剧照
详细剧情
长篇影评
1 ) From Civilization through Barbarism to Savagery
E.B.Taylor, A famous anthropologist and sociologist in nineteenth century, maintained that culture evolved from the simple to the complex and that all societies passed through three basic stages of development: from savagery through barbarism to civilization. But in this movie, we see the opposite law.A group of children were shipwrecked and landed on an uninhabited island. This group of children must build their own society on the island. At first, There was in order. Everyone had division of labor, everyone could express their views, everyone had food to eat. But soon, everything was broken, and the thirst for power and food made the children fall apart.
There are two core figures in the film：Ralph and Jack.Ralph has knowledge and thought of a civilized world, he is more mature than the other children.Jack is a very attractive child. He has strong organizational skills. He leads the children in hunting, and leads everyone to sing when they breaks.
It is worth noting that almost all the actors in the movie are children.Children mean ignorance, innocence and simplicity.So, children’s society is closest to Hobbes's "state of nature”.
Ralph has wisdom from the civilized world of the future.He advocated cooperation and set up a democratic system. Everyone has the right to speak and establish rules and regulations to regulate people's behavior. But the rules he made are loose, and are not guaranteed by force. It is obviously not suitable for children's society, because they are children, few people can understand it.So Ralph was seen as a idealist.In contrast, Jack's tribe is more realistic.In that case, whoever can let everyone have meat to eat and help everyone fight against wild animals will become the leader.People followed Jack because of fear or hunger.Then a hierarchy is formed.As Hobbes pointed out that society was a group of people under an authority , each individual delivered natural rights to this authority to maintain peace and resist foreign aggression.
The conflict between Ralph and Jack is mainly institutional. In the early days, Ralph made many rules and regulations. This is also the result of modern civilization. Jack is tired of these constraints and finds that the rules of civilization cannot give everyone a substantial hunting. Help, so Jack chose to give up humanity and regain the animal nature. They killed Simon, Piggy, and pursued Ralph (both children who advocate democracy in the movie). At this time, they are no different from the wolves and can no longer be Belong to the ranks of people.
My major is archaeology, in daily learning, I learned the state of ancient society.In the Paleolithic age of hundreds of thousands of years ago, people were hunting and gathering for living.The state of that time was very similar to that in the movie.People couldn't imagine what cooperation would bring to them.The only thing people want is safety and food.So the man who is the strongest with the highest hunting skills became the leader.
Another focus in the film is the monster.It is because of the fear of this ultimate evil that people finally lose their mind.People started offering sacrifices to it.But such a monster has a good appearance only (in the film, which is figurative as the corpse of a pilot), and the truth of the "paper tiger" will be discovered by uncovering its skin. Unfortunately, the children are ignorant, and they can not admit the simplest truth. Children who know the truth are either accidentally killed as "monster" （Simon）or are killed as "wild animals"（Ralph）. In fact, the truth is the weapon that the rulers fear most.
This once again restore the real ancient society.The ruler establish his authority by mystifying some ordinary things and consolidate authority through a strict hierarchy.People who are not in the ruling elite have no right to know the truth.For example, in ancient Egypt, people could not see Pharaoh himself, because Pharaoh wanted people to believe he was God.The Shang Dynasty was the same.As we know, the Shang and Dynasty has a brilliant bronze civilization. In the same period, the exquisite bronzes were in sharp contrast with the rough and backward tools of production. The rulers with bronze casting technology monopolized the technology and raw material. They did not want to share the technology ,but set up a complete system for mystifying and sanctifying bronze to maintain this order.
This movie show us a battle of modern morality and primitive instinct. Violence and instinct are necessary. There is no need to talk about such superstructures as reason and democracy without satisfying the instinctive physiological needs.It takes thousands of years for people to walk into civilization, and it takes only one second to think about backing savagery.
The stupidity, blindness, and animalism that the boys concealed under the education were induced by the director.When human civilization faced the crisis of survival, it unveiled its hypocrisy. The conch symbolized the democratic order but it is so fragile in the face of violence and the desire to survive.
