狼族盟约

无疑，这部作品有太多的中国元素:)当我跟同学看到神秘蒙面侠客早雨中大斗一帮地皮时,就争相猜测这是那路棍法。

我先说是少林棍法，然后同学说是丐帮打狗棒法，突然回忆前段时间看的《神雕》中黄蓉使的那路，才恍然大悟的确是得丐帮真传棍法归棍法，里面让我感到中国情调最深的还是贵族们狩猎打狼那段，骑士和贵族小姐林中奔马的几十秒钟，配上激情洋溢的音乐，活生生就是香港古装武侠的片段，只不过人物换成金发贵族，地点移到了则法兰西。

所有这些，都让我亲切。

欧美电影加上中国情调已经不是奇闻，何况是动作电影，没几个中国武指恐怕难成气候。

但或许是法国与中国文化中有着太多的共通之处，这部电影的法国味道依然浓烈，欧洲的骑士与我们的侠客本是同一人群的不同称呼而已，虽然骑士是有官方身份的，而我们的侠客却没有身份限制，只要你有一身好武艺与一腔路见不平拔刀相助的热血，海角天涯处处为家，谁人奈我何？

这不，骑士最后一走就去了非洲。

开始的时候我们都以为里面有很多科幻、神怪的东西，到最后才发现它跟科幻根本搭不到边，反而还把历史演示得头头是到，让人不得不相信这是的确发生过的野史，虽然这么大的祸害在正史里只记录到一半就盖过了。

