|
楼主 |
发表于 2007-5-6 15:30:44
|
显示全部楼层
Richard Roeper's review in the Chicago Sun-Times is 1,144 words long and covers 47 paragraphs. He suggests that it takes that much copy to describe what the movie is about. "I don't think there were this many storylines in Crash," he writes. Christy Lemire of the Associated Press calls it "a bloated, uneven behemoth." It's a complaint echoed by Lou Lumenick in the New York Post, who begins his review by writing, "Oh, what a tangled web does Spider-Man 3 weave. Overly long and complicated, it's packed with crowd-pleasing moments and satisfactorily wraps up the trilogy -- without quite capturing the magic of the first two installments."
理查·鲁波尔在芝加哥太阳时报上的评论长达1144字47段落。他说他花了好大篇幅来说明白电影到底讲个啥。他写道:“我想《撞车》里面都没有这么多故事情节。”美联社的奎斯蒂·莱米尔称这部电影是“一头浮肿不堪疙、疙瘩瘩的巨兽”。同样的责难也出现在纽约邮报卢·拉姆尼克的评论中,他在开篇就写:“哦,《蜘蛛侠3》编织的这张网那是相当乱哪!故事过长,情节过于复杂,同时加以迎合大众口味的桥段和令人满意的第三部包装——却不曾抓住前两部的魔力所在。”
That's also the conclusion of Claudia Puig in USA Today, who writes that the movie "tries gamely, is solidly entertaining and possesses dazzling special effects, but it falls short of the near-perfection of" Spider-Man 2. But Jack Mathews in the New York Daily News concludes that there is only one thing on which audiences will judge the movie: "I'll take a wild guess and say that Spidey fans come for the action and, on that count, they will not be disappointed."
这点同样符合《今日美国》克劳迪娅·皮格的结论,她认为这部电影“兴致勃勃地尝试,并且看起来确实非常有趣,也运用了大量令人眼花缭乱的特效,然而在近乎完美的《蜘蛛侠2》面前它却显得不尽如人意。”但纽约日报的杰克·马修斯却推断观众们衡量这部电影好坏与非其实只有一个标准:“我敢大胆地猜测,小蜘蛛的粉丝们上影院就是为了看那些动作场面,就这点来说,他们不会失望。”
http://ts.hjenglish.com/page/20128/?page=4 |
|