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

兩男一女極簡(jiǎn)布景——《愛麗絲的失蹤》

今天聊聊電影《愛麗絲的失蹤》。

片名The Disappearance of Alice Creed (2009)，別名愛麗絲蒸發(fā)奇案(港) / 愛麗絲失蹤事件簿(臺(tái))。

本片是導(dǎo)演J·布萊克森自編自導(dǎo)的處女作長(zhǎng)片，影片用極少的演員和極簡(jiǎn)的布景，完成了一個(gè)極為有趣反轉(zhuǎn)頗多的驚悚小故事。

但凡能夠闖出一番名號(hào)的處女作，作品都是帶有鮮明的個(gè)人特點(diǎn)和為人稱道的優(yōu)點(diǎn)。本片最大的特點(diǎn)與昆塔《落水狗》類似，沒有復(fù)雜的布景，僅依靠臺(tái)詞和表演推動(dòng)劇情，最終呈現(xiàn)一個(gè)完成度極高的有趣故事。

就像演職員表所示，《愛麗絲的失蹤》全部演員總共就三人。

兩男一女共處一室，兩名男人是綁匪，女人是被綁架的倒霉蛋。

綁匪里年紀(jì)大的叫維克特，面相兇惡，行事干練，一舉一動(dòng)透露出慣犯的自信和沉穩(wěn)。年紀(jì)輕點(diǎn)的叫丹尼爾，看起來唯唯諾諾，唯維克特馬首是瞻，復(fù)雜打下手，類似從犯角色。

剩下那位女性就是片名提到的愛麗絲。她是一名富家女，老爸很有錢，但她和老爸感情卻不見得多好，顯得很叛逆。

《愛麗絲的失蹤》的主要場(chǎng)景也十分簡(jiǎn)單，就一座密不透風(fēng)的房子，絕大部分時(shí)間兩男一女都在這間房子里度過，頂多加上一輛汽車和廢倉(cāng)庫(kù)。

簡(jiǎn)單布景同時(shí)，影片還照顧了重口味惡趣味。變裝、囚禁、捆綁、受辱、野外……似乎這些極為吸睛的標(biāo)簽都可以用在這部影片上。而且觀眾們看完正片后也不會(huì)覺得有一絲一毫的標(biāo)題黨，這些元素都在影片中有詳細(xì)表現(xiàn)。

最為亮眼的就是影片劇情。劇情也像布景一樣，猛地一看十分簡(jiǎn)單。綁匪精心策劃綁架了愛麗絲，向愛麗絲老爹索要兩百萬現(xiàn)金。

從影片第一秒開始，凌厲的剪輯就瞬間抓住觀眾，經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富行事干練的綁匪預(yù)示著他們將要做一起大案。于是從影片一開始，懸念就設(shè)立完成。

而緊隨其后的劇情更是反轉(zhuǎn)不斷，每每以為事情可以一帆風(fēng)順地走下去時(shí)，就會(huì)來一點(diǎn)兒揪心的小狀況。小懸念也沒有停過，大到整個(gè)綁架案、小到一個(gè)彈殼，都能玩出新花樣。

好的劇本是成功的一半?！稅埯惤z的失蹤》優(yōu)秀的劇本是影片成功的基礎(chǔ)，影片進(jìn)行中持續(xù)不斷地推出新懸念，慢慢積蓄觀眾情緒，直到最后高潮徹底宣泄，整體感受酣暢淋漓。

最后回到片名《愛麗絲的失蹤》，三個(gè)人一頓充滿懸念的操作后，最終，愛麗絲還是失蹤了……

對(duì)于這種強(qiáng)調(diào)反轉(zhuǎn)的電影，觀眾們只需要按照片名去找來看就行。千萬不要看那些劇透式詳解，所謂詳解就是毫無營(yíng)養(yǎng)地將整個(gè)故事復(fù)述一遍，觀眾將毫無觀影樂趣可言。

