電影影評英文

Ⅰ 英語影評一篇

《功夫熊貓》採用純東方家庭倫理的敘事邏輯，使得整個故事更輕松。

Kung Fu Panda adopts the narrative logic of pure Oriental family ethics, which makes the whole story more relaxed.

這樣處理使得「主題」略顯單薄，但確實更適合小朋友去看。

This treatment makes the "theme" slightly thin, but it is more suitable for children to see.

這部作品不會感動到落淚，也不會無厘頭到笑翻天，但是這個平衡點才是「小朋友」最輕松的觀看環境。

This work will not be moved to tears, nor will it be ridiculous to laugh, but this balance point is the most relaxed viewing environment for "children".

(1)電影影評英文擴展閱讀

影評目的——

電影評論的目的在於分析、鑒定和評價蘊含在銀幕中的審美價值、認識價值、社會意義、鏡頭語言等方面，達到拍攝影片的目的，解釋影片中所表達的主題，既能通過分析影片的成敗得失，幫助導演開闊視野，

提高創作水平，以促進電影藝術的繁榮和發展；又能通過分析和評價，影響觀眾對影片的理解和鑒賞，提高觀眾的欣賞水平，從而間接促進電影藝術的發展。

Ⅱ 求經典外國電影影評---要英文版本的

珍珠港的影評

pearl harbour film review

Pearl Harbor consists of three incongruous acts, mashed together into an ungainly whole. It appears to be more interested in reprocing the success of Titanic, which also set a fictional love story amidst a tragic historical event, than it is in telling the story of the men and women who fought and died in the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Titanic worked because the central characters were interesting, the story was cohesive, the historical events were handled respectfully and with the proper dramatic tone, and underneath it all was an intelligent reflection on the human failings that permitted such a tragedy in the first place.

Pearl Harbor reces the historical backdrop into a series of action set pieces. Instead of exploring ideas inherent in the events, it extracts them, recing the reason for Japan's attack to something inexplicable at best, and having utterly nothing to say about why the attack happened, how it was carried out, or how we responded. The film is dedicated to the men who died at Pearl Harbor, but what does it dedicate to them? It does not seem very interested in them except as a tool for dramatic imagery. Consider, for example, a scene in which we learn that men are trapped in a sunken ship in the harbor. We learn this to emphasize the brutality of the attack, as if such emphasis were needed. Then the film forgets this point entirely, providing the fates of those men in a narrated line just before the closing credits. Why wasn't the third act of the film about those men, instead of a rushed covering of the Doolittle raid on Tokyo, complete with overblown crash landings and an improbable engagement with Japanese soldiers?

If you want to see a real movie about Pearl Harbor or the Doolittle Raid, one that paints a deep and accurate picture of what it was like, one you can learn from, one that pays tribute to our veterans, or even just one that functions as convincing entertainment, there is no shortage of options. Tora! Tora! Tora! chronicles the events before, ring, and after the attack from both the American and Japanese sides. Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo is as thorough a chronicle of the Doolittle Raid as is probably possible in a feature film, while also following the personal stories of a few indivials involved (any one of which is more interesting than the personal story in Pearl Harbor). The Purple Heart, one of the most heartbreaking movies I've ever seen, tells the story of Americans captured by the Japanese after the raid.

Writing off the historical aspects of the film, I am left with the love triangle that makes up the entire first act and pervades the rest of it. It is wholly uninteresting. This same story has been told better, countless times before. Not one of the three characters is fleshed out into an indivial: they are bland stereotypes, dolled up to look pretty and given trite lines that they recite to convey the illusion of genuine emotion. It's telling that it doesn't much matter to us how the love triangle is resolved. Unless they both die, she'll get one of them, and who cares which? Neither of the men are personable, and we surely suspect early on that her decision will be based more on fate than her own volition anyway. (In plots like this, it's survival of the survivors.) And so, alas, we are denied even the most basic of all elements of storytelling, namely, characters making actual decisions

Ⅲ 英文影評急需!!

預見未來：
Given the number of attempts, surprisingly few really good movies have been made from the writings of sci-fi visionary Philip K. Dick (BLADE RUNNER, MINORITY REPORT, A SCANNER DARKLY). Most range from merely middling (IMPOSTOR, TOTAL RECALL) to downright awful — remember PAYCHECK? This lazy, incoherent adaptation of Dick's strange short story "The Golden Man," however, just might be the worst. It takes only the central character from the source material — a mutant human who can see several minutes into his own future — and throws away everything that made the story interesting.

