《手机》经典观后感集

　　《手机》是一部由冯小刚执导，张国立 / 葛优 / 范冰冰主演的一部剧情 / 喜剧 / 家庭类型的电影，文章吧小编精心整理的一些观众的观后感，希望对大家能有帮助。

　　《手机》观后感(一)：终于你做了别人的小三

　　《手机》看过很多年了，说话不方便吧，电影里的这句台词至今还记得。严守一本来事业有成，是一个电视台的著名主持人，还有一个幸福的家庭。但是他却在外面搞小三。最后搞得离婚，而那个小三却上位了，当上了主持人。取代了严守一的位置。他的那位领导，也遇到了年轻女孩的追求，但是他却抵制了诱惑，没有做错事。男人嘛，一旦有钱有势，自然会有不少女孩子喜欢。虽然很多人鄙视小三，但是小三怎么却越来越多了呢。有钱有爱，多么美好的画面啊。

　　男人年轻的时候，女孩们都不会喜欢他，因为他穷。等他奋斗成功了以后，岁数也不小了。这个时候也就容易犯错误了。因为家里的老婆已经人老珠黄了。如果正好遇到年轻貌美的女孩倾慕，肯定会经不起诱惑的。这个世界的诱惑太多了。男人有钱就变坏，女人变化就有钱。对另一半的背叛，是有一种负罪感的。到底谁先对不起谁，真的那么重要吗。只能说明一件事情，爱情已经慢慢不见了。

　　爱情已经睡着了，转化成了亲情。可是我们还是需要爱情的呀。年轻的女孩子也需要爱情，但如果她们找了一个岁数大的老头。那就很难让人认为他们这是爱情。男人喜欢女人的年轻貌美，女人喜欢男人的财大气粗。只是各取所需而已。或许这样的组合反而能长久呢。因为这样的组合更务实一点，更实际一点。

　　《手机》观后感(二)：像他这么成功的钢炮也没几个

　　第一的感觉就是，葛优扮演严守一的角色不像，气质不像，王志文像，不过电视剧版本的手机是王志文扮演的。

　　第二的感觉就是，严守一主持的电视节目有点像内种广播里专门给失足、婚外恋妇女出怪招儿的情感类节目，区别是严守一没一般印象里那么愤世嫉俗。

　　第三的感觉就是，费老最不像，戴一眼镜，大家一口一个费老的叫着，还出书。你说他能出什么书呀！估计就是刘墉写的内些教你诈，不是教你诈的破书。

　　整体感觉:俗。特别是费老东窗事发，说什么以前好，以前交通通讯不方便，做什么事儿都有缓和的余地，争辩的机会，手机时代里的人太近。电影名字就是手机，没必要在电影里夸大手机及手机时代人和人内点猫道狗道说的太清楚，知道就成，说太细，俗了。还有电影结局，严守一不再使用手机，费老远走他乡的设定，有点事事儿的，过了。突出电影主题，但也得考虑逻辑和人情世故不是？

　　冯小刚电影都挺贴的，有种与生即来的亲近感，还有电影里一些“番外”的设定，都挺好，电影特生活化，也不臃肿。对于情节的把握，冯小刚还是挺有一套的。

　　再说说额外的，就是手机讲什么主题，不言而喻。看完之后，突然想到伍迪艾伦的《午夜巴黎》。费老说古代好，午夜巴黎干脆穿越回古代。手机讲信息时代带给都市人生活便利的同时，也带来了生活中隐隐的不便利之处，他大概可能是说社会和人性之类的东西。午夜巴黎在说黄金时代情节，追忆过期，对现金社会的反思之类。

　　然后我突然意识到，这两个电影除了主题和内容不同，而片子自身的定位都还挺像的，知音体电影，故事会的模式。那为什么我看手机和看午夜巴黎的评价不同呢！再延伸一下，我还想起了杨德昌的《独立时代》，独立时代的巧妙之处是在于它的多点开花，从各类人的角度寻求安身立命的机会。说实在，把这些简单、统一，可以归结于与手机类似的主题，其实它也没有想象中的高不可攀。

