目前日期文章:201102 (8)

瀏覽方式: 標題列表 簡短摘要

路線 (在聖彼得堡之前先去了美國)
此次旅行日誌寫的非常隨便,因為事前就知道不可能回來後再一口氣回憶。
在這個分類: 旅行--> 2010聖彼德堡 to 台灣
現在正在重新整理精簡版中......不確定會完成。

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

如此簡單的劇本對整個團隊,尤其是導演,是個挑戰:一個酷愛旅遊登山的年輕人出了意外被困在岩石狹縫中。不難猜測的是他走的不是一般遊客會走的步道,因此沒有其他人會經過可以救援,此行之前也沒有充分告知行程──總之是個被孤立了的危急情況,這是背景。

背景交待完畢,接著就是自助的過程。但是這樣要撐起整部電影還是不夠,剩下的就是主角在這個過程中的回憶,幻想,心理狀態,情緒……等等。這是整部電影最精采的部份。

Danny Boyle證明了他的才能,利用實驗性質的影像:分割鏡頭,高反差,失焦等等,切合心理狀態的音樂運用,最精采的仍是James Franco的演出,讓這段過程扣人心弦。,否則,這裡的故事情節僅是由主角的片段回憶所組成,但之所以產生令人有繼續看下去的動力的無非就是上述導演與演員的精采表現。

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

"the blind side" isn't bad but is nothing but a pop movie. The premise of adaption from true story which might be written in poster, is the only thing to convince audience its reality. Anything esle about the plot is absolutely pale and shallow. Its main function is to comfort people by the filtered inspirational story but ignore anything bad. That's ok, surely, don't be so sreious. and by its nomination by AMPAS shows the commercial essence of the academy again.

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

What a amzing excellent horroe movie about a insane teenager's illusion,it's about irony of reality, sadness of the truth, inevitable fate, critism of hypocritical adults. It mentioned time travelling but it takes it as a raw to duscuss free will. The most important is it's still a story. Yes it has something interesting but it's never a lession.

But, it's still too weird for people. sadess, and darkness. I think probaly hard-core fan would like it. it's a cult movie.

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

Some people can not understand why somebody would post some secrets on public internet?

Maybe it’s kind of therapy by revealing one’s own stories and then trace back the source of sadness. Or at least gets a remission by expressing one’s feeling.

I don’t think it’s cowardice to show soft spot to people. What a coward would do is seeking of consolation BY doing this.

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

劍雨絕對不是什麼刻意要講什麼大道理,企圖把武俠提升到什麼層次去的作品。他就是要好好的把個故事說給你聽的電影。總算這個想法,近來是越來越多編導回神了。

所有武俠該有的梗都放了進去,細心編排橋段,氣氛醞釀,故事鋪陳,該打的戲,不要刻意亂添,要注意故事的合理性;該有的文戲,也不要嫌麻煩,好好的經營一下人物的情感其所由來,用以說服觀眾。最後也耍了個小小顛覆,讓這場武林風暴說穿了仍是場荒謬遊戲。而故事的最重要核心,還是在於人物的刻劃,梗可以老套,但要安排得宜,故事可以陳舊,但是鋪陳不可馬虎。比方說前面適度埋個伏筆,最後關鍵時刻爆雷出來,那個張力自然就打動人心。雖然打戲真正最好看的還是楊紫瓊,但是其他人藉由適度的剪接運鏡,搭配人物性格的刻劃,打的就有了內在,而不只是雙方互毆。(要著重打的暢快淋漓也行,但就要到達Taken,或是導火線,殺破狼那般水平)

舉出兩個編劇對打戲用心編排的地方:第一是劍法,第二個平衡。

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(1) 人氣()

精巧的故事被導演用流暢環環相扣的敘事帶出,這樣的影匠技巧是一個優秀導演的基本功夫。中島哲也無疑是被歸類成強烈的表現主義的導演,他讓我們知道了不是他把電影拍的像MV(ex: across the universe),而是把MV的表現方式用電影的血肉成長出更鮮豔的花朵,讓電影這門藝術再次證明了它的多元。

「從這個文本裡粹取出了什麼反映了日本社會當下的哪些」這個瑣碎過程有許多人樂於從事。在這裡不贅述。我所讚賞的是,電影在如此絢爛的表現手法之下,導演竟然還能把電影始終維持在故事本身的基調中,不但沒有喧賓奪主,反而更因為這些表現的動人,讓故事的內在更被催出強烈的情感力道。

「復仇」是人類原始的情感衝動,中島哲也用絢爛的影像音樂表現手法,適度的配合著故事的敘事,讓這個原始情感有了讓人(讓我)看的激動的無法動彈的力量。

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()

"Shutter Island", made by Martin Scorsese, made some people disappointed due to its insufficient difficulties of puzzle. However, I don’t think the producer or director intend to make a suspense film but a plot with a puzzle to perform a man who is suffered by his past memory without any awareness. If he really wants to play a riddle game with audience, he has a lot of chances to bewilder us. The point is how it goes and what he shows along with the plot. I see the leading man: outstanding actor Leonardo Dicaprio shows how a patient lost himself in continued nightmare; I see a few excellent sections shows a good director’s skills to render a horror atmosphere; and the best is the ability to overlook total plot and made every line every word every move has its own function. Especially in the rear part, what appear in the front become clues to the truth. Nothing is wasted. It’s so CLEVER and I always found this kind of work in sophisticated directors, maybe it manifests sort of wisdom in veteran directing.

Although it doesn’t show obvious intention to deeper meanings, director still insert some meaningful line to give audience a glance of his ideology: please notice every conversation between insane Teddy (Dicaprio) and other persons, it’s about violence, of people, of institution, of Country, these dialogue is made elaborate.

The end is unexpected not due to the puzzle itself, as I said, it’s not hard, and director seems not intend to focus on this, the unexpectedness is rendered undramatically: Teddy seems leave his “cycle” and then director tells us he fails actually, but actually, he made choice. And it undoubtedly means, whatever this is reality or dream, true or fake, he decides to own the good and dies.

milstein 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(0) 人氣()