2 ) 孩子与恶（又是得自河合隼雄先生的启发）
《蝇王》观感
看了书，又去看电影。美国的新版看了几眼，还是喜欢英国旧版，尤其喜欢Piggy，他的抑扬顿挫又奶声奶气的英式英语，十分可爱。
眼看着自己喜欢的小孩，从惯被欺凌到被谋杀惨死，深深感到人性的恶。代表理性与秩序的Ralph有，反派角色Jack有，事实上在我们的人性深处都有，这种恶人人有份。这大概是《蝇王》想要表达的主要观点。
在生活中遇到另一种观点：把儿童想象成善。这是一种简单化的儿童观，分裂了儿童与成人，似乎善与恶两者各负责一半。读书会上次讨论艺术，有同学认为儿童画更有艺术性，大人要向孩子学习。这是同一种论调。画家刘老师对此的回应是否定的。
这样想的人，一旦发现恶在孩子身上也同样存在，就会180度转向另一种观点：人性如此之恶，应该寻找一些对策把它彻底消灭。从学校到社会，这会带来更大的恶：过度控制乃至极权专制。
听来一个故事：幼儿园，小班，老师发现有人偷偷把吃剩的饭菜倒在不该倒的地方，为了找出这个小孩，动员大家举报，还用糖果作为奖励，可是实在是查不出来。老师后来甚至想要调出监控，最终担心“面子”作罢。
道德洁癖吗？痒痒一定要抓，皮肤抓破也不要紧。
因为明知道有恶，就去大肆干涉孩子的行为，限制孩子的自由。这样做，无论抓到抓不到，都可能破坏孩子的世界。这其实还是不能正视孩子的世界中这个恶的存在，还是一味的想要孩子与善良、正义，与那些我们希望的美德在一起。
推荐一本书，河合隼雄的《孩子与恶》，这是一本把善与恶整合起来思考的书。他说孩子本来就是与恶一起成长的，恶也有建设性的作用。黑格尔说：“恶是从普遍的事物中切离出自己，是自我的个别化的过程。所以恶不仅是必然的，还是必须的。”
再推荐两部电影，都是孩子与恶的主题：《白丝带》和《蜂巢幽灵》。
3 ) “饿”？恶！
这群孩子们在荒岛上演绎了一个微缩的人类社会。我从不知道由一个个小天使一样的孩子来表现人类最极致的丑恶会如此令人胆寒。《蝇王》带给我的不论是视觉上、精神上还是心理上的震撼，都是极具冲击性的。我觉得，黑白电影的张力永远在于避免眼球被色彩的跳动分散注意力，从而使得我们能够静静思考。
民主、科学、理性、暴力这些字眼很抽象，所以，我想象不到它们碰撞的结果。我读过描写我国饥饿年代的书籍，也看过南非那个骨瘦如柴的小孩儿的图片。可那座荒岛上的十几个孩子，让我第一次知道，没有物质基础的文明多么脆弱，没有严格社会规则的人性多么丑恶。
过去，我不相信人有原罪。人刚刚生下来怎么会有罪？没来由地就犯了罪？我不懂。我总觉得有因有果，才是逻辑。可近些年来，青少年犯罪越来越趋于低龄化，几年前一岁半的小原原在电梯里被一个10岁的小女孩打成重伤的事件我还记忆犹新。著名的“李天一案”中一名警官接受采访时说“那几个犯了强奸罪的孩子根本不清楚自己犯了多大的错，也根本不懂法。开始的时候还问我‘警察叔叔，我什么时候能回家呀？’……”可那几个十几岁的少年就是做出了那样恐怖的事，他们什么都不懂，什么也不想的时候，选择了遵从本能，这一刻，我想到了野兽。
我也越来越迷茫， 是人性的缺失，才作恶？还是人性本恶？
4 ) 蝇群出现带头大哥这一过程涉及的几个关键字
1、孤岛+孩子+20世纪
孤岛，故事发生的地点。孩子，故事主体。20世纪，故事时间。
影片开头采用的是静景照片叙事方式，类似于放映PPT。如果观众能够留意，就会发现画面主要涉及到了两样东西：孩子+飞机。注意这些孩子出现的时候的背景配音，老师授课+教堂赞歌。这些孩子是20世纪接受正常培养的孩子，并没有什么不同。在这些片段最后，一架飞机坠落，而后镜头开始出现动景镜头，两个孩子出现在镜头里。
孩子：两组，A组出现穿白衬衣，学生打扮，思维来源偏向于常规课堂；B组穿黑色长袍，唱诗班打扮，思维来源偏向于基督教洗礼。对比《鲁滨逊》，人数生存年代相同，人数增多，且全部小男生。
孤岛：这是故事主题面对的生存环境，影片交代了他们来到这里的途径（飞机坠落），他们要做的就是离开则个岛屿。而且自始至终的途径都是寻找飞机（惯性思维，怎么来就怎么走），（戏剧性地是最后出现的不是飞行员，而是海军）。对比《鲁滨逊》，鲁滨逊所在的年代没有飞机，所以他等待的只能是海船，何况他也是坐船来的。
