法外之王 (2018)

7.5

2018 / 英國(guó) 美國(guó) / 劇情 動(dòng)作 傳記 歷史 / 大衛(wèi)·馬肯茲 / 克里斯·派恩 斯蒂芬·迪蘭

我感覺這個(gè)突現(xiàn)出戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是多么的可怕，不過不管怎么樣我覺得歐洲那些國(guó)家歷史都是特別血腥的，要不然怎么可能成為世界上的強(qiáng)國(guó)，畢竟沒有戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，你可能不可以侵略這么多的國(guó)家和霸占這么多的領(lǐng)土，這一切的一切都源自于歐洲的本性吧，因?yàn)樗麄兊娜撕脩?zhàn)，所以造成了這么多不必要的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)發(fā)生獲取，這就是和平的重要性，戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)是如此的殘酷

I could talk about God, but He has no place where we are going. I could talk about honor, but you are here. You know enough about honor. I know you all as men, but today, today we are beasts. You can fight for God, for honor, for country, for family, for yourselves. I do not care, so long as you FIGHT!!

1. 還記得電影《勇敢的心》里威廉華萊士最后一句吶喊么？ 對(duì)，是：“FREEDOM……”！ 蘇格蘭獨(dú)立運(yùn)動(dòng)就此結(jié)束了？事實(shí)上一切才剛剛開始…… 這部《法外之王》就是《勇敢的心》的續(xù)集，電影講述的是羅伯特布魯斯反抗英格蘭長(zhǎng)腿愛德華統(tǒng)治的故事。 《法外之王》的英語名字是《Outlaw King》，如果直譯的話，那便是非常粗俗易懂的“歹徒王”。 在中世紀(jì)，一旦被國(guó)王宣布為“法外之徒”，其結(jié)局那就是基本判定這個(gè)人的死刑，為此“法外之王”顯然是一個(gè)“叛國(guó)者”，這個(gè)要判絞刑的，更甚者那就是華萊士的結(jié)局：五馬分尸。 可是在一個(gè)金錢和權(quán)力統(tǒng)治的背后，要么做一個(gè)奴隸，選擇順服統(tǒng)治者的鐵蹄。要么做一個(gè)男人，拿起武器選擇戰(zhàn)斗。 顯然，羅伯特布魯斯沒有一直跪下去，雖然在《勇敢的心》中，羅伯特成為一個(gè)背后捅刀的“小人”，事實(shí)上以華萊士為首的蘇格蘭人民起義，從一開始并沒有得到眾多貴族的支持。 因此《勇敢的心》對(duì)布魯斯的塑造，確實(shí)有點(diǎn)為藝術(shù)犧牲的感覺。 《法外之王》就是從華萊士死后的故事開始談起，也是華萊士的延續(xù)。 2. 自由并不是廉價(jià)的，反而，要犧牲很多！ 為此，羅伯特布魯斯在教堂殺了蘇格蘭王位的另一個(gè)潛在的繼承者，約翰康明。 這一事件，一直折磨著布魯斯的靈魂，雖然最終他得到了蘇格蘭天主教會(huì)特威斯哈特主教的寬恕。事實(shí)上，隨后羅馬教皇還是對(duì)其下達(dá)了開除教籍的命令。 法外之王，也是教外之王。 加冕當(dāng)日，因?yàn)槭韬?，差點(diǎn)命喪營(yíng)地。一路退敗，部下只剩下40人。 就這樣，羅伯特布魯斯居然絕地逢生，從游擊戰(zhàn)開始，一個(gè)城堡，一個(gè)城堡的打下來了。 電影中的羅伯特布魯斯是一個(gè)沉默寡言的男人，就連新婚的妻子，他也只會(huì)說對(duì)她說一聲“晚安”。 可以說，電影基本還原了羅伯特布魯斯的基本史實(shí)。 最后一戰(zhàn)，班諾克本戰(zhàn)役。羅伯特布魯斯居然出奇制勝，以一比三的力量懸殊重創(chuàng)英格蘭騎兵和威爾斯親王。 要知道蘇格蘭的軍隊(duì)那可是一群烏合之眾啊。 據(jù)史料記載，英格蘭軍在整個(gè)班諾克本戰(zhàn)役中總共傷亡重騎兵、長(zhǎng)弓兵和步兵約9000余人，是英格蘭700多年歷史上傷亡最慘重的一次。 如果你喜歡看《權(quán)力的游戲》，那么這部電影的最后一戰(zhàn)頗有“私生子之戰(zhàn)”的味道。 無論是服裝，道具，還是場(chǎng)面，《法外之王》和《權(quán)力的游戲》不相上下，制作算是相當(dāng)精致了。 畫面呢，更不用說，《法外之王》用了大量長(zhǎng)焦鏡頭去塑造蘇格蘭的美景，無論是外景還是內(nèi)景，都美到極致。 反正我是一口氣看完的，劇情沒有過多的拖沓，反而看完有一種“這么快就結(jié)束了！”的感覺。 3. 再說一下兩個(gè)配角，首先是長(zhǎng)腿愛德華的教女，也就是布魯斯的第二任妻子伊麗莎白 。全片她的戲份并不多，但是導(dǎo)演用簡(jiǎn)單幾個(gè)情節(jié)就把她刻畫的相當(dāng)完美。 羅伯特決定起兵當(dāng)日，伊麗莎白堅(jiān)持站在丈夫這邊，她說：“我選擇了你，不論你計(jì)劃要去哪里。我選擇你，我的丈夫?！? 這個(gè)決定非常艱難，畢竟是造反，要掉腦袋的，而且他是英格蘭國(guó)王愛德華的教女，這已決定相當(dāng)于自己也叛變了。 但是在基督教信仰的背景下，順服自己的丈夫，這是第正確的決定，她的堅(jiān)持，忠貞，慈愛也得到了回報(bào)。 另一個(gè)比較出色的配角是道格拉斯，這個(gè)人塑造的也相當(dāng)成功，殺得英格蘭士兵聞風(fēng)喪膽。 這個(gè)人物也是后來“勇敢的心”的傳奇人物，據(jù)說晚年羅伯特布魯斯非常懊悔在教堂殺了約翰康明，于是決定參加十字軍東征。 可是羅伯特晚年根本無法隨軍，于是他囑托道格拉斯在他死后，將其心臟取出，帶之出征。 羅伯特死后道格拉斯忠實(shí)地遵守了諾言，他在1330年離開蘇格蘭，脖子上戴著用鏈子綁住的銀制琉璃骨灰盒，里面陳放著羅伯特·布魯斯的心臟。 這就是“勇敢的心”的由來，后來道格拉斯也戰(zhàn)死在十字軍的沙場(chǎng)。 回到電影，最終電影以羅伯特布魯斯和妻子相聚結(jié)束。 1328年，愛德華三世與羅伯特簽訂《北安普敦條約》和《愛丁堡協(xié)議》，正式承認(rèn)了蘇格蘭王國(guó)的獨(dú)立主權(quán)。 直到，他的后代詹姆斯六世繼承了英格蘭王位。這樣一對(duì)英倫千年冤家走向聯(lián)合，從此英格蘭和蘇格蘭迎來了王朝聯(lián)合"（Union of the Crowns）時(shí)代。 人民創(chuàng)造了歷史，歷史卻把英雄變成了傳說。 無論是開明君主還是無法之王，電影給我們的體驗(yàn)只是一種慰藉。 我們的故事可以有很多很多，可是我們拍出來的電影卻只有一頁紙那么淺薄，精神的自由仍在被轄制著。 因此，被奴役的命運(yùn)不是他給，而是自取。但是無論怎么樣，還是期望有一天，我們的熒幕前后都有人能從心底發(fā)出“FREEDOM”的吶喊。

