close
一向很少看好萊塢大片的我，在抵擋不住「黑暗騎士」一片叫好的影評聲浪下，也趕時髦去應卯了一下，而且挑選的觀看場所是美麗華的IMAX，結果也慶幸看的是IMAX版，否則還真的覺得乏善可陳...
因為從來就不是蝙幅俠的漫畫迷，過去的蝙幅俠電影系列也只看過近二十年前，由提姆波頓導演，米高基頓飾演蝙蝠俠，傑克尼克遜飾演小丑的那一集而已，印象中跟一般英雄片不同的是美術甚佳，影像突出，傑克尼克遜的演出令人難忘，其他如敘事、角色設定以及影片看頭都跟同類型的影片差不多，沒什麼特別感覺，就是除暴安良，人物性格兩極化嘛~~
沒看「黑暗騎士」前，就一直聽說克里斯多福諾蘭此役成績很優，是美好的商業與藝術的結合。但是藝術處理在哪裡?我實在看不出來，因為很明顯的，通片的創作概念還是完全符合好萊塢高概念的操作，也就是先決定片型、情節、看頭、卡斯...這些非關戲劇藝術性高下的商業因素，然後再在這個框架下操兵，所謂的聲目之娛、完美的因果結構、觀眾期待看到的飛車、緊身衣、超能力搏鬥...都要排在情節的合理性、角色關係的可信度、戲劇處境的真實性之前，藝術片的處理在哪裡?
論者多認為本片能夠將檢察官、蝙蝠俠的型像塑造跳脫原有之完全正面英雄的處理，而變的比較曖昧譽為增加了角色深度，並符合人性，那這樣的藝術標準也太低了，從下面轉貼的一篇文章中就可窺見，這已是後解構社會中，好萊塢不得不做的一種調整而已，超英雄轉型為人性化英雄，有其負面或黑暗面的描寫，早就是為繼續抓住觀眾的必然趨勢，但骨子裡，還是徹頭徹尾的商業片呀!
我不是百分之百的討厭這部片。相反地，我其實還得到不少樂趣，但這些愉悅多是由影片在攝影、特效方面的科技性成就所帶來，與戲劇藝術方面的感動無關，也因此，我肯定IMAX 的經驗，可以令我看得十分過癮，但卻不能在看完後回味再三。
(附錄)
How Many Superheroes Does It Take to Tire a Genre?
超級英雄電影浮濫 何時現疲態？
By A. O. Scott
“Batman has no limits,” says Bruce Wayne to his manservant, Alfred, early in “The Dark Knight,” and the accountants at Warner Brothers, which released the movie, are likely to agree. I’m not so sure.
「蝙蝠俠沒有極限，」布魯斯韋恩在「黑暗騎士」前段告訴男僕阿福，負責發行的華納公司會計人員可能有同感。我可沒這麼有把握。
“The Dark Knight,” praised by critics for its somber themes and grand ambitions, has proven to be a mighty box office force in a summer already dominated by superheroes of various kinds.
「黑暗騎士」陰鬱的主題和宏偉的企圖普獲影評讚賞，並在各式各樣超級英雄精銳盡出的暑假成為票房強檔。
But any comic book fan knows that a hero at the height of his powers is a few panels removed from mortal danger, and that hubris has a way of summoning new enemies out of the shadows. Are the Caped Crusader and his colleagues basking in an endless summer of triumph, or are they already on their way out?
但任何漫畫迷都知道，英雄能力極盛時距致命危險只有幾格之遙，狂妄自大將從幽暗處召來新的敵人。蝙蝠俠和其他超級英雄是沉浸在接連不斷的夏季大捷中志得意滿，還是正走上敗亡之途？
The season began with “Iron Man” back in May, which anticipated “The Dark Knight” in striking many reviewers as a pleasant surprise. The first weekend in July belonged to “Hancock,” which played with the superhero archetype by making him a grouchy, slovenly drunk rather than a brilliant scientist, a dashing billionaire or some combination of the two. In that case, the reviews were mixed, but the money flowed in anyway. Even the lackluster “Incredible Hulk,” back in June, managed a reasonably robust opening, as did “Hellboy II,” a somewhat more esoteric comic-book movie.