Cris Johnson (Nicolas Cage), aka Las Vegas clairvoyant "Frank Cadillac," uses his intentionally tacky lounge act to make a living while disguising the fact that he really can see two minutes into his own future. But not everyone in the audience is buying the fake-mentalist act: FBI counterterrorism agent Callie Ferris (a woefully miscast Julianne Moore) knows real "patterns of advanced awareness" when she sees them, and she needs his help on a little job she's been working on: A 10-kiloton WMD has fallen into the hands of a pack of eurotrash terrorists who, for some undisclosed reason, have their hearts set on nuking L.A. Even though she knows Cris' clairvoyance only extends to a couple of minutes into the immediate future, Callie thinks Cris can use his severely limited skill to help her find the device and save eight million lives. He, however, refuses to be treated like a science project and goes on the lam with his new girlfriend, schoolteacher Liz Cooper (Jessica Biel), hotly pursued by both the FBI and the terrorists.

Three big problems plague this misbegotten mess. First, for much of the movie Cris is running from the good guys, who only want to prevent the rest of us from a nuclear holocaust. Secondly, Cage's age-defying look — the uncertain hairline, the dyed eyebrows, the teeth — has reached the point where he's become troubling to look at. Worst of all, director Lee Tamahori repeatedly stages a dramatic event — Cris getting shot in the chest or smashed by a speeding train — only to rewind the action and reveal that the mayhem was nothing more than just one of Cris' premonitions. The first time, it's a legitimate "Gotcha!" When it happens again, it's tremendously irritating. The third time Tamahori hauls this cheap shot out of his near-empty bag of tricks, you'll cease to believe in anything that happens on screen and most likely give up on the movie altogether.

2
To avert the frightening possibility of another terrorist outrage, read the press notes for sci-fi thriller Next. "It would be most valuable if we could see into the future."

Well, of course it would. Come to think of it, ray guns and superhuman strength might come in handy too, as would the power to leap tall buildings in a single bound. In their absence, Lee Tamahori's shamelessly preposterous film has to make do with Cris Johnson (Cage), a Las Vegas clairvoyant whose bargain-basement act masks a genuine extra-sensory ability to see what will happen to him two minutes ahead of time.

Under the pseudonym Frank Cadillac, Johnson is perfectly happy to exploit his gift to impress gullible tourists and cheat at cards. When his winning streak is noticed by the casino's eagle-eyed security, however, Cris is forced to flee - straight into the hands of Callie Ferris (Moore), an FBI agent on the trail of a shadowy cabal intent on exploding a nuclear bomb in downtown Los Angeles. Jack Bauer being otherwise engaged, this seedy showman is her best chance to avert a catastrophe. Cris, though, has other things on his mind, having fallen for a beautiful young teacher (Biel) he's been having premonitions about for months

3
Since the spectacle explosion of the 1980s blockbuster action movie, beginning with The Terminator and Die Hard, the genre has run the course of fresh and exciting to cliché and contrived. It seems that masked heroes sporting spandex have replaced muscling heroes with an endless supply of ammunition. These days, it』s a rare occasion to come across an action movie that doesn』t bore your brain and waste your time. Next does both. Perhaps it』s Cris Johnson's (Nicholas Cage) ability to see only two minutes into the future that explains why he doesn』t see the audience』s feelings of betrayal and disappointment coming.

Veiled by a sleazy Las Vegas club act, Johnson』s powers of future perception keep him one step ahead of the world. When he』s not on stage guessing people』s names and performing dime store magic tricks, he spends his days supplementing his income by gambling and waiting in a diner for the love of his life – the only vision he has seen more than two minutes ahead of time. For whatever reason, FBI agent Callie Farris (Julianne Moore) is convinced that Johnson is the real deal and tries to enlist his help in defusing a nuclear bomb threat by French terrorists. But all Johnson wants to do is get to know his lady love, who, eventually walks into the diner right when he knew she would.

Next』s pre-Terminator 2 computer-generated effects are endlessly distracting, but the film』s greatest flaw is that it introces ideas of destiny and determinism and the role (if any) of freewill yet doesn』t explore them. By being able to look into the future, Johnson is able to choose the best possible personal outcome, but as he explains, 「every time you look at the future, you change it.」 In seeing the future, it』s a given that Johnson will act to preserve his own existence and whatever interests him, which seemingly eliminates freewill.