　　那对于我自己的疑问，我给出的答案就是:我的虚荣。我的思想意识在作祟。还有就是导演的专业性的区别，电影的包装和代入感的区别。

　　手机是大俗片，讲的道理也是臭不可闻，但我们看的其他电影也不见得比手机好多少。除却糖衣炮弹，看看你欣赏的电影与手机有什么本质的不同。如果你杯具地发现，没什么区别，也不好意思去鄙视小钢炮吧。毕竟中国这片文化沙漠里，像他这么成功的钢炮也没几个。

　　《手机》观后感(三)：何苦浪费信任，不如一起怀疑一切

　　不知道是不是有哪个思想家强调过怀疑的重要性。

　　怀疑权威，怀疑官方，怀疑所有属性100%的事，怀疑主动的善意，怀疑陌生，怀疑自己。

　　那既然这样，为什么要放下身段去相信一个半路遇到的人？

　　他讨好般地取信于你？还是自欺欺人地觉得真诚是彼此的，你待人真诚自会得到友善的回馈？

　　劣根性在人类身上是多么难以剔除？对于欲望，有多少人能有反抗之力？这些问题，我以为在自己身上你已经得到了答案。既如此，所谓信任就只是虚妄而已。

　　也有将经济学概念的契约精神代入婚姻关系的说法。刨除经济上的联系以降低风险及其它分工上的裨益，所谓婚姻契约精神是难以成立的。

　　从起源说起，契约精神来自于自由流动交换的商业社会。商业活动持续稳定地存在，离不开经济活动主体对于契约的重视。而这种重视（也就是契约精神）是基于重视权利和平等的社会氛围及有力的制度设计的。

　　在婚姻契约里，社会环境条件不具备，有力的制度约束更是不可想象。

　　《手机》观后感(四)：黑色与幽默。

　　进入二十一世纪，有两个事物逐渐在普通百姓的生活中流行起来。一个是手机，手机作为一种革民性的移动通信设备，使人们的谈话空间私密化，把曾经开放式的人际关系变得私密化，而曾经私密化的人际关系，则有了秘密行进的空间。与此同时，婚外恋作为一种在社会上悄然发生的真实现象，也引起了整个社会的讨论与关注。每每都能抓住百姓阶层正经历着的并关注着的社会热点，这也是是冯小刚能成为中国累积票房最高导演的原因。著名节目主持人严守一，因一档谈话节目为千家万户所熟知。可在私人生活上，他生活在谎言与欺骗之中，他依靠着手机织出一张布满谎言的大网，意图将前妻于文娟、女朋友沈雪和情人武月三个女人网在自己身边。他用手机维持着与情人的暧昧关系，他用手机隐瞒和欺骗自己身边的女人，妄想在情感的错置寻求一种荒谬的平衡。他最终失去了工作，失去了所爱的人，在对自己所忏悔的谎言中度过余生。影片中张国立所饰演的费墨有着这样的一句话“这哪里是手机，分明是手雷”。没错，小小的手机里可能隐藏着巨大的秘密，一旦手机里人际密码被揭开，我们的感情、名声、尊严都会被炸得粉碎。冯小刚的贺岁片，都寻求让市民阶层的审美意趣与精神诉求能在他所刻化的小人物的自我狂欢与自我解嘲中得到释放。但这部影片除了这种特质外，更具有更强烈的写实主义与批判性特征，对社会中隐晦而确实在发生着的现象进行了准确而生动的表达，这种表达诙谐而深刻，充满了黑色幽默。也提醒着很多电影工作者，我们的观众，需要的不是被教育，而是被娱乐。

　　《手机》观后感(五)：秘密花园的崩溃

　　早就从父母口中闻本片大名，今日终于有幸观看。

　　片子讲得不是一深奥的故事。内容浅，直白，大家都看得明白。一琐事缠身的中年男人的生活，被手机搅得翻天，最后新媳妇没了，知己走了，工作也给情人占去了。手机被描述成了知善恶树上的果子，好处是方便沟通，代价是人际距离进一步消失导致的总总恶果。

