對(duì)于那個(gè)時(shí)代，白人黑人的矛盾我并不了解。
這部片子從maid出發(fā)，切入矛盾。
難得的是這個(gè)話題表現(xiàn)的并不沉重。
觀眾們觀影的時(shí)候還能哄然大笑。

只是單純從造型來(lái)說(shuō)，40年代的及膝連衣裙，女人們的卷發(fā)，紅唇，豐乳肥臀，雙指間的香煙，很讓人著迷。
這些女人高傲，自私，自以為是，法語(yǔ)中的snob是對(duì)她們的最好的形容。

Emma Stone 在里面演的對(duì)于這種現(xiàn)狀看不下去的女孩，她寫下故事，想要幫助這些黑人maids改變狀況。

相對(duì)于其它女人的優(yōu)雅，她的不拘小節(jié)，睡衣，蓬亂的頭發(fā)也十分嬌憨可愛(ài)。
在crazy, stupid love到les sentiments des couleurs，她演繹的都是那種敢做，直率的女孩。美女始終算不上，但是屬于有觀眾緣決不惹人討厭的演員。

一直說(shuō)，我愛(ài)的電影是笑中帶淚的。
這部也是。
推薦你看它。

以女性觀眾為主打的電影，在沉重感的刻畫上綁手綁腳?？吹臅r(shí)候一直很怕最后是壞結(jié)局，所有參與者都被3K黨干掉了，實(shí)際上這很有可能。
不知道有沒(méi)有人在看的時(shí)候一直想，這個(gè)地方的男人都去哪里了？
如果這個(gè)故事有男人參與進(jìn)來(lái)，一切都不一樣了。女傭會(huì)被強(qiáng)X，和黑人交往密切的女記者會(huì)被地方青年團(tuán)威脅，受到懲罰的壞女人有她老公和全社會(huì)撐腰。那個(gè)棕發(fā)的壞女人之所以那么囂張，還是因?yàn)樗瞎袡?quán)勢(shì)，院子里被扔滿舊馬桶，最好她老公能忍氣吞聲……

電影里是一個(gè)大體上很美好的世界，窮人富人都穿戴整潔，住在明亮的房子里，吃美麗的食物。所有人內(nèi)心都有點(diǎn)正義感，女記者一呼百應(yīng)，家人、老朋友、新朋友都暗暗支持她。
壞人做壞事是因?yàn)楹苡薮赖睦碛桑合矚g出風(fēng)頭，喜歡控制身邊的人，和男人被搶走的嫉妒。
這點(diǎn)小小的黑暗私心馬上被溫暖的社會(huì)大家庭淹沒(méi)，連她自己的老媽都嘲笑她。
因?yàn)檫@是一個(gè)杜撰的故事，我們?cè)敢獬两诿利惖哪喜匡L(fēng)情畫中，會(huì)心一笑，小感動(dòng)一把，然后為自己的善良感到欣慰。

最好這個(gè)世界上只有女人，大家喝喝茶，說(shuō)說(shuō)閑話，做幾件漂亮的衣服，烏泱泱跟著一個(gè)強(qiáng)勢(shì)的老大欺負(fù)窮人，有人指出就一起抱頭大哭，然后悔過(guò)做好人，再繼續(xù)喝喝茶，說(shuō)說(shuō)閑話……
其實(shí)我很想引用Daily Show對(duì)這個(gè)電影的評(píng)價(jià)：那些女人讓人有智商上的優(yōu)越感。

女主與女反角的關(guān)系：兩人中學(xué)時(shí)曾是最好的姐妹，但是Skeeter去外地上大學(xué)，Hilly嫁人生子，人生觀才漸行漸遠(yuǎn)。所以一開始Skeeter在Hilly身邊的地位很高（在冷飲店吃東西時(shí)Elizabeth給女主讓座），而且Hilly也為她張羅相親什么的很賣力。發(fā)現(xiàn)Skeeter看違禁書籍時(shí)私下警告她，很大原因是出于好意，類似于寶釵教導(dǎo)黛玉看了閑書不要帶出幌子來(lái)。

女主拉直頭發(fā)后母親高興滴說(shuō)你終于可以穿高跟鞋了：女主個(gè)子太高了，這也是她嫁不出去的原因之一。電影中體現(xiàn)在Constantine離去前看著柜門上過(guò)去逐年給Skeeter記下的身高，當(dāng)然Emma本人沒(méi)那么高。

Elizabeth為啥不喜歡自己的女兒：嫌女兒胖，認(rèn)為女兒需要減肥。電影中倒是真的找了個(gè)胖呼呼的小丫頭來(lái)演。

Celia為啥與別的女人在生活方式上格格不入：不僅僅是因?yàn)楦鶭ohnny未婚先孕的事兒，她是苦出身，來(lái)自deep south的所謂white trash，本身沒(méi)什么教養(yǎng)，啥也不懂，所以打不進(jìn)當(dāng)?shù)靥娜ψ?，在黑人女仆面前也缺乏?yōu)越感（《飄》里面受過(guò)教育的黑人家奴對(duì)于所謂“下流白人”很不屑的）。電影里也有所體現(xiàn)：她只會(huì)水煮土豆和玉米餅，親自動(dòng)手殺雞毫無(wú)問(wèn)題。

Cinematographically speaking, especially from the technical side, this first movie of Tate Taylor is not impressive. The direction is good, but surely it does not take any risk and ends up quite deprived of some artistic value.
Most of the actors did a very good job, especially the two bimbos playing respectively the "villain" (or at least the bad person opposing the main protagonists – Bryce Dallas Howard) and the supportive role (Jessica Chastain). The two black women whose backstories are developed have also pulled of a good performance (Viola Davis, & Octavia Spencer who has won an Oscar). The main character (Ema Stone) however played her role without impressing very much and was clearly outshadowed by the others.
Some may disagree, but as I see it, the universe in which the story unfolds is a caricature of the real world. And this is not a negative critique at all. It just seems that the indoor settings (even the maids' houses) were too rich, too bright, too colourful. Except three characters (protagonist + 2 black maids), each and every character is a stereotype, a clichey of what they represent. The women are dressed in a flashy and vulgar way, they have pounds of make up on their face, they are constantly on high heels even at their own house, their hairstyle, their habits, their way walking & talking...etc. They did not seem as REAL people, behaving as if they are evolving in a normal and living world. They just seemed posing all the time and overplaying their role. Now once again don't get me wrong because I think that the result is really good. You can easily expect their behaviour and manners and concentrate on the other REAL characters, while enabling the writer to make an interesting point: the dumb people IRL with this type of personality & ideology are lacking depth and substance : they are mere tools, plot devices – denied from humanity and conscience. So in the end, these characters are almost just part of the setting itself. This type of setting is fitting very well the idea of a remote & isolated place, a sort of sub-world outside the world's tendancies and evolution. Martin Luther King only belongs on a TV that gets turned off right away by the masters. History goes on, but only outside of this bubble – before getting smashed by protagonist.
The tone of the movie, though the subject is quite serious, leans more towards the comedy rather than the drama. The movie is funny: the delicious pie which main ingredient is shit is certainly the most memorable joke, along with a couple of others (WC at the garden ; the fried chicken etc.). But the more serious tones were from time to time played, mainly in order to pinpoint white people's cruelty towards the black (how the protagonist's maid was fired, the false accusations of theft, the firings...etc.).
As far as I could tell, the music was nothing special, and rather discrete, going with the flow.

Overall it's a nice, light movie. At the same entertaining and educative.