Voice 1 (male "professional announcer" type): This neighborhood(1) was made for the wretched dignity of the petty bourgeoisie, for respectable occupations and intellectual tourism. The sedentary population of the upper floors was sheltered from the influences of the street. This neighborhood has remained the same. It was the strange setting of our story, where a systematic questioning of all the diversions and works of a society, a total critique of its idea of happiness, was expressed in acts.
These people also scorned "subjective profundity". They were interested in nothing but an adequate and concrete expression of themselves.
Voice 2 (Debord, monotone): Human beings are not fully conscious of their real life - usually groping in the dark; overwhelmed by the consequences of their acts; at every moment groups and individuals find themselves confronted with results they have not wished.
Voice 1: They said that oblivion was their ruling passion. They wanted to reinvent everything each day; to become the masters and possessors of their own lives.
Just as one does not judge a man according to the conception he has of himself, one cannot judge such periods of transition according to their own consciousness; on the contrary, one must explain the consciousness through the contradictions of material life, through the conflict between social conditions and the forces of social production.
The progress achieved in the domination of nature was not yet matched by a corresponding liberation of everyday life. Youth passed away among the various controls of resignation.
Our camera has captured for you a few aspects of a provisional microsociety.
The knowledge of empirical facts remains abstract and superficial as long as it is not concretized by its integration into the whole "” which alone permits the supersession of partial and abstract problems so as to arrive at their concrete essence, and implicitly at their meaning.
This group was on the margins of the economy. It tended toward a role of pure consumption, and first of all the free consumption of its time. It thus found itself directly engaged in qualitative variations of everyday life but deprived of any means to intervene in them.
The group ranged over a very small area. The same times brought them back to the same places. No one went to bed early. Discussion on the meaning of all this continued...
Voice 2: "Our life is a journey "” In the winter and the night. "” We seek our passage..."�
Voice 1: The abandoned literature nevertheless exerted a delaying action on new affective formulations.
Voice 2: There was the fatigue and the cold of the morning in this much-traversed labyrinth, like an enigma that we had to resolve. It was a looking-glass reality through which we had to discover the potential richness of reality.
On the bank of the river evening began once again; and caresses; and the importance of a world without importance. Just as the eyes have a blurred vision of many things and can see only one clearly, so the will can strive only incompletely toward diverse objects and can completely love only one at a time.
Voice 3 (young girl): No one counted on the future. It would never be possible to be together later, or anywhere else. There would never be a greater freedom.
Voice 1: The refusal of time and of growing old automatically limited encounters in this narrow, contingent zone, where what was lacking was felt as irreparable. The extreme precariousness of the means of getting by without working was at the root of this impatience which made excesses necessary and breaks definitive.
Voice 2: One never really contests an organization of existence without contesting all of that organization's forms of language.
Voice 1: When freedom is practiced in a closed circle, it fades into a dream, becomes a mere representation of itself. The ambiance of play is by nature unstable. At any moment "ordinary life"� can prevail once again. The geographical limitation of play is even more striking than its temporal limitation. Any game takes place within the contours of its spatial domain. Around the neighborhood, around its fleeting and threatened immobility, stretched a half-known city where people met only by chance, losing their way forever.
The girls who found their way there, because they were legally under the control of their families until the age of eighteen, were often recaptured by the defenders of that detestable institution. They were generally confined under the guard of those creatures who among all the bad products of a bad society are the most ugly and repugnant: nuns.
What usually makes documentaries so easy to understand is the arbitrary limitation of their subject matter. They describe the atomization of social functions and the isolation of their products. One can, in contrast, envisage the entire complexity of a moment which is not resolved into a work, a moment whose movement indissolubly contains facts and values and whose meaning does not yet appear. The subject matter of the documentary would then be this confused totality.
Voice 2: The era had arrived at a level of knowledge and technical means that made possible, and increasingly necessary, a direct construction of all aspects of a liberated affective and practical existence. The appearance of these superior means of action, still unused because of the delays in the project of liquidating the commodity economy, had already condemned aesthetic activity, whose ambitions and powers were both outdated. The decay of art and of all the values of former mores had formed our sociological background. The ruling class's monopoly over the instruments we needed to control in order to realize the collective art of our time had excluded us from a cultural production officially devoted to illustrating and repeating the past. An art film on this generation can only be a film on its absence of real creations.
