UCLA college student Jonathan Moore (Anthony Edwards) is playing a game called "Gotcha" (popular on mid-1980s college campuses as "Assassin" or "Tag"), wherein the players are all assigned a mock "hit" on another player by use of a harmless paintball gun. Moore and his apartment roommate Manolo go on a vacation to Paris, France. After touring some of Paris, in a cafe Moore meets Sasha Banicek (Linda Fiorentino), a Czechoslovakian girl. Eventually, Jonathan has intercourse with Sasha, losing his virginity.
Jonathan decides to leave Manolo (who is heading to Spain) and go with Sasha to West Berlin to spend more time with her. Jonathan believes that he is in love with Sasha. There, Jonathan and Sasha continue to have sex and even go to an Oktoberfest beer gathering. One night, Sasha tells Jonathan that she has to go to East Berlin to pick up a package. One night after arriving in East Berlin, Sasha leaves their hotel room and walks to dark street corner. There, Sasha meets a German man who tells her the location of the pickup of her package. Meanwhile, Sasha was being monitored by a Soviet agent, who was sitting in a car at a distance. During the day, Sasha tells Jonathan that if she gives him a certain message, it means that he has to leave East Berlin immediately. At a cafe, Sasha gives Jonathan a package and says that a strudel is inside. A little later, Sasha tells Jonathan to meet her at the butcher shop near their hotel. All of a sudden, a Soviet agent begins to chase after Sasha. Sasha decides to use Jonathan (who is holding her package) to unknowingly get the package over to West Berlin. Meanwhile, Sasha is taken by the Soviet agent and East German secret police.
Jonathan goes to Checkpoint Charlie to cross the heavily fortified border into West Berlin. At the East German customs search, Jonathan is stripped of his clothes and given a cavity search. Meanwhile, Sasha is stripped and searched for possible espionage evidence. Vlad arrives at the border crossing to search for Jonathan, however Jonathan passes the border safely before he can be captured. Once in West Berlin, Jonathan feels liberated by the Westernized society. In the hotel, Jonathan receives a message from Sasha to meet him at a specified location. Jonathan finds out that his hotel room was broken into and robbed of his traveler's checks. Soviet agents eventually find Jonathan in West Berlin and chase him throughout a public park. Jonathan jumps into a water canal and manages to escape from the Soviets and stumbles upon a German rock group headed for Hamburg, who offer him a ride to the airport.
The rock group successfully get Jonathan to the airport (using full-face makeup to sneak him past a checkpoint) and Jonathan finally arrives in Los Angeles Tom Bradley International Airport and to his apartment. Soon, Vlad and a band of Soviet agents arrive too in Los Angeles. Once home, Jonathan stumbles upon a film canister, which was planted by Sasha. Jonathan visits his parents and tells them what happened in Germany but they cannot believe a word of it and think Jonathan is on drugs. Jonathan decides to call the FBI then the Central Intelligence Agency for help. Jonathan returns to find his apartment broken into and looted.
