剛看完這部電影，本來下載好后發(fā)現(xiàn)沒有字幕，而唯一有字幕的版本的字幕組好像并沒有那么高的正確，為了保證自己完美的觀影體驗(yàn)，硬是忍了小半個(gè)月，直到有1080p版本和人人字幕組出現(xiàn)。

種族大團(tuán)圓可能達(dá)到了一個(gè)巔峰，印度、黑人、白人，通過種族歧視而歧視種族歧視這一觀點(diǎn)非常的棒，但其實(shí)也有點(diǎn)感覺真的需要如此表達(dá)政治正確的觀點(diǎn)嗎？ok，is fine！雖然最近的上氣令人不爽，但這是一個(gè)不錯(cuò)的電影。

這是一部不要深究只需要感受其中的愛情故事，當(dāng)然劇中也自己進(jìn)行了調(diào)侃，但這沒關(guān)系，看得很舒服，長(zhǎng)久都是男人在強(qiáng)權(quán)地位，通過這部電影讓男女平等的關(guān)系，其實(shí)并沒有難以接受，雖然我相信絕對(duì)不可能一個(gè)演講供稿人可以單獨(dú)、私密的和國(guó)務(wù)卿進(jìn)行親密交談以及完全的私人時(shí)間，并且國(guó)務(wù)卿團(tuán)隊(duì)愿意在影響資本方、合作方以及政治面貌前提下發(fā)生如此關(guān)系，但是

愿意愛無所不能，那么這就是一部好電影了。

很喜歡其中的一個(gè)橋段，最好朋友其實(shí)有著自己最討厭的宗教信仰和支持的黨派，但其實(shí)你一直都接受并且支持，life is fucking movie，enjoy it。

原諒我狗屁英語(yǔ)哈哈哈哈

Lord Jesus virgin Mary help me this movie is sooooo bad. Waste of my time and Charlize Theron’s beauty, also did she use up all her acting in Monster or what? No, it cant be. Mad Max was fine, Bombshell was fine, hell Tully was intriguing to some extent. Atomic blonde was not so well but damn she was hot in that. This politician character does not suit her at all, somehow even worse it magically did the impossible trick of diminishing her charisma which is worldly accepted as everglowing. and this male actor oh god did he bore the shit out of me…Im not even talking about looks, this guy is just so plainly unattractive and mediocore, not to mention the character itself being written to a stereotype of the cynical brilliant media writers. Men like him should not be legal to be in the same room with Charlize Theron. Charlize, woman, please, choose your scripts wisely, this movie truly hurt my vulnerable soul.

Charlotte Field （Charlize Theron）是一個(gè)才貌雙全的美國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)卿，而 Fred Flarsky （Seth Rogen）是一個(gè)懷才不遇的記者?？此苾蓚€(gè)沒有任何交集的人，命運(yùn)卻讓他們相遇，不，應(yīng)該說再次相遇。

4月17日 加拿大媒體首映

Charlotte16歲的時(shí)候曾經(jīng)作為Fred的保姆而照顧他，雖然比Fred僅僅大幾歲，但是少時(shí)的她就有大夢(mèng)想，她想要當(dāng)總統(tǒng)。而Fred不僅崇拜她，更加懂她。

因?yàn)楣竞喜?，F(xiàn)red不甘心為新的“壞老板”而賣命，于是辭職。他的好朋友Lance （O'Shea Jackson Jr.）為了讓他開心，帶他參加了一個(gè)party。在這個(gè)party上，F(xiàn)red意外的再次遇到他曾經(jīng)的夢(mèng)中情人Charlotte Field。而此時(shí)的她已不再是那個(gè)鄰家姐姐?，F(xiàn)在她是世界上最具有權(quán)利的女人之一，她舉手投足的優(yōu)雅，談吐之間的智慧讓所有人都拜倒在她石榴裙下。是的，時(shí)隔多年，他與她再次相遇了。