最后法国大革命的镜头还是有着强硬的收尾风格，而不只是“他们最后过着幸福的生活”。

另外一点就是宗教。

同样让我想起《达芬奇密码》，不同的是“达”用虚构的大阴谋考验了宗教的力量，而这部电影却更像是以为历史人物勇敢得揭露自己的缺点与负面，最后还是回归到自己的主张。

宗教是没有对错的，但凡心可变。

最后，我们还是幸福得生活着。

R.I.P. Émilie Dequenne (1981-2025), the brilliant Belgian and the recipient of Best Actress award at Cannes for her first acting gig in Dardenne brothers' Palme d'or winner ROSETTA, has sadly succumbed to a rare cancer at a young age of 43. Dequenne is endowed with a superb knack for disappearing into a role, making her performances feel both instinctually naturalistic and uninhibitedly expressive. After ROSETTA catapults her status as a promising young thespian, her follow-up, Christophe Gans' BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is an authentic Gallic blockbuster. A lush, genre-mashing period epic where Dequenne takes on a smaller but still intriguing part cannot be more different from the one in ROSETTA ROSETTA is a stripped-down, bare-bones exposé of underclass subsistence. It’s not trying to charm or entertain, but to make audience feel something real but also too close for comfort, regarding poverty, misery and struggle with no buffer between spectators in cushy seats and the relentless hardship on show. In short, a poverty porn in its most effective and acute fibers. The plot follows our titular heroine, a teenager living in a dreary caravan park with her alcoholic mother (Yernaux), scraping by on the edge of the society. Her sole hope is to find a stable job, and the only way to achieve that turns out to be a cruel zero-sum game, to heartlessly betray the kindness of Riquet (Rongione), a coworker who befriends her and throw him under the bus, especially after that cardinal scene where Rosetta hesitates while Riquet falls into the murky lake, flailing, in real danger of drowning. Rosetta's longer-than-it-is hesitation is brutal. It’s not cinematic suspense but ethical discomfort. The camera traces her face, and we can see the storm inside her: should she help him or not? And what’s devastating is that, for a few long seconds, she leans toward not. Not because she hates him, or because she’s evil, but because she’s desperate, beaten and exhausted. She knows that if he dies, the job at the waffle stand - the one lifeline she clings to - could be hers. This is one of the film’s most daring moves. The Dardennes refuse to protect Rosetta from her worst thoughts. They let her hover on the edge of some horrible thoughts: letting an innocent person die out of her personal economic desperation. It’s a moment that rips away any illusion of moral clarity. The world has taught Rosetta that survival is a ruthless game, that there is no room for compassion, only competition.But then she thinks better of it and rescues him. This action doesn't erase the hesitation. It doesn't redeem her in a neat way. But it does mark a crack in the hardened shell she's built around herself. It’s one of the few choices in the film that feels free - ungoverned by necessity, nor by the grim laws of a world where everything must be earned in pains. She chooses to save Riquet simply because, despite everything, a trace of moral instinct remains. That’s the genius of ROSETTA. It shows us that morality, especially in a world like that, is messy, costly, and sometimes even irrational. The fact that she nearly lets Riquet drown makes her human whereas the fact that she doesn’t makes her still worth rooting for. In a lesser film, this would be the redemptive climax. But Rosetta keeps going. It keeps grinding. The weight of survival doesn’t lift. But we, and Rosetta, are left with the memory of that decision - a moment when she could have been monstrous, and wasn’t. A reminder that even in the ugliest conditions, humanity clings on by its fingernails.The Dardennes’ approach is famously no-frills. Handheld cameras, natural lighting, and zero gloss over its milieu, a cinema-vérité style mixed with a stimulating guerrilla kinetics. The camera is almost invasive in how close it sticks to Rosetta, her face, her hands, her feet stomping through the mud. We barely get a second to breathe without being pulled into her smoldering rage and frustration of constantly getting the short end of the stick, her kept-to-herself tenacity, or the incessant pain from her period cramps. ROSETTA's focus on natural sound rather than a traditional score only adds to the Dardennes’ felicitous evocation of realism. The sound design focuses on the grating, everyday noises of Rosetta’s environs: the crunch of gravel under Rosetta’s boots, the droning noise of the factory where she briefly works, and the susurrus of the sylvan area where her digs are. No emotional manipulation through music - just the raw sounds from real life. There’s no color, no warmth. The film is washed out and gray. The caravan park itself feels like a cage - muddy, gray, and bleak. Even Rosetta herself looks drained of vitality, dressed in cheap, worn-out clothes. The Dardennes avoid any kind of aesthetic appeal because the film is meant to hit a raw nerve, exposing the underside of a developed Western country many folks refuse to acknowledge. Dequenne’s performance is all in the body language - tense shoulders, a clenched jaw, defensive eye contact. You can feel how much emotional energy it takes for Rosetta just to get through the day. She’s desperate to find stability, but also held back by her mother - a lush who cannot shake off her jones - who is as much a weight around her neck as the poverty they live in. Just when the film heads to a dismally tragic end, the Dardennes scores with a finale that is quietly devastating and, at the same time, subtly redemptive. Attempting ending her misery by turning on the gas, Rosetta strains to carry a gas canister - a heavy one - back to her trailer (for her, the bitter irony is that even suicide comes with a price tag). The canister is an obvious metaphor for the life-size burden she must grapple with. Then Riquet arrives on his moped, circling around her noisily, and she puts down the canister, finally cracks up. There’s the beginning of a tremor in her voice. She breathes heavily, perhaps for the first time in the whole film, and we can almost see her letting someone in.This ending is masterful for a few reasons. First, it’s ambiguous but emotionally clear. The film ends with an act of human decency. It signifies that even in a base, survivalist world, there might still be room for forgiveness, for solidarity, for connection. Secondly, it is a moral ending without being moralistic. In the end, Rosetta is not cheaply saved, but she pauses, and that pause is monumental. After 90 minutes of relentless motion, of trying to fix her life through sheer will, she finally stops. In that moment, something human is rekindled.It’s also important to recognize that the Dardennes are offering no easy solutions. Rosetta’s life won’t suddenly be all's well. But she’s no longer alone, and that small, stubborn act of mutual recognition with Riquet is enough to breathe life into a closing image that could otherwise have been hopeless. It tells us that while systems may fail, and institutions may be indifferent, individuals still have the power to break cycles - if only for a moment. It’s not a fairytale ending, but in the Dardennes' harsh universe, it might as well be a miracle.

