第一篇：费城故事的影评
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：费城故事影评
《费城故事》影评
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《费城故事》中JOE和ANDREW在法庭上的一段对话。我看过三遍这部影片了，但是，每次听到这段对话，都觉得很震撼，心情复杂，有对ANDREW的崇敬之情，又有作为一个学习法律的人的自豪，还有一点，用ANDREW的话说，是thrill，振奋！
ANDREW作为一名律师，他所从事的工作，不仅仅是为了生计，更是兴趣所在。正是如此，他学习勤奋，工作努力，忙碌中感受着工作带给他的乐趣。他工作的动力，正如他所说：“我爱法律，我了解法律，我善于从事这一行；我最爱法律的什么？就是有时，不是时常，但偶然，我是促成公平的一份子，这真是一种令人振奋的感觉。”听着他的话，我为自己是一个法学专业的学生而感到由衷的骄傲，因为我，我们，就像ANDREW一样，也可能是促成公平的一份子。这是证明自己存在价值、实现自我价值的途径，是对社会的贡献。这种精神上的愉悦是任何物质享受所不能比拟的。
但是，我们并不能保证所有的法律人都像ANDREW那样热爱法律，信仰法律。想起行政法课上老师讲的一件令人哭笑不得的事：一个法学专业的学生，居然请教老师“有人出2万元请我替考，我去还是不去？”一个学习法律的人，了解法律的人，居然连基本的道德观念都没有！学习法律的人不遵纪守法，我们似乎司空见惯了。报纸上铺天盖地的新闻，我国有那么多律师、法官违法犯罪，和国外，尤其是一些法制健全的国家相比，数量实在是多得有些不可思议了。在这些报道的影响下，普通百姓对法律工作者的评价似乎越来越差了，而法律工作者自己也对自己的职业缺少职业自豪感和捍卫职业尊严感了。著名法学家伯尔曼曾经说过：“法律必须被信仰，否则它将形同虚设”。如果连学习法律，了解法律，运用法律的人本身都不信仰法律，那么，法律究竟为什么而设立？在实践中有能起什么作用？有与没有又有什么区别？有人说，中华民族是缺少信仰的民族。也许这是一个影响因素。但是，我们这些学习法律如此多年的人，难道会对法律没有丝毫感情吗？我不相信。因为当我看到不公平的事情时，我和绝大多数同学一样，首先想到的是运用法律武器来捍卫自己的权益；当我们看到报刊上的案件时，我们会用法律思维去思考、分析这些问题；甚至在生活中，很多玩笑都是有关法律的。我们时时刻刻都在关注法律，运用法律，这难道不是对法律的热爱吗？难道不是一种对法律的信仰的体现吗？普通百姓并不了解法律，让他们建立对法律的信仰并不容易。但是对于我们，对于学习和以法律为职业的人来说，是承担树立法律信仰责任的最佳人选，也是最应该的人选。只有法律人自己信仰法律，才能影响周围的民众。
在第一次开庭后，记者问ANDREW：“Do you see this as a gay rights issue?”
ANDREW：“I'm not political.I just want compensation for being fired.”很简单的回答。ANDREW没有怨恨，没有报复，没有其他的想法，只是简单的，维护自己的权利。“人生而平等”，每个人都清楚的真理，但是面对AIDS，却完全不同了。因为AIDS，律师事务所非法解雇了ANDREW；因为AIDS，JOE一开始拒绝了ANDREW的案子；因为AIDS，图书馆管理人员要求ANDREW到另一
个房间查阅资料；因为AIDS，JOE代理ANDREW的案子受到了很多骚扰和耻笑„„在那个艾滋病刚刚被认识的年代，艾滋病人的平等权是那么难以实现。
在这样的背景下，JOE一开始拒绝了ANDREW的案子，似乎合情合理。因为ANDREW他得艾滋病并不像那位女士一样，是因为输血，而是同性恋发生性行为导致。同性恋不被当时大众所接受，而JOE自己也是个对同性恋有偏见的律师。JOE的回答与前边拒绝ANDREW的九名律师相同，他们似乎已经麻木，因常期处于城市烦躁独立的生活方式里而变得谨慎和小心，很难敞开心关注身边的人，亦不懂得理解彼此，距离越大隔阂越深。但是，作为一名律师，他的职业伦理和大众伦理是不同的，他自己应该深知这一点。像刘涌案，田文昌被很多大学生指责，说他以前为弱势群体做代理，现在变了，竟然为犯罪分子、坏人作辩护。当时听到这个消息时，很多同学都哭笑不得。法律人所遵循的伦理与大众所崇尚的伦理是有所区别的，法律家对待道德问题的方式也是有其独特之处的。善于关注道德问题的法理学家朗．L．富勒曾就律师的职业道德谈到这样一个问题：在一件刑事案件中，律师替一个他明知有罪的人辩护是完全妥当的。非但如此，而且律师还可以收取费用，他可以出庭替一个他明知有罪的人辩护并接受酬劳而不感到良心的谴责。富勒说： 假如被告所请的每一位律师都因为他看上去有罪而拒绝接受办理该案件，那么被告 就犹如在法庭之外被判有罪，因而得不到法律所赋给他的受到正式审判的权利。„„假如他因为认为一个诉讼委托人有罪而拒绝替他辩护，那末他便错误地侵占了法官和陪审员的职权。