　　费默说，羡慕农耕社会的人。那些进京赶考的考生们一去几年不归，回来时说啥都圆的过去。不过可惜农耕社会可不是人人都能去进京赶考，甚至再当上驸马爷的。村庄的熟人社会，没有手机也比有手机的都市人“亲密”的多。一村子里人都都认识，什么流言蜚语都是家常便饭。阴暗处干点坏事也指不定就有哪个人看见。牛彩云之前那么实诚（缺心眼），跟没用过手机没啥关系，倒是跟她没进过城里有关系。“进京赶考”或许就是一种理想型——是一种去西藏式的二者得兼——既没有熟人社会又没有无线信号的地方。当然如前所述，这种地方不存在。

　　确实，手机没来时，严守一事业有成，家庭幸福，还干着男人们梦想着的风流韵事。手机一来，清梦醒来，一切慢慢完蛋。但这事儿要怎么赖到手机头上，得在细细想想。手机到底是让人们变得更亲密还是更疏远，真不好说（除非你用上万能的“辩证法”），也不重要。手机的可怕在于，我们无论做什么事情都得会留下更多证据了。短信、通话记录、录音，乃至你接电话的表情、开关机的时间都会变成别人观察你的证据。手机不促进谎话生产（该撒的谎还得撒），手机改变的是谎话的“分配”。任何电子产品其实都是这样，你做事是方便了，但留下证据也方便了。要是没有手机，严守一想要偷个情也不怎么容易。有了手机，事儿是变容易了，可处处留下的证据，就成了“地雷”了。

　　隐私，是现代都市人最看重的东西。然而现代科技却不断宣判这座“秘密花园”的围墙是腐朽的。这也是严守一内心恐惧的真正来源。科技的进步似乎难以抵挡，我们又要如何面对注定到来的、悲剧式的不安呢？

　　《手机》观后感(六)：不在于工具在于人心

　　科技发达，世界变小了，人们之间的距离近了，科技为我们带来了翻天覆地的变化，也有些让我们无所适从。导演的本意应该是想要通过这个故事来抨击手机给我们带来的烦恼与彷徨，但是用这个故事来说明手机的弊端却不是很恰当。

　　严守一，著名主持人，有家室却和有一个编辑部的女孩私通。当然，手机是他们一个联系的工具，是拴住两只蚂蚱的那条线。但是，背叛妻子，满口的瞎话是手机的错吗？没有手机就不私通了么？就不说慌了吗？相反我认为真是手机的存在才让那些人前满口仁义道德人后和学生勾勾搭搭的教授无可遁形。

　　谁能载舟亦能覆舟，不是工具出了问题是心出了问题。

　　《手机》观后感(七)：Cell Phone and the Cinema of Infidelity

　　Cell Phone (2003) marks the culmination of the popular cultural preoccupation with infidelity. A famous TV talk show host Yan Shouyi, tries without success to maintain the delicate network of lies and concealments that allow him to have two different mistresses in addition to his estranged wife.

　　The story starts in a small town where the town’s first telephone, which signifies the modernization in China, has just been installed. In a small village nearby, a young man Yan Shouyi takes a peasant woman to the town to make a phone call to her husband. About twenty years later, the middle-aged Yan Shouyi has already become a popular TV talk show host in a big city, owning a wife, a nice job, a BMW, and a mistress. His life and work would not have taken this path if he had not been equipped with a cell phone, the latest wireless communication technology. But the Cell Phone also causes the end of his marriage: his wife accidentally answers a phone call from his mistress complaining about his absence from a date.

　　After getting a divorce, Yan starts a new relationship with a college teacher, Shen Xue, while still occasionally dating his old mistress, Wu Yue. On the several occasions when his double life is about to be discovered by Shen, Yan deftly covers the truth with lies. His close friend Fei Muo, a university professor and producer for his television show, is also involved in a similar love affair with a graduate student, which is soon discovered by his wife. Eventually, Yan’s infidelity is discovered by Shen who sees a digital picture of Yan and Wu making love, a picture taken by the digital camera built into Wu’s new cell phone. Not only is Yan’s relationship destroyed, his career also ends as Wu threatens to expose their relationship and takes over his position as the talk show host. At the end of the film, throwing his cell phone into fire, Yan swears that he will never again own one. Then after a dip-to-black, the film welcomes a second ending, Yan’s niece, who is also from the same village, becomes a cell phone saleswoman and comes to demonstrate the latest product to his uncle Yan. (Zhang, 135)

　　Given the obvious Marxist bent of Cell Phone’s rhetoric and its fable-like narrative of the dangers of commodity fetishism, one might easily conclude the film as criticism of the effects of rapid economic transformation in urban China, and denial of male dominance. However, underneath this reading which is merely based on the resolution provided by the film, we can find both the cultural underpinning and ideological impacts of the film, whether they are conscious directorial decisions or not, are the other way around.