Taking the loss of freewill idea even further, when Johnson is caught by the FBI and forced to help, his indivial rights are trampled on in favor of the many who could die in a nuclear explosion. It』s funny that the strength of our political system places the power in the indivial and collective 「we,」 but we are quick to forfeit our rights in service of the 「greater good」. It』s a slippery slope that could lead to a unified loss of all indivial rights to preserve our own lives.

Unfortunately, these are topics that the movie barely mentions. It』s more concerned with fancy future fast-forwarding effects and twisting what happens next. The problem is that when the major dramatic twist happens, there is no thematic substance to hold onto and you suddenly realize that you』ve just wasted 2 hours and $10+ on a gimmick. Had the move delved into some sort of subtext and offered something in the way of thematic substance, then the deal-breaker twist wouldn』t be so empty. Instead, Next is a great example of an action movie light show – quick, meaningless and not worth remembering.

4What if you could see two minutes into the future? Would you use your powers for good or would you make a killing in Vegas? You probably would avoid a few embarrassing moments, but how much can a couple of extra minutes really get you? If you believe Next, the new movie starring Nicolas Cage, Julianne Moore and the increasingly-hot Jessica Biel, a power like that would mostly just be a pain in the ass. Cage plays Cris Johnson, a Las Vegas showroom magician who didn't do a very good job of keeping his superpower secret and underwent examinations as a child to figure out just what was wrong with the weird kid. Cris actually does live in Vegas, making a small living with his power, although not drawing too much attention to it. It's only when the world needs him, when a terrorist group threatens to detonate a nuclear bomb in Los Angeles, that Cris goes from gambling with his cash to gambling with the fate of humanity. But is the latest in a long line of Nicolas Cage movies that didn't screen for critics what's really "next" or will it be closer to "last" when you list your favorite movies of 2007?

It will probably be somewhere in the middle. The first startling thing about Next is that there's absolutely no explainable reason that it's been kept from critics. Sure, this trip to Vegas with Cage isn't quite like when he won an Oscar for trying to leave the city of sin, but it's also far more enjoyable than most of the action movies that actually have screened for critics. Yes, it's completely and totally ridiculous, but there's a spirit and an energy in Next, very much propelled by the cast and the action chops of Lee Tamahori (Die Another Day), that's missing from most movies. By the end of Next, which features a twist that is so ridiculous that you almost have to be impressed that it even got filmed, you'll likely have suspended disbelief and gone along for the ride. You should be warned that the ending will definitely leave some moviegoers feeling cheated, but in an era of predictable movies, it's kind of impressive to see something so completely shocking in the final reel.

變形金剛2
so far in the year 2009, only one film truly kept me at the end of my seat and that was Star Trek. Terminator Salavtion was a close second (which you people aka worstpreviews staff ripped apart for some ridiculous reason) but now here comes the film I personally thought would be THE blockbuster of 2009 and thought you guys would love. I read your review and thought what a great to say absolutely nothing about it. You rip Michael Bay apart for making a film to smash robots nto one another. Listen you guys used to be a healthy alternative to the horrible critics who only like artsy films such as Slumdog Millionaire and rip apart good movies such as Transformers. So worstpreviews, way to drop the ball on a great movie.

Onto my review: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, hits all the right notes. To the amazing CG and perfect fight scenes, to the just right amount of dialogue and comedic relief, Bay creates a masterpiece that rivals the original. The highlight was definately the fight scene in the woods with Optimus owning the Decepticons. Only low point was Sam's roommate who was a little annoying. So users of Worstpreviews, listen to me when I say that Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, is nothing shy of EPIC. And again a big FAIL to the staff, how about you take a movie for what it is and not try to make every movie be like what YOU want.

2
It』s no secret that I LOVE Transformers. I grew up playing with the toys as a kid. Aside from the Star Wars prequels I』ve never looked forward to a movie as much as I did for the first Transformers a couple of years ago… and I LOVED the first movie (weaknesses and all). So it』s no surprise that Transfomers 2 (aka Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen) has been my #1 most anticipated movie of the year.

The other night I had a chance to go and see it in IMAX here in Los Angeles and I can tell you this right up front. This movie is bigger than the last one, has more action than the last one, has better effects than the last one but over all is not as good as the last one. As one friend of mine wrote to me 「It』s more spectacular than the first one… but not as good」.