所有的小懸念、小反轉(zhuǎn)，觀眾一定要沉浸式體驗(yàn)電影時(shí)才能有所體會(huì)。

兩男一女極簡(jiǎn)布景，

懸念不斷反轉(zhuǎn)不停。

這里是硬核影迷集散地，歡迎關(guān)注：妙看影視

也算是帶給人驚喜的一部小成本電影了

全篇兩男一女，只有兩個(gè)室內(nèi)場(chǎng)景

總覺得應(yīng)該是那種劇情很簡(jiǎn)單，臺(tái)詞很單一，呼吸很粗重的那種羞羞的電影

羞到確實(shí)有點(diǎn)羞羞的

但是…...劇情絕不簡(jiǎn)單

有沒有尿點(diǎn)？

鬼刀般的剪輯和配樂，你只會(huì)絞盡腦汁思考劇情走向，然后被編劇啪啪打臉

尿點(diǎn)？你敢去撒尿，回來保你一臉懵逼，完全不知道剛才發(fā)生了什么

電影爆點(diǎn)不少，對(duì)于三觀正直的青年來說，有的時(shí)候可能會(huì)被突然嚇的屁滾尿流

比如

這就完了？還早呢！

再比如，赤裸裸的X暗示，估計(jì)很多直男得費(fèi)點(diǎn)紙巾

這部劇真不適合劇透，小成本電影贏就贏在劇本

雖然現(xiàn)在喜歡編劇式觀影的大神越來越多了

但對(duì)于還沒看過先看影評(píng)的大多數(shù)人來說，一看劇透，本劇毀90%

所以這里直接甩出幾個(gè)靈魂拷問

如果你看完都能回答

恭喜你，這劇對(duì)你來說應(yīng)該不止價(jià)值7分了

靈魂拷問1：愛麗絲異性戀、小V同性戀這個(gè)基本無疑，那么你認(rèn)為丹尼爾真的是雙性戀嗎？

靈魂拷問2：丹尼爾對(duì)愛麗絲或小V是真愛嗎？還是一場(chǎng)蓄謀已久的瞞天過海？亦或是如你所見的一步錯(cuò)、步步錯(cuò)，愛比紙薄，命比錢賤？

靈魂拷問3：小V臨死為何要救愛麗絲？真的只是人之將死所以變善嗎？

靈魂拷問4：丹尼爾明知回去復(fù)仇奪金自己就會(huì)命不久矣，為何最終還是選擇這樣的黃粱一夢(mèng)，而放棄生命？

終極拷問5：導(dǎo)演苦心伏筆的電影名稱，為何叫《愛麗絲的失蹤》而不叫“綁架愛麗絲”？

以上冷魚自然有自己的理解，不過一百人眼中有一百個(gè)哈姆雷特，如果你看出了自己的理解

那么這部電影，就沒有想的那么簡(jiǎn)單，也同樣歡迎留言探討。

當(dāng)然，如果看完沒法回答，或者你根本不是特別care劇情本身，不要緊

劇情反轉(zhuǎn)反轉(zhuǎn)再反轉(zhuǎn)，基情又激情四射；剪輯給力，bgm完美，果體迷人（男女都是）。以上這些也完全價(jià)值7分，作為日常觀影爽口小菜，綽綽有余了。

本劇優(yōu)酷免費(fèi)觀影但略有幾分鐘果體刪減，不過冷魚自有資源

冷魚電影VX工號(hào)

臺(tái)詞講究，沒有廢話。

人物性格鮮明，但都很現(xiàn)實(shí)。

愛麗絲前男友丹尼和獄中新結(jié)實(shí)男友維奇，在愛麗絲毫不知情下綁架了她，因?yàn)樗挠绣X爸爸。

有意思的是，反轉(zhuǎn)并不在丹尼計(jì)劃之內(nèi)，愛麗絲掙脫后，被槍口所指的丹尼不得不拉攏前女友，說服她扮演人質(zhì)。

愛麗絲也不是傻白甜，在一次體液交流后，順利拿到電話報(bào)警。卻被維奇發(fā)現(xiàn)（此處有些生硬），無奈之下也撒了一個(gè)謊，丹尼只是利用維奇。

維奇先發(fā)制人，丹尼雖中一槍卻僥幸逃脫，維奇最終死在丹尼槍下。

臨死之即，維奇將手銬鑰匙給了愛麗絲，逃出的愛麗絲找到了路邊轎車內(nèi)做著美夢(mèng)死去的丹尼（流血過多）。

愛麗絲則在痛哭一場(chǎng)后，拿著錢失蹤了。

所以，在綁架這種高危、高緊張狀態(tài)下，缺乏信任實(shí)在可怕。

人性的趨利，不考慮別人損失，很容易造成沖突。