　　The film is based on patriarchal and post-socialist assumptions in the first place. The leading character, wealthy, successful TV host Yan Shouyi, is representing the controlling patriarchal order and the ruling class. The young and charming mistress Wu Yue, on the other hand, is a sexual object and an oppressed worker reinforcing and perpetuating an exploitative capitalistic scheme. Yu Wenjuan, the pregnant wife and later the mother of Yan’s only child, is a cheap labor whose family value in undertaking housework and fostering children is totally underestimated and neglected by both the character Yan and the filmmaker Feng. Shen Xue, the successor of Yu and Wu, is a wonderful replacement of the two women, since she functions as both mistress and wife and has the highest total value. Therefore, marriage and divorce follow the rules of product exchange. The values of women as sexual commodities are estimated by their male owner, based on evaluation and grading of their sexual attractiveness and productivity among others.

　　In the second place, the narration neglects and degrades women’s family values.

　　While there are scenes of Yan Shouyi working at the TV station and attending meeting with his colleagues, which confirms his value in production, there is hardly any scene of the women working. In addition, among the values of women, the four structures proposed by Mitchell, sexuality is emphasized against reproduction, and socialization. While there are a lot of scenes of Yan Shouyi flirting and having fun with her young and passionate mistress Wu Yue, there is hardly any scene of him and the older and less attractive wife spending time together. The cinematic representation of the reproduction process of Yan’s first wife is almost absent in the film. Having been pregnant for months, Yu Wenjuan did not inform her husband at all, and Yan is only informed several months after divorce by his ex-brother-in-law that his first wife had already given birth to their baby and needs money from him.

　　Hiding behind socialization of children and the new motherhood are deeper oppressions of women. Spending a lot of time and energy nurturing the kid, the woman Yu did not get the compensation in improving her own social status; instead she lost her job in the big city after she went back to her hometown. As the value of socialization of children is often neglected by the society, this part of the plot is also omitted in the film, and is only told through Yan’s narration, serving as an obstacle that hinders and adds drama to Yan’s women pursuing career. As her value looks invisible, Yan replaces his first wife not with his mistress whose value only lies in sexuality, but with a beautiful college professor Shen Xue who seems to be a more serious and proper wife candidate, but also has the sexual disposition of a mistress.

　　From Yan’s perspective, all the three women can be valued on a materialistic basis. Women become commodities, and their sexual attractiveness, job, education status are all counted in their exchange value while man is the buyer who has the right of choice because of his economic power and dominance in a patriarchal society.

　　Extramarital relationship is a fatal violation of Chinese social norms and a tradition that often punishes the woman for such “immoral transgression” (Cui 181). In Cell Phone, the mistress Wu Yue, became the conflict's cause and the incarnation of immorality instead of the Male character Yan Shouyi. As an advanced prostitute, she would love to sell her body in exchange for money and power. And, ultimately, she threatens to replace Yan Shouyi as a television talk show host by using the photo she took in her cell phone. Thus, Yan Shouyi becomes the victimized character pitied by the audiences instead of the evil woman.

　　The resolution of the film, Yan Shouyi’s abandoning of the cell phone, which may seem like a self-criticism, is actually a displacement and denial of the guilt and regret by reprimanding the modern technology and communication device. Cell phone becomes the scapegoat for Yan Shouyi, the hypocritical and immoral character, and therefore the patriarchal and capitalist order behind the story, which was supposedly to be criticized, is actually being extended sympathy.

