第一篇：費城故事的影評
Philadelphia
The movie Philadelphia reflects some social problems by combining AIDS and homosexuality together, which draws people’s attention on homosexual and makes people introspect in what ways they should treat homosexuals.Instead of calling upon people’s sympathy to homosexuals, I think the purpose of the film is to criticize people for their injustice and discrimination to homosexuals.At the beginning of the film, Andy conceals his illness and sex orientation, working as an ordinary person in the law company.Because of his excellent work, he receives appreciation of his bosses.Maybe in this period, Andy is looking forward to his wonderful future.What he doesn’t expect is that he gets fired ruthlessly after his secret is disclosed.The most frustrating part is that when he tries to protect his rights, all he receives is discrimination, and even lawyers, whose task is to safeguard the rights and interests of people, shows indifference to him.When he gets into library to look up some books related to HIV-discrimination, he is asked to go to a private research room by the librarian for the sake of avoiding spreading the virus to other people.At this moment, Andy’s eyes fills with tears;he must be heartbroken.At that time in America, AIDS is viewed as much more than a transmissible and lethal disease and homosexuality is considered as an unreasonable and disgusting thing.Nowadays，homosexuality is not unfamiliar to us, but sometimes people still can't accept this fact.Ordinary people won't interest in the same gender and they won't try to build a relationship beyond friendship with the same sex.Above all，homosexuality has nothing wrong with itself.Different people have different lifestyles including homosexuals.They do have families, friends and contribute to our society.We should respect them rather than discriminating them.
第二篇：費城故事影評
《費城故事》影評
JOE: Are you a good lawyer?
ANDREW: I'm an excellent lawyer.JOE: What makes you an excellent lawyer?
ANDREW: I love the law.I know the law.I excel at practicing it.It's the only thing
I've ever wanted to do.JOE:What do you love about it?
ANDREW: Well...many things.But I think the thing I love the most, is that every once
in a while, not that often, but occasionally...you get to be part of justice being done.It's really quite a thrill when that happens.以上是《費城故事》中JOE和ANDREW在法庭上的一段對話。我看過三遍這部影片了，但是，每次聽到這段對話，都覺得很震撼，心情復雜，有對ANDREW的崇敬之情，又有作為一個學習法律的人的自豪，還有一點，用ANDREW的話說，是thrill，振奮！
ANDREW作為一名律師，他所從事的工作，不僅僅是為了生計，更是興趣所在。正是如此，他學習勤奮，工作努力，忙碌中感受著工作帶給他的樂趣。他工作的動力，正如他所說：“我愛法律，我了解法律，我善于從事這一行；我最愛法律的什么？就是有時，不是時常，但偶然，我是促成公平的一份子，這真是一種令人振奮的感覺。”聽著他的話，我為自己是一個法學專業的學生而感到由衷的驕傲，因為我，我們，就像ANDREW一樣，也可能是促成公平的一份子。這是證明自己存在價值、實現自我價值的途徑，是對社會的貢獻。這種精神上的愉悅是任何物質享受所不能比擬的。
但是，我們并不能保證所有的法律人都像ANDREW那樣熱愛法律，信仰法律。想起行政法課上老師講的一件令人哭笑不得的事：一個法學專業的學生，居然請教老師“有人出2萬元請我替考，我去還是不去？”一個學習法律的人，了解法律的人，居然連基本的道德觀念都沒有！學習法律的人不遵紀守法，我們似乎司空見慣了。報紙上鋪天蓋地的新聞，我國有那么多律師、法官違法犯罪，和國外，尤其是一些法制健全的國家相比，數量實在是多得有些不可思議了。在這些報道的影響下，普通百姓對法律工作者的評價似乎越來越差了，而法律工作者自己也對自己的職業缺少職業自豪感和捍衛職業尊嚴感了。著名法學家伯爾曼曾經說過：“法律必須被信仰，否則它將形同虛設”。如果連學習法律，了解法律，運用法律的人本身都不信仰法律，那么，法律究竟為什么而設立？在實踐中有能起什么作用？有與沒有又有什么區別？有人說，中華民族是缺少信仰的民族。也許這是一個影響因素。但是，我們這些學習法律如此多年的人，難道會對法律沒有絲毫感情嗎？我不相信。因為當我看到不公平的事情時，我和絕大多數同學一樣，首先想到的是運用法律武器來捍衛自己的權益；當我們看到報刊上的案件時，我們會用法律思維去思考、分析這些問題；甚至在生活中，很多玩笑都是有關法律的。我們時時刻刻都在關注法律，運用法律，這難道不是對法律的熱愛嗎？難道不是一種對法律的信仰的體現嗎？普通百姓并不了解法律，讓他們建立對法律的信仰并不容易。但是對于我們，對于學習和以法律為職業的人來說，是承擔樹立法律信仰責任的最佳人選，也是最應該的人選。只有法律人自己信仰法律，才能影響周圍的民眾。
在第一次開庭后，記者問ANDREW：“Do you see this as a gay rights issue?”