The CIA officer tells Jonathan to give them the photo film canister. At the Los Angeles headquarters of the CIA, Jonathan spots Sasha who looks like she was working there. Jonathan eventually meets up with Sasha. Sasha admits that she is Cheryl Brewster, a CIA agent, originally from Pittsburgh. Out of nowhere, Vlad and his gang begin to chase Jonathan and Cheryl on the UCLA campus. Jonathan eliminates all the Soviets with a tranquilizer gun which he gets from the campus veterinary sciences building. The Soviets are arrested, the CIA agents thank Jonathan for his (indirect) help in obtaining the film, and Sasha tells him she wants to continue their relationship.
After they part, Jonathan talks to a pretty student who rebuffs him coldly. As she walks away, he aims the tranquilizer pistol and shoots her in the rear.
简•康平的作品看得不多，但感觉她似乎总是用现代的眼光审视着身处前现代的人物。坦言讲我并不认为表演有多么出彩，但我看到了超越大部分同题作品的细腻，这是导演的心性。“犬之力”在我看来是一种少有人所具备的视角，心思肌理复杂到一定程度，定是非同凡响，无论善恶。特别想知道当彼得把带有病毒的牛皮递给菲尔时，他心里在想什么？对于这个由羞辱过他到逐渐接纳甚至教导他的男人是否理解大于复仇？倘若不再给出一定的指向，只是留下线索与结果，我想定是一部更值得反复咀嚼的作品！
从表面上看菲尔暴躁易怒，傲慢粗鲁，常常展现出过分且具有攻击性的男子气概，是典型的牛仔形象，而彼得敏感纤弱，心思细腻，长着人畜无害的漂亮脸蛋加上弱不经风的身躯，是不受待见的娘娘腔。但表像背后看似强大的菲尔却有别人难以洞察的敏感与脆弱，他通过霸陵萝丝来宣示统治地位，却也会躲在暗处偷偷舔舐伤口，而看似乖巧的彼得在波澜不惊的神情下却藏匿着杀伐的冷酷与决绝，他能忍受所有异样的眼光，也会残忍的解剖可爱的兔子并精心策划惊天杀局。这么两个精神位面失常的极端主义者碰撞让影片沉浸在主人公莫名其妙又焦虑不安的情绪里，散漫的叙事以及支离破碎的情感纠葛让一个同性谋杀的故事看起来晦涩难懂，说白了其实就是“母诱弟，子弑兄”的故事，但又蕴含了极强的情绪，这也注定了有些人“见山是山”，而有些人“见山如狗”。
好闷啊，有点像berlin school那帮人拍的东西，take itself so seriously...看不了这种arthouse，空镜啊drone shots啊靠特写动作传递情绪啊，可能work for others，not for me。视角一直在变，谁是主角谁是villain一直在变，因此就真的can't connect to anyone以及很容易显得不平衡。当然都是故意的咯，就是不要让观众identify anyone，大家都有问题，大家又都值得同情，okay fine。而且这片子真的太长了，不过就是想说masculinity bad patriarchy bad; social, class and gender conforming is suffocating, sure，但最根本的冲突驱动力是masculinity吗还是明明是每个人的嫉妒？也没讲清楚rose为啥就那样了而george这工具人后面就一直失踪...Thomasin McKenzie出演一个完全可有可无的工具人纯是为了增加星光吧，更显出这片子的废篇空间。
2.5 / 剧本里有些很有趣的对位，比如偷听-协奏，比如屠宰-解剖，本可以拍得多么邪性。几乎每一个人物都只有可概括的层次，毫无深邃的内在。中段一度好了些，但整体依然拼贴感严重有气无力。更不用说视听的结合生硬到了令人厌恶的程度。
BC的演技炉火纯青了，菲尔让人心疼，为什么人们对于和自己不一样的人不能少一点敌意多一点包容爱情与年龄无关，也可以和性别无关对吗？
电影透露出令人不寒而栗的（真实社会）难以觉察但细思极恐的恶意。1.你的不为人知的秘密会是隐匿敌人的强力武器，要藏好秘密。2.来自同类的恶最致命，因为他懂你舔舐伤口的温柔与疼痛，因为他自己也如此。3.一个异类在被定义为异类的时代里，要成为敌人定义强者的样子，因此对自己也最狠。4.综合前三点，装扮成异性恋的基佬最恐同，对同类最恶毒。5.俄狄浦斯情结自然可以是恋母，但现实代价是弑父。家庭结构里，父权是掌权者；在社会结构里，父权是定义「正确」的文化，通过杀死强悍的、男性化的同类，温柔的、女性化的社会呈现得以经由权力的获得而拥有（局部）的正当化可能，本质却仍旧要凭借他弑掉的父权路径。6.一个再强大的人，因为不符合「社会期待」，你竟然可以看到他死之后所有人都松了一口气，包括慕强的父母兄弟。7.连狗都慕强
简洁克制却张力十足，男性的粗粝与阴柔，甚至人性的残酷与脆弱都刻画的太好了。
A damaged person will eventually be destroyed by the world. It’s he versus the world. Phil lived in the past and lived in the memory. But life goes on, so either the world destroys him or he keeps attacking everyone to maintain his balance. Once he shows vulnerability, he can not immune to the harm, cause he is so lonely, lonely to death.
天呐 有必要在现在这个时代刻画这样一个故事吗？太狠了。而且如此扭曲人性的故事有必要拍来给大众观赏吗？原著小说背景是在印第安人和犹太人的黑色背景下还情有可原，现在时代环境下不知道改一改？
放在19世纪的牧场封闭空间，挖掘一个人的内在脆弱，这一切都过于正常，要是能放到当下某个政客或者企业家就更牛了。
人物是隐性的，暴露在外的都是不同的情绪，愤怒、悲伤、绝望，再由此重新拼凑出每一个完整的形象。正因为这样人物都是单纯的，比如固执张扬的Phil，歇斯底里的Rose，但作为农场异己份子的Peter却一直在隐藏，一直在不动声色地监视/目击着一切——他想重新拥有「人」的感官记忆，那就必须与恶魔做一场交易。
其实最先想到的是同在威尼斯获奖的《希斯特斯兄弟》，首先都指向文明的更迭，相较于那种显山露水的社会学符号的陈列，本片把代表西部世界的男性气质的式微融入了更具体细微的人物关系或者情结里，比如henry既是时代象征又是精神意义上的父亲，主题和故事互相促进的同时又是平等的、相互独立的。
罕见的题材。讲述少年人的残酷。具体就是残酷的少年人杀死了长大成人的残酷少年。片子极闷，音乐是加分项，一直在暗示事情不妙。《断背山》后传。
人畜无害的“小清新”其实有可能是最最危险的
银幕诗人简康平，力量、脆弱、阴谋与美好的蒙太奇不过如是。
整部电影。我愿意用肉欲横流来形容。导演的很多镜头。都透露出一种强烈的欲望色彩。而这些镜头本身与欲望又无关。加之配乐以及故事背景就显得格外的诡异，压抑，充满性的变态与冲突。欲望在整个电影的互动中满溢了出，却没有得到一丝的释放。这无疑是非常高级的。而整个的结尾也出乎了我的意料。总而言之，整个电影的情绪内核以表达的方式都非常的让我感到舒适。电影真的是一种很有魅力的艺术，在疫情期间我看过的太多的烂片。而这样的电影才是我看真正想找寻的。
面对着 The Power of the Dog，我们都是待屠宰的猪羊。
不排除有很多电影是追求状态和情感的细腻，但是过分摈弃掉情节上的合理性或过分的不讲好故事，反倒不会留下电影的余韵，而会使状态和情感不能准确的与观众达到共鸣。母亲嫁过来以后的状态，儿子莫名起的杀心，太不能自圆其说了。也许其本身是带有一定的突破和先锋在里面的，需要好好消化。其实暂时还是不知道怎么评价此作，也许去温习一下导演金棕榈前作才能更好的去理解？
“人不可貌相”。后劲还挺足的，喜欢Greenwood的配乐
谁会真的跟这种二傻子电影较劲呢，客观一点讲就是自恋且乏味。以后不会再看这类东西是它最大的好处。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
