第一遍沒怎么認(rèn)真看，到第二段故事的時(shí)候被道格拉斯和拉娜迷的神魂顛倒，然后又從頭看了一遍，如果這段一個(gè)單獨(dú)的故事多好，如果他倆結(jié)局圓滿多好，嗚嗚嗚。

道格拉斯看著個(gè)子不高還腿短，但完全不影響他散發(fā)魅力啊，叼著筆認(rèn)真創(chuàng)作的時(shí)候，穿梭在一摞摞書本中的時(shí)候，靈感迸發(fā)滿臉欣喜的時(shí)候，拍攝時(shí)一絲不茍謹(jǐn)慎嚴(yán)肅的樣子，把野心寫在臉上，從容自信胸有成竹。聲音也好聽的不行，連著問拉娜幾個(gè)why那里蘇死了??脆弱與瘋狂共存在一個(gè)人身上真是太美妙了。

他不愛任何人，只愛創(chuàng)作，愛電影，愛制片。在拍恐怖片那里，他抱起那個(gè)尖叫的小女孩兒說你是我的第一個(gè)明星。演員，劇本，一切都是他的作品，他的試驗(yàn)。

中間他和小浪蹄子麗娜（麗娜也好美?。┚陀悬c(diǎn)苗頭，當(dāng)然這也是他的消遣。拉娜特納陷入愛情的樣子太可愛了，和我想象中的雍容華貴蛇蝎女人完全不一樣。想想她當(dāng)時(shí)咖位應(yīng)該挺高的，在片尾的致謝她是最后一個(gè)，但應(yīng)該是男主戲最多，拉娜真是個(gè)優(yōu)秀的女人。

面癱跳舞的樹懶美女長得好像金諾瓦克，神經(jīng)兮兮怪可愛的。我喜歡的格洛莉亞在這里是驚喜出現(xiàn)，她在這部里真的真的好像蔡明老師，不是說蔡明老師不好看，只是不得不承認(rèn)幽默質(zhì)真的很折美女氛圍

這兩位不知道還有沒有其他合作了，好虐的感情。

他是才華橫溢野心勃勃的知名制片人

她是初出茅廬演技生澀的小小演員

他在人群中一眼選中了她，培養(yǎng)她，包裝她，引導(dǎo)她，鼓勵(lì)她。

她卻日漸迷失在他的溫柔與熱情里。

她越來越愛表演，也越來越愛他，她告訴他，這愛意越濃，越讓她害怕。

從此他便知道了如何控制她。

他的成功了，她成為了萬眾矚目眾星捧月的大明星。

她逃離了派對，一如她當(dāng)年逃離了片場。

周圍的人，阿諛奉承她，嫉恨嘲諷她，羨慕拉攏她，只有那個(gè)人才知道她靈魂的模樣。

當(dāng)她手捧香檳欣喜若狂，想與他分享這一切榮耀時(shí)。

另一個(gè)女人出現(xiàn)了。

那一刻她才回想起他說過的話：

我要和你做一個(gè)試驗(yàn)，我們都會收益。

我不需要一個(gè)妻子，我需要的是一個(gè)巨星。

致我新的巨星，喬治亞，一位讓我驕傲萬分的巨星。

自始至終，他是她的星探，伯樂，導(dǎo)師，朋友。他在她的生命中扮演了很多角色，卻沒有一個(gè)叫做愛人。

年度十佳。明耐力導(dǎo)好萊塢小品、三段式閃回?cái)⑹?，關(guān)聯(lián)風(fēng)流女妖、玉女奇男與費(fèi)城故事、大玩家和三妻艷史。好萊塢編劇有關(guān)的原電影、類比改編劇本與好萊塢式結(jié)局。女星、想成為導(dǎo)演的編劇、制片人，原著作者四個(gè)切片的好萊塢。電影是個(gè)自私的東西，為了電影，要放棄你的女人，你的愛。

拉納特納崩潰駕車，好萊塢就是如此雷電交加，光影背后的意義就是如此南轅北轍。曾是大學(xué)教授，成了通俗西部片的編劇。最后本來拒絕再次合作的三人卻又選擇了再聽聽這個(gè)電影瘋子在四美分每分鐘的長途電話中滔滔不絕的的新的瘋狂的電影設(shè)想。影片就在這樣一種確定的不確定中戛然而止，但是對于有電影強(qiáng)力意志的人，這個(gè)故事肯定還沒有結(jié)束…原本道格拉斯的角色是要給蓋博演的，不過或許是因?yàn)榇似吧銬OS的關(guān)系，蓋博拒絕了。而老道的角色應(yīng)該是是DOS、奧胖和Val的混合體。拉納特納那個(gè)出身世家的二流醉鬼女演員的發(fā)跡史，顯然是以戴安娜·白瑞摩為原型的。迪克鮑維爾那個(gè)大學(xué)教授，后來成為暢銷書作家和好萊塢編劇的角色，據(jù)說是以北卡羅來納大學(xué)教授Paul Green為原型的，他有著類似的職業(yè)軌跡。