　　Depicted as the direct cause of all the conflicts between the protagonist and the three female characters, cell phone, the symbol of post-socialist modernity seems to be criticized. Rui concludes that Cell Phone addresses the subject through the director’s satirical take on consumerism and his exposure of the moral crises and ethical issues brought by expansion of high technology into our everyday lives (Zhang, 136). However, in the first 90 minutes of the film, a fantasy of the patriarchal and post-socialist (capitalist) utopia was already created for the male audiences: mistress as a symbol and accessory of urban success. Female audiences were also given a utilitarian fantasy integrated with the narcissistic and masochistic visual pleasure: being someone’s mistress is the shortcut to wealth and success. Thus, the film belittles the value of women, and denies women's independent existential meaning.

　　In addition to the narrative constructed to propagate the attractive image of the “successful personage” that has represented the “new ideology” of contemporary China, an image that endorses a reality of growing class differences and income disparities, Feng Xiaogang adopts a lot of meta-cinematic elements in Cell Phone to offset the seriousness of his own criticism, a technique abundantly used in his early films. There are ample shots within the TV station, such as the staff operating camera, and outtakes of the TV host Yan who says his lines wrong, that remind the audiences to question the authenticity of their own movie watching experience. There is also a lot of inserting advertisements for cell phones that deconstructs the movie’s final critical stance towards post-socialist modernity. As the audiences identify and follow the male protagonist throughout the film, they highly enjoy and celebrate his material wealth and “romantic affairs” brought about by his professional success in the patriarchal and post-socialist order. In the meantime, they also accept a message that all women, whether they are educated or not, college professor or press editor, wife or mistress, are all annexed to the life of men.

　　As McGrath noticed, the basic narrative structure of Cell Phone already had become so common by the end of the 1990s as to constitute a cinematic genre in itself, a genre that offers fable-like narratives of the moral dilemmas confronted by protagonists facing dramatic changes in personal economics as well as libidinal possibilities in the reform era. In such films, a man takes on one or more extramarital lovers after achieving some sort of economic success and social elevation (McGrath, 98). In many cases, a man’s ability to defy his wife is supported by both his male role and some sort of economic success. Even though these films reveal the social issues of the oppression of women, they neither provide a solution nor hold a feministic point of view that attempt to liberate women. Instead, they stand in line with the successful male protagonists, and celebrate the current patriarchal and post-socialist status quo. In a word, these films are women-concerned, but not at all feminist films.

　　upposedly a subgenre of family melodrama that aims to criticize the social immorality and educate the audiences, the actual impact of the “cinema of infidelity” is rather doubtful. An example is the sex diary scandal of Han Feng, the former senior tobacco official, which culminates the “mistress fashion” in 2010. Even more dramatic than Feng’s films, the purported diary, written in graphic detail, includes boasts that Han was enjoying sex romps with many different women while taking bribes and attending banquets. Populated by Internet users, Han’s case is just one in a million of the government officials and the privileged stratum in Mainland China.

　　《手机》观后感(八)：只有葛优才配演这个有良心的花心汉

　　真正意义上的好演员，应该像姜文那样，无论他出现在那一部戏里，演的是什么角色，你都随时随地能够将他从他所饰演的角色里拖出来，还原一个本色姜文。这样一种演员独立于舞台之外的事情发生在一位演员身上，绝对不是他功力不足。虽然角色的形象设定早在剧本撰写之初就已经有了定论，但剧本是死的，演员是活的，这就好比种盆景，导演编剧是园艺师，剧本的设定是花盆和泥土，演员是植物，花盆和泥土是为了给植物的生长提供可能，除了园艺师的适时修剪，最终长势如何，能否成为一件合格乃至优秀的艺术品，则要看植物修剪在修剪之外，是否能够以最自然合理的姿态长成。而所谓最自然合理，就是它是否既符合客观审美，有顺应先天特质。姜文之所以是姜文，无他，但姜文耳。

　　而葛优，也是这样一类演员，他的特质在于他长了一张虽然不是俊美但是善意良知的小市民的脸，不管角色如何变，从《活着》到《卡拉是条狗》到《手机》，从地主阶级养狗市民到花心搞外遇的艺人，他都坏不彻底做不了大恶，这写角色，既有角色本身设定初衷里对于人性的善意理解——性本善，也很可能存在导演编剧们的精心策划——葛优不可以演彻底的坏人。

