欢迎安装高清版[一起看]电影APP
剧照
剧情介绍
天知道电影免费高清在线观看全集。
公园长凳、酒吧厕所、空屋废墟，纽约街头就是哈莉的家；只要一包白粉、一个针筒、一次注射，哈莉就可以上天堂。伊利亚的出现，为她无可救药的毒虫人生带来炙热光芒，然而血淋淋的窒息爱恋、无穷尽的毒品需求，耗损着两人世界，宛若急速冲向悬崖，狠狠坠地。爱与痛同源，没有模糊地带。这毁灭性的人生，唯有毒品可以证明自己存在。改编自女主角艾瑞儿荷姆斯的真实故事，导演萨弗迪兄弟在街头遇上无家可归的她，深受其戏剧化人生吸引，于是著手打造这部充满地下色彩与毒虫文化的电影。类纪录片的写实手法，古典与迷幻电音交相冲击，残酷而写实呈现一场致命爱恋。镜头从头到尾没有一丝喘息余地，被Indiewire 誉为是迷幻经典《梦之安魂曲》以来最好的一部类似题材影片。向日葵出人头地1990中途岛之战医生的假日蝙蝠侠：黑暗骑士崛起国语痛心疾首：泰拳真面目对我而言危险的他暗流2007星途叵测第二季国语丑女大翻身娚的一生订阅女友七仙女之勤奇梳化名门媳妇亡灵成成烽火之骑兵第一师贝拉的秘密相棒第5季侦探韩森失落的梦一眉道姑粤语双胞回声第一季恶夜凶狼与君重逢时于成龙树木之城野兽的青春火线之上三个女人兄弟(2017)爷们儿夏伯阳爱谁谁关山度若飞哆啦A梦大山版老大哥(加拿大版) 第三季深海侵略者阴阳打更人暴风前夜庭院深深致命24小时（国语版）
公园长凳、酒吧厕所、空屋废墟，纽约街头就是哈莉的家；只要一包白粉、一个针筒、一次注射，哈莉就可以上天堂。伊利亚的出现，为她无可救药的毒虫人生带来炙热光芒，然而血淋淋的窒息爱恋、无穷尽的毒品需求，耗损着两人世界，宛若急速冲向悬崖，狠狠坠地。爱与痛同源，没有模糊地带。这毁灭性的人生，唯有毒品可以证明自己存在。改编自女主角艾瑞儿荷姆斯的真实故事，导演萨弗迪兄弟在街头遇上无家可归的她，深受其戏剧化人生吸引，于是著手打造这部充满地下色彩与毒虫文化的电影。类纪录片的写实手法，古典与迷幻电音交相冲击，残酷而写实呈现一场致命爱恋。镜头从头到尾没有一丝喘息余地，被Indiewire 誉为是迷幻经典《梦之安魂曲》以来最好的一部类似题材影片。向日葵出人头地1990中途岛之战医生的假日蝙蝠侠：黑暗骑士崛起国语痛心疾首：泰拳真面目对我而言危险的他暗流2007星途叵测第二季国语丑女大翻身娚的一生订阅女友七仙女之勤奇梳化名门媳妇亡灵成成烽火之骑兵第一师贝拉的秘密相棒第5季侦探韩森失落的梦一眉道姑粤语双胞回声第一季恶夜凶狼与君重逢时于成龙树木之城野兽的青春火线之上三个女人兄弟(2017)爷们儿夏伯阳爱谁谁关山度若飞哆啦A梦大山版老大哥(加拿大版) 第三季深海侵略者阴阳打更人暴风前夜庭院深深致命24小时（国语版）
长篇影评
1 ) 天知道
“莲花”台风正在小心翼翼地刮过。
小时候，总以为台风就是从台湾刮起来的，直到初中上地理课时，才明白台风原是离台湾更远的洋面，升成的一股强大飓风气流，迅雷而狂奔。
《军中乐园》那暴风骤雨的时代早已远去，如同一场远去的横逆台风，但问题还在，最终何去何从，是自然走向还是人为走向，都有待时间验证……
2015、7、10
日据时期的1938年，少女珠兰被父母送到山间一处封闭的学校。她的来到，渐渐发现诸多离奇之事。
惊恐与不安，时时困扰着她。一个个鲜活的生命离她远去。
原来这儿只不过是一间日军通过活人实验的实验室。
韩国导演李海英的《京城学校：消失的少女们》（2015），画面唯美、安静，对人物的心理刻画也极为细腻。只是美少女们的结局，令人伤感。
历史总有千千结，七十年前的战争，总有诸多故事可以呈现。想必这也是日韩关系难以彻底改善的原因之一吧。
2015.7.26
本・萨弗迪、约书亚·萨弗迪兄弟俩的《天知道》（2014），一部彻头彻尾的迷茫影像，如片中14岁女孩佛里，被麦克和伊里亚这两个流浪毒男缠绕着，开始还有一个爱情痴情症的红衣男，但他望而退却了。
流浪、毒品和歇斯底里相连，这是如纽约这样大都市不能见光的公开秘密。
其细腻如惨淡地佛里割腕后的丝丝疼痛，更多的是内心深处的哀嚎。
电影获得第27届东京国际电影节3项大奖“最佳影片、最佳导演及最佳男演员”。
算是一部尽人事尽心力之作。
2015、9、13
2 ) drug story
Another film about junkies? That question almost inevitably follows one’s learning the subject of Josh and Benny Safdie’s New York-set drama “Heaven Knows What,” and its main implication is clear: heroin addiction is at once so limited and so overdone as a narrative premise that filmmakers approaching it need to have something new to say, or to show.
Watch Now
Unfortunately, the Safdies don’t. Their film is the latest in a long line of movies that seem to assume the milieu of addiction is justification enough for its existence. The result is a work that—like a whole sub-species of French films of the recent decades—fetishizes its own hyper-naturalistic visual style and performances (all but one by non-actors) while offering no original or striking insights into the world it portrays.