Unfolding as a triptychal recollection of a Hollywood bigwig producer Jonathan Shields (Douglas), Vincente Minnelli’s THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL is a quintessential, sharp-edged critique of the studio system’s problematic modus operandi, with an egocentric producer ruling the roost, who is always getting his own way to produce a movie by hook or by crook, creating clashes and dissensions with a director Fred Amiel (Sullivan), a movie star Georgia Lorrison (Turner) and a screenwriter James Lee Bartlow (Powell), respectively.

Through sequentially trifurcating streams of flashback, Jonathan’s unscrupulousness escalates in every stage, he betrays Amiel to produce the latter’s pet project with a more eminent director in the helm, since that is the terms for the studio to green-light the deal, it is an underhanded maneuver, but if Amiel’s credit is given a fuller acknowledgement, they might still maintain on speaking terms.

For Georgia, Jonathan is keen to make her a legitimate star, as he sees her mainstream appeal even though she might not fully realize that, getting wimped out before her breakout role accorded by him, Georgia is somewhat a damaged good desperately needs the nourishment and affirmation of romance to plough on, and Jonathan astutely seizes the opportunity, playing the prince charming to woo her during the production,he is patiently panders to all her whims, only to elicit the best performance of her, then, after the movie’s successful premier, a new star is rising, but a bogus romance fizzles out inevitably, as for the ilk like Jonathan, who has been in the glitterati since day one (he is the son of a notorious movie producer), going to the altar with a high-maintenance movie star is a crying clichéand he rather prefers another sort of female companion, the low-hanging fruit.

Finally, a good script for a producer is like honey for a ravenous bear, after successfully cajoling Bartlow, a university professor, into the Tinseltown to write for the film adaptation of his bestselling novel, Jonathan smells blood that James Lee’s southern belle wife Rosemary (Grahame), who is inconveniently tagging along, retards her husband’s writing process, so it doesn’t take him much seconds to ask a rakish matinee star, the Latin lover Gaucho (Roland, a pleasurable skirt-chaser) to sweep her off her feet, so that James Lee can be glued in front of his typewriter without her incessant interruptions, but when a catastrophe occurs, he has no guts to confess his complicity in it to James Lee, only to let up a Freudian slip in a later time, that closes the deal of their friendship.

Be that as it may, what makes the film stand out from the crowd is that it also elucidates a trenchant message, through the mediator Harry Pebbel (Pidgeon), a B-movie producer who gives Jonathan a crack in the business and later cunningly rides on his coattail as his business partner, that the careers of three of them, Amiel, Lorrison and Bartlow, embark on an easy ride after the bumpy start with Jonathan, which avows that although they all have been at the receiving end of some form of deception from Shields (but at the very least, he doesn’t leave them in the lurch or being blood-mindedly vengeful), it eventually stands them in good stead, indeed, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, which graces the film a topical sagacity that we are not always able to divine what is a blessing in disguise or a real hammer blow.

Notably winning 5 Oscars among its six nominations, the film still holds the record of the most win for a film is denied the top honors (neither BEST PICTURE nor BEST DIRECTOR), Gloria Grahame’s BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS victory looks like a fluke in retrospect, a stock impression of a shallow, corn-fed wife that doesn’t have enough screen-time to pack a more profound punch except for being completely hailed from a different planet from the rest of cast. In fact, it is Lana Turner who bowls audience over in a tailor-made character that makes the best of her swinging between self-destructive and heartbroken out of her usual poised glamor, only the first-billed star cannot humble herself to contend in the supporting actress category, as in those bygone days, star powers prevails over the size of a role.

The late Kirk Douglas, received his second Oscar nomination, is in his usual macho, forceful screen image and emotes grandly in the key scenes, facing off a devastated Turner, Shields is a ruthless go-getter whose monstrosity is rooted deeply in the fact that he is born into and fed off on the money-seeking business, there is no humility left in him to be empathetic to others, as his botched attempt as a director acutely attests,only the unquenchable appetite for fame and profit and a disproportionately deflated ego are his lifelong companion, though the former is a touch-and-go one. Supervised by Minnelli’s dexterity in the rein, and emblazoned by a streamlined mobility of the camera and David Raksin’s enchanting jazz standard theme song, THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL might rightly be Golden Age Hollywood’s best self-reflective melodrama of its own business, warts and all.

referential entries: Minnelli’s FATHER OF THE BRIDE (1950, 7.1/10); Robert Altman’s THE PLAYER (1992, 8.2/10).