[1] 更何况ANDREW没有罪，他是一个工作勤奋、热爱家庭、有责任感的完美男人，他只是在维护自己的权利。无论什么人，都有权辩护，请律师代理。简单的道理，却在大众的伦理观面前变质了。在图书馆，在人性善的驱使下，JOE许久之前封闭的良知被ANDREW的坚强、坚定唤起。ANDREW获胜得到了巨额赔偿，赔偿的数额并不是ANDREW追求的，他关注的是对自己权利的维护。ANDREW在病床上笑着说：“What doyoucall a thousand lawyerschained together at the bottom of the ocean?JOE：“ What?”ANDREW：“A good start.” Joe smiles.开始我并不十分了解这个玩笑的含义，在看到第三遍时，才明白：一千个律师被捆在一起丢进海里，的确是个好的开始，律师少了，不公少了，社会不需要太多的律师来主持正义了，那么，这就是一个好的开始。ANDREW得到了公平的判决，但他希望更多的人得到公平公正。于是又回到庭审时ANDREW所说的“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.”这句话也成为他运用法律武器维护自己权利的理由，不止为自己，也是为公平公正，为更多人的权利。
影片最后在
注：[1]哈罗德·伯尔曼：《美国法律讲话》，陈若桓译，三联书店1988年版，页26。
第三篇：英文影评《费城故事》
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：《暹罗之恋》和《费城故事》影评
谈社会特殊人群的权利与尊严
以影片《暹罗之恋》和《费城故事》为例
泰国著名影片《暹罗之恋》和美国著名影片《费城故事》都非常巧合地选取了生活中特殊群体“同性恋”为叙述视角，真实再现了生活中特殊人群的生存困境。
《暹罗之恋》中从小相识的两个男孩Mew和Tong在分别多年之后又意外相遇，在彼此的相处中，他们逐渐产生了纯真的恋情。但在恋情刚刚产生之际，就频频受到同学的歧视和家人的阻碍，以致最后他们为了彼此更好地生活，不得不放弃这段真挚的情感。小说的主人公Mew是个非常有音乐天赋的歌手，但却一直写不出情歌，直到他再次遇到Tong。当Mew第一次在Tong家的舞会上演唱了他写给Tong的情歌时，歌曲里渗透的纯洁的爱情打动了全场听众，也使Tong开始正视自己的情感，在舞会后接受了Mew。但这一幕却被正在收拾碗碟的Tong的母亲看到，Tong的母亲在遭遇失去女儿和丈夫酗酒的家庭创伤之后，再也无法忍受Tong是同性恋的打击，开始阻止他们之间的恋情。影片最后，Tong说了一句引人深思的话语“不和你在一起，并不代表我不爱你。”短短的一句话道出了影片的真谛，在无法改变的现实面前，家庭的阻碍、社会的歧视，让他们不得不放弃自己的情感。影片以Mew的泪水告终，这发自肺腑的泪水道尽的是所有“同性恋”者的悲情。
相对于《暹罗之恋》，《费城故事》在社会特殊人群的权利与尊严遭受侵害方面，就揭示得更加露骨。此影片的视角不仅仅停留在“同
性恋”人群上，还有“艾滋”患者。它选取了一位生活在“费城”这一和平、安宁，宣扬人权和平等的美国城市中的一名同性恋者，一名艾滋病患者为表现对象。这一典型环境下生存的典型人物安德鲁，他是一名律师，一位为维护和促进社会公平而不懈奋斗的人。他因患“艾滋”而被公司陷害，公司以他工作不称职为借口将他解雇。为维护自己的平等权利，他向法院提起了诉讼。在他寻求众多律师为其辩护都遭拒绝后，他愤然决定自己为自己辩护。他的这一行为感动了律师乔，于是他开始了与乔一起为权利与尊严斗争的艰难历程。当法院问及他问什么喜欢律师这一职业时，他只平淡地说了一句：“当我偶尔为促进社会公平做出一点贡献后，我感到很振奋。”到此，我才真正感觉到他向法院提起诉讼，不但是为自己争夺权力，而且更多的是为与他相同的群体争夺权力，为了在生命的最后一刻再为促进社会公平做出一点点贡献。
律师乔也因为给安德鲁辩护而被误以为是同性恋，同样遭到朋友和同事的嘲笑。但他并没有向现实低头，当法庭上的安德鲁因病倒下后，法庭宣布了他们的胜利。在安德鲁即将离世时，他与恋人麦高相拥哭泣的场景极其打动人心。不管安德鲁遭受怎样的困境，麦高都对他不离不弃，唯有至尚的爱情才能达到麦高的境界。我们应该知道，同性恋者和艾滋患者同样需要爱与自由，但他们为了寻求那一点点爱与自由却在社会的夹缝中挣扎。
影片结尾那一幅幅幸福安宁的画面是我们所有人的期望，可现实生活中一个个不平等的现象却隐藏在我们的周围，像“同性恋”和“艾滋”患者这样遭受歧视的现象在生活中仍是屡见不鲜，《暹罗之恋》和《费城故事》不仅是对同性恋和艾滋患者权利与尊严的呼喊，还是对现实的抨击、对社会公平的呼吁，是与人们的顽固思想做斗争，是对爱的追寻。面对现实，维护真正的社会公平、权利平等和人的尊严还需我们大家更多的努力。
第五篇：费城故事英文影评[小编推荐]
Name: 倪天一
Class: 酒管131
Dept.: 酒店管理学院
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.
点击咨询 