No doubt the film’s surface attractions and its core weaknesses both owe to its origins. Reportedly, the Safdies were researching a project in New York’s diamond district when they spotted a pretty young blonde who they assumed might be a Russian diamond worker. Turns out she was a heroin addict from New Jersey named Arielle Holmes who had a troubled romantic relationship with another addict named Ilya.
Fascinated by Holmes’ stories of her street life, the Safdies persuaded her to write an account of it, a manuscript that became the basis for their screenplay (co-written by Ronald Bronstein). With Holmes playing Harley, a character who apparently differs from herself in name only, the filmmakers shot in the neighborhoods she frequented using people she knew as secondary characters and hidden cameras to disguise their presence (a technique also employed in Oren Moverman’s forthcoming “Time Out of Mind,” about a New York homeless man).
The look, of course, is very close to that of a documentary, which raises the question: Why isn’t “Heaven Knows What” a documentary? If conveying the reality of junkie life was the main objective, that course might have been more productive. As in many other cases, turning real-life material into drama can produce an awkward hybrid: a film in which the reality is diluted by fictionalization, while the fiction is rendered thin and sometimes clichéd due to being shackled to its real-life origins.
So it is here. When we first see Harley, she’s in full hyperactive mode, threatening suicide to the long-haired, plainly doped-up Ilya (Caleb Landry Jones), who’s far more interested in the public computer he’s staring at. She’s so desperately in love that she wants to sacrifice her life for him. His groggy response: If you want to prove your love, go ahead and off yourself.
One gets the feeling this pathetic little melodrama among the drug-addled has been having a long run. Soon enough, though, Harley makes good on her morbid proposal, buying a razor at a bodega and cutting her wrist in a park with Ilya looking on. Whisked to a hospital, she’s left with only some nasty-looking stitches as proof of her love.
For a while thereafter, thankfully, Ilya disappears from her life and two other guys take his place. Skully (rapper Necro) is a burly dude in a baseball cap who offers to treat her well and help her out, though it seems like he might have other agendas as well. She, in any case, isn’t interested in being courted with kind behavior and rebuffs him.
