Two film adaptations of August Wilson’s plays, FENCES is Denzel Washington’s third sortie as a director, who also acts as the producer of MA RAINEY’S BLACK BOTTOM and is committed to bring Wilson’s CENTURY CIRCLE (10 plays in total, each takes place in one specific decade from 1900s t0 1990s) onto the screen, one-fifth has been done and long live Denzel!

FENCES is set in the ‘50s Pittsburgh, about the family of Troy Maxson (Washington), a middle-aged garbage collector, whom at first glance, we reckon as a hard-working, decent family man, bantering with his chummy coworker-cum-longtime-friend Jim Bono (Henderson), living with his wife Rose (Davis), football jock son Cory (Adepo) in their own house. But in time, Troy’s defects will surface through the strife between him and Cory, his paternalistic high-handedness is too overbearing even for its time, and more so, he is an unregenerate adulterer who sires a daughter with another woman, a bolt out of the blue that pulverizes Rose.

So, why should we feel sympathetic towards such a reprobate? who is grumpy, egotistic, hypocritical, macho and conceited, whose own past is rife with bad parenting, violence, theft and prison time, all attribute to his warped psyche. For one thing, Wilson’s own script (he passed away in 2005, and received sole credit for the screenplay) is teeming with dialogues that reflect the Afro-American existence that plays a significant part in molding Troy’s personality, no highfalutin wording, all down-to-earth grists, eloquently delivered by Washington firing on all cylinders, a performance irrefutably marks another apex of the star’s extraordinary career.

That is another thing which makes Troy a fascinating character, his masculine pride (the anathema that feeds bigotry) is all he has to hold onto after receiving many raw deals, and only through Washington’s reeling-off, unrelieved elocution, Troy’s ignorance, insularity and self-delusion bulk large, it is painful to watch him lay into his own son like a tyrant, yet, for an illiterate, case-hardened alpha man, who has three children all from different mothers, we should be thankful that his bark is worse than his bite.

Facing off an indomitable Washington, Davis isn’t cowed, albeit Rose is hemmed in the conventional angel-in-the-house bell jar, which she compensates with such seismic effusions that gooseflesh is sure to crawl all over one’s skin, also in those less vehement moments, one can always bank on her to give a piece of her mind that will bowl audience over.

Still, FENCES is a ponderous entity, and its 139-minute running time does it a disservice for being repetitively prolix, several sequences should be pruned, for example, Troy’s mentally impaired brother Gabriel (Williamson) is the source of Troy’s guilt, but his presence often slows down the momentum, and who can steal his thunder from Washington and Davis? Nary a chance.

By comparison, MA RAINEY… is more efficacious for its rapier-like, confrontational stagecrafts, after a short prologue, it occurs succinctly during one afternoon of a recording session in Chicago in the ‘20s, prominent singer Ma Rainey (Davis), dubbed “Mother of the Blues”, has to put her foot down in upholding her demands in face of her pale-skin manager and producer, whereas the trumpeter of her band, Levee (Boseman), is reckless and hot-headed enough to burn his bridge and fancy striking out on his own.

Sporting Ma’s oleaginous, smudgy war paint and flamboyant outfit, Davis goes for broke in the prima donna default (her singing is dubbed, right?), Ma can’t suffer gladly anyone who doesn’t bend to her biddings, neither the subservient manager Irvin (Shamos), the dour-looking producer Sturdyvant (Coyne), nor those who have the same pigmentation like hers. Being a colored woman who make good in the societal echelon, she has the clout to be nobody’s doormat, her pride festering into conceit and her pertinacious insistence of equal respect making her egocentric (giving white lickspittles a taste of their own medicine, she can also stand pat with nepotism). It is interesting that there is no love lost between Ma and Levee, under any mitigated circumstances, the pair could have hit it off and put their talents together into greater use. Yet, can’t we not relate to Ma? Anyone in her position will be none the wiser, her bluntness and high-handedness reflects how she manages to cope with a vastly unjust, racist world at large, Davis again, amps up the decibel and bulldozes any obstruction with her utterly transfixing verve and flexibility.

