《高中》影评精选

　　《高中》是一部由弗雷德里克·怀斯曼执导，纪录片主演的一部美国类型的电影，特精心从网络上整理的一些观众的影评，希望对大家能有帮助。

　　《高中》精选点评：

　　●感觉是师范大学学生需要看的

　　●怀斯曼其实还算挺高产吧，不相信他会为拍摄先在高中呆个把月甚至半年。那么问题来了，在当时的机器条件下，他怎么能这么恣意如苍蝇般的拍特写？还是因为选定了段落化、随意化的表达，就在每天大量的素材里跳出最特写的一部分？

　　●disciplinarians enforcing rules that students rebel against, sex-ed by a disgusting gynecologist, a teacher body-shaming students in a fashion show, all while echos of MLK's death and the Vietnam war seep within the walls. Ends with a letter from an ex-student shipped to war, teacher proud of producing students for the war effort. Highly subjective

　　●怀斯曼第二部 他自己说前两部的时候自己还有目的性地讽刺和嵌入观点 关于所谓规矩关于教育机器关于越战的大背景 但刚真 高中做成这样还讽刺 中国学生要哭了。小片段是真的好看 老师是天然的台词写手。

　　●不能说他在镜头后面完全要把握一个教育机构的客观层面，虽然摄影机已尽可能地冲向所有人，但角度、时长和后期剪辑都还是透露导演个人的某些意趣。

　　●有人说：“那会儿剪辑技术什么的太贫乏了吧。”这傻逼是学广播电视编导的吧

　　●凝视的目光。

　　●The Dangling Conversation

　　●不喜欢仅仅是因为还没有远离高中生涯太远，以及不喜欢高中生各种愚蠢行为笑点。Yes, the institution is rigid but don't pretend we can do anything to change it. 但怀斯曼的镜头还是诗意的，尤其喜欢老师在教室放Simon & Garfunkel's The Dangling conversation

　　●大量特写镜头，有节奏感。“I don't try to be anything but subjective”，导演Wiseman不喜欢所谓cinema verite，认为interview is a "performance"。管制与反抗。

　　《高中》影评(一)：运转中的机构

　　怀斯曼经典纪录片《高中》(1968)记录了费城东北高中的师生互动，通过将家长座谈、性教育演讲、课堂讨论和教务惩戒等独立场景反映现代教育机构的权力运作模式。以直接电影手法、尤其是大量的局部特写作为社会学检验方式，貌似无序的剪辑实则通过独立场景的并置达到叙事的递进，从而不断深入教育权力手段的弊端在空间和时间维度的影响。

　　作为怀斯曼的早期作品之一，并不像提提卡蠢事那般给人以强烈的主观现实。提提卡像是怀斯曼站在精神病患者旁边说“嘿，看看这个人，是什么让他变成这般模样。”而高中一片怀斯曼则躲到了背后，蒙太奇剪辑带来的跳跃感也明显地淡化。在主题意涵，学校作为微观社会，是一个无时不刻不在运转的独立主体。类似于地球公转，家长老师属于地球（压抑，世俗，工作，疲惫，矛盾），孩子（反叛，突破，改革，性冲动，理想，自由，奉献，寻找）就像是金星。同时，太阳系又处在银河系中，银河系类似于美国社会。美国梦与个人梦，两极分化与种族歧视，大国主义与高中老师保守固执……那么，处于中心的太阳在此是什么？处于银河系中心的又是什么？

　　《高中》影评(二)：六十年代的美国与当下的中国

　　一部非常典型的直接介入社会，记录真实的纪录片，大量的特写镜头恰到好处地捕捉、呈现各路角色人物的表情动作和肢体语言。该片是对1968年美国高中教育和社会代际价值观念的展现，具有十分珍贵的文献价值，难怪本片入选了美国国家电影保护名单的目录。上世纪六十年代的美国主流价值观以及师长与青春期孩子之间的矛盾冲突与当下中国的现状可谓不谋而合。那时候的美国师长们仍旧抱持着传统的清教徒式的价值观，努力，节俭，尊重传统和秩序，希望自己的子女听话，尊敬长辈，与中国的大家长别无二致。而那时候的美国青少年们则是反叛的，但在师长所代表的权威面前同时也是怯懦的，仍旧对秩序和权威心存畏惧，在面对未来的人生抉择时，他们也在自己的理想与师长们的期许间徘徊纠结………然而，有意思的是，同时期的中国孩子们却正在听课闹革命，批完老师批校长，俨然走在了全世界的前列，成为欧洲青年争相模仿崇拜的对象，尽管是带着东方神秘主义的猎奇心理。相反，五十年后的中国却与五十年前的美国在代际文化差异方面遥相呼应起来，真不知道我们是滞后了世界五十年，还是自身倒退了五十年………