Far more important is the relationship with Mike (Buddy Duress), who also seems to want to help her but is constantly exasperated by her neediness, unreliability and demands for both dope and credit. Unlike Skully, he evidences no romantic feelings for Harley—though he plainly despises Ilya, a point that becomes more important later in the story—but is nevertheless bound to her by their never-ending rounds of scoring, shooting up and finding places to crash.
Though the protagonists here end up in hospitals repeatedly, there are no doctors, therapists or social workers as characters. Nor are there parents, family members, non-junkie friends, police officers or similar. The film keeps its characters in a tightly circumscribed bubble of junkie-dom, and that’s one thing that makes it feel a bit phony, less a probing, realistic view of a complex milieu than one that partakes of the junkies’ own gauzy self-involvement as well as previous fictions’ oblique romanticizing of them.
Given the film’s relative weakness on the narrative level, its performances become all the more important, and here the news is largely good. For a first-timer, Holmes is amazingly assured and precise. Landry Jones’ mopey, narcissistic Ilya, meanwhile, is solid and convincing, though not as extraordinary as his turn in John Boorman’s “Queen and Country” earlier this year. The stand-out, though, is Buddy Duress’ Mike. Though it’s clear the reputed “street legend” is not an experienced actor, his work has a force and rough authenticity that make it edgily compelling, his mannerisms and vocal intonations sometimes recalling the young Elliott Gould.
A stand-out of another sort is the camerawork of Sean Price Williams. Using understated lighting, long lenses both outdoors and in close-quartered interiors, and near-constant re-framings, this gifted cinematographer turns in a bravura performance that fully realizes the naturalistic intent of the Safdies’ stylistic approach. That such verité-like verisimilitude can’t substitute for dramatic truth is an obvious truism, but Willliams’ sharp work offers its own elegant justifications.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/heaven-knows-what-2015
Watch Now
Unfortunately, the Safdies don’t. Their film is the latest in a long line of movies that seem to assume the milieu of addiction is justification enough for its existence. The result is a work that—like a whole sub-species of French films of the recent decades—fetishizes its own hyper-naturalistic visual style and performances (all but one by non-actors) while offering no original or striking insights into the world it portrays.
No doubt the film’s surface attractions and its core weaknesses both owe to its origins. Reportedly, the Safdies were researching a project in New York’s diamond district when they spotted a pretty young blonde who they assumed might be a Russian diamond worker. Turns out she was a heroin addict from New Jersey named Arielle Holmes who had a troubled romantic relationship with another addict named Ilya.
Fascinated by Holmes’ stories of her street life, the Safdies persuaded her to write an account of it, a manuscript that became the basis for their screenplay (co-written by Ronald Bronstein). With Holmes playing Harley, a character who apparently differs from herself in name only, the filmmakers shot in the neighborhoods she frequented using people she knew as secondary characters and hidden cameras to disguise their presence (a technique also employed in Oren Moverman’s forthcoming “Time Out of Mind,” about a New York homeless man).
The look, of course, is very close to that of a documentary, which raises the question: Why isn’t “Heaven Knows What” a documentary? If conveying the reality of junkie life was the main objective, that course might have been more productive. As in many other cases, turning real-life material into drama can produce an awkward hybrid: a film in which the reality is diluted by fictionalization, while the fiction is rendered thin and sometimes clichéd due to being shackled to its real-life origins.
So it is here. When we first see Harley, she’s in full hyperactive mode, threatening suicide to the long-haired, plainly doped-up Ilya (Caleb Landry Jones), who’s far more interested in the public computer he’s staring at. She’s so desperately in love that she wants to sacrifice her life for him. His groggy response: If you want to prove your love, go ahead and off yourself.
