outsourced影评（精选3篇）
outsourced影评 第1篇
英语词语学习：outsource
今天我们要学的`词是outsource。
Outsource, 外包。奥 巴 马 政府宣布将采取新举措振兴就业市常
US “President Barack Obama says he will propose new tax incentives to encourage U.S. companies to bring jobs back to the United States instead of outsourcing them abroad,”
美国总统 奥 巴 马 表示，他将提议新的税收方案，鼓励美国公司将就业机会留在美国市场，而不是外包到外国。
“Many tech giant companies such as Apple and Microsoft now outsource their assembly lines to China and India,”
苹果和微软等很多科技巨头公司现在都将生产线外包到中国和印度。
如何写影评 第2篇
学写影评, 不但能提高写作能力, 还能提高鉴赏能力, 一举两得。
如何写好影评?可从以下几个方面入手。
一、找准突破口, 写自己感受最深的。一部影视剧展示的东西很多, 写影评不可能面面俱到, 而应该选取那些给你感受最深、最能打动人的内容 (甚至是某个方面的内容) 。这样, 才能写深写透, 给读者留下深刻的印象。
二、影评重在评。就文体而言, 影评属于议论文范畴。如果不了解这一点, 就容易把影评写成影视简介。一部影视剧, 哪些地方最精彩, 最能吸引人, 或者哪些地方表现得好, 哪些地方有瑕疵, 都可以作为评论的内容。关键在于写出你对它的感受, 即好看或不好看、精彩或不精彩等, 并据此进行评析。
三、影评虽带有强烈的主观色彩, 但也必须客观公正。既不能人云亦云, 也不能为了某种功利目的而不顾事实地夸大其词, 或者片面地把所评的电影说得一无是处。
下面是关于去年热映的美国动画片《功夫熊猫》的一则影评, 请同学们欣赏。
《功夫熊猫》中的几个亮点
最近热映的美国动画片《功夫熊猫》有这样几个亮点深深地打动了中国观众。
一、除暴安良的故事情节
除暴安良历来是中华武术的优良传统, 也是中华武林人士价值观的充分体现。《功夫熊猫》叙述的就是这样一个除暴安良的故事:
熊猫肥波在和平谷举行的一次武林大会上, 意外地被长老乌龟大师指定为“神龙大侠”, 这就意味着他要为捍卫和平谷的安宁付出代价。而此时, 被猫头鹰师傅关在监牢里的大弟子残豹太郎正蓄积力量, 准备冲破牢房重出江湖独霸武林。对一个平时好吃懒做、毫无武术功底的胖熊猫肥波来说, 要成为一代武林高手, 并且要对和平谷承担起责任, 实在是不可想象!
猫头鹰师傅费尽心机, 精心指点, 肥波开始了魔鬼训练, 终于学有所成, 勇敢地打败了一心想独霸武林的太郎, 为和平谷重新赢得了安宁。除暴安良的价值观迎合了中国人的传统美德, 是这部动画片在中国火爆的一个重要原因。
二、精彩激烈的打斗场面
《功夫熊猫》是一部武打片, 武打片最吸引人的地方是精彩激烈的打斗场面。在这部影片中, 有两处打斗场面可圈可点:
一是猫头鹰师傅的五个弟子———“盛怒五杰” (猴王、灵鹤、快螳螂、俏小龙、悍娇虎) 与残豹太郎在和平谷悬崖的长索道上进行的殊死较量。悍娇虎一马当先, 毫不畏惧地拦住了太郎的去路, 给太郎以迎头痛击;接着娇小的俏小龙———小蛇, 奋不顾身地死死缠在太郎身上, 猴王和灵鹤牢牢拉住摇摇欲坠的索桥绳索。在打斗的过程中, 快螳螂不失时机地果断剪断索桥绳索, 猴王乘机一头撞向太郎……就这样, “五杰”你一拳, 我一脚, 齐心协力, 终于把太郎打下山谷。精彩的打斗场面, 令人目不暇接, 拍手叫绝。
二是太郎与熊猫肥波为争夺武林秘笈———卷轴进行的单打独斗。双方从山崖打到山脚, 从空中打到地下, 从屋下打到屋顶……最终肥波拿出杀手锏———巫师指, 制服了太郎。
三、幽默搞笑但意蕴深刻的无厘头语言
如:“昨天是历史, 明天是谜团, 只有今天是天赐的礼物”;“我私家汤的绝密食材, 就是什么都没有”;“认为它特别, 它就特别了”;等等。这些无厘头语言, 不但为影片增添了喜剧气氛, 也给观众带来启迪。
outsourced影评 第3篇
Recently， the local government announced plans to outsource Yueyang Tower by transferring the right to operate the scenic spot to a commercial entity. City authorities say the local tourism sector is short of capital and managerial talent and is being restrained by rigid mechanisms， so they need to bring in investors to help upgrade the sector. Besides， higher income derived from better operations will make it possible for the tower to be kept in good condition.
The news has sparked heated debate not only locally， but also across the nation. Despite local authorities upbeat rhetoric， opponents worry that a business which focuses on maximizing profit will damage the tower instead of protecting it. Furthermore， some people say its unacceptable for such a historical spot to be placed in the hands of a private business. Others， however， are in favor of this approach， saying its worth trying.