　　《高中》影评(三)：带有时代印记的中学

　　8.0，大量的特写、快推、大光圈镜头使得画面持续聚焦于局部（如身体的部位、物体的局部等），从而营造出一种脱离感，在这里，环境成了无关紧要的背景，而人物的行为、话语、精神状态以及人物之间的关系成为了展现的重点。作为1968年的纪录片，摄影机虽然仅仅聚焦于美国东北部一所高中，但依然能感受到社会性事件和时代性背景的凸显，譬如马丁·路德·金遇刺、越南战争、美苏两极太空竞赛等。惊讶于六十年代美国开放的性教育，不像中国的性教育一样，扭扭捏捏，好似见不得人。 相比周浩的《高三》，该片注重个体的呈现，而《高三》中大量的集体化镜头则更多注重集体的展示；在结构上，《高三》有一条明确的主线，即高三开学——高考结束——下一届高三生到来，形成一种开放式的解构；而《高中》的解构则较为随意、散乱；此外，相比《高中》这种直接电影作壁上观式的纪录，《高三》中的部分采访则使其带有真实电影的色彩；《高三》是倾注情感的关注，《高中》则是客观、漠然的纪录。 ps：如果你看过1975年梅索斯兄弟的《灰色花园》，你大概会记得梅索斯兄弟肩扛的摄像机，然后我相信你会和我一样疑惑，这里的怀斯曼是如何操作笨重的摄影机，使其看起来如此灵活、轻盈。

　　《高中》影评(四)：“搁置的对话，肤浅的叹息”

这个纪录片里面呈现的也是填鸭的教学，也是权威主义或者说威权主义的教育模式。但是填得比我们现在的高中还丰富多彩，填得不是围绕高考，而是围绕实际生活学习工作，是实际的或者说实用主义的为成年在做准备。 流水账：训话（服从权威以适应社会的模式），健身操，做饭，女士怎么穿对身材友好，打字，朗读，家庭中女性身份，男性身份，女性自我保护，舞会得体穿着，吊环练臂力，欣赏诗歌（老师朗诵得非常好，之后还播放了用这个谱点歌曲），处理学生纠纷，让学生适应班集体，尊重大人，大学毕业后计划工作还是深造，志愿的大学，社会现状尤其是经济现状，参与政治俱乐部，音乐视唱，反省教学体系，舞台表演活动，男性婚前教育，球类运动，模拟宇航员，模拟仪仗队，老师朗读关乎越南战争的信。 喜欢的话语，是里面高中生和家长老师谈志愿时候说的：“我没有因为没有去上大学而感觉内疚”，“这是我的人生”，“我觉得我想成为什么比他（父亲）渴望我成为什么更重要”。老师嘱咐的话也不错。 可一切都有种流水作业的感觉，即使是模式如此杂乱的高中日常生涯剪切，还是给人流水线的感觉，但是流水线上生产的是人，未来的成年男人与成年女人，黑白片加上无数特写，凑得老近的，似乎构成了对人的冒犯，所以怪怪的。或者说，文明人走向成年的最后一段路，父辈想灌进去的真的太多了。

老师朗读的诗，作者未知，文字是这样的：

《搁置的对话》

像是水彩静物，现在是傍晚时分

阳光通过花边窗帘照射进来

阴影洗过房间

我们坐着喝着我们的咖啡

冷漠地靠着，就像贝壳落在岸上一样

你能听到海洋的嚎叫

在搁置的对话和肤浅的叹息中

我们生命的边界

你读着你的艾米莉•狄金森，而我读着我的罗伯特•弗洛斯特

我们用书签标记位置，衡量我们失去了什么

像一首写得不好的诗，我们是无节奏的诗句

在切分的时间内，失去了节奏的对韵

搁置的对话，肤浅的叹息

是我们生命的界限

是的，我们谈论重要的事情，用必须说的话语

“分析是值得的吗？”