One gets the feeling this pathetic little melodrama among the drug-addled has been having a long run. Soon enough, though, Harley makes good on her morbid proposal, buying a razor at a bodega and cutting her wrist in a park with Ilya looking on. Whisked to a hospital, she’s left with only some nasty-looking stitches as proof of her love.
For a while thereafter, thankfully, Ilya disappears from her life and two other guys take his place. Skully (rapper Necro) is a burly dude in a baseball cap who offers to treat her well and help her out, though it seems like he might have other agendas as well. She, in any case, isn’t interested in being courted with kind behavior and rebuffs him.
Far more important is the relationship with Mike (Buddy Duress), who also seems to want to help her but is constantly exasperated by her neediness, unreliability and demands for both dope and credit. Unlike Skully, he evidences no romantic feelings for Harley—though he plainly despises Ilya, a point that becomes more important later in the story—but is nevertheless bound to her by their never-ending rounds of scoring, shooting up and finding places to crash.
Though the protagonists here end up in hospitals repeatedly, there are no doctors, therapists or social workers as characters. Nor are there parents, family members, non-junkie friends, police officers or similar. The film keeps its characters in a tightly circumscribed bubble of junkie-dom, and that’s one thing that makes it feel a bit phony, less a probing, realistic view of a complex milieu than one that partakes of the junkies’ own gauzy self-involvement as well as previous fictions’ oblique romanticizing of them.