My dear heavens I never would have thought that the effects in Transformers could be outdone… but Transformers 2 did it. The Autobots and Decepticons look far more real and awe inspiring than they did in the first one. They become especially impressive when you see them interacting with real world actors and sets. It』s so hard to believe that these gigantic warriors aren』t real. Exactly what Transformers fans wanted.

The action. Holy sweet nuts cakes the action! This movie just goes and goes and goes. The movie OPENS with a HUGE scale action sequence that just makes your jaw hit the floor in amazement. 「This is what they』re STARTING the movie with?!?!」 went through my head a couple of times in the first 60 seconds. So many more action sequences and battles than the first one. Exactly what Transformers fans wanted.

There is A LOT more screen time for the Autobots and Decepticons than in the first film (something that a bigger budget allowed for I guess). We even get to see a much longer Megatron/Starscream squabble which is something painfully missing from the first movie. Exactly what Transformers fans wanted.

There is a much deeper history revealed about the Transformers in this flick that I thought added some much needed richness to the whole mythology of the Cybertonian race. We learn more about 「The Primes」 (a certain leadership sect within the Transformers of which Optimus is obviously a direct descendant of). We learn more about Energon (no, we don』t get to see 「Energon Cubes」 unfortunately) and the history of the Transformers on earth as well as the grander plans (evil ones… n n uuunnnhhhh) the decepticons have for Earth. Exactly what Transformers fans wanted.

Yes, it seems Transformers 2 takes all the good things about the first movie and builds on them. Exactly what Transformers fans wanted. BUT… they unfortunately also built on all the first movie』s weaknesses and put them on steroids, which leads us too…

Ⅳ 求一篇 電影 英文影評！

If you've ever been poor, this movie may be hard to watch. It depicts poverty in America in gut wrenchingly accurate ways. I've been as poor as Chris Gardner, and, like him, I've been poor among very rich people in the Bay Area while trying to work my way up.

Chris Gardner is a loving father and failing businessman. He is chosen for a competitive internship at Dean Witter, a stock brokerage. The internship, which offers Chris a very long shot at a better life, doesn't pay any salary. Chris has to live without a salary for six months while risking just about everything for that long shot gamble.

Chris is really smart. He can solve a Rubrik's cube in minutes. But, he's poor. Poverty, like an octopus, keeps trying to suck him down to the bottom, and make him stay there.

His car is towed. His wife walks out on him, leaving him with a five year old son. He is arrested for unpaid traffic tickets. He becomes homeless. He has to rely on a homeless shelter.

All this while, he must appear for work in the morning in a suit and tie, and be ready to charm some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the Bay Area. These people take wealth so much for granted that two of them stiff him for cab fare.

Having lived through similar experiences, I cringed throughout this movie. My stomach hurt. I winced. I cried. I hugged my knees to my chest.

The movie is very accurate, but painful to watch. I hope a lot of rich people, who think that they understand poverty, see it.

This movie will be politically controversial. First of all, it doesn't touch the race issue with a ten foot pole. For example, when Chris appears to stiff a taxi driver for fare (it was really the rich white guy who failed to pay), the taxi driver never uses the "n" word. In real life, I think he probably would have.

Is the movie afraid to talk about race, or does it not want to? I don't know, but I know that some will protest the movie's not shoving race in the movie goer's face. I'm not one of those people. The movie's approach to race -- treating it as almost incidental -- worked for me. As a poor white person, I can tell you that poor white people face the same obstacles Chris did.

Second, does the movie sell the message that if you work hard, you will succeed, no matter what, and does that message tell the truth about success in America? I think that the movie is open to interpretation. Some will see it as an indictment of poverty in America. The scene of carefree rich people driving past the line to get into a homeless shelter is pretty devastating. Other people will become angry because they believe that the movie's depiction of hard work leading to rewards, in some cases, is too facile. I disagree, but that's what you'll hear.

Third, is this movie meant to chastise black men who abandon their children? Chris is a role model exactly because he moves heaven and earth to be a good father to his son. This will be debated back and forth.

The movie has a big philosophical statement to make, that has been lost on many reviewers, for example, Richard Schickel in TIME.

