本文目录一览：
电影观后感
七宗罪的特点
这部出色的惊险悬疑影片对犯罪心理学也作了详尽的描述，而罪犯通过圣经的道德审判来杀人，更具社会意义。一个警察最后却成为凶手计划的执行者，这是对社会和人生的讽刺，是对茫茫之中天主那七大信条的不可抗拒，还是象征了这多罪该罚的人世间的混乱的生活秩序？正象影片结束时斯班瑟说的那句话“海明威说：这个世界如此美好，值得人们为它奋斗。我只同意后半句。”
在电影里，七罪、七罚、七次下雨、故事发生在七天，甚至结局也由罪犯定在第七天的下午七时，无处不在的“7”暗示观众：它是宿命的罪与罚。既然如此，宿命的悲剧是必定要属于人间的，“上帝”作为“授意者”和“观望者”，参与了整个事件。冷血杀手作为传道者莅临人间，最终以身殉道。从某种角度看，悲剧中没有正邪的区分，作为渺小的人类，只能接受宿命的审判。
然而《七宗罪》恰好利用观众对玄学的神秘感和不理解，剑出偏锋的讲一个连环谋杀的故事。 “Seven”在宗教上是个神秘的数字，这一点在旧约中有最充分的表现。上帝用七天造亚当，取出亚当的第七根肋骨造了夏娃。撒旦的原身是有七个头的火龙（《启示录》第十二章第三节写道:“有一条大红龙，七头，也戴着冠冕......
《七宗罪》深度解析是什么？
《七宗罪》深度解析：
七宗罪讲的是一场离奇的连环杀人案，受害者都是死于这七宗罪其中的一种。威廉是纽约警察局的刑事警官，也是个凶杀案专家，他当了32年的警察，多年来几乎每一分钟都在辛劳地工作，他也看到和感受到了太多的不幸，他觉得疲惫极了，幸好现在还有7天他就要退休了，终于可以享享清福了。
为了接替他的工作，上司又给他派了一个新搭档——年轻气盛的米尔斯，他是和妻子翠西一同搬到纽约来的，起初翠西并不同意来这座繁乱的城市，但米尔斯认为只有这里才能让他接手一些重要的案子，于是在他的百般劝说下，翠西才同意了。威廉作风严谨，办事老成，米尔斯则有些冲动，心高气傲的他对威廉办案的方式很不以为然。
也许是冥冥之中已经注定了的，米尔斯的之一个案子正是威廉的最后一个案子：一个胖得出奇的男人在家中被杀了。可是在现场，米尔斯和威廉却没有发现什么线索。紧接着另一起案子发生了，一位富有的辩护律师格特被杀害，在凶案现场的地板上，凶手用血写着两个字：贪婪。
细心的威廉重新回到前一个案发现场，不露掉每一个蛛丝马迹，终于在冰箱后面发现了两个字：暴食。这时他们才醒悟到原来他是被强迫吃下大量的东西直到胃被撑破而死的。威廉猛想到了《失乐园》中的语句──基 督教的七重罪孽：暴食、贪婪、懒惰、愤怒、骄傲、淫欲和嫉妒。
他认为接下来还会发生5个谋杀案，分别与其他的诫条可怕地联系起来，可米尔斯却并不相信。翠西邀请威廉来家中吃饭。米尔斯有些不高兴，但翠西却和威廉谈得很愉快。在现场发现的指纹使格特的当事人毒贩维克多成了怀疑对象。他有前科，而且有心理疾病。
但当警察赶去拘捕他时，却发现他早已经死了，在墙上写着“懒惰”二字。通过图书馆内部的调查资料，威廉终于把目标锁定为记者约翰·多伊，一个为了不留下自己的指纹而将手指上的皮剥掉的变态者。但当威廉和米尔斯前去寻找他时，他已经溜走了。
在约翰家中，他们发现了一个金发 *** 的照片。但等他们找到她时，她也死了，旁边又是“淫欲”两个字。
到星期日，威廉就要退休了，而约翰打来 *** 告诉他们他又下手了。一个女人 *** 地死在床上，旁边写着“骄傲”。威廉决定办完这个案子再退休，可约翰却突然来自首了。谨慎的威廉认为事情不会如此简单，因为还有两条罪未完成，约翰一定还有花招。
约翰招认还有两具尸体，并愿意带他们去找。这时，有人给米尔斯送了个包裹来。威廉打开时却发现了里面竟是翠西的头颅，约翰告诉米尔斯是“嫉妒”杀死了翠西。
盛怒和悲伤之下的米尔斯无法控制自己，开枪打死了约翰，他犯了“愤怒”之罪，是完成7条训诫的最后一人。看着米尔斯被押上警车，威廉面对夕阳默默无语。
《七宗罪》的社会意义
《七宗罪》因为深刻反映了道德沦丧等社会问题而广受好评。这部电影在某种程度上严肃地探讨了有意义的暴力与无意义的暴力的差别，同时也激起了观众的“原罪”意识。
影片中的七桩案件忽隐忽现，若明若暗，不时有“山穷水复疑无路，柳暗花明又一村”的境界。片中对犯罪心理学做了详尽的描述，而罪犯通过《圣 经》的道德审判来杀人，更具社会意义。一个警察最终成为凶手计划的执行者，这是对社会和人生的讽刺。
七宗罪的观后感 英文
Although not originating from the bible, the concept of deadly sins is almost as old as Christian doctrine itself. Theologians like 4th century Greek monk Evagrius of Pontus first compiled catalogues of deadly offenses against the divine order, which 6th century pope Gregory the Great consolidated into a list of seven sins, which in turn formed the basis of the works of medieval/renaissance writers like St. Thomas Aquinas ("Summa Theologiae"), Geoffrey Chaucer ("Canterbury Tales"), Christopher Marlowe ("Dr. Faustus"), Edmund Spenser ("The Faerie Queene") and Dante Alighieri ("Commedia Divina"/"Purgatorio"). And in times when the ability to read was a privilege rather than a basic skill, the depiction of sin in paintings wasn't far behind; particularly resulting from the 16th century's reformulation of church doctrine, the works of artists like Hieronymus Bosch and Pieter Bruegel the Elder brought the horrific results of humankind's penchant to indulge in vice back into general consciousness with surrealistic eloquence, reminding their viewers that no sin goes unseen (Bosch, "The Seven Deadly Sins") and that its commission leads straight into a hell reigned by gruesome, grotesque demons and devils whose sole purpose is to torture those fallen into their hands (Bosch, "The Hay-Wagon" and "The Last Judgment;" Bruegel, "The Triumph of Death" and "The Tower of Babel").
