A most pleasingly atmospheric rendition of the tale, noirishly photographed and moodily set, this is the version which probably would have delighted Conan Doyle the most. There is one important plot change which enables the beautiful Alice Brandt to enjoy both a larger role and a more intriguing part in the proceedings. This change also builds up the parts of Dr Mortimer and Lord Charles, yet at the same time provides a nice introduction to the is-he-sinister or is-he-a-good-guy Barrymore, deftly played here by Fritz Rasp.
Despite the sting of its well-developed story, the spellbindingly atmospheric direction and the engrossing performances delivered by the entire cast, many fans may find this version somewhat disappointing. For at least three reasons: As in the novel, the part played in the narrative by Sherlock Holmes, though vital, is minimal. And in this version, not only has no attempt been made to enlarge his role, if anything both writer and director do their best to minimize it. Holmes does not even make his entrance for half-an-hour, and when he does finally appear, he has his back to the camera. It is Fritz Odemar, as Dr Watson, who receives the more favorable camera angles. And there is a purpose in this. It is Watson, not Holmes, who figures as the main protagonist of The Hound of the Baskervilles. For the bulk of the narrative, Holmes disappears. It is Watson and Lord Henry (Peter Voss) who take up the running. The movie is almost over, before Holmes closes in on the villain. And even so, this is not the obsessed, self-important Holmes we are accustomed to see taking charge. Another problem is that the title hound itself does not figure a great deal in the action, a downgrading which will undoubtedly rate as another major disappointment for fans. And finally, it could be argued that the script gives too much attention to Conan Doyle's red herring, the escaped convict, and not enough to the real villain.
This said, it must surely be admitted by all, that Odemar's interpretation of Watson—intelligent, charming, level-headed, courageous and resourceful—is much closer to Conan Doyle's conception than either the bungling, inveterately stupid Nigel Bruce or the self-effacing Ian Fleming.
One other player deserves special mention: Erich Ponto (Dr Winkel in The Third Man) who seems exactly right for Stapleton. A difficult part, superbly played.
- JohnHowardReid, imdb
看了这个电影我才知道原来支教这么辛苦，我在这里向那些在偏远山区支教的老师们致敬，“谢谢你们，你们辛苦了！”
好家伙，一开始说自己是巡山员的那个人出现就觉得有点端倪，果然不出我所料，是个假的！
题材不错，取景不错，情节差了点意思，在打磨打磨会更好
看完很感动，现在的城市生活太嘈杂，却很少有人能够静下心去到一些偏远的地方生存，韩松虽然进入藏区，途中的种种困难很难不令人放弃，但是藏区的人民之淳朴，待人之真诚。希望有越来越多的人可以看到，可以重视教育资源不均的问题，可以帮助他们，可以帮助他们的未来。他们的内心是干净的，是充满对未来无限憧憬的。
其实很多时候付出不一定有回报，但是不付出肯定没有回报，男主是成功的，也是幸运的
虽然超过了绝大部分电影，但还是有太多瑕疵。前半段称神，后半段狗血
我会间或疑问，人这一生为了什么？
导演真的很会拍，无论是取景，还是故事叙述，层层递进，纵观老师的一生。
看这个电影，不禁让我想起多年前看的同题材电影——《美丽的大脚》，应该说两部电影相同点很多，后者展现的中国偏远地区，那种贫困更深刻一些；前者则展现的时间跨度更大，反映出在一批批支边教师的努力下，偏远地区教育状况的改变。
但他为了藏区的孩子们，依旧留了下来。
现实中有些支教为了那些山区的孩子，确实付出了自已的青春。给我们带来了更多的是感动。
总之，好好的故事，强行用人命牺牲拔高立意，不行。
特效算是劣势吧，这种类型的电影基本没有看到过特别满意的特效，总之还是演技取胜了
绝对好片
越真实越感人，说的就是这部电影吧，人类都是因为真实才被感动的啊！
韩老师一开始也没那么伟大，我是能在电影里面看到一点点他的心里历程变化的，到最后的结局，我一点都不意外
现实中有些支教为了那些山区的孩子，确实付出了自已的青春。给我们带来了更多的是感动。
藏区恶劣的环境和艰苦的生活条件，让支教老师不知所措，但孩子们的善良纯朴，让老师心坚定不移地做出奉献。
非常具有深意的一部电影，值得刷多次，每次看完都会有不同的感受
这个反应的是过去吧，现在已经没有这样的了吧，你知不知道，人类从历史中学到的唯一教训，就是没有从历史中学到任何教训
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