Shall Boseman land a posthumous Oscar nomination or even a win for his lived-in incarnation of Levee, a gifted musician for sure, but also an aspirant blowhard sans any savoir faire to break out against the antagonistic milieu? The verdict is a big “yes!”, Levee is the antithesis of Ma, she has made it but he ain’t, his tragedy lies in his impatience, his arrogance and naivety, one must pay his dues to earn his entitlement. Levee is too keyed-up, hot to trot to become someone, and puts all his hope in the hands of a treacherous white man. When his hope is roundly dashed, it is harrowing, even despairing to witness the target of his wielding knife is an innocent low hanging fruit (Glynn Turman is another memorable presence as Toledo the pianist) other than the culprit, Wilson’s lucid dissection of a colored man’s warped mentation is uncompromisingly brought home to its audience, and a visibly scraggy Boseman pours all his heart and soul to ascertain Levee has nothing else left to show, he is a miserable failure, but he fails cordially.

Both films do justice to Wilson’s urtext (the most impressive through-line is a man’s death/devil-defying/wrestling struggle, manifested in both works), and are terrific showcases for their thespians. If FENCES is rather exhausting than exhaustive, MA RAINEY…, deceptively differing from a standard biopic, is a more exuberant, trenchant and shocking treatment that is able to cram enough meat into a frills-free narrative.

referential entries: John Patrick Shanley’s DOUBT (2008, 8.9/10);Robert Zemeckis' FLIGHT (2012, 6.7/10).

這個(gè)丈夫 背叛妻子 因?yàn)樗拱琢?所以我試著客觀一點(diǎn)看 她和妻子講的道理我理解 可是我更多妻子的話感同身受 丈夫?yàn)槭裁床荒芟衿拮右粯尤套〖拍?而且 我沒法理解丈夫坦白后繼續(xù)劈腿 后來 他把兒子趕走 為了什么 我忍不住想是為了 給女兒騰地兒 這個(gè)父親 嚴(yán)厲 專制 但對(duì)自己有所認(rèn)識(shí) 遺傳了自己父親的混賬個(gè)性 可是他也有自己的有點(diǎn) 堅(jiān)守家庭責(zé)任 他總歸是希望兒子好的

這個(gè)妻子 就算丈夫坦白劈腿她的態(tài)度仍保持客觀 崩潰時(shí)候都不抱怨丈夫 我很佩服 被現(xiàn)實(shí)打擊到以后她會(huì)思考 理解不了丈夫堅(jiān)持出軌的行為 可是她接受了現(xiàn)實(shí) 從她向丈夫傳達(dá)醫(yī)院打來的電話時(shí)的平靜和一絲絲有自尊的人所表現(xiàn)出的同情里能看出 當(dāng)丈夫抱回那個(gè)不屬于她的孩子時(shí) 聽到丈夫在門廊上唱起的歌 而非丈夫那只說了一半 硬邦邦的懇求 又想到無辜的孩子 處于發(fā)自心底的善良 她表態(tài)：孩子有媽了 但你沒媳婦兒了

電影將他們分居不分家的日子留白 兒子被趕走后 母親是怎樣的 可以想象 又不可想象 幾年后她依舊平靜堅(jiān)強(qiáng) 一定是又想通了 妥協(xié)了 的確 她理解了丈夫 甚至她想要像丈夫一樣嚴(yán)厲的對(duì)待女兒 她說 她要像他一樣把自己最好的給女兒

沒看懂這是省么價(jià)值觀??？他爹打棒球失敗當(dāng)清潔工運(yùn)垃圾，然后整天和朋友及媳婦兒無腦快樂犯貧，在外面找別的女的有了孩子女的生孩子時(shí)死了然后把小孩讓自己原裝媳婦兒養(yǎng)著，他對(duì)自己倆親兒子野蠻粗暴，把自己小兒子趕出家。全片除了給他媳婦兒撫養(yǎng)費(fèi)就是蓋了個(gè)不到五米的籬笆。反而他媳婦兒是典型的中國(guó)式賢妻良母在家洗衣服帶孩子做飯任勞任怨三觀端正，Viola Davis大姐自the help 之后又一次精彩演出，贊。身為一個(gè)男同志這次挺孩子?jì)寢專蝗菀琢?。就這整天還得忍讓著他。完了最后一幕一家人在這感慨父愛？就這他爹還整天自己顯示的和命運(yùn)抗?fàn)?？這不自己作的都是？他媳婦兒付出那么多最后還教育不愿去他葬禮的小兒子他爹多么不容易，這是什么偉大女性啊？一貫提倡女權(quán)的好萊塢怎么到了這個(gè)層次？就這還百老匯舞臺(tái)?。坑腥丝催^嗎去？來討論討論，是不Denzel改編時(shí)候有偏差啊。這種無腦男權(quán)父愛不是在讀者雜志上天天登啊，怎么奧斯卡也到了《讀者》這個(gè)層次？省么價(jià)值觀??？