Given the film’s relative weakness on the narrative level, its performances become all the more important, and here the news is largely good. For a first-timer, Holmes is amazingly assured and precise. Landry Jones’ mopey, narcissistic Ilya, meanwhile, is solid and convincing, though not as extraordinary as his turn in John Boorman’s “Queen and Country” earlier this year. The stand-out, though, is Buddy Duress’ Mike. Though it’s clear the reputed “street legend” is not an experienced actor, his work has a force and rough authenticity that make it edgily compelling, his mannerisms and vocal intonations sometimes recalling the young Elliott Gould.
A stand-out of another sort is the camerawork of Sean Price Williams. Using understated lighting, long lenses both outdoors and in close-quartered interiors, and near-constant re-framings, this gifted cinematographer turns in a bravura performance that fully realizes the naturalistic intent of the Safdies’ stylistic approach. That such verité-like verisimilitude can’t substitute for dramatic truth is an obvious truism, but Willliams’ sharp work offers its own elegant justifications.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/heaven-knows-what-2015
3 ) 底层的美国人，过得的确不堪，好在他们有医疗保障，天朝如何？
底层的美国人，过得的确不堪，好在他们有医疗保障，天朝如何？美国低收入家庭和穷人不少，在一些低收入家庭和穷人没有医疗保险的时期，洛杉矶县有条规定，当一个人因病或意外事故生命有危险时，任何医院的急诊室不准将病患拒之门外，不管这位病患有钱没有钱。如果医院要先收钱后救人，那免不了是要吃官司的。穷人患重症或要命的事，医院可以先把抢救和住院的费用记上账，如果病患真的是低收入而无力支付医疗费用账单，这些费用就由医院和病患协商，看看病患到底能支付多少，然后再决定交多少钱。
4 ) 烟花照亮纽约蝼蚁
《天知道》根据女主Arielle Holmes的真实经历改编，讲述吸毒成瘾的她流落纽约街头的故事。关于吸毒人群的电影有很多，本片在情节上并没有太大新意，但是它的呈现方式却极具张力，影像粗砺，配乐迷幻，写实的同时又自成风格。
Arielle Holmes饰演的Harley性格火爆，嗓音粗哑，一双失神的三白眼让人一看就怀疑是吸毒者。这样一个现实中见了会绕道走的角色，在片中却神奇地吸引观众进入她的世界，跟随她四处漂泊，喝酒、吸毒、乞讨、偷窃，还有跟反复无常的男友Ilya相爱相杀。影片没有交代任何背景，各色人物走马灯般在Harley身边出现，消失，再出现。喧嚣冷漠的都市，一群蝼蚁醉生梦死，他们是如何一步步沦落至此的？这不重要，过去将来都不重要，对蝼蚁来说，重要的只有当下——今朝有酒今朝醉，明日愁来明日愁。
全片最爱的一个镜头：Ilya把情敌Mike送给Harley的手机抢过来掷向空中，手机划过夜空，在天上绽放出一朵巨大的烟花。
那一刻，所有外在都褪去，他俩相爱着，脸上有神圣的光。
几个印象深刻的镜头：
Harley自杀被送到医院后一段4分钟的长镜头，令人焦虑的电子乐遮盖对白，气氛紧张、诡谲；
Ilya捡了件里子破了的皮衣，Harley默默揽过来，掏出针线盒，用颤抖的手开始穿针；