Chris is shown running throughout the movie. Remember the title of the movie: "The PURSUIT of Happiness." Chris places emphasis on "pursuit." Jefferson, when he penned the Declaration of Independence, did not promise Americans happiness, but only the right to pursue it. Chris says, at one point in the movie, paraphrase, "I am happy right now. It is a fleeting moment." We experience happiness in eyeblinks. The rest of the time we, like Chris, are chasing after it.

Ⅳ 英文電影影評

Julie & Julia is a 2009 American comedy-drama film written and directed by Nora Ephron starring Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, Amy Adams, and Chris Messina. The film contrasts the life of chef Julia Child in the early years of her culinary career with the life of young New Yorker Julie Powell, who aspires to cook all 524 recipes in Child's cookbook in 365 days, a challenge she described on her popular blog that would make her a published author.

Ephron's screenplay is adapted from two books: My Life in France, Child's autobiography written with Alex Prud'homme, and a memoir by Julie Powell documenting online her daily experiences cooking each of the 524 recipes in Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking, and she later began reworking that blog, The Julie/Julia Project。 Both of these books were written and published in the same time frame (2004–06). The film is the first major motion picture based on a blog。這是我最喜歡的一部電影之一，我在維基網路上找的資料，你根據那裡的資料改一改，至於觀點，你可以寫堅持自己的興趣和愛好這一方面，寫興趣是最好的老師什麼的，給你個鏈接

Ⅵ ！！！！急求英語電影的英語影評

簡愛
Kent
State
University's
school
of
theatre
and
dance
performed
a
rendition
of
the
classic,
Jane
Eyre
this
month.
The
show
was
a
musical
with
all
of
the
necessary
elements
to
lift
you
from
your
seat
and
submerse
youinto
a
society
in
nineteenth
century
England
from
the
time
the
cell
phone
shut-off
announcement
was
made
until
the
last
note
at
the
curtain
call.
The
recurring
arches,
darkened,
soft
lighting,
and
the
use
of
a
classic
chorus
to
go
along
with
them
alluded
that
a
sinister
underbelly
of
social
status
and
reputation
were
present
in
the
performance.
One
of
the
first
things
that
an
audience
member
noticed
was
the
grandeur
of
the
set.
It
was
composed
of
a
gothic-style
foreground
with
rustic
twigs
of
a
root-like
earthy
appearance.
There
were
grand
arches
for
windows
and
entries
as
well.
Also,
the
background
was
a
large
arch
with
the
silhouette
of
roots.
There
were
also
two
matching
greek-style
pillar
arches
on
either
side
of
the
stage.
They
added
a
lot
to
many
messages
of
the
show.
For
one,
they
were
grand
structures
that
were
barren
inside
which
is
much
like
Mr.
Rochester
himself.
He
was
a
man
of
high
social
stature
but
felt
enslaved
by
his
trick
of
a
marriage
and
his
grand
yet
incomplete
(without
a
true
love)
home.
The
arches
also
suggest
the
importance
of
reputation
with
the
same
sort
of
fundamental
grand
image
yet
emptiness.
The
way
that
people
are
enslaved
yet
scramble
to
ascertain
that
solid
image
amongst
their
peers.
The
arches
were
almost
inviting
the
audience
to
come
inside
to
reveal
their
secret,
the
thing
that
was
hidden
deep
inside
that
could
send
the
structure
crumbling
in
ruin.