暑假檔由「鋼鐵人」在五月揭開序幕，搶在「黑暗騎士」前，讓許多影評人感到驚喜。七月第一個周末是「全民超人」的天下，修飾超級英雄的原型，將其變成一個愛抱怨、不修邊幅的醉漢，而非聰明的科學家，瀟灑的億萬富翁，或兩者的綜合體。「全民超人」雖然影評褒貶不一，但反正財源滾滾。甚至乏味的「無敵浩克」也在六月交出算得上強勁的首演票房，有點難懂的漫畫電影「地獄怪客II：金甲軍團」亦然。
The commercial strength of the superhero genre is hardly news, of course. Ever since the success of “Spider-Man” back in 2002, this decade has been something of a golden age for large-scale action movies featuring guys in high-tech bodysuits battling garishly costumed, ruthless criminal masterminds. Some of them – the “Fantastic Four” pictures, most notably – are content to be entertaining pop-culture throwaways. But most aspire to be something more, to be taken as seriously as their heroes and villains take themselves.
當然，超級英雄類型的商業片賣座已經不算是新聞。從「蜘蛛人」早在2002年奏捷，這十年是大排場動作片的黃金年代，穿高科技緊身衣的男人對抗穿著花稍俗麗，冷酷無情的犯罪首腦。某些這類型影片，尤其是「驚奇四超人」系列，自甘為看過即忘的娛樂流行文化商品。但絕大多數企圖不僅於此，它們渴望被認真看待，如同電影裡的英雄與惡棍那樣正視自己。
There have been disappointments – Ang Lee’s 2003 “Hulk”; Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns”; the third installment of the “X-Men” series, directed by Brett Ratner – but these have hardly dented the power of the genre.
令人失望的作品一直都有，像李安2003年的「綠巨人浩克」，布萊恩辛格的「超人再起」，及布萊特雷特納執導的「X戰警」系列第三集，但都難以削弱這類影片的威力。
Still, I have a hunch, and perhaps a hope, that “Iron Man,” “Hancock” and “Dark Knight” together represent a peak, by which I mean not only a previously unattained level of quality and interest, but also the beginning of a decline. In their very different ways, these films discover the limits built into the superhero genre as it currently exists.
儘管如此，我有個預感，或許是希望，「鋼鐵人」、「全民超人」和「黑暗騎士」共創一個顛峰，我的意思不只是品質和趣味達到前所未有的水準，也是衰退的開始。這些影片各自以迥然不同的方式，找到現有超級英雄片類型的內在極限。
I’m willing to grant that “The Dark Knight” is as good as a movie of its kind can be. There is no doubt that Batman provided Christopher Nolan with a platform for his artistic ambitions. You can’t set out to make a psychological thriller and expect to command anything like the $185 million budget Mr. Nolan had at his disposal in “The Dark Knight.” And that money allowed Mr. Nolan and his team to create a seamless and evocative visual atmosphere.
我樂於承認，「黑暗騎士」是同類型影片中的佼佼者。蝙蝠俠無疑提供克里斯多夫‧諾蘭一個發揮藝術企圖心的舞台。你拍一部心理驚悚片，無法期望能像諾蘭執導「黑暗騎士」那樣編列1.85億美元預算。這筆錢讓諾蘭和他的團隊營造出天衣無縫，勾引興趣的視覺藝術氛圍。
But to paraphrase something the Joker says to Batman, “The Dark Knight” has rules, and they are the conventions that no movie of this kind can escape. The climax must be a fight with the villain, during which the symbiosis of good guy and bad guy, implicit throughout, must be articulated. The end must point forward to a sequel, and an aura of moral consequence must be sustained even as the killings, explosions and chases multiply.
但詮釋小丑對蝙蝠俠說的話，「黑暗騎士」有其規則，而且這類型電影無一能夠免俗。電影高潮必然善惡大戰，一直只用暗示來呈現的好人與壞人共生關係，在此決戰中必須清楚表達。結局必然指出另有續集，殺戮、爆破、追逐場面加倍，但善有善報、惡有惡報的道德原則必須確立。
Every movie genre is governed by conventions, and every decent genre movie explores the zones of freedom within those parameters. Thus “Iron Man” loosens the reins to give Robert Downey Jr. room to explore the kinks and idiosyncrasies of Tony Stark, the playboy billionaire engineering genius who grows up and builds himself a metal suit. And “Hancock” takes the conceit of a dissipated, semi-competent hero and turns it into the occasion for some sharp satire on race, celebrity and the supposedly universal likability of its star, Will Smith.