因?yàn)榭偨y(tǒng)想要進(jìn)軍影視界而放棄繼續(xù)任選總統(tǒng)，他推崇Charlotte當(dāng)任下一屆的總統(tǒng)。Charlotte當(dāng)然高興不已，但是她現(xiàn)在面對(duì)一個(gè)問題，她足夠智慧，足夠優(yōu)雅，足夠美麗，但是不夠幽默。而她現(xiàn)在急需要一個(gè)幫她寫演講稿的人，她想起了Fred。她看了Fred曾經(jīng)發(fā)表的文章，Charlotte覺得他是可用之才。他寫的文章辛辣，一針見血，直擊要害。最重要的是，他從小便認(rèn)識(shí)她，Charlotte更希望有一個(gè)了解她的人來幫她寫稿子。就這樣, Fred成了Charlotte隊(duì)伍中的一份子，跟著Charlotte滿世界奔跑，參加各種活動(dòng)。而為了能夠?qū)懗龈艽騽?dòng)人心的演講稿，F(xiàn)red提出詢問Charlotte各種私人的問題。比方說，她喜歡看什么電影、什么電視劇等。就這樣，朝夕相處下，一次次對(duì)話交流下，他們?nèi)站蒙榱?。兩個(gè)陷入愛情的人在激情褪去之后，終會(huì)面對(duì)一個(gè)問題 – 他們懸殊的身份如何被群眾們所接受？尤其是Charlotte是要參選總統(tǒng)的候選人，怎么可以向大眾告知她的男朋友是一個(gè)天天穿著彩色運(yùn)動(dòng)服，帶著HIP-HOP帽子，胡子滿臉的無名人士？

Charlotte想要Fred暫時(shí)隱瞞他們之間的關(guān)系，然后慢慢改變Fred的身份，讓他慢慢變成一個(gè)和她社會(huì)地位接近的人士?？墒荈red卻不愿接受，因?yàn)樗诤跽鎸?shí)性，他只考慮到了自己，他不想群眾接受一個(gè)不是真實(shí)的他。他放棄了她，而她也選擇了遵循自己夢(mèng)想的道路。

這畢竟是一個(gè)喜劇愛情電影，當(dāng)然故事會(huì)是一個(gè)完美的結(jié)局。Charlotte在參選過程中終于說出了總統(tǒng)與商人之間的交易，而也向群眾告知了她的男朋友就是Fred。而Fred也表示愿意做她背后的男人，只要能夠和她在一起。

Charlotte在影片最后成為了美國(guó)總統(tǒng)，一位受群眾支持的女總統(tǒng)。而Fred把自己的姓氏改成了Charlotte的姓氏，并成為輔助Charlotte“背后的男人?！?/p>

看到片尾，觀眾才會(huì)明白為什么片名叫做 LONG SHOT，因?yàn)楫?dāng)Charlotte終于愿意面對(duì)并且承認(rèn)對(duì)Fred的愛意時(shí)，F(xiàn)red的回答是，“從12歲時(shí)，我便已經(jīng)愛上了你“。多么漫長(zhǎng)的等待，多么奇妙的緣分。終于等到你，緣分終究讓我們走在一起。

此影片能夠每?jī)煞昼娋妥層^眾大笑一次，就好像劇情電影版的comedy show。Seth Rogen也將自己的幽默展現(xiàn)無遺，風(fēng)趣的臺(tái)詞讓人忍俊不禁。片中作為國(guó)務(wù)卿的Charlize Theron每件衣服與配飾都將一位女政治家的優(yōu)雅風(fēng)采展現(xiàn)的淋漓盡致。二人嫻熟的演技更是能夠抓住觀眾們的心。尤其是Charlize Theron特別具有女總統(tǒng)的范兒，一舉手一投足，都透露著女政治家的大氣和講究，著實(shí)演出了總統(tǒng)候選人的精髓 。值得一提的是，在很多細(xì)節(jié)中，此片都宣示了女權(quán)主義。影片的最后，Charlotte當(dāng)上了第一位美國(guó)總統(tǒng)，我相信這也是對(duì)未來女性社會(huì)地位的美好愿望。

此片不但在極具有政治氣息的“白宮”取景，更是去到不同國(guó)家，讓這部講述政治家的愛情故事變得更具有浪漫氣息。片中首首耳熟能詳?shù)慕?jīng)典音樂，一次次把故事烘托到高潮，讓觀眾心跳不已。

