Fraught with over obvious symbolism, Hartley's early feature is nonetheless a joy to watch. Hal here shows us his uncanny ability to cast his characters perfectly came early in his career.
Adrienne Shelley is a near perfect foil to herself, equal parts annoying teen burgeoning in her sexuality (though using sex for several years); obsessed with doom and inspired by idealism gone wrong she is deceptively – and simultaneously – complex and simple. Her Audrey inspires so many levels of symbolism it is almost embarrassingly rich (e.g., her modeling career beginning with photos of her foot – culminating her doing nude (but unseen) work; Manhattan move; Europe trip; her stealing, then sleeping with the mechanics wrench, etc.)
As Josh, Robert Burke gives an absolutely masterful performance. A reformed prisoner/penitent he returns to his home town to face down past demons, accept his lot and begin a new life. Dressed in black, and repeatedly mistaken for a priest, he corrects everyone ("I'm a mechanic"), yet the symbolism is rich: he abstains from alcohol, he practices celibacy (is, in fact a virgin), and seemingly has taken on vows of poverty, and humility as well. The humility seems hardest to swallow seeming, at times, almost false, a pretense. Yet, as we learn more of Josh we see genuineness in his modesty, that his humility is indeed earnest and believable. What seems ironic is the character is fairly forthright in his simplicity, yet so richly drawn it becomes the viewer who wants to make him out as more than what he actually is. A fascinatingly written character, perfectly played.
The scene between Josh and Jane (a wonderful, young Edie Falco . . . "You need a woman not a girl") is hilarious . . . real. But Hartley can't leave it as such and his trick, having the actors repeat the dialogue over-and-over becomes frustratingly "arty" and annoying . . . until again it becomes hilarious. What a terrific sense of bizarre reality this lends the film (like kids in a perpetual "am not"/"are too" argument).
Hartley's weaves all of a small neighborhood's idiosyncrasies into a tapestry of seeming stereotypes but which delves far beneath the surface, the catalyst being that everyone believes they know what the "unbelievable truth" of the title is, yet no two people can agree (including our hero) on what exactly that truth is. A wonderful little movie with some big ideas.
其实只值七分多一点，各种反转突兀且套路，音乐和慢镜头毫无增色，同题材的沉默的真相各方面都比它丰满太多。但真的希望这样的题材能多在大陆看到
案中案，局中局，套中套。法庭上的反转，原来所谓的正义不过一场作秀！所谓的英雄不过是政治筹码！眼见一定为实吗？大众舆论一定是对的吗？一个个屏幕背后是人是鬼又有谁知，不过是愚人愚己，纵横之术罢了。
一堂社会学教研课，期待第二部
我看到了一个评论，简单的说就是韩国在描述人性，日本在描述小人物的日常，印度在描述他们种姓制度下的一个奇特环境，而我们呢？？？
电影给了社会重重的抨击，最后的反转也是很精彩，不过如此长的电影，中间的铺垫细节（虽然每个都很残忍）却有点像蜻蜓点水了。不是在说这些不应该批判，只是做为电影个人感觉可能太泛
就是律师怼受害者母亲那段有点令人不适，人家老太太女儿都死了，你好好问话不行吗，还非要让她反复大声说出女儿被强奸了，不觉得残忍吗，她被媒体误导了也不能说是她的错啊
前80分钟平淡无奇，后80分钟真相抽丝剥茧的过程看的头皮发麻，反转到怀疑人生。 印度拍电影总是有惊喜，什么题材都改拍，都能拍，集政治，人性，法律，悬疑，真相于一体的佳作
但，它同时有着不能深究的故事逻辑，略微混乱的故事线，以及表面且杂糅的故事议题。
看到最后，着实有些沉默了！琢磨了一会儿，突然想起这是不是就是古人说的“半部论语治天下”？仁义礼智信，而不是单单的ZZ丛林法则！又或者，搞ZZ本来就是一片黑暗森林？不然为什么那么多昧良心的ZZ玩家
7.5，近年来印度电影佳作频出，博采众长、表现出惊人的成长，逐渐摆脱“歌舞片”之刻板印象。两小时四十分的时长导致叙事略显拖沓，整体上情绪＞叙事，但胜在承继于歌舞片传统的情绪调动能力，情节数次反转之间情绪渐高。还有令人惊叹的主题承载：体制、媒体、女性主义、阶级、政治等等，更讶异的是各方主题完成度都算不错，并且与剧情融合极佳。
印度的zz斗争片总觉得不太现实。也没看下去
1. 电影是好电影，题材由点及面涉及很多热点话题（很难不联想到我国一些事，所以你的国家我的国家大家都一样）情节跌宕多重反转，法庭戏不少台词都是能截图永留存的水平，缺点也有，时长疲惫，音乐铺得太满（毕竟印度电影）；2.“一个国家的尊严等同于它给女性的尊严”（道理都懂但我就是不改系列）；3.法律是道德的底线，刑法是法律的底线，然而这中间还有一条隐形的线叫程序正义，可迟来的正义还算得上正义吗；4.你以为的事实有时只是别人想让你看到的事实，无论哪个时代哪个国家，媒体都应该是真相的传声筒而非政治的喉舌；5.年轻人切忌过度激进或温水煮蛙，任何时候都不要急着站队，有时间多学习，不要在微博自诩判官；6.每每看到别的国家拍出这样的电影，我们总是会思考我国的审查与尺度并痛恨薛定谔的404（叹气）；7.陈思诚👌
民众的声音太好引导了
包罗万象，底层社会到上流高校，中国未来50年内没有可能拍出这样的电影，当我们提起印度电影的时候，我们也应当知道，印度不只有宝莱坞的喜剧，不只有阿米尔汗的摔跤吧爸爸，不只有精彩绝伦的误杀瞒天记，还有这部警世醒世的《宿敌》
连豆瓣也变得充满政治正确而不看电影的基本素质了，立意和选题不能掩盖这部电影的硬伤，配乐明显是给电影院坐不住的印度底层准备的，这种出戏的无意义内容至少出现了四五次，剧情走向也是一团糟，本应该是电影高潮的庭审让人摸不着头脑不讲证据全是故事，不知道是印度司法体系真的胡来，还是欺负观众没文化，太不符合逻辑了吧
高分不是来自于电影本身，而是来自于现实角色的带入。
涉及面广，女性，学生运动，黑社会，私刑道德，媒体舆论，种姓，毒教材，政治大腕。但是我觉得伴随着这种程度的反转，前面讨论议题的力量就被相对地削弱了。
一部电影浓缩了很多焦点问题，在看的过程直呼过瘾。认可网友的评论。它的其他意义远远大于电影悬疑的意义。
题材加一颗星 敢想敢说 但说好一个故事的各方要素都太薄弱了
反转着实牛逼
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