If ROSETTA is hard-edged and minimalist, BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is maximalist in every possible way. Gans’s film is a wild mix of period drama, creature horror, mystery thriller, and political intrigue, set during the Age of Enlightenment. It’s loosely inspired by the real-life legend of the Beast of Gévaudan - a mysterious creature that terrorized the rural French region. The story follows Grégoire de Fronsac (Le Bihan), a naturalist and royal agent, who is sent by the King to investigate the atrocious, almost supernatural killings attributed to the mythic beast. Fronsac is accompanied by Mani (Dacascos), an American Indian from the Iroquois tribe who has become his blood brother. As the pair digs closer to the truth, if laboriously (as the film is 2 and a half hour long), in time they will discover that the beast is not a natural creature but a secretively fashioned and controlled weapon, part of a political conspiracy to undermine the crown and exploit the growing unrest in the country. Eventually, BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF comes through as a full-bore rampage on the clash between Enlightenment rationalism and religious superstition, as well as sending the sideswipes to the political manipulation of fear.Gans goes all-in on spectacle here. Lavish period costumes, huge set pieces, engaging fight scenes choreographed straight out of Hong Kong cinema, with slow-motion flips and swashbuckling flourishes. The creature itself is a blend of puppetry and animatronics (designed by Jim Henson's Creature Shop), with CGI-assisted effects to smooth out the discrepancies. The beast looks both organic and unnatural, which gives it a genuinely unsettling quality. The film also has a kind of dark fairy-tale atmosphere - lots of shadows, candlelight, and ominous fog rolling over the countryside.Dacascos is the film's biggest secret weapon. On paper, Mani seems to be the stoic "noble savage" trope pasted into a racist Europe for flair. But Dacascos dodges that trap by grounding him in simmering intensity and spiritual presence that consistently turns heads. He's a man of few words, but every gesture speaks volumes. His stillness is as commanding as his movement, which brings a grace and precision to Mani’s fight scenes that feel balletic, fluid but also grounded, almost ritualistic, hinting at a connection to an otherworldly universe - a worldview shaped by nature, balance, and ancestral knowledge. His combat style contrasts sharply with the baroque violence of those French barbarians and the snarling chaos of the beast. There’s a discipline to Mani’s presence, something elemental.What’s perhaps most impressive is that how much non-verbal work Dacascos does. Mani isn’t given a lot of dialogue, but he communicates with expressions. There’s a palpable sense of history and pain behind his eyes - this is a man who has lost his homeland, who walks in a foreign place that sees him as alien, and yet he carries himself with calm authority. In a story that often critiques the Enlightenment’s hypocrisies - its tendency to proclaim rational order while hiding grotesque violence - Mani stands in for another kind of wisdom. He represents a form of knowledge that isn't written in books or debated in salons. He knows the forest, he respects the dead, he moves like a ghost through a land that doesn’t know what to do with him.There’s also the unspoken commentary that the film slips in with Mani's harrowing death: the outsider, the one most in tune with nature, is the one to be sacrificed. The moment Fronsac sees Mani's corpse, any pretense of diplomacy or rational investigation drops away, marks a turn in the story toward unrestrained chaos and vengeance. Dequenne plays Marianne de Morangias, the daughter of a local aristocrat, the apple of Fronsac's eyes. It’s a supporting role, but Dequenne makes her presence felt, she’s controlled and subtle, dutifully playing a damsel in distress within the formal confines