影片一開頭老頭絮叨的讓我有些絕望，我在想如果全片就是這么在這老頭的絮叨中結(jié)束我會(huì)崩潰。

老頭靠當(dāng)垃圾工活一家老小，住著戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)受傷的哥們的房子，每天沒事和白人老哥吹吹牛喝喝酒，和老婆調(diào)調(diào)情，順便在外面找個(gè)讓自己放松的姑娘。也許這是沉重生活負(fù)擔(dān)下的喘息。

老頭是典型的中國(guó)式父親，對(duì)老婆表達(dá)情誼很多，對(duì)孩子很冷漠，孩子對(duì)他來說是responsibility。所以和兩個(gè)兒子感情都不好，因?yàn)閺膩淼貌坏秸J(rèn)可。

老頭在52歲高齡出軌了，還喜當(dāng)?shù)??；貋砀掀盘拱?，不認(rèn)錯(cuò)反而不斷的強(qiáng)調(diào)自己的痛苦，老婆一番話狠狠打臉。對(duì)啊，18年的婚姻誰(shuí)沒有痛快想放棄的時(shí)候，但婚姻的本質(zhì)是堅(jiān)守。

老頭戾氣很重，自我中心，整天抱怨，老眼光看人。人所有的認(rèn)識(shí)都源自自己的過往經(jīng)歷，老頭覺得有色人種一直被歧視，得不到好工作，打球不被重用，永遠(yuǎn)是外向歸因，不考慮自己的問題。

白人老伙計(jì)說藩籬既是為了不讓外面的人進(jìn)來，也是不讓里面的人出去啊。但最深的藩籬在老頭心里。

瞎寫的，想梳理一下，沒成功。

看之前就聽說過于話癆，做好了瞌睡的準(zhǔn)備，不過還好，熬過了前四十分鐘漸入佳境，爆發(fā)性極強(qiáng)的表演也撐起來了這個(gè)平凡但不平淡的故事。

華盛頓飾演的特洛伊幼年不幸，父親變態(tài)，自己運(yùn)動(dòng)能力優(yōu)秀卻備受種族歧視，只能做些偷盜謀生，弟弟不幸被炸彈炸進(jìn)腦子傻了，大兒子沒有謀生手段只知道追求音樂夢(mèng)想。一切都在大段長(zhǎng)篇聊天對(duì)話中被特洛伊說了出來，華盛頓似乎對(duì)原戲劇劇本的對(duì)話異常鐘愛，以至于為此不惜犧牲電影觀感。

隨著劇情發(fā)展，矛盾越來越激化，生活窘迫的特洛伊害怕被開除，大兒子不斷來找他借錢維持生計(jì)，小兒子為了追求運(yùn)動(dòng)夢(mèng)想不惜放棄打工，傻掉的弟弟還被投訴抓了起來。這時(shí)候的特洛伊雖抱怨但還是會(huì)在賢妻羅斯的勸慰下去解決這些事情。這時(shí)候我們看到的是一個(gè)為了生計(jì)放棄了理想的男人，不管他曾經(jīng)棒球打得有多棒，他都沒有上場(chǎng)機(jī)會(huì)，他也曾有過夢(mèng)想，有過自己的堅(jiān)持，在生活的逼迫下都選擇了告別。