羅伯特布魯斯

一直追權(quán)力的游戲，比較喜歡這類的片子，這部片子雖然比較短，但故事敘述清楚，人物設(shè)定飽滿，服裝道路精細(xì)，符合時(shí)代特征與歷史實(shí)際，血腥的殺戮場(chǎng)面，生與死只在一念間，縱然世道如此，仍有人保留一顆衷心與尊嚴(yán)，為了朋友甘愿受死，為了家族榮譽(yù)可以委曲求全英勇作戰(zhàn)，那是一個(gè)崇尚榮譽(yù)的時(shí)代，沒有要挾，沒有脅迫，勝敗只取決于生死對(duì)決，沒有太多陰謀狡詐，有權(quán)力的游戲的風(fēng)格，甚是喜歡。片里有彩蛋，少兒不宜，不過也很好的反映了當(dāng)時(shí)的風(fēng)土人情。值得觀看。

對(duì)本片比較陌生的可以先去溫習(xí)一下《勇敢的心》，本片在劇情上連接的是《勇敢的心》，威廉·華萊士在本片開始已被處死，本片的主角即為在《勇敢的心》當(dāng)中背叛（有爭(zhēng)議）威廉·華萊士那位貴族——羅伯特·布魯斯，如果說《勇敢的心》是點(diǎn)燃了英格蘭獨(dú)立的星星之火，那么本片可以說是對(duì)星星之火的進(jìn)一步發(fā)展，與《勇敢的心》相比本片在劇情設(shè)置和場(chǎng)景調(diào)度運(yùn)用上完全可以與之匹敵，《勇敢的心》悲劇式的結(jié)尾留下的遺憾在本片中得以發(fā)展，宏大的場(chǎng)面設(shè)置和場(chǎng)景調(diào)度以及非常良心的細(xì)節(jié)還原，片中很多劇情設(shè)置都是有史可依，有據(jù)可查，這樣處處細(xì)節(jié)的完善呈現(xiàn)出來的作品帶給觀者的也是滿滿的誠(chéng)意和震撼。如果說《勇敢的心》帶給觀者的是敢于反抗的力量，那么本片帶給觀者的則是逆境中求生的不屈和堅(jiān)強(qiáng)，蜘蛛以不懈努力而彌補(bǔ)破網(wǎng)之風(fēng)，人更應(yīng)該以不懈之力以彌補(bǔ)天災(zāi)人禍之害，在逆境中保持向上的決心和勇氣與在溫暖中保持清醒和鎮(zhèn)定同樣重要，《勇敢的心》教會(huì)我們，在烏云遮蓋的雨天，我們要學(xué)會(huì)追尋自己的太陽和活下去的勇氣，當(dāng)災(zāi)禍來臨我們除了忍受還可以反抗，本片則教會(huì)我們?cè)谄D難險(xiǎn)阻之中求生，在眾叛親離求存，在為世所鄙求同，在生死一線求變，在大勢(shì)所趨之下可以逐浪而行，在兵散人亡之際可以東山再起，意義非常深遠(yuǎn)的一部歷史傳記類電影，期待下一部的到來！