Harley和Mike走在纽约街头，听Mike吹牛，长焦镜头，配乐是电子德彪西；
Harley死缠烂打向Mike要到4袋粉，一次性嗨完后靠墙看着恐怖片昏昏欲睡；
结尾蜡烛倾倒，同时响起影片开头的电子乐。
5 ) 《天知道》，重新定义之后的真实感与代入感
Ruben Östlund携《自由广场》(The Square)摘得刚结束的第70届戛纳电影节主竞赛单元金棕榈奖。荧幕场刊给出了2.7的分数，低于排行第一的《无爱可诉》(Нелюбовь)，最后突出重围的《你从未在此》(You Were Never Really Here)，与Todd Haynes的《寂静中的惊奇》(Wonderstruck)持平，并列第三。
《无爱可诉》试图将镜头对焦于俄罗斯中产阶级现状，通过一出亲子关系的悲情戏投射于莫斯科阴郁且冷漠的普通家庭。《自由广场》则是对中产知识分子的讽刺：主人公Christian在影片中发生的桥段来自于身边朋友的生活，身份为当代艺术博物馆策展人的他在其中自嘲又自解，化解着内心的存在主义危机。《你从未在此》是我在将来的半年内最期待看到的影片，不仅仅是因为久未登场的Joaquin Phoenix（三年前连续轰炸的《她》(Her),《性本恶》(Inherent Vice)让我看腻最近又有些想念他），还有曾带着《凯文怎么了》(We Need To Talk About Kevin)强势回归大众视野的英国女导演Lynne Ramsay，此去一别，又是六年……
当然，最令人觉得兴趣盎然是Safdie兄弟的《好时光》(Good Time)，荧幕场刊2.6分，风格延续前作《天知道》(Heaven Knows What)，代入感强烈的碰撞在街头，心碎又满怀希望。
《天知道》将镜头对准纽约城市街头海洛因上瘾的年轻女孩Harley(Arielle Holmes饰演，她也是剧本的原创作者……一个有故事的girl?)，她深爱着自己的前男友Ilya并在注射海洛因的情绪诱导之后不惜为其当街割腕。出院后彻彻底底成为了一个接头流浪汉，在街边乞讨，用偷骗来的钱消费毒品与酒精……影片在结尾并没有对剧中出现的所有或好或坏的问题给出解决方案，没有正确错误的主观判断。兜兜转转回到了片子开头时候的原点，就像其中瘾君子的生活一样，找不到出路。
《天知道》的重要意义在于它如此真实的还原了一场令人心碎的不愉快经历，并无关于故事背景与未来发展，这一切都是当下的。也是因为Ben Safdie如此注重故事的真实感与社会性，在观赏电影的96分钟里，你会感觉Ilya与Harley都在触手可及的生活中，不断的与他们擦肩而过。我们一同成为了镜头背后的“观察者”，这一身份本身的意义就是不带有价值观处理的功能的。深焦、近景、手持的特写、快速移动的模糊背景……就这样进入了社会边缘人的生活，会有些许不适，会因为打斗而坐立不安，闭上眼睛不去看针管进入皮肤的尽头，同时又在怀疑着自由与社会制度共存的可能性——它们能够达到某种平衡吗？
值得一提的是，独立音乐人Ariel Pink用自己敏锐的观察力协助影像，为电影音乐的处理提供了一种全新的方法：全景式、电子化，本身就像极了一款听觉LSD。Arielle Holmes作为影片文本的原本创作者，自己演出自己的故事，本身也是Ben Safdie及整个创作团队对于作者性的尊重。《天知道》的出现重新定义了在荧幕前的我们与影像可以保持的距离，让我们沉浸在寻常生活体会不到的热烈中，如此直接和真实。
另：推荐Ariel Pink的专辑Pom Pom，惹人喜爱。
![]()
《无爱可诉》试图将镜头对焦于俄罗斯中产阶级现状，通过一出亲子关系的悲情戏投射于莫斯科阴郁且冷漠的普通家庭。《自由广场》则是对中产知识分子的讽刺：主人公Christian在影片中发生的桥段来自于身边朋友的生活，身份为当代艺术博物馆策展人的他在其中自嘲又自解，化解着内心的存在主义危机。《你从未在此》是我在将来的半年内最期待看到的影片，不仅仅是因为久未登场的Joaquin Phoenix（三年前连续轰炸的《她》(Her),《性本恶》(Inherent Vice)让我看腻最近又有些想念他），还有曾带着《凯文怎么了》(We Need To Talk About Kevin)强势回归大众视野的英国女导演Lynne Ramsay，此去一别，又是六年……