所有電影類型都受限於成規，每一部好的類型電影都在界限內探索自由的範圍。所以「鋼鐵人」給小勞勃道尼空間，探索東尼‧史塔克的奇想與怪癖，這位放蕩不羈的億萬富翁和工程天才成長，給自己打造了一件金屬衣。「全民超人」則是將耽溺於飲酒作樂、半吊子英雄的自負，轉換成對種族、名流、主角威爾史密斯萬人迷氣質的尖銳諷刺。
But in both cases, as soon as the main character is ready to do battle, the originality drains out of the picture, and the commercial imperatives – the big fight, the overscaled action extravaganza – take over.
但是在這兩個例子裡，主角一準備戰鬥，創意立刻枯竭，商業規律：大戰、超大規模的動作展示開始主導。
The disappointment comes from the way the picture spells out lofty, serious themes and then ... spells them out again. What kind of hero do we need? Where is the line between justice and vengeance?
片子闡析崇高嚴肅的主題，然後呢，換個講法又說一遍，令人失望。我們需要哪種英雄？正義和復仇的界線何在？
And yet stating such themes is as far as the current wave of superhero movies seems able or willing to go.
但陳述這樣的主題似乎已是現在這波超級英雄電影所能或所願去做的極限。
The masked and caped poor crusaders must turn big profits on a global scale and satisfy an audience hungry for the thrill of novelty and the comforts of the familiar.
戴面具、披斗篷的正義使者必須在全球締造巨大利益，滿足觀眾對新奇興奮的渴望和熟悉事物的舒適感。
Is it just me, or is the strain starting to show?
這只是作者自己的問題嗎，還是要滿足期待的壓力開始顯現？
原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/movies/24supe.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/24/arts/24supe.php
2008-08-05/聯合報/G9版/UNITED DAILY NEWS 張佑生 原文請見8月5日紐時周報十一版上
因為從來就不是蝙幅俠的漫畫迷，過去的蝙幅俠電影系列也只看過近二十年前，由提姆波頓導演，米高基頓飾演蝙蝠俠，傑克尼克遜飾演小丑的那一集而已，印象中跟一般英雄片不同的是美術甚佳，影像突出，傑克尼克遜的演出令人難忘，其他如敘事、角色設定以及影片看頭都跟同類型的影片差不多，沒什麼特別感覺，就是除暴安良，人物性格兩極化嘛~~
沒看「黑暗騎士」前，就一直聽說克里斯多福諾蘭此役成績很優，是美好的商業與藝術的結合。但是藝術處理在哪裡?我實在看不出來，因為很明顯的，通片的創作概念還是完全符合好萊塢高概念的操作，也就是先決定片型、情節、看頭、卡斯...這些非關戲劇藝術性高下的商業因素，然後再在這個框架下操兵，所謂的聲目之娛、完美的因果結構、觀眾期待看到的飛車、緊身衣、超能力搏鬥...都要排在情節的合理性、角色關係的可信度、戲劇處境的真實性之前，藝術片的處理在哪裡?
論者多認為本片能夠將檢察官、蝙蝠俠的型像塑造跳脫原有之完全正面英雄的處理，而變的比較曖昧譽為增加了角色深度，並符合人性，那這樣的藝術標準也太低了，從下面轉貼的一篇文章中就可窺見，這已是後解構社會中，好萊塢不得不做的一種調整而已，超英雄轉型為人性化英雄，有其負面或黑暗面的描寫，早就是為繼續抓住觀眾的必然趨勢，但骨子裡，還是徹頭徹尾的商業片呀!
我不是百分之百的討厭這部片。相反地，我其實還得到不少樂趣，但這些愉悅多是由影片在攝影、特效方面的科技性成就所帶來，與戲劇藝術方面的感動無關，也因此，我肯定IMAX 的經驗，可以令我看得十分過癮，但卻不能在看完後回味再三。
(附錄)
How Many Superheroes Does It Take to Tire a Genre?
超級英雄電影浮濫 何時現疲態？
By A. O. Scott
“Batman has no limits,” says Bruce Wayne to his manservant, Alfred, early in “The Dark Knight,” and the accountants at Warner Brothers, which released the movie, are likely to agree. I’m not so sure.
「蝙蝠俠沒有極限，」布魯斯韋恩在「黑暗騎士」前段告訴男僕阿福，負責發行的華納公司會計人員可能有同感。我可沒這麼有把握。
“The Dark Knight,” praised by critics for its somber themes and grand ambitions, has proven to be a mighty box office force in a summer already dominated by superheroes of various kinds.
「黑暗騎士」陰鬱的主題和宏偉的企圖普獲影評讚賞，並在各式各樣超級英雄精銳盡出的暑假成為票房強檔。
But any comic book fan knows that a hero at the height of his powers is a few panels removed from mortal danger, and that hubris has a way of summoning new enemies out of the shadows. Are the Caped Crusader and his colleagues basking in an endless summer of triumph, or are they already on their way out?
但任何漫畫迷都知道，英雄能力極盛時距致命危險只有幾格之遙，狂妄自大將從幽暗處召來新的敵人。蝙蝠俠和其他超級英雄是沉浸在接連不斷的夏季大捷中志得意滿，還是正走上敗亡之途？
The season began with “Iron Man” back in May, which anticipated “The Dark Knight” in striking many reviewers as a pleasant surprise. The first weekend in July belonged to “Hancock,” which played with the superhero archetype by making him a grouchy, slovenly drunk rather than a brilliant scientist, a dashing billionaire or some combination of the two. In that case, the reviews were mixed, but the money flowed in anyway. Even the lackluster “Incredible Hulk,” back in June, managed a reasonably robust opening, as did “Hellboy II,” a somewhat more esoteric comic-book movie.
暑假檔由「鋼鐵人」在五月揭開序幕，搶在「黑暗騎士」前，讓許多影評人感到驚喜。七月第一個周末是「全民超人」的天下，修飾超級英雄的原型，將其變成一個愛抱怨、不修邊幅的醉漢，而非聰明的科學家，瀟灑的億萬富翁，或兩者的綜合體。「全民超人」雖然影評褒貶不一，但反正財源滾滾。甚至乏味的「無敵浩克」也在六月交出算得上強勁的首演票房，有點難懂的漫畫電影「地獄怪客II：金甲軍團」亦然。
The commercial strength of the superhero genre is hardly news, of course. Ever since the success of “Spider-Man” back in 2002, this decade has been something of a golden age for large-scale action movies featuring guys in high-tech bodysuits battling garishly costumed, ruthless criminal masterminds. Some of them – the “Fantastic Four” pictures, most notably – are content to be entertaining pop-culture throwaways. But most aspire to be something more, to be taken as seriously as their heroes and villains take themselves.
當然，超級英雄類型的商業片賣座已經不算是新聞。從「蜘蛛人」早在2002年奏捷，這十年是大排場動作片的黃金年代，穿高科技緊身衣的男人對抗穿著花稍俗麗，冷酷無情的犯罪首腦。某些這類型影片，尤其是「驚奇四超人」系列，自甘為看過即忘的娛樂流行文化商品。但絕大多數企圖不僅於此，它們渴望被認真看待，如同電影裡的英雄與惡棍那樣正視自己。
There have been disappointments – Ang Lee’s 2003 “Hulk”; Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns”; the third installment of the “X-Men” series, directed by Brett Ratner – but these have hardly dented the power of the genre.
令人失望的作品一直都有，像李安2003年的「綠巨人浩克」，布萊恩辛格的「超人再起」，及布萊特雷特納執導的「X戰警」系列第三集，但都難以削弱這類影片的威力。
Still, I have a hunch, and perhaps a hope, that “Iron Man,” “Hancock” and “Dark Knight” together represent a peak, by which I mean not only a previously unattained level of quality and interest, but also the beginning of a decline. In their very different ways, these films discover the limits built into the superhero genre as it currently exists.
