您当前的位置:首页  »  电影  »  剧情片  »  永生的海拉

永生的海拉  海瑞塔·拉克斯的不朽人生 海拉细胞的不死传奇(港台)

950人已评分
神作
9.0

主演:奥普拉·温弗瑞罗丝·伯恩芮妮·戈兹贝里西尔维娅·格雷丝·克里姆里德·伯尼鲁本·桑地亚哥-哈德森洛奇·卡罗尔罗杰·罗宾森安德莱内·列诺斯拜伦·詹宁斯雷格·E·凯蒂莱斯利·格塞斯

类型:剧情悬疑传记历史导演:乔治·乌尔夫 状态:正片 年份:2017 地区:美国 语言:英语 豆瓣ID:26838175热度:360 ℃ 时间:2024-08-15 14:42:43

简介:详情  故事根据Rebecca Skloot的纪实文学改编。标题人物Henrietta Lacks是上世纪五十年代一位身患癌症的黑人女性,1951年医学研究者非法从她身上获取了癌细胞,结果却引出了令人震惊的医学突破——不仅改...

温馨提示:[DVD:标准清晰版] [BD:高清无水印] [HD:高清版] [TS:抢先非清晰版] - 其中,BD和HD版本不太适合网速过慢的用户观看。

      故事根据Rebecca Skloot的纪实文学改编。标题人物Henrietta Lacks是上世纪五十年代一位身患癌症的黑人女性,1951年医学研究者非法从她身上获取了癌细胞,结果却引出了令人震惊的医学突破——不仅改变了许多人的命运,甚至改变了整个医学界。据称当时Henrietta Lacks的细胞被用来创造第一株「不死的」人体干细胞——在接受植入后的一个星期仍然存活  该剧的主人公是Henrietta Lacks的女儿Deborah Lacks(Oprah Winfrey),她试图理解一个自己从未见过的母亲,研究她与现代医学发展之间的奇特关联。剧情深刻揭露了医学界的傲慢、自大、种族、贫穷等问题,同时深入剖析「最不可能成为朋友的人」如何建立起「最深厚的友谊」。Rose Byrne扮演年轻女记者Rebecca Skloot,她正在调查Henrietta Lacks的故事及其「不死的」细胞。她与Henrietta的女儿、魅力非凡但性格复杂的Deborah建立了亲密友谊。  经过长达十多年的调查研究,Rebecca最终写出了著名的《Henrietta Lacks的不朽人生》(The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks)。这本书出版后立刻登上《纽约时报》畅销书排行榜,并且在榜单上停留了整整四年时间,影响力甚为深远。(cr 天涯小筑)
  • 头像
    CRISPR\/Cas9
    这部电影是对The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks这本书的具体演绎,我阅读原著的时候头脑中构建的图像就和电影里所呈现的毫无二致。然而电影有两个问题:首先它太戏剧化了,部分情节讲故事的感觉太严重,让人一看就觉得假,一看就觉得出戏。第二个问题是它对原著的改编不合理,有的地方过分忠实原著了,就像删去原著里面所有讨论的内容只留下故事来。这两个问题使得它有点像动态的书籍插图。

    然而ILHL的演绎还是非常成功的,虽然看起来导演对视觉语言的把握也是有点刻意、不自然。让我很惊讶的是,我不需要任何线索,看到人物一出场就能知道他是谁,并且这些角色的演绎和我阅读的时候所想象的完全一致。比如HeLa女士,这个演员简直就是从照片里走出来的。还有Deborra,完全把底层黑人妇女演活了,很难想象这是一个非科班出身的脱口秀主持人的表演。只是Oprah的口音有点怪怪的南方风格,或许美国北方黑人也这么说话?

    白院士说,ILHL的原著是“女性主义视角”,但电影更像是少数族裔文化视角。无论如何,本片作为一个非虚构作品的改编,还是相当成功的,虽远达不到经典的水平,也堪称佳作了。

    P.S. 白院士说原著既有女性主义视角,也有少数族裔视角。
  • 头像
    Eve-L
    I have to say that I was not moved at all. They seem to care about only money and kept going after financial compensations, not justice. Any family without a mother will have problems around it, no matter how the mother died or whether she turned into an immortal cell line or not. So save the pity. I wish the movie could educate more on the medical regulations back then and today. The movie did not detail on the drug tests they did on their mother or sister and should have spent more time on it instead of having Oprah showing off her ability of playing hysteric. These people have very little basic biology/medical knowledge and it can be extremely hard to teach them and make sure they stay objective about science and knowledge. They are after the money. They don't understand medicine or science. That's it.

    If no consent was required from patient back then, they cannot sue Johns Hopkins.
    If it's just about donating a little cancer tissue for research, I don't think, even today, the patient gets any specific financial compensation for that. It does not matter what your little biopsy turns out to be in 50 years or longer. I don't see a lot of other unhumane drug tests described in the movie. It's all about Oprah's emotions, not history or science.

    Oprah's performance is too dramatic. If the movie is about racism, then make it about racism. And that did not seem to be the center of the movie either.

    Johns Hopkins did mis-reported the name of the patient in the first place, and called it Helen Lane. (For quite a while during my research career, I thought it was Helen...) They should do something about it. And I feel sorry about it, too.

    When HBO first released the movie, I thought they were going to make a very objective documentary instead of this sh*t. Isn't it true that HBO is good at showing good documentaries? What happened to them wasting money on this...

    Just want to be fair from the perspective of a medical researcher. Please don't take anything personally.
本网站所有资源均收集于互联网,如有侵犯到您的权益,请即时联系我们删除
Copyright © 2011-2025  合作邮箱:ystousu@gmail.com  备案号: