人生已至暮年的七位英国老人辗转前往印度斋浦尔度假。七人中，香港善解人意的伊芙琳（朱迪·丹奇 Judi Dench 饰）试图在丧夫后独立生活；患心脏疾病的大法官格雷厄姆（汤姆·威尔金森 Tom Wilkinson 饰）怀揣着无法启齿的秘密；道格拉斯（比尔·奈伊 Bill Nighy 饰）和琼希望能改善僵化的夫妻关系；老顽童诺曼和老来俏玛琪则时刻期盼着艳遇；至于穆瑞尔（玛吉·史密斯 Maggie Smith 饰），香港等待手术的她总是显得有几分冷漠刻薄。各怀心事的七人被异域风情广告吸引，不约而同下榻在玛丽戈德饭店。但是真实的饭店并不如广告宣扬的那般舒适，这趟印度心灵之旅也不似预想般尽如人意。在陌生的国度里，众人对余下的人生展开了新的思考，不希望抱憾终身的他们向着皆大欢喜的结局努力着。影片改编自英国女作家Deborah Moggach的小说《These Foolish Things》。
回复 :银狐、黑猫都是冷酷无情、杀人无数的杀手，她们自幼被杀手组织头目收养，并且身手敏捷，她们每次执行任务都战无不胜。 但是今次夺取杀手组织首领霍先生的犯罪证据的行动中，她们却遭到情报人员顽强的回击、银狐受重伤跌下海去失踪了，黑猫独个儿回报霍先生。后来银狐幸Rockey仔所救，两人渐生好感，在此银狐也与西兰花结为好友，西兰花慧是特种部队成员，因被仇家所害，被迫逃亡。霍先生得知银狐下落后。便派黑猫和蝎子去捉回银狐，银狐见黑猫后更恢复记忆，但她不愿重蹈覆辙，并请黑猫取那犯罪证据回去交差，但绝情的蝎子已先后把Rockey仔和黑猫杀死，幸好，西兰花及时赶到救走银狐，并夺回罪证。因此，霍先生便亲身与银狐、西兰花二人展开一场生死战。
回复 :奢靡生活的富二代富承华突遭父亲企业破产的打击，流落街头成为快递员。在帮送花的日子里，富承华与翁敏敏产生奇妙的情谊。为了拯救自家公司，翁平安同意翁敏敏与刘开明之间的婚约，并约定见面。在翁敏敏的闺蜜钟晓玲的建议下，富承华冒充翁敏敏的男友赴会也受到翁家人的青睐，但富承华却发现自家破产似乎与翁家有关。不听父亲婚约安排的翁敏敏发现富承华被刘天明打伤，并从刘天明口中得知富承华的“真相”。因心理负担，富承华拒绝了翁敏敏表白，后者被迫同意与刘家的婚事。已得到改造了解了生活真谛的富承华得知后，他怎么对待这样感情，如何处理这段恩怨！两人能否走到一起？两人真的能放下属于富翁的生活吗？
回复 :The subtitle of Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet’s first feature, from 1965, “Only Violence Helps Where Violence Reigns,” suggests the fierce political program evoked by their rigorous aesthetic. The pretext of the film, set in Cologne, is Heinrich Böll’s novel “Billiards at Half Past Nine,” which they strip down to a handful of stark events and film with a confrontational angularity akin to Bartók’s music that adorns the soundtrack. The subtlest of cues accompany the story’s complex flashbacks. The middle-aged Robert Fähmel tells a young hotel bellhop of persecutions under the Third Reich; his elderly father, Heinrich, an architect famed for a local abbey, recalls the militarism of the First World War, when his wife, Johanna, incurred trouble for insulting the Kaiser. A third-generation Fähmel is considering architecture, just as the exiled brother of Robert’s late wife, returns, only to be met by their former torturer, now a West German official taking part in a celebratory parade of war veterans. Straub and Huillet make the layers of history live in the present tense, which they judge severely. The tamped-down acting and the spare, tense visual rhetoric suggest a state of moral crisis as well as the response—as much in style as in substance—that it demands.