More recently, the seven deadly sins have been the subject of Stephen Sondheim's play "Getting Away With Murder" and a ballet by George Balanchine ("Seven Deadly Sins"); and on the silver screen the topic has been addressed almost since the beginning of filmmaking (Cabiria [1914], Intolerance [1916]). Thus, "Se7en" builds on a solid tradition both in its own domain and in other art forms, topically as well as in its approach, denouncing society's apathy towards vice and crime. Yet - and although expressly referencing the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, Chaucer and Dante - David Fincher's movie eschews well-trodden paths and grabs the viewer's attention from the beginning; and it does so not merely by the depiction of serial killer John Doe's (Kevin Spacey's) crimes, which could easily degenerate into a mindless bloodfest that would defeat the movie's purpose. (Not that there isn't a fair share of blood and gore on display; both visually and in the characters' dialogue regarding those details not actually shown; but Fincher uses the crimes' gruesome nature to create a sense of stark reali *** , rather than for shock value alone.) In addition, Doe's mindset is painstakingly presented by the opening credits' jumpy nature, his "lair"'s apocalyptic makeup and his notebooks, all of which were actually written out (at considerable expense), and whose compilation is shown underlying the credits. The movie's atmosphere of unrelenting doom is further underscored by a color scheme dominated by brown, gray and only subdued hues of other colors, and by the fact that almost every outdoors scene is set in rain. Moreover, although screenwriter Andrew Kevin Walker explains on the DVD that the story was inspired by his observations in New York (and the movie was shot partly there, partly in L.A.), it is set in a faceless, nameless city, thus emphasizing that its concern isn't a specific location but society generally.
Central to the movie is the contrast between world-weary Detective Somerset (Morgan Freeman) who, while decrying the rampant occurrence of violence in society, for much of the movie seems to have resigned himself to his inability to do something meaningful about this (and therefore seems to accept apathy for himself, too, until his reluctant final turnaround), and younger Detective Mills (Brad Pitt), who fought for a reassignment to this particular location, perhaps naively expecting his contributions to actually make a difference; only to become a pawn in Doe's scheme instead and thus show that, given the right trigger, nobody is beyond temptation. As such, Somerset and Mills are not merely another incarnation of the well-known old-cop-young-cop pairing. Rather, their characters' development over the course of the film forces each viewer to examine his/her own stance towards vice.