儘管如此，我有個預感，或許是希望，「鋼鐵人」、「全民超人」和「黑暗騎士」共創一個顛峰，我的意思不只是品質和趣味達到前所未有的水準，也是衰退的開始。這些影片各自以迥然不同的方式，找到現有超級英雄片類型的內在極限。
I’m willing to grant that “The Dark Knight” is as good as a movie of its kind can be. There is no doubt that Batman provided Christopher Nolan with a platform for his artistic ambitions. You can’t set out to make a psychological thriller and expect to command anything like the $185 million budget Mr. Nolan had at his disposal in “The Dark Knight.” And that money allowed Mr. Nolan and his team to create a seamless and evocative visual atmosphere.
我樂於承認，「黑暗騎士」是同類型影片中的佼佼者。蝙蝠俠無疑提供克里斯多夫‧諾蘭一個發揮藝術企圖心的舞台。你拍一部心理驚悚片，無法期望能像諾蘭執導「黑暗騎士」那樣編列1.85億美元預算。這筆錢讓諾蘭和他的團隊營造出天衣無縫，勾引興趣的視覺藝術氛圍。
But to paraphrase something the Joker says to Batman, “The Dark Knight” has rules, and they are the conventions that no movie of this kind can escape. The climax must be a fight with the villain, during which the symbiosis of good guy and bad guy, implicit throughout, must be articulated. The end must point forward to a sequel, and an aura of moral consequence must be sustained even as the killings, explosions and chases multiply.
但詮釋小丑對蝙蝠俠說的話，「黑暗騎士」有其規則，而且這類型電影無一能夠免俗。電影高潮必然善惡大戰，一直只用暗示來呈現的好人與壞人共生關係，在此決戰中必須清楚表達。結局必然指出另有續集，殺戮、爆破、追逐場面加倍，但善有善報、惡有惡報的道德原則必須確立。
Every movie genre is governed by conventions, and every decent genre movie explores the zones of freedom within those parameters. Thus “Iron Man” loosens the reins to give Robert Downey Jr. room to explore the kinks and idiosyncrasies of Tony Stark, the playboy billionaire engineering genius who grows up and builds himself a metal suit. And “Hancock” takes the conceit of a dissipated, semi-competent hero and turns it into the occasion for some sharp satire on race, celebrity and the supposedly universal likability of its star, Will Smith.
所有電影類型都受限於成規，每一部好的類型電影都在界限內探索自由的範圍。所以「鋼鐵人」給小勞勃道尼空間，探索東尼‧史塔克的奇想與怪癖，這位放蕩不羈的億萬富翁和工程天才成長，給自己打造了一件金屬衣。「全民超人」則是將耽溺於飲酒作樂、半吊子英雄的自負，轉換成對種族、名流、主角威爾史密斯萬人迷氣質的尖銳諷刺。
But in both cases, as soon as the main character is ready to do battle, the originality drains out of the picture, and the commercial imperatives – the big fight, the overscaled action extravaganza – take over.
但是在這兩個例子裡，主角一準備戰鬥，創意立刻枯竭，商業規律：大戰、超大規模的動作展示開始主導。
The disappointment comes from the way the picture spells out lofty, serious themes and then ... spells them out again. What kind of hero do we need? Where is the line between justice and vengeance?
片子闡析崇高嚴肅的主題，然後呢，換個講法又說一遍，令人失望。我們需要哪種英雄？正義和復仇的界線何在？
And yet stating such themes is as far as the current wave of superhero movies seems able or willing to go.
但陳述這樣的主題似乎已是現在這波超級英雄電影所能或所願去做的極限。
The masked and caped poor crusaders must turn big profits on a global scale and satisfy an audience hungry for the thrill of novelty and the comforts of the familiar.
戴面具、披斗篷的正義使者必須在全球締造巨大利益，滿足觀眾對新奇興奮的渴望和熟悉事物的舒適感。
Is it just me, or is the strain starting to show?
這只是作者自己的問題嗎，還是要滿足期待的壓力開始顯現？
原文參照：
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/movies/24supe.html
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/24/arts/24supe.php
2008-08-05/聯合報/G9版/UNITED DAILY NEWS 張佑生 原文請見8月5日紐時周報十一版上
全站熱搜
留言列表