Ⅶ 關於評論電影的英語作文

第1篇 英文：
Although Lei Feng left in a hurry, but leave us precious wealth. -- "
Lei Feng, the shock of universal name! When it comes to Lei Feng, my heart is always filled with respect and gratitude, especially after watching the movie "Lei Feng", this move is particularly strong.
No smoke of the battlefield on the screen, but each picture was so touching story; no extraordinary, plot twists and turns, but every detail was so exciting......
The movie "Lei Feng" tells the story of Uncle Lei Feng put one's heart and soul into serving the people's story. Was this a seemingly ordinary things, make Lei Feng in the hearts of the people to establish a very tall figure.
"No matter what position, I will do everything in my power, tried in every way to serve the people." This, Lei Feng -- a good son of the people! Outstanding member of the Communist party!
Each plot in the film is deeply moved me, however, the most let me unforgettable is Lei Feng for the victims.
Once, Lei Feng and his comrades driving transporting flood control materials to the disaster areas, to unload supplies, Lei Feng do not eat rice will return. Before he left, he took the opportunity to sneak an envelope was ready on the table, the envelope marked "with one hundred yuan donated to the disaster areas the people's Liberation Army soldiers". Beam director of the flood control headquarters after know, hurried to catch up, want to put the money back to Lei Feng, Lei Feng would take? Then, the beam director to see Lei Feng fall down an old pair of socks have mixed feelings, said: "you, you're wearing the socks, has donated one hundred dollars!?" He turned, the presence of people said: "comrades, this is not the one hundred dollars and a pair of thousands of joint million patch socks, this is a tremendous spiritual wealth!"
As you can imagine, this "one hundred yuan" was how huge amount! This can not but let us ponder: with only six yuan monthly allowance, save one hundred yuan of money is how not easy! However, who knows, Lei Feng's life is very simple: thirsty, refused to drink a bottle of that only five cents of soda; heat, even a sweat towel also did not carry...... But put those old socks, fill fill...... However, the people in the disaster areas have a difficult time, but he had no scruples, loosen one's purse strings generously, this is such a huge contrast!
At this time, the screen where everyone was excited; now, I had tears off screen. Who is not for Lei Feng's noble deeds and moved?
What is this spirit? This is work hard and perseveringly, thrift revolutionary spirit. Lei Feng's good qualities of this selfless dedication, sacrifice oneself to protect others is proud of the Chinese nation, is the pride of the Chinese people!
"A man's life is limited, but service to the people is limitless. I will dedicate my limited life to infinite serve for the people."
The film ended, Lei Feng's voice still echoes in my ears, my heart is not quiet for a long time -- although Lei Feng left us too early, however, he has left us with a very great wealth. This wealth, for you, I, he, the benefit of the whole society. I believe, this precious wealth will forever be handed down from age to age!
翻譯中文：
雷鋒雖然匆匆地離開了，然而卻給我們留下了寶貴的財富。——題記

雷鋒，這個震撼環宇的名字！每當提起雷鋒，我的內心總會充盈著崇敬與感激，特別是在觀看了電影《雷鋒》之後，這種感動尤為強烈。

銀幕上沒有硝煙彌漫的戰場，可是每個畫面竟那麼感人至深；故事裡沒有離奇、曲折的情節，可是每個細節竟那麼扣人心弦……

電影《雷鋒》講述的是雷鋒叔叔全心全意為人民服務的故事。竟是這一件件看似平凡的小事，使雷鋒在人們的心中樹立起無比高大的形象。

「不管在什麼崗位上，我都要盡一切力量、想一切辦法去為人民服務。」這，就是雷鋒——人民的好兒子！優秀的共產黨員！

影片中的每個情節都深深地感動了我，然而，最讓我難以忘懷的是雷鋒為災區捐款的事。

一次，雷鋒和他的戰友駕車給災區運送防洪物資，卸下物資後，雷鋒飯也不吃就要返回。臨行前，他趁機偷偷地把早就准備好的一個信封放在桌子上，信封上面寫著「內有一百元捐給災區人民解放軍一戰士」。防汛指揮部的梁主任知道後，急忙追出來，想把錢還給雷鋒，雷鋒怎肯收下呢？這時，梁主任見到雷鋒落下的一雙舊襪子，百感交集地說：「你，你就穿著這樣的襪子，卻捐出來一百塊錢！？」他轉過身，對在場的人說：「同志們，這不是一百塊錢和一雙千縫萬補的襪子，這是一筆巨大的精神財富！」

可以想像，這「一百元」在當時是多麼龐大的數額！這不能不讓我們深思：憑著每月僅僅六元錢的津貼費，積攢下一百元錢是多麼不容易啊！然而，又有誰知道，雷鋒的生活是多麼儉朴：渴了，不肯喝一瓶當時僅僅一毛五分錢的汽水；熱了，就連一條擦汗的毛巾也不曾攜帶……卻把那雙年久的襪子，補了又補……然而，在災區人民有難的時候，他卻毫不顧忌，慷慨解囊，這是多麼巨大的反差啊！

此時，銀幕里在場的人都激動萬分；此刻，銀幕外的我早已熱淚盈眶。誰不為雷鋒的高尚行為而感動呢？

這是什麼精神？這是艱苦奮斗、勤儉節約的革命精神。雷鋒的這種無私奉獻、舍己為人的優秀品質是中華民族的自豪，是中國人民的驕傲！

「人的生命是有限的，可是為人民服務是無限的。我要把有限的生命投入到無限的為人民服務之中去。」

影片放映結束了，雷鋒的聲音卻一直在我的耳畔回響，我的心更是久久不能平靜——雷鋒雖然過早地離開了我們，但是，他卻給我們留下了無比巨大的財富。這財富，惠及著你、我、他，惠及著全社會。我相信，這寶貴的財富將世世代代相傳下去！

Ⅷ 電影英文影評

極地特快：

Rarely does a movie let you forget who you are and become the main character. This is one of those rare movies.