ANDREW：“I'm not political.I just want compensation for being fired.”很簡單的回答。ANDREW沒有怨恨，沒有報復，沒有其他的想法，只是簡單的，維護自己的權利?！叭松降取?，每個人都清楚的真理，但是面對AIDS，卻完全不同了。因為AIDS，律師事務所非法解雇了ANDREW；因為AIDS，JOE一開始拒絕了ANDREW的案子；因為AIDS，圖書館管理人員要求ANDREW到另一
個房間查閱資料；因為AIDS，JOE代理ANDREW的案子受到了很多騷擾和恥笑??在那個艾滋病剛剛被認識的年代，艾滋病人的平等權是那么難以實現。
在這樣的背景下，JOE一開始拒絕了ANDREW的案子，似乎合情合理。因為ANDREW他得艾滋病并不像那位女士一樣，是因為輸血，而是同性戀發生性行為導致。同性戀不被當時大眾所接受，而JOE自己也是個對同性戀有偏見的律師。JOE的回答與前邊拒絕ANDREW的九名律師相同，他們似乎已經麻木，因常期處于城市煩躁獨立的生活方式里而變得謹慎和小心，很難敞開心關注身邊的人，亦不懂得理解彼此，距離越大隔閡越深。但是，作為一名律師，他的職業倫理和大眾倫理是不同的，他自己應該深知這一點。像劉涌案，田文昌被很多大學生指責，說他以前為弱勢群體做代理，現在變了，竟然為犯罪分子、壞人作辯護。當時聽到這個消息時，很多同學都哭笑不得。法律人所遵循的倫理與大眾所崇尚的倫理是有所區別的，法律家對待道德問題的方式也是有其獨特之處的。善于關注道德問題的法理學家朗．L．富勒曾就律師的職業道德談到這樣一個問題：在一件刑事案件中，律師替一個他明知有罪的人辯護是完全妥當的。非但如此，而且律師還可以收取費用，他可以出庭替一個他明知有罪的人辯護并接受酬勞而不感到良心的譴責。富勒說： 假如被告所請的每一位律師都因為他看上去有罪而拒絕接受辦理該案件，那么被告 就猶如在法庭之外被判有罪，因而得不到法律所賦給他的受到正式審判的權利。??假如他因為認為一個訴訟委托人有罪而拒絕替他辯護，那末他便錯誤地侵占了法官和陪審員的職權。[1] 更何況ANDREW沒有罪，他是一個工作勤奮、熱愛家庭、有責任感的完美男人，他只是在維護自己的權利。無論什么人，都有權辯護，請律師代理。簡單的道理，卻在大眾的倫理觀面前變質了。在圖書館，在人性善的驅使下，JOE許久之前封閉的良知被ANDREW的堅強、堅定喚起。ANDREW獲勝得到了巨額賠償，賠償的數額并不是ANDREW追求的，他關注的是對自己權利的維護。ANDREW在病床上笑著說：“What doyoucall a thousand lawyerschained together at the bottom of the ocean?JOE：“ What?”ANDREW：“A good start.” Joe smiles.開始我并不十分了解這個玩笑的含義，在看到第三遍時，才明白：一千個律師被捆在一起丟進海里，的確是個好的開始，律師少了，不公少了，社會不需要太多的律師來主持正義了，那么，這就是一個好的開始。ANDREW得到了公平的判決，但他希望更多的人得到公平公正。于是又回到庭審時ANDREW所說的“I think the thing I love the most, is that every once in a while, not that often, but occasionally...you get to be part of justice being done.It's really quite a thrill when that happens.”這句話也成為他運用法律武器維護自己權利的理由，不止為自己，也是為公平公正，為更多人的權利。
影片最后在
注：[1]哈羅德·伯爾曼：《美國法律講話》，陳若桓譯，三聯書店1988年版，頁26。
第三篇：英文影評《費城故事》
Film Review on Philadelphia
Philadelphia, directed by Jonathan Demme, featured by Tom Hanks and Danzel Washington, tells a story about a AIDS patients who has fired because suffering from AIDS fight for his right with legal.As the groundbreaking achievement in Hollywood's first look at AIDS discrimination, the movie is mainly about two sensitive topics: homosexuality and AIDS.To analyze the contradictions in the story from the theory of Structuralism, there are two sets of conflicts: the endless case with Andrew’s former employer, and Andrew’s good fight against sickness.The gay character, Andrew, a social outcast that facing to the death, is still fighting against the serious illness and the discrimination from the society all the way;The black lawyer, Miller, someone doesn't like homosexuals, agrees to take the case for sympathy.In the name of justice and humanity, in the spirit of compassion, Andrew and Miller tried to fight for legal right in a common action.They gradually become friends and come to understand one another during the quarrel.From Miller’s eyes, we can feel Andrew’s love to life and live.There is a impressiveness scene in the movie: Listening to theinspiring music, Andrew put on a drip, described to Miller his hunger for affection, and his desire for life.Life is not what you see in the films, it’s much harder.