2、野猪+怪兽+火
野猪，火，生存的必需品。怪兽，生存面对的危险。
注意A组老大第一次杀野猪的时候没有下得去手，而B组老大一直说自己是猎人。
怪兽，其实没有真正出现，而是成为统治者夺权的一种工具。
3、社会新秩序之信仰
信仰，永远是统治一个世界最牛逼的手段。
按理来说，除去对信仰特别忠诚的人才会死心塌地地尊重图腾。影片中”海螺“就起了这么一个作用。
海螺是眼镜肥仔和A组老大海边发现的，由A组老大拥有，并把它作为图腾号令大家。图腾，这是一个种族，或者某组织特有的标志，或者信物。图腾，前提必须是被号令的所有人都对其有敬畏心理。反观影片，此处缺乏严谨，一个海螺的作用只是用于集结号，与其拿海螺做信物，不如拿肥仔的眼镜来得漂亮。
4、社会新秩序之民主决议
自人类出现，种族内部和种族外部会议必然一定是存在的，它有助于民主表决某些难以决定的涉及种族利益的事件取舍。为何会出现会议，因为有帮派。基于利益取舍的不同，帮派很容易就人类社会中存在。
请注意，影片的民主决议是自发性的，这些孩子未经培训就懂得信服多数人的决定，而且在影片以后的情节中，会议越来越复杂，出现了“投诚”“叛逃”。
5、社会新秩序之统治者和被统治者
这里的孩子只有20人左右，可能是导演没有顾忌统治者和被统治者出现的必然性，他只是简单地把孩子们划分为两部分，A组主张返回文明社会（强调规则），B组主张狩猎（偏向暴力）。夺权贯穿始终。
（更多可百度“斯坦福监狱实验）。
附件评价：
小演员们演得不是很好，有舞台剧那种可以夸张台词的倾向。整部电影的节奏把控也不算很好，高潮出现在模仿《精神病患者》于是谋杀的那一刻。离结局太远，最后部分推进偏于缓慢。
5 ) 除了理智，还需要计谋
在我看来，如果最后的军队没有出现，拉夫的结局也逃不开死。单枪匹马，踌躇不定的双胞胎也已经被Jack识破。再加上他不屑使用计谋，不愿伤人，不愿加入Jack行列，独自一人，又没有火和其他工具，即使Jack不杀，他也很难生存下去。
人性的恶如果只单单靠民主理性这样的字眼来约束大概是很难的，不然现代社会的秩序也不会出现法律，道德是锦上添花的作用。法律才是真正起作用的。所以如果拉夫能够利用这一点，情况会好很多。
刚开始的时候拉夫受到同伴的支持，做了团队的领导者。与之能匹敌的就是Jack，如果我是拉夫，我首先就是要的到Jack百分百的支持。Jack和其中几个男孩比较身强体壮，这时就可以把队伍划分为猎人组，后勤组，看火组等等，甚至可以让猎人组作为军队惩罚的作用。但同时为了抗衡猎人组的威力，拉夫可以加强大家回家的信念，展现自己之前在野生训练营训练过的优势，必要时也可以“制造”一些机会让团队更加信任自己，从而得到大家的肯定。
人性有美有恶，最重要的是如何引导。如果有更多方法及计谋，悲剧发生的机会会更小。
6 ) The rebel of Lucifer – my understanding of Lord of the Flies
Then what is it that disturbed me so much? Simply speaking, it is a question unanswered: Why Jack? Why did the children choose Jack instead of Ralph? You may explain it by elaborating on the evil tendency of the human soul, but besides it there must be something else that attracted the children who, although have not yet formed proper judgment between good and evil, have the natural ability to tell what they prefer. In a word, there must be something at which Jack was right while Ralph was wrong.