An innovative model
Bi Xiaozhe （www.gmw.cn）： There are different reasons for scenic spots being run by commercial operators. For instance， local governments are not good at operating them and have suffered big losses. The authorities hope to develop these scenic spots into attractive projects. Also， in some places， due to a lack of advanced managerial and market experience， excellent tourism resources are left to rot， and the involvement of commercial operators can help to tap into the potential of these resources.
Of course， sometimes local governments may not calculate the results， but just follow others or fashion by outsourcing local scenic spots to commercial operators. Indeed， in many cases， commercial operators hope to gain maximum profits within a minimum period of time. They tend to pay little attention to the repair and maintenance of basic infrastructure in scenic areas， but instead overuse the aging facilities. As a result， rather than making big money， local governments may have to face up to severely damaged scenic spots after taking back possession.
However， there are also successful examples. After transferring the operational rights to eight major scenic spots to commercial entities， Fenghuang County in Hunan harvested 3 billion yuan （$436 million） from the tourism sector in 2010 alone， tripling the revenue of previous years. Meanwhile， facilities in these areas were renovated.
Tourism has the potential to become a major contributor to local economy， but we need new operational concepts for scenic spots. While the government-run model has been found to be ineffective in many places， outsourcing is being increasingly accepted as an alternative. Under the original arrangements， Yueyang Tower has been operated quite inefficiently， so why not give the new model a chance？
Liu Songhan （www.cnhubei.com）： The state forbids transfer of ownership of cultural heritage sites like Yueyang Tower， but it does not ban transferring associated operational rights. This tower is of great historical and cultural importance， but as with many other such places under government control， its commercial value has not been fully tapped. To outsource the towers operation to a private business is a very good strategy which will fully exploit its cultural significance and probably provide new source of growth for the local economy.
Opposition to the scheme is mostly based on the assumption that the company awarded the right to operate the tower will skimp on maintenance. However， this idea is unfounded. If the company behaves in such a fashion， the local government can withdraw the operational right. Actually， as long as the companys responsibilities are made clear and a mature supervisory mechanism is put in place， the private operator will not dare to allow the tower to come to harm. Changes always come together with risks， but this should not be used as an excuse to refuse the local governments new reform.
Walking a fine line
Ran Yu （Beijing Times）： Transferring a scenic spots management to a commercial operator is nothing new. However， when it comes to Yueyang Tower， the move has triggered controversy. Thats partly because the tower is a symbol of Yueyang， and locals are very proud of it.
You can generate money very quickly if you run a scenic site as a business， but the fallout is also serious. After transferring operational rights， some local authorities tend to relax supervision， and as a result， the commercial operators focus solely on making money， regardless of damage sustained by the sites in the process of development.
Market-oriented operation does not necessarily go against preservation of cultural relics. However， its still important to walk a fine line. Local governments must understand that market forces are not a panacea for tourism development. The potential side effects should be fully assessed and only on this basis can authorities decide whether or not to transfer management rights.
Zhu Dan （Beijing Morning Post）： The debate is not just about the right to operate Yueyang Tower， its also about the protection of historical and cultural relics. The bottom line is that no matter who actually operates the tower， it must be kept in safe condition.
Once the tower is operated by a commercial entity， authorities should step up supervision instead of keeping their hands off. Detailed protection measures should come first， before the transfer happens.
Zhang Dongfeng （Nanfang Daily）： Cultural relics are a legacy left by our ancestors， and their development or utilization must serve the public interest. However， its widely known that commercial entities tend to pursue the preservation of historical relics merely for profit. Therefore， many people are concerned about the news that the operation of Yueyang Tower is to be contracted to a private enterprise.
To promote the local economy by developing tourism resources is a tendency
in many places around the nation. Yueyang Tower is so famous among Chinese people that the local government must consider not using it to generate revenue a waste of resources.
In the past decade or so， a lot of disputes arose over how cultural relics should be protected and developed for tourism purposes. Local governments and tourism authorities， driven by eagerness for money， separate the ownership and operational rights of scenic spots. They believe commercial development of cultural relics and places of interest can not only boost the local economy， but also help to preserve the treasures. However， some people believe that once cultural relics are made into tourism products， they risk being abused and damaged.
Whether Yueyang Tower should be operated by commercial organizations should be decided by cultural heritage preservation authorities. In so many cases， when commercial entities take over operation of tourist sites， visitors are faced with ticket price hikes and， particularly in historical towns and streets， the scenic spots groan under huge pressures when operated at full capacity. In either case， commercial operation goes against the principle of protection coming first in case of cultural relic development.
Qiao Mu （www.jschina.com.cn）： Yueyang Tower is a famous historical site， to which locals have strong sentimental attachment. Its understandable why the news of the operation of the tower being“outsourced” to a commercial entity has stirred up heated debate. Many people find it unacceptable. Meanwhile， its quite doubtable whether the nations laws allow such a prestigious cultural heritage site to be operated by a private business.
There is no lack of examples of cultural heritage sites being trampled， and who can guarantee that the outsourced Yueyang Tower will not be overdeveloped and its surrounding environment will not be damaged？ Will the government take full responsibility for the towers protection and supervise its operation？ Its suspected that the government will completely retreat.