“Philadelphia” was made in 1993, In that time, people’s attitude to AIDS and homosexual are stern, rigid and unreasonable.Most people still feel a hearty dislike about homosexuality, much more a gay with AIDS.“Philadelphia” leads the trend of innovation to the AIDS discrimination.It gave hope to the many others who face this dilemma at some point or another in their lives.On the other hand, it also tries to turn our view to the AIDS.For viewers of the movie, the meaningful question is not whether they sympathize with Tom Hanks' AIDS-afflicted, but whether that sympathy opens up a different perspective on the victims of the disease in the real world.We should ask several questions to our selves: Should the social outcast have the unfair treatment? What the Public opinions to AIDS? Will any sex orientation of the people be accepted by society?No matter what he is, he has the right to live on happily.That’s what I learn from “Philadelphia”.when I see the light.I know I'll be all right.Philadelphia.
第四篇：《暹羅之戀》和《費城故事》影評
談社會特殊人群的權利與尊嚴
以影片《暹羅之戀》和《費城故事》為例
泰國著名影片《暹羅之戀》和美國著名影片《費城故事》都非常巧合地選取了生活中特殊群體“同性戀”為敘述視角，真實再現了生活中特殊人群的生存困境。
《暹羅之戀》中從小相識的兩個男孩Mew和Tong在分別多年之后又意外相遇，在彼此的相處中，他們逐漸產生了純真的戀情。但在戀情剛剛產生之際，就頻頻受到同學的歧視和家人的阻礙，以致最后他們為了彼此更好地生活，不得不放棄這段真摯的情感。小說的主人公Mew是個非常有音樂天賦的歌手，但卻一直寫不出情歌，直到他再次遇到Tong。當Mew第一次在Tong家的舞會上演唱了他寫給Tong的情歌時，歌曲里滲透的純潔的愛情打動了全場聽眾，也使Tong開始正視自己的情感，在舞會后接受了Mew。但這一幕卻被正在收拾碗碟的Tong的母親看到，Tong的母親在遭遇失去女兒和丈夫酗酒的家庭創傷之后，再也無法忍受Tong是同性戀的打擊，開始阻止他們之間的戀情。影片最后，Tong說了一句引人深思的話語“不和你在一起，并不代表我不愛你?！倍潭痰囊痪湓挼莱隽擞捌恼嬷B，在無法改變的現實面前，家庭的阻礙、社會的歧視，讓他們不得不放棄自己的情感。影片以Mew的淚水告終，這發自肺腑的淚水道盡的是所有“同性戀”者的悲情。
相對于《暹羅之戀》，《費城故事》在社會特殊人群的權利與尊嚴遭受侵害方面，就揭示得更加露骨。此影片的視角不僅僅停留在“同
性戀”人群上，還有“艾滋”患者。它選取了一位生活在“費城”這一和平、安寧，宣揚人權和平等的美國城市中的一名同性戀者，一名艾滋病患者為表現對象。這一典型環境下生存的典型人物安德魯，他是一名律師，一位為維護和促進社會公平而不懈奮斗的人。他因患“艾滋”而被公司陷害，公司以他工作不稱職為借口將他解雇。為維護自己的平等權利，他向法院提起了訴訟。在他尋求眾多律師為其辯護都遭拒絕后，他憤然決定自己為自己辯護。他的這一行為感動了律師喬，于是他開始了與喬一起為權利與尊嚴斗爭的艱難歷程。當法院問及他問什么喜歡律師這一職業時，他只平淡地說了一句：“當我偶爾為促進社會公平做出一點貢獻后，我感到很振奮?！钡酱?，我才真正感覺到他向法院提起訴訟，不但是為自己爭奪權力，而且更多的是為與他相同的群體爭奪權力，為了在生命的最后一刻再為促進社會公平做出一點點貢獻。
律師喬也因為給安德魯辯護而被誤以為是同性戀，同樣遭到朋友和同事的嘲笑。但他并沒有向現實低頭，當法庭上的安德魯因病倒下后，法庭宣布了他們的勝利。在安德魯即將離世時，他與戀人麥高相擁哭泣的場景極其打動人心。不管安德魯遭受怎樣的困境，麥高都對他不離不棄，唯有至尚的愛情才能達到麥高的境界。我們應該知道，同性戀者和艾滋患者同樣需要愛與自由，但他們為了尋求那一點點愛與自由卻在社會的夾縫中掙扎。