The movie starts out with a story that every Santa believer experienced. On Christmas eve a boy in Grand Rapids Michigan has reached the age where the statistical impossibility in the Santa story ( the size and speed of Santa's sleigh, the north pole being a barren wasteland) are causing him to doubt the big mans existence. Not knowing for sure the boy drifts into a deep sleep. At 11:55 PM the boy is awakened by the arrival of the Polar Express literally outside his front door. Going to investigate what is going on the boy meets the witty conctor of the Christmas eve train. (Tom Hanks)who informs him that the train is headed to the north pole so the kids can meet Santa Clause. Not totally sure that the train is going to the north pole but to curious to let it go the boy climbs on board. The adventure puts the boy in contact with a girl who is a natural born leader and who's belief in the Christmas magic couldn't be stronger. Other characters include a know it all socially awkward boy, a young underprivileged loner who has never experienced the magic of Christmas and a cast of other more mysterious characters such a a hobo ghost. Through the adventure the combination of great music, flawless animation and fantastic dialog really make you believe you are there and let you relive those days when you thought Santa Clause just might exist. The story ends on Christmas day with a line (narrated by Tom Hanks) about belief that brings back those kid on Christmas eve chills all over again. The themes of belief and friendship are a strong theme in the movie and part of the magic that brings you back to a time when you did believe.Its a great movie for children and alts alike and rekindles the Christmas magic that us alts lost many years ago.

Ⅸ 英語電影影評

侏羅紀公園3英文影評 Jurassic Park III(2001)2010年1月25日 "Jurassic Park III" is neither as dreadful as it might be, nor as perfectly wrought as it could be. For one thing, it moves along as jauntily as one of those horrific raptors scooting alon侏羅紀公園2失落的世界The Lost World英文影評(1997)2010年1月22日 Where is the awe? Where is the sense that if dinosaurs really walked the earth, a film about them would be more than a monster movie? Where are the ooohs and ahhhs? ``The Lost World: Jurassic Park''侏羅紀公園Jurassic park英文影評(1993)2010年1月20日 When young Steven Spielberg was first offered the screenplay for "Jaws," he said he would direct the movie on one condition: That he didn't have to show the shark for the first hour. By sl 後天The Day After Tomorrow英文影評(2004)2010年1月15日 It is such a relief to hear the music swell up at the end of a Roland Emmerich movie, its restorative power giving us new hope. Billions of people may have died, but at least the major characters ha 全金屬外殼Full Metal Jacket英文影評(1987)2010年1月13日 "Full Metal Jacket" is more like a book of short stories than a novel. Many of the passages seem self-contained, some of them are masterful and others look like they came out of the bottom 狂蟒之災3英文影評(2008)2010年1月10日 It's not surprising to note that Anaconda 3: Offspring immediately establishes itself as the weakest entry within this ongoing series, as the film boasts many of the problems and deficiencies one geDeep in the jungles of Borneo lurks the blood orchid, which blooms only once in seven years, and whose red flowers contain a mysterious ingredient, which extends the ability of living cells to reproEvery preconceived notion audiences might have about "Anaconda" is correct. This supposed serpentine shocker features doomed adventurers wading through murky water while a deadly snake app U-571英文影評When it comes to films that take place in submarines, World War II is still the favorite time period. There have been exceptions - The Hunt for Red October and Crimson Tide spring to mind - but the

Ⅹ 英文電影英語影評怎麼寫

建議的寫作內容：
1.先寫一下在什麼情況下看了這部電影，對這部電影的整體評價。
2.簡單介紹影片內容，以及影片的背景信息。例如：編劇、導演、主演的其他作品等。
3.選擇一個方面對影片作出具體的評價。例如：故事情節、角色性格、配音、特效、音樂等。
4.做出結論，是否向他人推薦，適合什麼樣的人觀看。