Everyone unthinkingly followed the paths learned once and for all, to their work and their home, to their predictable future. For them duty had already become a habit, and habit a duty. They did not see the deficiency of their city. They thought the deficiency of their life was natural. We wanted to break out of this conditioning, in quest of another use of the urban landscape, in quest of new passions. The atmosphere of a few places gave us intimations of the future powers of an architecture it would be necessary to create to be the support and framework for less mediocre games. We could expect nothing of anything we had not ourselves altered. The urban environment proclaimed the orders and tastes of the ruling society just as violently as the newspapers. It is man who makes the unity of the world, but man has extended himself everywhere. People can see nothing around them that is not their own image; everything speaks to them of themselves. Their very landscape is alive. There were obstacles everywhere. There was a cohesion in the obstacles of all types. They maintained the coherent reign of poverty. Everything being connected, it was necessary to change everything by a unitary struggle, or nothing. It was necessary to link up with the masses, but we were surrounded by sleep.
Voice 3: The dictatorship of the proletariat is a desperate struggle, bloody and bloodless, violent and peaceful, military and economic, educational and administrative, against the forces and traditions of the old world.
Voice 1: In this country it is once again the men of order who have rebelled. They have reinforced their power. They have been able to aggravate the grotesqueness of the ruling conditions according to their will. They have embellished their system with the funereal ceremonies of the past.
Voice 2: Years, like a single instant prolonged to this point, come to an end.
Voice 1: What was directly lived reappears frozen in the distance, fit into the tastes and illusions of an era, carried away with it.
Voice 2: The appearance of events that we have not made, that others have made against us, now obliges us to be aware of the passage of time, its results, the transformation of our own desires into events. What differentiates the past from the present is precisely its out-of-reach objectivity; there is no more should-be; being is so consumed that it has ceased to exist. The details are already lost in the dust of time. Who was afraid of life, afraid of the night, afraid of being taken, afraid of being kept?
Voice 3: What should be abolished continues, and we continue to wear away with it. We are engulfed. We are separated. The years pass and we haven't changed anything.
Voice 2: Once again morning in the same streets. Once again the fatigue of so many similarly passed nights. It is a walk that has lasted a long time.
Voice 1: Really hard to drink more.
Voice 2: Of course one might make a film of it. But even if such a film succeeds in being as fundamentally disconnected and unsatisfying as the reality it deals with, it will never be more than a re-creation "” poor and false like this botched traveling shot.
Voice 3: There are now people who pride themselves on being authors of films, as others were authors of novels. They are even more backward than the novelists because they are unaware of the decomposition and exhaustion of individual expression in our time, ignorant of the end of the arts of passivity. They are praised for their sincerity since they dramatize, with more personal depth, the conventions of which their life consists. There is talk of the liberation of the cinema. But what does it matter to us if one more art is liberated through which Tom, Dick or Harry can joyously express their slavish sentiments? The only interesting venture is the liberation of everyday life, not only in the perspectives of history but for us and right away. This entails the withering away of alienated forms of communication. The cinema, too, has to be destroyed.
Voice 2: In the final analysis, stars are created by the need we have for them, and not by their talent or lack of talent or even by the film industry or advertising. Miserable need, dismal, anonymous life that would like to expand itself to the dimensions of cinema life. The imaginary life on the screen is the product of this real need. The star is the projection of this need.
The images of the advertisements during the intermissions are more suited than any others for evoking an intermission of life.
To really describe this era it would no doubt be necessary to show many other things. But what would be the point?
Better to grasp the totality of what has been done and what remains to be done than to add more ruins to the old world of the spectacle and of memories.
1. This film, which evokes the lettrist experiences at the origin of the situationist movement, opens with shots of the Paris district frequented by the lettrists in the early 1950s.