of nobility.Cassel, as Marianne's brother Jean-François, carries himself like a man who believes in his own superiority - social, physical, intellectual - but there’s something rotten underneath, something festering. Cassel leans into that decay with delicious intensity. His facial expressions shift rapidly - from charming to menacing, from amused to dead-eyed. He’s magnetic precisely because he’s so unpredictable. There's a hint of the dandy villain about him, but it's twisted further by a creeping sense of obsession - particularly in his scenes with Dequenne, where the presence of a one-sided attraction gives their dynamic a faintly gothic, almost incest-drama-meets-werewolf-movie kind of vibe.Jean-François’s backstory - his injury, his time abroad, his missing hand—only adds to the mythologized weight of the character. And when it’s revealed that he’s behind much of the carnage and fearmongering, Cassel drops the mask completely and revels in the character’s moral unraveling. In full villain mode, he’s Shakespearean: arrogant, bitter, and fully convinced of his own right to dominate. It’s an over-the-top performance in all the best ways, perfectly matched to the film’s high-pulp sensibility.Then there is Cassel's then partner in life, Bellucci, as Sylvia, the impossibly glamorous Italian courtesan who becomes romantically entangled with Fronsac. At first, she seems like a stock femme fatale - witchy, sensual, aloof. But Bellucci knows how to play with that archetype, and slowly we begin to suspect there’s more to Sylvia than silk and smoky glances. And sure enough - there is. It’s a fun reversal that repositions her not as the seduced, but as the one in control. Bellucci plays the double role - lover and agent - with icy cool. She doesn’t overplay the reveal; instead, she lets Sylvia’s intelligence telegraph through minimal gestures, loaded silences, and strategic manipulation. What’s particularly effective is that Sylvia never drops her mystique, even after her motivations are revealed. She’s enigmatic to the end, a conduit of both desire and disillusionment. Bellucci keeps the tone just right - seductive, slippery, always a half-step out of reach.On the debit side, Le Bihan is a bit of a mixed bag here. He’s the official lead, the rational Enlightenment-era man of science turned reluctant warrior. While he looks the part - ruggedly handsome, well-costumed, and physically up to the task - his performance doesn't always match the theatrical hijinks or charisma of his co-stars. He delivers his lines with clarity, but rarely with the emotional punch or tension that the stakes seem to demand. It’s not that he’s bad, just a bit bland. Thankfully, when Fronsac is thrusted to be an avenging force in the third act, Le Bihan gets to show some piss and vinegar, his grief becomes palpable, a killing spree and a one-to-one throw-down that follow give him a chance to step out of his moral limbo and comport himself as a legitimate, rousing action hero.After all, BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF is a rare example of cinematic excess that somehow works precisely because of its contradictions. It’s overstuffed, tonally chaotic, and often ridiculous, but also bold, visually arresting, and completely unafraid to take risks. A handsome revenue (grossing over $70 million in worldwide theatrical release) is a meritorious reward. referential entries: Joachim Lafosse's OUR CHILDREN (2012, 6.7/10); Albert Dupontel's SEE YOU UP THERE (2017, 7.7/10); Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne's THE PROMISE (1996, 8.0/10), TWO DAYS ONE NIGHT (2014, 8.6/10). Title: RosettaYear: 1999Genre: DramaCountry: Belgium, FranceLanguage: FrenchDirectors/Screenwriters: Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Luc DardenneComposer: Jean-Pierre CoccoCinematographer: Alain MarcoenEditor: Marie-Hélène DozoCast:Émilie DequenneFabrizio RongioneOlivier GourmetAnne YernauxBernard MarbaixFrédéric BodsonFlorian DelainRating: 8.1/10