大勢(shì)所趨之下的逐浪而行，

生死存亡之際的絕地而生，

法外之王的窮途末路，

英雄誕生的徐徐歸途，

沒有人會(huì)忘記自由的回想，

我們更不會(huì)忘記，

陰霾之下，

明亮陽光的堅(jiān)強(qiáng)！

以上內(nèi)容轉(zhuǎn)自微信公眾號(hào)《詩詞里的影院》

詩詞里的影院

“Outlaw King” is a historical drama about the journey of the legendary king of Scotland, Robert the Bruce. Robert, facing the British, one of the strongest armies in Europe, who had already defeated the Scots before, needs not only to find a way to victory but also to be a leader for a discouraged and restless nation. The film is directed by David Mackenzie, who was praised for his 2016 Western crime drama “Hell Or High Water,” my favorite film of that year. For that reason, I was looking forward to “Outlaw King,” Mackenzie and Pine’s second collaboration.

As a historical drama, the film did a solid job of putting the audience in the context of medieval England. From depictions of daily life to an elaborate wedding ceremony, the film more than meets Hollywood’s standards. The whole film was shot in England and Scotland, which lent even more authenticity to the battle scenes.

Unfortunately, the film is disappointing on almost every other level. The pacing is inconsistent, to say the least. The story starts with Robert the Bruce and his family submitting to King Edward I of England after a failed first Scottish revolution. Instead of taking its time to build up the characters, the film’s first 25 minutes rush the process through which Robert is crowned by the Roman Catholic Church as the new King of Scotland. Any part of that time could have been expanded to show his struggle leading the revolution when his allies failed him and his family left him. Instead, I found myself half an hour into the movie with nothing but a dozen characters, who had neither background nor personality to care about.

The film drags through a series of defeats, which force Robert into guerrilla-style warfare and scorched-earth policy. Once again, those are moments that could have been used to show Robert’s military genius or determination to destroy everything in order to restore his nation. Instead, it is briefly explained in a rushed precursor to the last battle. While the Battle of Bannockburn is the most enjoyable moment of the movie, I cannot help but remember the famous battle scene in “Braveheart” and notice how similar those two are. Even if that is exactly what happened in history, it is astonishingly uncreative for the director to film a battle scene in the same way it was done 20 years ago. Not coming up with a different way to present the battle shows the lack of creativity in this film.

While the minor characters are hustled over with no significance, the main characters are also poorly established. Elizabeth de Burgh, the female lead played by Florence Pugh, is introduced as a stranger who is not particularly comfortable with her identity as Robert’s second wife and as an outsider. However, with almost no transition, the struggle is over. Romance emerges between the two characters and Robert somehow gains her absolute loyalty despite her background as a member of a noble family that allied with Edward I. For the rest of the movie, her character does practically nothing other than escape and be imprisoned. Once again, one can argue that it is what happened in history, but that does not justify the blandness of the character.

Speaking of the performances: The acting in this film does nothing to redeem the troublesome story. In the past, I enjoyed the director’s skill at building up characters through actions instead of dialogues. Chris Pine also has shown that he can deliver a variety of different characters when given good material to work with. Unfortunately, at least in this movie, he is not able to elevate his character from the generic script. Except when the script demands shouting, Chris Pine has the exact same tone and facial expression throughout the whole movie. Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s performance as James Douglas, Robert’s second hand, is somewhat more interesting. His furious fighting style and wild facial expressions make him a demon on the battlefield. However, that is also his character’s only memorable trait. Prince Edward, played by Billy Howle, is just another plain sadistic villain who acts like an over-the-top lunatic whenever he’s onscreen.

Robert the Bruce is still an interesting character for his lifelong struggle between being a successful ruler and a faithful Christian, despite the fact that there is already a successful film about the Wars of Scottish Independence made twenty years ago, However, “Outlaw King” skims over the struggles that Robert encountered and barely touches on his motivation to pursue his mission. At the end, the cavalry is destroyed by the Scottish and the grand battle against the English is won, but I find myself sitting in my seat, unmoved and unable to find a character I can empathize with, wondering if it’s a bad idea to walk back to campus when it’s 30 degrees outside.