“戏剧真的死了吗？”

房间轻轻的褪色，我只能亲吻你的影子

我不能感受到你的手

你现在对我来说是个陌生人

迷失在搁置的对话中，和肤浅的叹息

在我们的生命边界

　　《高中》影评(五)：美国挖掘哪里好？就去费城东北高！

　　让我们荡起双桨，看看别人怎么讲~

　　Author: geprescott from Philadelphia 8 April 2003 （IMDB）

　　I attended Northeast High School shortly after the movie was filmed. It is a disturbingly accurate presentation. Mr. Wiseman's cinema verite approach has encapsulated that time and space in the way to which historical endeavors aspire, but rarely achieve. The black and white format, while most likely driven by technology and cost, perfectly underscores the bland, but far from sterile, environment. While no accounting, regardless of volume, objectivity or technical accuracy, can fully convey an experience, this film merits its standing as an excellent historical work.

　　I remember the staff and how they made me feel. From comments I have read here and elsewhere, the movie provides the right mix of raw material for the audience to experience what I did. Or, if they "just don't get it," like the staff at the school, they will see what the staff did when the movie was made. Only after viewers expressed what they saw did the cast become incensed with what they later recalled as deceptive, malicious, slanderous abuses of trust. One teacher remarked to my class that the cameras were equipped with secret mirrors, so they could surreptitiously capture other than what they appeared to be filming. The movie was banned from Philadelphia for a number of years. This was during the Cold War. I remember wondering if people in the Soviet Union were allowed to watch it, and if I would be arrested should I smuggle it into the city.

　　With pathetically few exceptions, the teachers and administrators were generally condescending, arbitrarily authoritative, and guided by their own biases. They cared little for the students as learners or human beings, were poorly qualified to communicate, let alone teach, and were surprisingly more ignorant of current events than most of the students.

　　There was one notable exception, and I wish Mr. Wiseman could have found a way to weave it into the film's cloth without betraying its honesty.

　　The dean of students, figuring prominently in the movie, known as "The Mean Dean" in my day, taught my 12th grade history class. I was fortunate not to have known him in the more familiar context. At least that's what my memory tells me. With his Frank Rizzo haircut, overwhelming physical presence, brutal manner of speech, and distinctive gait owing to severe WW2 injuries, he contrasted with all of the other social sciences teachers in every way.

　　At the start of the school year, he explained that his â？odeanâ？ alter ego would never enter the classroom and he held to that. He was honest about his opinions, never declining a straight question. He admitted what he didn't know or understand, and welcomed input from the class. He proudly related how the GI Bill allowed him to make a good life after his horrible experience in the war, his Corvette indulgence that was not popular with staff, and an almost childlike fascination with the complexity of the world. His unambiguous goal was to encourage the students to be skeptical of news and politics, to collect information from many sources, and to analyze and draw their own conclusions. It was one of the only classes in which we were taught to think for ourselves. The only textbook was a mandatory subｓｃｒｉｐｔion to the Sunday New York Times, which we were required to read. Class assignments consisted of our comments and analyses of articles and editorials. Grading was based entirely on quality of the analysis. He was excruciatingly critical of process, and completely oblivious to content. I donâ？Tt know how he felt about the late Justice, but for me William Brennan and my 12th grade history teacher are my two First Amendment icons. I agreed with almost none of his very clearly expressed opinions. Still, I remember this as the most liberal of any class in my public school education.

　　There was one other notable exception to the gray abyss of high school. The SPARC extracurricular program, and its associated magnet program curriculum for the tiny clique of "advanced placement" students, was one bright spot in the school district's otherwise unenviable history. But it was so academically and physically isolated from the school mainstream, I don't see how it could have been accurately integrated into this movie. The shame is that the excellent teachers and equipment afforded by the program were not available to the large majority of students.

　　The reading of the soldier's letter was a perfect closing, as it so perfectly distilled the utter ignorance of that generation of teachers and administrators. There has been some progress in the intervening 30+ years, but there has also been some backsliding. "High School" remains, sadly, a timely insight into the education system in this country.

　　以上评论版权归发言者所有，不代表草民观点~ FYI~ 分割线~~~~~~~~

　　好多美丽妹子的特写，真是小心肝儿推开波浪一个劲儿晃啊晃~~~