English Title: Brotherhood of the WolfOriginal Title: Le pacte des loupsYear: 2001Genre: Action, Horror, Adventure, Mystery, DramaCountry: France Language: French, Italian, GermanDirector: Christophe GansScreenwriters: Stéphane Cabel, Christophe GansComposer: Joseph LoDucaCinematographer: Dan LaustsenEditors: Xavier Loutreuil, Sébastien Prangère, David WuCast:Samuel Le BihanMark Dacascos Vincent CasselÉmilie DequenneJérémie RenierMonica BellucciJean YanneÉdith ScobJean-François StéveninBernard Farcy Jacques PerrinHans MeyerPhilippe NahonVirginie DarmonJohan LeysenJean-Loup WolffNicolas VaudeMichel PuterflamBernard FressonEric PratAndré PenvernGaspard UllielRating: 7.4/10

《狼族盟约》。

9分。

我私下里认为包括这个片名的翻译在内，几乎所有汉译名都不精准。

克里斯多夫·甘斯编剧、导演，塞缪尔·勒·比汉、马克·达卡斯考斯、杰瑞米·雷乃、文森特·卡索、艾米莉·德奎恩、莫妮卡·贝鲁奇主演作品。

大咖云集。

剧本扎实。

而且一定要看151分钟的导演剪辑版，非常赞！

事实上，这并不完全是一个和狼族有关的故事，片中虽然马克饰演的印第安人马尼和狼群有着某种神秘的联系，但狼在本片中只是个简单被利用的道具而已。

而故事的本质是爱情、权谋与复仇。

可谓精彩极了。

塞缪尔饰演的皇家骑士法兰克和好友马尼奉命前往吉瓦岗地区捕杀怪兽，途中既有开明派人士热情接待，也有保守派多加阻拦。

法兰克博学多才，武艺高强，也风流倜傥。

野兽尚未捕杀，已和城中莫妮卡饰演的名妓多次偷欢，又和艾米莉饰演的伯爵女儿玛丽安纠缠不清。

彼时，恰好是法国大革命前夕，各方势力都在暗暗较劲。

所谓怪兽，自然也都是有人故意为之。

世上最可怕的是人。

唯有片中两位奇女子，实在是美艳动人！！！

最后，我还是坐在了这里，像故事的结尾一样，像那墙上黄昏的影子，像叙述人年迈的目光，正环顾着四周，摸索着情绪。

当我问自己，要说什么的时候，我想起了原因。

如今，再不能如同从前，两个人坐在长长的枕木上，谈了这样的话：等我积蓄够了钱，就找个月租便宜的房子，在僻静的地方悄悄地生活。

那是个阳光耀眼的下午，我蹲在公交站牌旁，在水泥的灰尘扑向鼻尖时，仿佛是来自从前的情形，那灰尘让我想起了自己的童年，当然，还有那天早晨。

我总觉得不该这样开始，更怕让自己想得更多。

怕自己愧疚。

听到敲门声时，望着远处的身影，我已养成习惯地垂着头。

听自己喃喃低语。

再有一个小时，又到明天了。

而那天早晨回旋在穹顶的光芒仍然为我所记着，像故事里人们聚在餐桌前闲谈哲学和艺术，还是青年的叙述人站了起来，给人们朗读着他刚想起的诗般。

那天早晨的光芒便这样不时从眼前一掠而过。

从我稚拙的言谈里。

也许笨拙和从来不曾灵敏过。

我发现自己就是这样。

有天早上，我花一块钱买了厚厚一叠《北京青年报》的旧报纸用来贴窗户，阳光照在上面时，看到了上面有篇金基德《弓》的影评。

那是二零零六年的春天，北方的寒风尚未过去。

当时，读影评让人感到像在受苦，以致我至今还很排斥那些格式。