当然，最令人觉得兴趣盎然是Safdie兄弟的《好时光》(Good Time)，荧幕场刊2.6分，风格延续前作《天知道》(Heaven Knows What)，代入感强烈的碰撞在街头，心碎又满怀希望。
《天知道》将镜头对准纽约城市街头海洛因上瘾的年轻女孩Harley(Arielle Holmes饰演，她也是剧本的原创作者……一个有故事的girl?)，她深爱着自己的前男友Ilya并在注射海洛因的情绪诱导之后不惜为其当街割腕。出院后彻彻底底成为了一个接头流浪汉，在街边乞讨，用偷骗来的钱消费毒品与酒精……影片在结尾并没有对剧中出现的所有或好或坏的问题给出解决方案，没有正确错误的主观判断。兜兜转转回到了片子开头时候的原点，就像其中瘾君子的生活一样，找不到出路。
《天知道》的重要意义在于它如此真实的还原了一场令人心碎的不愉快经历，并无关于故事背景与未来发展，这一切都是当下的。也是因为Ben Safdie如此注重故事的真实感与社会性，在观赏电影的96分钟里，你会感觉Ilya与Harley都在触手可及的生活中，不断的与他们擦肩而过。我们一同成为了镜头背后的“观察者”，这一身份本身的意义就是不带有价值观处理的功能的。深焦、近景、手持的特写、快速移动的模糊背景……就这样进入了社会边缘人的生活，会有些许不适，会因为打斗而坐立不安，闭上眼睛不去看针管进入皮肤的尽头，同时又在怀疑着自由与社会制度共存的可能性——它们能够达到某种平衡吗？
值得一提的是，独立音乐人Ariel Pink用自己敏锐的观察力协助影像，为电影音乐的处理提供了一种全新的方法：全景式、电子化，本身就像极了一款听觉LSD。Arielle Holmes作为影片文本的原本创作者，自己演出自己的故事，本身也是Ben Safdie及整个创作团队对于作者性的尊重。《天知道》的出现重新定义了在荧幕前的我们与影像可以保持的距离，让我们沉浸在寻常生活体会不到的热烈中，如此直接和真实。
另：推荐Ariel Pink的专辑Pom Pom，惹人喜爱。
找到我。
6 ) 65
曾经某刻，在谈及美国电影的意识形态之时，我指出了三个国家的电影人未曾拍出真实影像。但此处的“真实”仅就电影还原现实这一新现实主义所标示出的道路而言；因而招致了大家的误解，将我认定为一位口不择言之人。实则是冤枉。
此时此刻，《天知道》给了我一个辩白的机会，同时也提醒读者作者在尝试文学化表达之时，是不该作实证主义理解的。我想尤其指出的是《天知道》这部电影看似反驳了我在前面提出的观点，也即美国电影人未曾拍出过真实影像；实则是提供了观察这一问题的新方式。
《天知道》给予我们的就是一种异乎寻常的真实，已经脱离了新现实主义所开辟的语境。这种真实质感的获得不只在于电影聚集的是社会边缘人物的生活主题，这是通过对这些人物恋爱、吸毒、犯罪等一系列生活常态的刻画；还在于导演为获致这一真实质感所采用的方式。
借用一个比拟，我们可以将这部电影的镜头称为“望远镜式”的。它们是这样的镜头：深焦，近景（特写），背景的模糊化，以及晃动。因而观众如同举着一架望远镜将目光投向远方，看到了这些社会边缘的弱势群体挣扎的身影；会因为刀刃划开血管而不敢直视，会因为吸毒场面而坐立不安，会因为其自由地反抗着这个荒诞社会而欢欣鼓舞……
这是一类直接作用于我们感知的影像，如同那个在片名出来之后的长镜头，其伴随着配乐和镜头的自如移转导致的不可思议的观感，无不在提醒我们：我们需要这样的电影。
此时此刻，《天知道》给了我一个辩白的机会，同时也提醒读者作者在尝试文学化表达之时，是不该作实证主义理解的。我想尤其指出的是《天知道》这部电影看似反驳了我在前面提出的观点，也即美国电影人未曾拍出过真实影像；实则是提供了观察这一问题的新方式。
《天知道》给予我们的就是一种异乎寻常的真实，已经脱离了新现实主义所开辟的语境。这种真实质感的获得不只在于电影聚集的是社会边缘人物的生活主题，这是通过对这些人物恋爱、吸毒、犯罪等一系列生活常态的刻画；还在于导演为获致这一真实质感所采用的方式。
借用一个比拟，我们可以将这部电影的镜头称为“望远镜式”的。它们是这样的镜头：深焦，近景（特写），背景的模糊化，以及晃动。因而观众如同举着一架望远镜将目光投向远方，看到了这些社会边缘的弱势群体挣扎的身影；会因为刀刃划开血管而不敢直视，会因为吸毒场面而坐立不安，会因为其自由地反抗着这个荒诞社会而欢欣鼓舞……
这是一类直接作用于我们感知的影像，如同那个在片名出来之后的长镜头，其伴随着配乐和镜头的自如移转导致的不可思议的观感，无不在提醒我们：我们需要这样的电影。