這兩個(gè)“不般配”的人最完美的詮釋了“愛情”這兩個(gè)字。再完美的人，不如一個(gè)懂你的人。雖然應(yīng)該堅(jiān)持自我，但是也會(huì)因?yàn)閻?，而愿意為?duì)方放下很多。很多時(shí)候在愛情的十字路口，不是不能舍棄自己的道路， 而是因?yàn)閻鄣貌粔?。而這Charlotte和Fred愿意為了對(duì)方，而犧牲自己最看重的東西。誰(shuí)說相愛的兩個(gè)人必須“平起平坐“，在愛情面前，我們都是普通的男人和女人。 此片讓我這個(gè)對(duì)愛情不抱希望的人再次點(diǎn)燃心中的火苗。 也許，也許未來的某天，我也能夠遇到那一個(gè)比我自己還懂我的人。人生一知己,足以慰風(fēng)塵。

哈哈，嘴炮無敵

這段太滿足幻想了

哈哈哈

可惜票房不好，剛剛蓋過budget，wiki上說可能是因?yàn)榫o隨復(fù)仇者聯(lián)盟最終篇上映導(dǎo)致的

However the film under performed, considering the strong test group data, and ended up losing an estimated $30 million dollars. Long Shot premiered one week after blockbuster Avengers: Endgame which may have led to the disappointing box office results.

夢(mèng)想的初衷無非是成為自己心中最好的自己，完成最有意義的一生。也就是說“夢(mèng)想”就是“成為……樣的自己”，既可以崇高耀眼，也可以平凡美好，甚至可以自我滿足?？沙３Ｓ腥嗽谧分稹皦?mèng)想”過程中忽略了身邊的風(fēng)景、犧牲了雙腳的步態(tài)、丟掉了最重要的“自己”。本片用一個(gè)現(xiàn)代美式童話故事探討了這個(gè)話題。

童話故事之妙在于，它的虛擬與美好，讓人輕松地把自己放在主人公的角色中，代入感地隨著主人公面對(duì)選擇，投影式地思考自己的人生。女主角夏洛特集美貌、能力、果敢、機(jī)遇于一身，女國(guó)務(wù)卿的身份讓她儼然一個(gè)漫威女超人的存在。而這樣的夏洛特沒能幸免地陷在把“做夢(mèng)”當(dāng)成“做自己”的人生誤會(huì)之中。

夏洛特的英雄夢(mèng)，竟突然間變得觸手可得，她陷入迷失也實(shí)在值得理解。畢竟面對(duì)成為總統(tǒng)的這種終極英雄夢(mèng)，沒有誰(shuí)會(huì)不熱血沸騰，特別是夏洛特這樣的英雄主義者。所以，當(dāng)面對(duì)現(xiàn)任總統(tǒng)“任性”的職業(yè)再規(guī)劃后，夏洛特和團(tuán)隊(duì)開始契合大眾、媒體、政客的認(rèn)知與口味，有計(jì)劃地向競(jìng)選下一任總統(tǒng)而發(fā)起進(jìn)攻。

為了贏得選票，夏洛特一方面改變言行舉止，改觀大眾對(duì)“性感”、“美女”職場(chǎng)偏見；另一方面意以促成一項(xiàng)環(huán)保議題來提高競(jìng)支持率。為此，團(tuán)隊(duì)需要一個(gè)撰稿人。于是，童話中拯救公主的騎士出場(chǎng)了。因言行激進(jìn)而失業(yè)的優(yōu)秀記者、與夏洛特有過一段年少糾葛的弗萊德，在團(tuán)隊(duì)擔(dān)憂的眼神中被吸納成為撰稿人。

果然，擔(dān)憂是有原因的。先不說弗萊德過于隨意、與政客不符的衣著舉止，單是他因不愿妥協(xié)修改協(xié)議條款而大鬧協(xié)談宴會(huì)就令團(tuán)隊(duì)頭疼不已。但也是這次沖突讓夏洛特反思“在有資格制定游戲規(guī)則之前，先遵守游戲規(guī)則”的妥協(xié)是否有背初衷。朝夕相處下，夏洛特少年時(shí)代的自我被喚醒，而兩人的情愫也悄悄蘇醒。