所以，我如同自己在黑黢黢的屋子里看电影一样，老听到别人间的指责：你怎么看着看着又睡着了。

2011.8.4

有以下原因令你要看看2001年的《狼族盟约》：1. 如果你喜欢好莱坞的史诗式电影的话，片中有大片原野任你眼部驰骋，让你有《勇敢的心》的体会。

2. 如果你喜欢文艺片的话，片中有大量关于贵族的宫廷对话，足以填饱你对十八世纪中叶的宫廷文化的饥饿，使你会找到《圣女贞德》的感觉。

3. 如果你喜欢带有激情的场面来促进一下荷尔蒙，片中有意大利宝贝Monica Bellucci，也有萎靡的古代欧式妓院，让你回忆起《惊情四百年》的兴奋。

4. 如果你喜欢英雄主义和动作至上者，片中请来了香港的武指和剪接，恰到好处的慢镜头处理不但没有卖弄技术，反而会令你过足功夫瘾。

5. 如果你喜欢故事中有残缺的人物，片中的Vincent Cassel便是独臂者，可以勾起你对《独臂刀》系列的思念。

6. 如果你喜欢特技魔兽场面，片中电脑制作出一只硕大的怪兽，可媲美《风云雄霸天下》的火麒麟。

7. 如果你喜欢古代政治阴谋片，片中有法国大革命之前的宫廷阴谋，当然比《夜宴》要好看。

8. 如果你对狼或者种族主义话题有兴趣，片中有印地安人漂洋过海借助狼的力量侦察神秘谋杀案，相信你定会回忆起《与狼共舞》。

9. 如果你是环保主义者，印地安人马尼绝对是你最钟情的战友。

10. 如果你钟情爱情片，本片仍可满足你的需求，也有《神雕侠侣》小龙女被玷污那段的影子。

11. 如果你喜欢对抗好莱坞电影，本片也是一个例子，融合了以上10大元素并且让人大呼精彩，绝对是对好莱坞电影的一个反击。

本片为2001年法国十大卖座片第四名，并获得第27届凯撒奖最佳服装奖。

当然以上也可以是你不会去看《狼族盟约》的原因，反正如果我早知道是这样的话就不会去看。

由于此片同时向众多电影做出了“致敬”，因此它也只相当于一头美轮美奂的“四不像”。

2006年11月15日

很喜欢，也让人遗憾，这是一部含有大量顶级镜头的作品，许多构思细节场景让人喜欢让人惊叹让人凝望，更不用说绝赞的音乐。

但是！

可是！

可惜的打斗部分不伦不类，装逼指数破表，还有个就是影片前期就各种精彩，把后期给透支几乎殆尽，变得冗长，这点不够明智，就我认知的满分作品，前期铺垫大多枯燥，一个好故事需要先抑后扬，于高潮处落幕，不过有时也会想正式因为拖着这么冗长，大多数人都能感觉这部影片本身落寞不行的感觉，居然和片尾老帅哥从人群中走出来的落魄结局相呼应，由戏外呼应戏内，如果这么想，也算一个小亮点。

　　 给4星。

后半部给透支的有点厉害，有时候烂尾太长就不能说烂尾了，不仅仅只是收尾不好，而是拉低整个影片的层次感觉。

所以其实3.5星也许更合适。

令人惋惜！

143分钟剧场版和150分钟导演版的剧情差别从68分钟开始，杀了怪兽以后，导演版有在妓院的一段剧情，剧场版则跳过。

非常棒的电影！

画面精美！

剪接张弛有度，动作设计相当漂亮。

尤其是印第安人的武士这个角色，给人印象深刻！

商业动作片的典范！

法国大片总爱跟邪教 打交道，暗流1，2如此，此片也如此。

翻来覆去的就是强调人性的恶大于野兽的恶。

有点烦，另外也太长了点，好多地方不知所云。

为了避免剧透，我只说题外话。

故事发生在爆发法国大革命的三十多年之前，所以不难理解，此时的背景：罗马教廷，法国皇权以及不断发展壮大的新型贵族和资产阶级这三股势力之间的深刻矛盾。

本片里的主要角色几乎可以作为上述三种势力的agents，唯一显得另类的则是那个宛如小清新一般的印第安勇士，那淳朴的眼神，坚毅的表情，救死扶伤而又被人误解之后不屑于争辩的态度，干净利落的身手，独来独往又充满神秘的行为，他和男主角的关系恐怕不只是朋友那么简单。

其实作为从小被某种意识形态的历史观所灌输的人，我们可能从心底里认为或者说理解并支持着那些生活在社会底层的人们一定是遭受着地狱般的痛苦的说法，并且有理由去使用暴力的手段推翻这不平等的旧制度。