三段重复无趣的流水账和一段精彩刺激的肉搏。6
22_024。看了三个晚上才看完这电影……。虽然是“罗生门式”的三段式，但拍得并不妙，没有很好的分出三段的差别来，而要说这是女权电影是真的不认同，虽然最后女主的一段拍出了两位恶劣男子的自以为是和女人地位的可怜，但前面两段实在是太……长了，当然朱迪演得很好的。最后要说一句，马迪蒙再丑，也论不到亚当当帅逼啊！
老雷是一个真正的女权主义者:直到第三章开始，观众才明白这部电影的野心--补全男性叙事中缺席的女性视角。最后那场决斗，隐喻了几千年以来，女人在男人的血腥斗争中永远只是一个观众，甚至是这场战斗的“战果”或者是“牺牲品”。那一个男人拼尽一切赢得的“荣誉”又是什么呢？斯科特用一段非常简单的平行剪辑揭露了这背后的虚伪和虚无:簇拥欢呼的人群只为每一个“胜者”欢呼，他们才压根不在乎“truth”。狂热的人群里，唯有玛格丽特看透了这一切。
以及，在罗生门的叙事结构之下，这场最后的决斗有着惊人的说服力、情感基础和戏剧张力。
+，这才是真的让人想说别拍了……手法太老式了。
对女权和MeToo的映射简直呼之欲出，除了有点过于工整以外别的都挺好。此外服化道及美术都是老雷一贯的高水平。
大手笔还原中世纪领主、骑士、守卫的服化道令人震撼不已，着实让人回到了十四世纪封建庄园时代。qiang暴戏和最终决斗都令人揪心。内核故事却角度清奇，美丽的少妇和行事粗暴的丈夫，外加俊美的对手，演员演技炸裂，衍生出了极其容易令大众误解的窘境。其一，当代的性犯罪取证何其困难，一场中世纪的强奸案更是难以获取证据。其二，影片狠狠嘲讽了sex事中不知取悦女性的男方。其三，面对强暴，敢怒直言的女性值得敬佩
这是中世纪，一个女人为真相发声，一个男人决定拼死决斗，不管男人是出于虚荣还是真义，他们守护了无法自辩的真相，也许出于上帝的公正或者仁慈，也许是男人和女人作为人的倔强。
都已经明显、直接的呈现强暴了，还怎么叫“罗生门”？以为我没看过罗生门吗。所谓的各自讲述只是无关痛痒的个人小动作而已，情节也很一般也没有激荡的战争场面，不值8.5，最多7分。亚当长得真丑，片里每个女人还夸他英俊，老雷也是瞎。有时间不搞异形，拍这么部扯淡片。
漂亮的结构，导演的企图心又是如此的谦逊。细节里处处见斯科特对历史的把握与人性的谙熟。这一次他谦逊而有一些老谋深算地选择了变化的视角来处置沉闷的历史题材，揭示了视角属于谁谁就是受害者谁才是得道者的精美比喻。真正读史的人不能错过的一部好戏，爱电影的人应该注目的一部好戏。字幕升起，掌声，泪水应该献给这部提供了持久的共鸣感的电影。
导演、编剧、演员都很好。但比起黑泽明的《罗生门》，不那么轻盈，神秘。
无法被证实的真相，每个人都是只看到自己选择看到的那一面，三个视角既相似又截然不同，细枝末节的处理非常棒。
成品给我感觉并不是一个罗生门的故事，包括老司机这个角色也承认自己的行为，并没有表现出各执一词的情况，这就使得三段意义不大了，而且诸多重复段落好像在看中世纪版金刚川。最后一段拍得值得肯定，女性被边缘化工具化，正凸显了男权社会，面子和私欲大于人性，最可怕的一幕是jean听到自己妻子遭遇后的反应是立刻行房，因为不能让jacques成为最后占有自己妻子的人。教廷审判反复对女性的质问，以及女性命运掌握不在自己手中的种种控诉时至今日也依然常见。
好基友 一辈子！| 大本真是太可了，可宽可窄。还有让非脸盲认不出来的演技！
以决斗始，以决斗终。场上的两个男人披挂整齐、杀气腾腾、一本正经的捍卫着所谓荣誉和正义，其实他们只是目光短浅、粗鄙无能、卑劣下流的配角而已，真正的决斗，是女主和封建霸权、世俗偏见的战争。虽然她的丈夫在决斗场上获胜了，但是其实在他自己的决斗中，她没有赢。但是，历史会铭刻。老雷又一部古装片，虽然没有《天国王朝》那般的史诗感，但充满人性关怀，假以时日会成为佳作
决斗现场很过瘾，中世纪画风感觉很到位。每个人的视角都会不自觉美化自己，却不一定是在撒谎。
一场强奸演两遍，废话连篇复述三回，还满口真话的《罗生门》肥皂剧。如果黑泽明在世的话，会骂斯科特无耻吗！84岁斯科特只拍了20分钟决斗好吧！前面两个小时的废戏从来都是斯科特不擅长的。美英联手蹭法国700年前的女权，别扯淡了。4
非常工整也很稳的命题作文，看之前以为是「罗生门」，但其实特意留下的「the truth」已经表明了整部电影并不意在扑朔迷离——只有婆婆带着所有仆人离开这段没有给出明确解释。比为了美化自我而说谎更恐怖的，是从头到尾都认为自己的真相合情合理。哪怕是慷慨勇猛自诩爱妻的骑士，也只是把妻子当成财产。
往往一个女人的子宫就决定了整个世界
想討巧，用歐洲中世紀的故事、羅生門的方法來展現metoo的主題。但Ben & Matt Damon參與的劇本和Ridley Scott的拍法都弱化了Jodie Comer本人最重要的視角和人本，比如強暴場面不用拍兩次，完全可以用其它鏡頭代替；不用以好母親作為化解。到頭來和故事裡兩個充滿toxic masculinity的角色一樣自以為是地展現所謂正義。如果不是Jodie Comer，這部電影會更失色。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
