细看过电影的人不用看到片尾就会发现屈塞和马奇其实都是教徒只不过他们对待宗教的观点不一样,而以凯利为代表的无神论者并不被影片所推崇当然也没有鞭挞反而是这一角色的很多台词讲出了一部分观众的心声比如人还不如猴子,人已经在不断倒退都快要退回海洋了。此角色最后说的一句台词真的是太让人感慨了,他对屈塞说,你会在那里的,你就是那一类人,还有谁会捍卫我孤身一人的权力?屈塞片中那段慷慨陈词更是掷地有声。两位影帝飙戏非常过瘾,尤其他们还是以两种完全不同的方式在表演,戏份不多的马奇的妻子也演的很好。PS真实事件改编,首演于百老汇的阵容还包括保罗.穆尼。

28分钟前
  • 秦诺诺
  • 推荐

四星半1.克雷默的法庭戏总是精彩,镜头运动和人物构图依然直白而高效。2.暴食的信仰者律师,扰害己家的承风者牧师。尽管偏向明显,克雷默却依然揭示、同情甚至部分认同了布拉迪这位信奉宗教者的可敬一面。3.审判落幕后处于闹剧中的演讲恰是宗教信仰已经在美国人心中几近全面崩塌后的图景。4.影片同样对金凯利代表的虚无主义者和怀疑主义者表达了否定,电影主题也因此由自由之思考拓展至对信仰(只能由自由的思想确立)的坚定与追求。Everybody has the right to and should build one's own monument.

31分钟前
  • JeffLivorno
  • 力荐

关于《进化论》与上帝、人权与神权、真理与信仰/意识形态 的法庭辩论,在导演的执导、演员的演绎下,精彩万分

34分钟前
  • 有心打扰
  • 推荐

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:9d6c216afe2794a2a391cc1ba98fc1e8487b9130&dn=Inherit.the.Wind.1960.1080p.BluRay.X264-AMIABLE%20%5BPublicHD%5D

37分钟前
  • Eden's Curve
  • 推荐

058:“如果你针对进化论来立法,然后禁止在公立学校里教授它,随后你就可以禁止在私立学校里教授它,然后你连阅读进化论都禁止掉,然后你可以禁止办报和出书……如果你可以做到一点,你完全可以做到另一点……很快,到来的就是满天禁令,还有满耳的歌功颂德,我们就要大步地开始倒退了!倒退!”

39分钟前
  • 鹿鸣
  • 推荐

"An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man's knowledge is a greater miracle than all the sticks turned to snake."

42分钟前
  • 马赛克
  • 推荐

影片根据斯科普斯案(猴子审判案)改编,尽管稍有改动,仍然十分生动真实地再现了该案的来龙去脉。最艰难的抉择并不是发生在对与错之间,而是对与对之间。在科学与宗教的关系上,爱因斯坦的话或许更有启发性,“没有宗教的科学是跛子,没有科学的宗教是瞎子。”科学与宗教,一个负责世俗社会的物质进步,一个负责内心世界的灵魂宁静,完全可以并行不悖,携手前行,共同促进人类社会的发展和繁荣。在正确处理两者的关系上,我们最需要的也许就是宽容精神,尊重彼此的差异,学习彼此的长处,就像丹诺在为该案辩护时所说的,与其说他在为科学辩护,不如说他是在为宽容辩护,他唯一不宽容的对象就是不宽容者。

44分钟前
  • 尤里卡
  • 力荐

两个影帝的强强对抗,接受达尔文的进化论不代表亵渎上帝,而信神也不说明就无视自然规律,可惜狂热教徒不理这套还将讲授进化论认作为违法就非常可笑,但卫道士律师的偏执与倒下又让人看得唏嘘,一切都不必如此极端。

47分钟前
  • touya
  • 推荐

Can't you understand that if you take a law like evolution and make it a crime to teach it in public schools, tomorrow you could make it a crime to teach it in private schools, and tomorrow you may make it a crime to read about it? And soon you may ban books and newspapers. And then you may turn Catholic against Protestant, and Protestant against Protestant, and try to foist your own religion upon the mind of man.

48分钟前
  • 颍原真吾
  • 推荐

这部电影极高的立意、演员精湛的表演、巧妙的情节设置和振聋发聩的台词,使得它成为一部不可错过的佳作。“因为狂热和愚昧是永不止歇的,并且永远饥渴”,我还是第一次在电影中看到如此精准而形象地形容偏执和专断的危害的台词。“扰害己家的,必承受清风”,简单理解就是用专断的手段去达成思想上的目的的,终将被反噬,不是自己癫狂,就是被癫狂的他人吞噬。但是真正让影片升华的不是这些容易让人热血沸腾的台词。很遗憾地看到往往是传递和发泄情绪的文艺作品更容易流行,但是本片没有停留在输出情绪的层级上,而是在双方律师、当事教师、牧师和记者的关系上,传递出一种超脱于情绪的冷静和温情。这世上终有人独行,终有人会游离于所谓主流之外,但是所谓主流的存在只是特定时代背景下的产物,捍卫游离在主流之外的声音在任何时代都是有价值的。

53分钟前
  • 丑嘴唇
  • 力荐

结尾太厉害了,讽刺效果拉满,作为一部输出价值观的电影,其所有的矛盾都是围绕着形而上的主题展开的,但却丝毫不让人觉得无聊,因为关于自由思想、信仰的坚持、理性的怀疑的探讨都是那么地打动人,在20年代的南方,宗教的原教旨主义还是统治着人们的思想,法律在其中成为了极其尴尬的角色,但电影中塑造的多个形象都暗示着历史的转轨,新闻人的虚无主义、法官的平衡和睿智、牧师的顽固和煽动、学生的进步与觉醒,一切都在变化着,所以政治家成为了牺牲品,他所捍卫的那个旧时代已经渐渐远去了,“风”的意象成为了点金之笔,不管是扇扇子还是结尾突然切到了电风扇,人的价值才是最大的力量,我们回顾人类历史上那些伟大的转折时刻时发现那均是一次次关于思想解放的战争,所以说这部电影在回顾美国历史上关键时刻的同时也颇有对当时激荡时代的指涉

58分钟前
  • 幽灵不会哭
  • 力荐

这样的一个故事,拿到现在来看,也依然充满了明镜般的现实意义。荒诞剧是人类历史上亘古不变的主题之一。科学和理性或许能够战胜蒙昧,但始终战胜不了蒙昧的群体。达尔文的《物种起源》和《圣经》一起被男主捧在怀中的结尾,代表着那个年代里想要调和这一巨大分歧的真诚努力。而假使让我们这一代来翻拍的话,答案大概就是飞面神教了吧……

59分钟前
  • 猪头妖怪
  • 推荐

返回首页返回顶部

Copyright © 2023 All Rights Reserved