影片結尾那一幅幅幸福安寧的畫面是我們所有人的期望，可現實生活中一個個不平等的現象卻隱藏在我們的周圍，像“同性戀”和“艾滋”患者這樣遭受歧視的現象在生活中仍是屢見不鮮，《暹羅之戀》和《費城故事》不僅是對同性戀和艾滋患者權利與尊嚴的呼喊，還是對現實的抨擊、對社會公平的呼吁，是與人們的頑固思想做斗爭，是對愛的追尋。面對現實，維護真正的社會公平、權利平等和人的尊嚴還需我們大家更多的努力。
第五篇：費城故事英文影評[小編推薦]
Name: 倪天一
Class: 酒管131
Dept.: 酒店管理學院
Film Review ofPhiladelphia
Philadelphia was directed in 1993 when AIDS first became a common cause of death.It told us a story about how an AIDS patientcalled Andrew fought for his own rights with help of his lawyer Joe.Andrew Beckett was played by Tom Hanks, and Joe was played by Denzel Washington.The story happened in Philadelphia, where the United States Declaration of Independence was born.At the very beginning of the film, the director seemed to try to give us an impression of tolerance, which differed from the sad story very much.Andrew was fired for the reason he did something badly wrong during his work after one of his colleagues found that he had AIDS,.Since Andrew knew the real reason, he decided to charge against his past bosses.When Joe and Andrew first met each other, they sat side by side, arguing about a case, which looked normal and humorous.Before long Andrew asked for Joe’s aids, telling Joe that he got AIDS.When Joe heard that news, he soon kept Andrew away and went to see his doctor for checking whether he would catch HIV later.The scene showed a conflict between people with and without AIDS.We cannot blame Joe much since we could do the same thing under the same circumstances.First Joe tended to turn his back on Andrew, but he was determined to help
Andrew because of sympathy and belief in law and equality.As a man who opposed homosexuality, Joe did not understand Andrew until he attended a party for gays, seeing Andrew dancing with his partner.I think at that moment Joe suddenly understood the love between two men, which actually was the same as love between women and men.They sat together shoulder by shoulder again just like the first meet, which meant their hearts and souls became closer and closer.At the end of the film, Andrew was too ill to attend the court.Joe eventually won before Andrew died, but he could only tell him the good news right beside his sickbed.The ending was not like those of typical Hollywood films;it was not such a kind of happy ending.However, through it we can still see hope and warmth.Philadelphia was seen as a symbol that marks the first time that Hollywood has risked a big-budget film on AIDS and homosexuals.The film may attract people’s attention to AIDS, homosexuality as well as humanism.When some people tend to look down upon AIDS patients, this film may be an alarming bell.
點擊咨詢 