但是新的制度难道就能体现底层人们的全部意志么？

别做梦了。

作为生活在金字塔的最底层，那些人是麻木的，冷血的，无知的，是最容易被歪理邪说所煽动所迷惑的所利用的。

这也就不难解释，为什么每次变革中牺牲最多的是这种人，而分得到的利益最少的还是这种人，毋宁说他们的自身地位在任何暴力革命中都没有发生实质性的变化，作为工具的使命一旦完成，等待他们的就像那只剧中“野兽”一样的命运。

剧中反派好像说过，那只“野兽”是长生不死的，这好像也在暗示着什么。

尽量跳出带有自身阶级的深深烙印那种历史观，你是否会像我一样发现，A或B或C之间的矛盾，相似的说法就是利益冲突的时候，往往会寻找其agents,借由某种特定的带有鼓动性质的理由，拉大旗扯虎皮一般的堂而皇之的打击其对手，维护自己的利益。

想起来某人的话，原话记不得但大意是说：自由，有多少人假借汝之名而行而行恶之实。

这里“自由”两个字，我想可以用任何人类美好的欲望去替代。

打着高尚的名号，披着自由的外衣，利用宗教的手段，类似的排比句可以一直延伸。

下笔千言，离题万里，但终须一折，言归正传。

一部电影抑或是任何一部文学作品，最能吸引人的不是那些血雨腥风的恐怖情节，而是爱情的力量，让我们看到了光明和希望。

小小的电影装不下太多的内涵，但是爱情这个亘古不变的主题确实不断吸引着人去一探究竟。

否则，你怎么也理解不了剧中人物为什么会死而复生的奇迹（英文字幕中称作神迹）。

用爱情的力量可以战胜一切，虽然显得形而上学，但是至少我还是很饱受鼓舞。

很多人给的评分过低的原因是剧情显得过于拖沓冗长，这个我真心反对，对于速食或快餐主义盛行的今天，还有什么比娓娓道来，丝丝入扣的情节更能让浮躁的心沉静下来的呢。

写到这吧。

啊，《狼族盟约》……啊，莫妮卡·贝鲁奇……啊，文森特·卡索……一部长达两个半小时的冗长的电影（还不知道有没有剪过），因着他们俩，闪着七彩的礼花^^莫妮卡·贝鲁奇这个性感尤物，作为同性的我都无法抵挡她的魅力……用刀子划破男猪的胸膛然后舔那带血的刀，煽情妖冶到一塌糊涂啊……迅速地展开铁扇杀死那个疯婆子再用极快的速度收回衣服里，真是杀手杀手杀杀手……文森特·卡索……这个变态的阴鸷的脆弱的迷人的超级大反派霹雳大恶人……真是华丽丽地吸引眼球啊……假残疾、训练怪兽杀人、乱伦、强奸……让·弗朗索瓦真真当得上“变态”这个词……最后还以那样的死法向被他杀死的深爱的妹妹玛丽安倾诉爱意……男猪赢了又怎样……亲爱的玛丽安在地狱里陪的可是哥哥让……（好吧这是我的愿望，玛丽安最后被印第安治疗术救活了）死前和男猪的对话：让：玛丽安，看啊！

（然后把刀子拉过来戳到自己肚子上）男猪：玛丽安不在这里！

笨蛋（笨的是你）让：你让我们可以永远在一起了（从这句话知道，其实怪兽不怪兽死不死对让来说都没有意义，他从头到尾都只要玛丽安一个……华丽丽的乱伦啊……）然后死时那没有闭上的眼睛，看那眼神，销魂啊……记住了让·弗朗索瓦的同时也记住了他的扮演者：文森特·卡索……《不可撤销》《公寓》《伊丽莎白》《秘密雇员》《圣女贞德》《仇恨》《太保密码》《暗流》《快感，或小小的麻烦》……还有他让全世界男人仇恨的一点：他是莫妮卡·贝鲁奇的老公！

其实那个印第安人马尼也是个萌点，但他死得太早了ORZ……所以不提了可怜的孩子，你是好样的……啊……现在看电影都没法萌主角了……尽看配角……