　　花心艺人严守一，在物欲横流的北京某电视台主持着一档颇为火热的谈话节目，他是贫嘴名嘴名人，他待人和善，家庭幸福，事业成功，但他有外遇，却又对老婆很是在乎，放不下原配，躲不开情人，于是利用手机你来我往的撒谎遮掩。后来事情被老婆撞破，离婚了遇上了情妇以外的女人，好上了同居了，再重演一遍有老婆有情人的使劲浑身解数靠着谎言度日的日子，但是现在不止家里家外两个女人，离了婚的老婆瞒着他生下了留在肚子里的孩子报复他，而他出于责任，既要对情人负责，又要关照到同居女友的感受，还要时不时的为前妻儿子的事情奔忙一番，一个活在无数个借由手机编造的谎言重、同时良心未泯的男人，无疑是这个世界上悲剧的男人。

　　而这样一个做过一些坏事但本性纯良的角色，只能由长了一张“小人”脸又拥有一股善良气质的葛优来演了。

　　《手机》观后感(九)：隐私与谎言

　　在当今的时代，科技迅速发展，时代也在变化，大都市甚至小县城，小乡村里的人都学会了带着面具生活，把自己隐藏起来，手机成了必需品，我们的家庭成员里多了“手机”这个人，大多数人开始每天早晨醒来第一件事就是看手机，我不知道这样的时代究竟是在进步还是在倒退。手机在方便我们交流的同时，也给我们的生活带来了很大的影响。

　　手机里面隐藏着我们的隐私，冯小刚导演借助这个主题塑造了“严守一”这个形象，顺势探讨了人性阴暗的一面，影片中的严守一是一个电视节目的著名主持人，他在去电视台主持节目的时候把手机遗忘在了家里，这一个小小的失误却让他的妻子于文娟发现了他的“隐私”，也就是婚外情，剧情由此展开，妻子提出离婚，严守一原以为离婚以后的生活会变得轻松自由，但事实并非如此。

　　冯小刚导演脱离了以往的冯氏幽默，用简单的手法，有限的叙事剪辑，将这样的故事展现在我们面前，影片借费墨之口指出：你们的手机里藏满了秘密。而在现实世界里，谁的手机里没有秘密呢？

　　严守一在影片中说道，要想说真话，恐怕就得回到肢体语言时代了，在他的生活里，谎言已经离不开他，或者说，他已经离不开谎言了，他在于文娟的产房里接到沈雪的电话时，竟然毫不犹豫的说在开会，由此可见，撒谎已经成了他的习惯了。他告诉我们：时代在发展，人性却不一定。

　　冯小刚说，我还是想一如既往的深挖生活，甚至揭生活的伤疤。这是一部与现实高度接轨的影片，它让我们思考了很多，这样的影片，还是越多约好。

　　最后我想说的是，你手机里的隐私，藏好了吗？

　　《手机》观后感(十)：确实是个恐怖片

　　刘德华说一点没看出来《手机》是个喜剧，这可能和南北文化差异有关系，我们看粤语片很多笑点也笑不到。还有人说了这就是个恐怖片，还不建议少妇看。那就是强烈的代入感先把自己弄恐怖了，说明哥们就是个生活中的严守一。

　　那时确实奔着喜剧片的路子去看的《手机》，也看出了些有趣的片段。但总的感觉是本片和冯导“四字片名”时期的贺岁片不同。人要向前走，不想大变就得螺旋式上升。反正不能不上升，你在那儿原地踏步观众就腻歪了，早晚得把你抛弃。反正人总是有意识无意识的成长，改变。不是谁主观意志能够控制的。

　　严守一就是个自作自受的主儿，非得把安稳的生活折腾两下。所以这样的人适合当风流浪子，不适合成家立业。如果明白这个道理，一样的快意人生。可要是不知足，想两全其美就得看有没有这个本事和境遇了。我第二次看本片几乎没有笑出来过，这就是很多人的生活。防着编着，可是个累！

　　倒是范冰冰演的武月这次又让我注意了下，几次私下的哭泣博得了我的好感，这不是个普通为利的小三。就像她说的，不能什么都得不到。如果没有自己想要的那就图个利也比一无所有强！其实这叫现实。

　　（写于2009-03-10）