做自己，當(dāng)然不是放任自流，而是按照自己的原則與方式去肩負(fù)起所選擇角色的責(zé)任。頂著酒精與花妝的夏洛特能夠臨危受命成功地完成國(guó)際談判營(yíng)救出人質(zhì)，可見她對(duì)于責(zé)任感與使命感的自我要求，但恰是這份自我要求也成為利益對(duì)立方的要挾籌碼：在競(jìng)選結(jié)果面前，協(xié)議內(nèi)容、愛情對(duì)象是否都要成為犧牲品？

童話故事總有圓滿的結(jié)局，夏洛特做回了自己，也做圓了夢(mèng)想。但對(duì)于平凡人來說，意志堅(jiān)決地劃出一條通向夢(mèng)想的人生軌跡，不忘初心地勇敢前行就足以了不起了。至于是否真的能夠抵達(dá)夢(mèng)想，那真的不完全服從于主觀能動(dòng)。況且，同一個(gè)夢(mèng)想有那么多人在做，而自己只有自己才能做。如果在“做夢(mèng)”和“做自己”的中做一個(gè)選擇，那么我選擇“做自己”。

Since presently the traditional mid-range budgeted original adult rom-com is an endangered species in Hollywood, a warm welcome must be issued to Jonathan Levine’s LONG SHOT, his 7th feature film and a third collaboration with star Seth Rogen, after 50/50 (2011) and THE NIGHT BEFORE (2015).

Present day, Rogen plays liberalistic journalist Fred Flarsky, who rage-quits after his newspaper is bought by Parker Wembley (an almost unrecognizable Andy Serkis), a media mogul he doesn’t see eye to eye with. On a paralleled plot, Charlotte Field (Theron), is the high-flying U.S. Secretary of State, who seeks the current president’s endorsement to run for presidency in 2020. The seemingly unrelated two individuals are reunited in a black-tie fundraiser party and yes, they have a history, although to the embarrassment of Fred, he wishes he could erase the past.

After perusing his articles, Charlotte enrolls the jobless Fred to her retinue as a speech-writer, to the overt disagreement of her manager Maggie Millikin (June Diane Raphael, perfects the corny contrarian sidekick role with sublime élan and nuances) and they takes on a globe-trotting to seek assent of her progressive environment-preserving plans from all the leaders of the world. Levine and his screenwriters faithfully hew to the genre’s time-honored tropes to burnish their unorthodox romance: a bullet-flying insurrection in Manila timely enkindles their romantic passion, subsequently a scenery of aurora borealis during their spat deepens their feelings, a recreational use of MDMA to chill out paves the way for more hilarity when an urgent hostage crisis needs Charlotte’s arbitration while she is still jacked up. But setback seeps in before soon and after ructions about their different ideologies, a provisional break-up is unavoidable until a last-minute turnaround sets the record straight, and we have our first lady POTUS and FMOTUS.

While the story unfolds in a well-trodden path, the two leads are gamely enjoying their gender-swapping set-up with high spirits, on top of his usual alter ego of a laidback millennial, Rogen pleasurably suits up with a Teflon carapace in the face of all the disparaging remarks and humiliating gags (including a viral video of his ejaculation while masturbating in front of Charlotte’s public speech video) and bestirs himself to look upon and canoodle with his superior partner without any hint of male egoism, and that mission is eloquently accomplished. For Theron, her marvelousness of bringing about both a competent, principled politician and a woman falling in love with trepidation and oscillation is the fount of the movie’s strength and allure, to a point, a pungent base note wafts in after the movie finishes, perhaps, this wicked world doesn’t deserve her idealized embodiment of a female president, that is depressing.

Parodying the current states of affairs with open arms (Alexander Skarsg?rd risibly plays the young, eligible Prime Minister of Canada with a Francophone predisposition and a practiced smile; Bob Odenkirk’s TV actor-turned-president is a goofy laughing stock, although bad-mouthing Jennifer Aniston’s movie stardom is a sexist low blow, why not try Jon Hamm or Bryan Cranston for a change, I am sure these guys will not mind either), LONG SHOT is an enterprising wish-fulfillment on the topical dire political climate in America, one could only hope dreaming is not the only thing we can do.

referential entries: Levine’s 50/50 (2011, 7.5/10); Michael Showalter’s THE BIG SICK (2017, 6.9/10).