最后的诱惑

首先，豆瓣简介如下： “布丽姬（琳达•费奥伦蒂诺 Linda Fiorentino 饰）的丈夫是一名毒贩，不过她比她的丈夫更“毒”。她乘丈夫不留意的时候，将他贩毒所得的巨款洗掠一空，携款从美国繁华的纽约市跑到了西班牙巴塞罗那郊区的一个小镇上去享受她的快乐人生。布丽姬看上了当地天真无暇的帅哥康奥尼尔，同时，另一位金发美女也看上了康奥尼尔。老谋深算的布丽姬设下一个又一个的圈套牢牢套住了康奥尼尔，将情敌打得落花流水。看来布丽姬的人生将继续在她的掌控中顺利展开。” 这个简介不知道谁写的，第一，根本没有女主和什么金发女郎情敌斗争的故事。。。胡说八道。。。两个版本都没有这些。。。第二，女主是在去芝加哥的路上停下了，因为没有汽油了，地点是 柏斯顿，距离芝加哥 10-12 小时的车程。。。 D9 加长版在25分钟后，大略增加了下面一些内容，蓝光暂时没有加长版。。。 1、办公室大约增加了2段，都是女主在做电话推销培训员工的情节，大概在于体现女主的强势性格。。。另外，和后面告诉男主如何从电话名单中，晒选被冷落的妻子，这个情节来互相呼应。。。 2、女主在汽车旅馆，独自抱着现金睡觉，以及收看有线电视花花公子后花屏的情节。。。估计是为了表示女主很孤独，以及她为啥有了性趣去勾引男主。。。 3、女主半夜看到街道外有汽车，红色的那辆。。。估计是表示男主的依恋？懒得想了。。。 4、女主在新地方订阅了纽约时报。。。 女主路怒症发作，对过路的老太太猛按喇叭。。。 女主的上司道歉男主骚扰了她，其实是故意，为了在办公室保持距离。。。 5、其他的几段，都是女主和男主的互动，包括在酒吧的简短聊天，以及半夜去中学的体育教室聊天做爱，还有男主早上起床后发现被拷在床头而女主出去了，等女主回来后，两人互相喷口水最后OOXX。。。 这里的一段估计是最长的，主要是表现男主是如何一步一步地迷恋上了女主，最后愿意为了她杀人。。。 总的来说，删减的都是些小细节，影响不是很大，但如果有了的话，对女主的人物形象塑造会更加充实，也能使得男主迷恋上她会显得更加真实可信。。。 如果你看的是蓝光，再能够看到我这篇补充的话，加长版可以不用看了。。。节省点时间。。。 7.0/10 分。女主和女主丈夫的表演都非常不错。 琳达·费奥伦蒂诺 Linda Fiorentino 1994 年，35岁的她以“黑寡妇”形象主演了《最后的诱惑》，而一举荣获纽约影评人协会及美国独立精神奖最佳女主角奖，并成为奥斯卡最佳女主角提名的一匹黑马。 1995 年，琳达被美国的《人物》杂志评为全球最漂亮的50位人物之一。

An American Neo-Noir thriller on the heels of BASIC INSTINCT (1992), trying to cash in on the splash of erotic charge, but story-wise John Dahl’s THE LAST SEDUCTIONechoes more of Lawrence Kasdan’s sweltering BODY HEAT (1981), meanwhile stoutly posits its focal point in its femme fatale Bridget Gregory (Fiorentino). On the spur of the moment (after being slapped by her doctor-in-training husband Clay), Bridget decamps from NYC with the $700,000 Clay (Pullman) has just obtained by selling stolen pharmaceutical cocaine to two drug dealers, and fetches up in a small town called Beston near Buffalo. Using an alias to lie low when her lawyer is seeking to facilitate a divorce from Clay, Bridget hooks up with a local man Mike (Berg) for sexual gratification and patly rebuffs the latter’s knowing-each-other-more overtures, unlike Kathleen Turner using her body to entice William Hurt into her husband-killing plan in BODY HEAT, here Bridget’s motive is purely carnal (at least initially), and there is a comical vibe oozing from Mike’s dorky frustration of trying to deepen their liaison to little avail, he is her sex toy and he well twigs that she is too smart, too dangerous for his own good, but when the sensual satisfaction is mutually transmitted, a man of Mike’s wit just cannot make any wise decision because they all tend to live in the wish-fulfillment that their sexual prowess can eventually tame the lioness both physically and mentally. But Mike is not a lion, he is just an ordinary Joe with average sexual allure and common codes of moral behavior. On the other hand, Bridget is not promiscuous in spite of her horny predisposition, Mike has remained as her only bedfellow under the circumstances, but when she needs someone to do away with Clay, who hires a private detective and is bent on having his doles back, she must wheedle a law-abiding Mike into a murderous vigilante, and this transitional arc is the meat of this erotic indie, and who would expect it is the deepest shame of homosexuality becomes the ultimate fillip in Bridget’s cunning scheme. The film is soft-core in sight but ingrained feminist on the strength of Steve Baranick’s sometimes incoherent (if Bridget simples leaves and starts anew somewhere, never resorts to a divorce and never contacts Clay again, there will be a very different story to be told)but piquantly subversive script albeit its male angle, and Linda Fiorentino shall be hallowed as one of the most iconic femmes fatales in the film-noir history, her lethal sex appeal is never feel contrived, or rehearsed to flaunt or conquer, but strangely spontaneous, she can talk about risqué stuff as if she is narrating a poem (in the scene where she manipulates the black private eye played by Bill Nunn) and never degrades her part into hokum, Bridget is lack of empathy, predatory, sly but also whip-smart, dominant and intuitively self-empowering, she is not a woman you want to be entangled with, but it doesn’t hurt to put her on a pedestal for being uncompromisingly true to herself. Peter Berg’s Mike is on a lesser note in terms of extraordinariness, an exceptional decision for him to convert to a career of directing blockbusters (HANCOCK 2008, BATTLESHIP 2012) and Mark Wahlberg vehicles. Bill Pullman is another humdinger here, poles away from his usual good-guy image, heis hilariously wackyand uncouthly sympatheticin this city-trash-versus-small-town-simpleton throw-down, for once, justice may not be proper served, but we all prefer this way!referential points: Dahl’s ROUNDERS (1998, 5.9/10); Paul Verhoeven's BASIC INSTINCT (1992, 7.0/10), Lawrence Kasdan'sBODY HEAT (1981, 7.9/10)