Morgan Freeman and Brad Pitt perfectly portray the two detectives; while Freeman imbues his Will Somerset with a quiet dignity, professionali *** and learning, muted by profound but not yet wholly irreversible resignation, Pitt's David Mills is a brash everyman from the suburbs with an undeniable streak of prejudice, a penchant for quick judgment and a thorough lack of sophistication, both personally and culturally. Notable are also the appearances of Gwyneth Paltrow (significantly Brad Pitt's real-life girlfriend at the time) as Mills's wife Tracy and ex-marine R. Lee Ermey as the police captain. Yet, from his very first appearance onwards, this is entirely Kevin Spacey's film. Reportedly, Brad Pitt especially fought hard for his casting; and it is indeed hard to imagine "Se7en" with anybody other than the guy who, that same year, also won an Oscar for portraying devilish Keyser Soze in "The Usual Suspects": No living actor has Spacey's ability to simultaneously express spine-chilling villainy, laconic indifference and limitless superiority with merely a few gestures and vocal inflections.
While "Se7en" can certainly claim the "sledgehammer" effect on its viewers sought by its fictional killer, the punishment meted out to Doe's victims - taking their perceived sins to the extreme - pales in comparison to that awaiting sinners according to medieval teachings. (Inter alia, gluttons would thus be forced to eat vermin, toads and snakes, greed-mongers put in cauldrons of boiling oil and those guilty of lust *** othered in fire and brimstone.) Most serial killers have decidedly more mundane motivations than Doe. And after all, this is only a movie.
Seven is a very disturbing thriller about a serial killer,John Doe(Kevin Spacey), killing people via examples of the seven deadly sins - gluttony, greed, sloth, lust, pride, envy and wrath. The story begins with Detective Mills (Brad Pitt) being assigned to Detective Somerset (Morgan Freeman). Detective Somerset is due to retire at the end of the week, and Detective Mills is moving up in the world, and is to take Somerset's place. This is a very disturbing movie. It will keep you enthralled and glued to your seat for the entire 127 minutes. Indeed, I was staggered that I never once lost concentration or was bored with this movie.This is a movie with an unexpected ending that is absolutely unpredictable and which is not at all a "Hollywood" style ending.
I saw this movie a couple times, and I liked it as a scary movie on a rainy day or whatever.... it's just that, I know too many people who take this stuff seriously. It's filled with Christian or more specifically Catholic, mythology - the seven deadly "sins" Lust, Vanity, Gluttony, Pride, Wrath, Sloth and Greed. It's basically a vigilante who goes around killing people in horrific manners as a punishment for their "sins." It has a surprise ending which was cleverly thought out more or less, but innocents suffered at this guy's hands and the plot doesn't really make sense. In no way does it make moral sense. First of all, Catholics practice child sacrifice and torture and enslave women, which does not qualify them as the best moral judges. The bible in itself is tyrannical and abusive, as well as chock full of lunacy - not the reasoned judge I'd want making decisions on my moral life that's for sure.
Also this guy does not really mete out justice. A person guilty of gluttony, sloth or vanity, does not deserve death, not even in the Catholic church and they loooove to kill and torture people. Usually, you go to confession and say a Hail Mary or two. I think the psycho in this movie was just looking for an excuse to kill people and get his pic in the paper, or whatever, and con a bunch of suckers into thinking he was some underground hero instead of what he was - a cruel psychotic, not-very-bright, jerk. Actually I have a lot of compassion for people who mess up in life, controlling the worst of your nature is difficult, most people mess up often on all counts - and Catholics can be overly critical - not to mention psychotic - about details anyway. You really have to know a person's whole life to know what they are. Maybe that guy was injured and gained weight because he couldn't move around very well, maybe the guy having sex was lonely and frightened and needed physical contact... who knows? You can't judge people on an outward, shallow look-over of their lives. If you want to help people out with their struggles for virtue why not invite the gluttony guy out to walk with you, or ask the lustful guy what intimate relationships mean to him, or why he's lonely or out of control? Maybe they're looking for help, virtue is it's own reward and all that - and lack of it is it's own justice in many ways. I think the psycho killer could've stayed at home and worked on himself, it would've worked out on it's own.