才华横溢且懂得控制（好不好另说）
终日游荡街头的瘾君子，在毒品面前一切都变得虚无、无意义，塑造的可怜可恨之人挺成功。
她的讲述从划开手腕的血管开始，扮演自己的她和他们在纽约街头奔跑，游荡，相比其它电影中无休止的注射，交易，歇斯底里，她的故事里更多的是无聊和孤独，是清醒和失控之间最真实的生存和最坚韧的爱情。死亡是留至最后的神圣。他掷出的手机在她眼里绽放成烟花，他的消逝在她想象中不过是生命燃烧殆尽。
这是个什么烂片啊！！！我去 完全不能接受 ，一个词 病娇
爱你多一点，恨他少一点，感情完全抵消，残冷世界的平衡法则正如此般，只剩混沌如初的躯壳在不知疲倦地挣扎；疲软化人物与刺激剧情感正面交锋，糅合旋转自成黑洞，充斥着漫无边际的迷雾与电音，引人入胜也自知因果；本以为结尾会是一场成功的功能性交接，没想到却是一次巧妙的指鹿为马。
诚挚。
珍贵的人物状态，人物几乎不停歇的语音喷发和肢体躁动牵引镜头的追踪，构成人物状态的基底，并抹平剧作或结构上的痕迹，让人物能先于“表演”灵动起来，是为“迷幻”精髓所在，也是吸毒群体精神游离后回归肉体本能的隐喻。电子乐在维持形式感的同时间离共情，在叙述空白处引向“观看”以削弱摆拍造成违和的“虚假”感。
独立电影的粗粝感谱写出病态的爱情故事，萨弗迪兄弟风格尽现。与《好时光》完全相反几乎要蹭到脸上的手持镜不同，《天知道》镜头始终与主角们保持一定距离，达到一种局外人的状态。火烧那段实在很癫狂了，可与《好时光》最后那个坠楼镜头一拼
它的难能可贵之处在于将一种地下手工作坊式的美学风格发挥到极致，横生出一种凛冽刻骨的真实性，无限贴近对生活的还原，同时又不矫揉造作。还有一点就是导演将整个故事的概念先抛出，展现毒虫们混沌的街区生活，真实而绝望，但又不乞求观众的怜悯同情，你也甭想从中获取到什么。
直接，强烈。最后一幕绝妙，回到社区一切照旧，只是Harly坐在旁桌。影片最后的pov镜头拍出了disillusion。Ariel Pink的音乐大赞。个别的镜头设计有点二。
异乎寻常的真实。没看过出片名后的那个长镜头，大概不可语2015年电影。
她和他在我眼里浪漫得不可救药。穿着帽衫的流浪汉毒瘾青年，恨你时想弄死你，爱你时在大街上亲吻乱搞，有情绪了就突然消失，不给理由。这才是特么的真实啊
C+ / 《好时光》是彻底的迷幻药，《天知道》更像是半吊子的毒品。后者在努力兼容的爱与错乱的过程中反而显得有些单薄，前者汹涌的癫狂反而更显真实。开头结尾优秀，中间不足。要凸显颠沛流离中爱的神性反而失焦，开始文本逻辑构建后影像之力反而弱化。几个长镜头简直醉酒般飘逸又上帝般沉重。
一次又一次，我们看到卡萨维蒂对美国独立电影的影响。人物畅游在剪接细碎与镜头失稳的真实中，却时不时感觉到遁入情节剧式表演的状态抽离。这也只是皮相。从中看到无意识如何反抗观众的惯性显然更为珍贵，局部段落比迈克李微妙。
As fucked up and beautiful as New York itself. 手机化作烟花真是神来之笔
7.5 改编剧本的主角由原著作者本人来出演，我想剧组在当初选角的时候考虑的是她能够还原那份真实感，女主也确实做到了。很喜欢结尾的处理，它没有对剧本中的冲突给出解决，正如同这群流浪毒虫的现实生活一样，找不到出路。也很喜欢扔手机与烟火的剪辑，很有诗意。
观感非常残暴的一部片。摧毁瘾君子的不仅仅是海洛因，还有两人之间病态、纠缠的爱情。但导演并没有用任何方式让角色变得善感，亦没有增加什么浪漫的成分，而是将电影带来的这种尖锐突兀的感受本身化为最激进的共情。不过依然没有解药没有出路，只有腐烂的生活和幻灭的自毁。
啟發至女主角的真實生活，吸毒成習，愛恨交纏，電影九成時間都被面孔佔據了畫面，透過零碎的鏡頭重組青春的死去活來。但。這不就是早期卡薩維蒂作品的風格嗎？(劇照都像極了<影子>)，相似不是問題，素材剪裁不夠準確，音樂的運用更是讓人不解，只有瘋沒有愛，珠玉在前，作品也只成為別人的影子吧....
“我吸毒割腕偷东西，骗钱滥交爆粗口，天知道我是个好女孩~”纽约宝贝不断坠落，唯有真爱天知道，扔手机化做天边烟火
卡萨维茨的皮，内里有卡拉克斯的烈味儿。导演兄弟俩在自己的方向上很成熟了，通篇怼脸上的镜头，自在的临场发挥气质，冷清又带着些许肉色的调色，介入感强烈。另外很贴近的写人，角色也并不单调（女主面对不同男人的态度抓取的好，但对毒贩剖白别有所爱的一场说辞勉强）。扔手机变烟花，唯一动情的描写