But what was it? At the beginning of the novel, when the two kids first met, Ralph was the more popular one: he was more handsome, a little bit bigger in size, and most importantly, he had the conch, the symbol of democratic power. His initial advantage against Jack was obvious, but Jack gradually took over. How? It is noticeable that Jack was a person with a strong desire to control, starting from the way he led the choir: even on a deserted island did he try to keep order and maintain control. After failing to become leader of the crowd, he quickly found himself a place as chief of the hunting team. As Ralph had noticed, Jack had “the voice of one who knew his own mind.” How about Ralph? According to Piggy, Ralph was “sensible”. What he wanted was to go back to the civilized society, but he put his only hope of rescue, the fire, under the control of Jack ("Ralph, I'll split up the choir--my hunters, that is--into groups, and we'll be responsible for keeping the fire going--"). Even after Jack’s negligence lost them a precious chance to be rescued, he still relied on Jack for the maintenance of the fire.
At first, Jack was all alone, for leisure was much more attractive for the boys than the fruitless effort of hunting. But Jack was determined “‘I went on,’ said Jack. ‘I let them go. I had to go on. I— ’”. He was driven by a desire to kill, though there was no need of it since they had enough fruit to eat. Why did he found himself so tiring a job as hunting when he could have been enjoying the sunshine and water as everybody else? He was definitely not just looking for something to do, but was again seeking control: the control of pigs, the control of food, the control of the hunting team, the control of the stone fortress, and most importantly, the control of life. While Ralph, after finishing the construction of the huts on the beach, what he did was mostly waiting: waiting for some passing ships or planes to take them home. He did call a number of meetings, but most of the meetings were fruitless for they could not reach a conclusion. Being a leader, Ralph always failed to keep his ground. He was furious at Jack’s negligence of the fire, but when Jack offered him the meat, he eagerly accepted. He was aware of the aggressiveness of Jack and the antagonism between him and Piggy, but was never determined to settle it, never determined to take sides. At last, he even forgot that he was the leader and had to be reminded by Piggy to regain his self-image.
The biggest difference between Jack and Ralph was their attitude towards life. For Ralph, he considered life as something that he himself as a child could not master, so he put the hope on others: on Jack who kept the fire, on the unknown adults who might come and take them home, thus losing control of his own life, putting his fate at the mercy of others. But Jack was quite different, he took the responsibility to hunt, to gather a group, to paint, to sing, to build a fortress all on himself, although he didn’t even have to. Instead of returning to the existing civilization, he was the one who tried to rebuild the civilization, though primitive, on his own.
During the process of gaining control, Jack revived the underlying evil force in his soul, which was true beyond denial. But the sense of “control”, once used on someone other than God, is always related to evil and sin. Think about Lucifer the seraphim who refused to bow before Adam. Once violating God’s will and seeking control of his own, the previous Angel of Light became Satan. But according to Paradise Lost by Milton, the wish to make his own judgment, to be his own savior, to look at the world with independent eye was so strong that Lucifer would rather sacrifice the heaven for it.