电影《七宗罪》观后感及疑点
我一直以为好电影是要给人启发或者传达给人想法的！据说《七宗罪》是一部好电影才看的。看了之后呢？没觉得有什么启发，也没感受到导演要传达的东西！想想可能是自己笨吧！看影评！结果呢？影评全都是争论最后那个盒子里面装的是什么！他老婆打底死没死！我很疑惑！难道导演拍这个电影就是想传达那个女人到底死没死？我的愚见是管她死没死！这只是一部电影，不是历史事件何必那么较劲？这部电影到底传达了什么给我们？是提示人们大家都在犯着这七种罪孽吗？这大家一直都知道啊！那然后呢？警示人们不要犯吗？很明显不可能啊！那到底是干嘛？吓唬大家犯罪了会有人来惩戒你？我真的模糊了！他想说什么？什么是好的电影！可能我真的太笨！
求《七宗罪》1500字的电影观后感，从心理学角度
七宗罪》观后感
暴食、贪婪、懒惰、淫欲、傲慢、嫉妒和暴怒——被天主教认为是遭永劫的七种大罪，在你的身上，有它们的影子吗？ 冬天的早晨，天阴沉沉的。
电影《七宗罪》在电脑屏幕上不断切换境头。人，也不由得惊悚起来。刚刚看这部电影，看前面部分老少警察搭档破案，觉得和一般的侦探电影并没有多大区别时，甚至有放弃的想法，直到后来才发现它的精彩。
这是部以破案为引子，带有浓厚宗教色彩的片子。故事的背景是肮脏的城市，动荡的居住环境，对情感难以把握的人心，似乎所有的都无以为靠。影片以黑色及灰色为主题背景，色彩不血腥却具有强烈的明暗差，时常出现的狭小黑暗的房间，手电筒强烈的光线不断出现在侦案现场。
老警察沙摩塞还有七天就可以退休，命案却一桩接一桩发生，当他将毫无关联的三桩命案联系起来，意识到将发生《圣经》里被天主教认为遭永劫的七种大罪时，本打算退出此案，后还是决定留下来与新警察米尔斯一起。案发现场没有任何指纹，直到发生五桩命案，警察却没能找到任何蛛丝马迹时，凶手约翰却来到警察大厅自首了，带着他的血淋淋的十指和平静的微笑。
这让所有人都费解，约翰主动被警察所困，那他将如何去实施他未完成的两桩命案呢？悬念顿生。影片中约翰的出镜不多，主要集中在后半部分，但却给我最深的印象。他带两个警察一起去郊外寻找最后两具尸体，坐在警车上隔着铁栏谈话的表情和语言，是全片的亮点。轻缓的语言讲述着他经手的五宗罪，眼神里荡漾着一种轻微的波浪，以至于你会觉得从他口中出来的残忍语言，都带着一丝优雅的色彩。你会相信，他所说的，都是有道理的。就是这样一个自信却邪恶的布道者，和米尔斯被激怒的粗暴神态形成强烈对比，你甚至会站在约翰的角度来说：“看吧，这就是浑身罪恶的人们！”
约翰因嫉妒米尔斯及其妻子翠茜的幸福，割下翠茜头颅让人送至案发现场，米尔斯暴怒之下击毙约翰，这种结局出人意料之外，却又似在情理中。此时，你似乎不得不佩服约翰的眼力，选中了米尔斯做为第七宗罪：“暴怒”的代替者是完全对的。而约翰自己，却是以那种邪恶自信的笑容坦然地面对被杀，因为他知道自己犯了“嫉妒”罪。约翰虽死，但他却是以一种胜利者的姿态死的，因为所有的都在他的掌控中，他完成了上帝交给他的任务。这个最引人眼球的结局发生在七天后的七点钟，那带着神秘色彩的“七”上。
约翰是个追求完美的人，只是这份完美过份极瑞，在剥夺了那些“罪恶者”生存权利的同时，也无法原谅自己的“罪恶”。他的笑，似一个诅咒，牵引着人们审视自身。
沙摩塞，这个办案慎密、行走孤独的老警察，对于社会上存在的丑陋早已司空见怪，他会告诉米尔斯遇到抢劫时不要叫救命而喊救火，他不要孩子，因为不想让孩子出生在这个肮脏的世界。他就这样不紧不慢地生活在这个肮脏的城市，冷眼旁观着一切。
米尔斯，脾气暴燥，却有着善良的心地，他似一个孩子般爱着家中的
宠物和妻子，却因这份对妻子的疼爱，在得知妻子被杀后无法抑制的悲痛终于爆发，以至于杀死了凶手。
执法者与上帝的传道者都有罪，活在这个世界上，谁能没罪呢？ 海明威曾说：“这个世界如此美好，值得人们为它奋斗” 。看完这部影片，这两句话我都不认同。