So was Adam who abandoned Eden for the forbidden fruit. Instead of obeying God, he chose the advice of Lucifer, just like the children who chose Jack instead of Ralph. It is rather interesting to notice that the forbidden fruit was the fruit on the tree of knowledge. It seemed that even ancient man had realized that knowledge is a dangerous thing: there is some knowledge that should never be obtained. It might not be a mere coincidence that the background of the novel Lord of the Flies was the third world war, a war triggered by nuclear weapon, the superlative development of human knowledge.
The writer seemed to imply that man is doomed to be destroyed: even the kids are taking the same route as their elders, gaining too much control on something that they are unable to rein. If this desire of power, of knowledge, of controlling one’s own fate is an inborn birthmark of human nature, then ever since Lucifer rebelled, since Adam went out of Eden, man is destined to die. But since it is a destiny of our own choice, not only of the children in the novel, not only of modern man, but of Adam and of Lucifer who could have enjoyed the heavenly peace so much desired, there might be something right about it that we could not yet understand.
环境造就恶魔
关于人，人性和男性永远与生俱来的恶与杀戮。（这一版比后来1990那一版好太多太多）
走进文明需要千年的迂回努力，走进荒蛮只需一秒的不假思索。
孤岛向来都是人性的试验场，在努力建立起的文明世界里成长起来的我们当然没办法感觉到大自然生存策略的残酷，但一旦一群人置身到遵从弱肉强食的丛林法则的极端环境下时会发什么现实和文学都已经无数次用血淋淋的事实证明了人是环境产物，群体意志确实存在，而为了对抗风险求生存人类什么事情都做得出。
很喜欢。
战争大环境下 孩子也都跟着疯了
小学时候读这本书时，懵懵懂懂被里面黑暗的力量所慑服。今天重温寒意仍在，关于成人社会的政治比拟好懂许多，但更大范畴其实仍旧有东西可供挖掘。原著魅力强大。这个版本的Piggy和Ralph成功过Jack, 节奏、气氛、演绎基本高度忠于原作。慢镜头爬上Captain惊愕脸庞时，绝境逢生的
8/10 迫不及待想看原著小说啊
开头交代事件背景时使用的停格摄影颇为前卫。原著还有影片所表达的，即对于人性的无奈。即便是天真不谙世事的孩子，在他们之中亦会形成战争，有人的地方就有群体，有群体便有野蛮和专制。掌握在少数人手里的理性与民主中将会被其取缔，这个小岛里确实有野兽，他们的内心就是。人性才是最为肮脏的东西
精彩呈现原著，理性和民主匍匐在野蛮与独裁的脚下。
成人才看得懂的儿童片
孩子们害怕莫须有的野兽，到头来真正的“野兽”却是在人性中潜伏着的兽性。
民主法制和独裁专制，谁给人以最迫切的富足和最触手可及的希望，谁就会拥有海量的追随者。
虽然Ralph代表皿煮和理性，但Piggy才是智慧和光明的象征。双胞胎是纯粹和纯洁？燃鹅看完后还是不造"Lord of the Flies"啥意思……（最后成年男子出现时想到空中杀手。。
对原著的完美改编，看片过程中多年前读的原著如抽丝剥茧般被回忆起来。有几段甚至超出了我的想象，例如第一次去山顶确认“野兽”的存在那一场景。
通往奴役之路，何其自然平坦！通往民主之路，何其曲折艰难。
开头不错
远胜于90版。
http://v.pptv.com/show/Oa2CAGjOPnzfXaE.html
据说戈尔丁很喜欢对原著的“简单化处理”。寓言的性质过强，反而看起来有点刻意了。视听上发明了“fake tracking”，用变焦镜头造成轨道的效果。最好的一个段落是Piggy死后拉尔夫奔逃的段落的画外音处理，高度心理化。时间、服装、光的衔接性很不好。