這就是全部么？不，隨著劇情發(fā)展你會(huì)知道像他這樣一貧如洗的人能擁有一套房子是因?yàn)榘哉剂说艿艿馁r償金，你會(huì)看到他譏諷白人司機(jī)啥都不干就能拿錢自己成了司機(jī)時(shí)卻連駕照都沒有，你會(huì)看到他因?yàn)樽约旱氖《鴱?qiáng)迫自己小兒子放棄運(yùn)動(dòng)夢(mèng)想老老實(shí)實(shí)打工貼補(bǔ)家用。在他這里，夢(mèng)想只不過是個(gè)被證明無用的借口，別人的夢(mèng)想一文不值。

可是，這一切都是他本意么？當(dāng)他晉升為司機(jī)，當(dāng)他大兒子可以參加演出了，他卻出軌了。他想到了他也曾有夢(mèng)想，他也曾風(fēng)光無兩，可是羅斯的夢(mèng)想呢？可是他弟弟的夢(mèng)想呢？可是他兒子們的夢(mèng)想呢？諷刺么，一個(gè)人的悲劇，折射出了一家人的悲劇。

故事的最后特洛伊逼走了自己的小兒子，自己帶著私生女回到了家中，弟弟去醫(yī)院接受治療，一切都有了結(jié)果，雖然不完滿，也是結(jié)果不是么。

這個(gè)片子中的所有人作為旁觀者都可以清楚的說出一番道理，但是當(dāng)他們變成局中人，卻又深陷其中。就像那個(gè)頭發(fā)花白的朋友說的，羅斯只想要個(gè)藩籬，不僅只是想要阻擋外來人，更是要留住里面的人。生活就是這樣，你放棄了自己的夢(mèng)想，別人成了你的夢(mèng)想，你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)他這樣那樣的不足，你都做不到放棄，畢竟那是僅有的指望，你能做的，僅僅是去完成自己的一輩子，平凡又混蛋的一輩子。

其實(shí)很喜歡那個(gè)傻掉的弟弟，或許傻了的人最天真，他的世界沒有貧乏的物質(zhì)，沒有失去的理想，沒有混蛋的人性。他可以采一朵花，對(duì)羅斯說，“嗨，羅斯，我給你帶來了一朵和你一樣名字的花。”

建了六個(gè)月又六個(gè)月的藩籬，把危險(xiǎn)隔離在外面，也把心愛的人禁錮在里面。Troy以自己認(rèn)為對(duì)的方式，徒勞地守護(hù)著自己所愛，可憐又可悲。

Rose說的好：“Sometimes when he touched, he bruised.”（有時(shí)候，他的觸碰會(huì)讓人受傷）Troy龐大的身軀填滿了Rose的心靈、填滿了她的生活、填滿了她所有可望不可及的夢(mèng)想，他為Rose帶來了何等的生命力與活力，但在填滿一切的同時(shí)，他也占據(jù)了Rose的空間，占據(jù)了她的自由。Troy牢牢地掌握著不容置疑的父權(quán)，他自私傳統(tǒng)、思想僵化、以為自己只要奉獻(xiàn)得足夠多就可以無限制地索取，他代表的傳統(tǒng)父權(quán)不容任何反抗。然而，絕對(duì)權(quán)威的誕生昭示著惡魔的降生，Troy的精神病弟弟以瘋癲的姿態(tài)說著哥哥名列圣彼得的審判書中，揭示了Troy必然毀滅的命運(yùn)。Troy一生與命運(yùn)斗爭(zhēng)，又一次次失敗，棒球夢(mèng)在種族歧視的天塹前破滅，安逸的小家也在自己對(duì)自由的渴望、對(duì)本我的追尋中破碎。他曾在雨夜向著死神怒吼，最終卻先于所有人死去。沒人能否認(rèn)他對(duì)這個(gè)家奉獻(xiàn)了所有，但也沒人能否認(rèn)他拿走的太多；我們感嘆他的悲哀無助命運(yùn)悲慘，也感嘆他不能珍惜眼前面美好，選擇了最差的方式去與命運(yùn)抗?fàn)帯?

結(jié)局就像他常唱的那只老狗Blue，英勇赴死，長(zhǎng)眠在應(yīng)許之地。在弟弟的小號(hào)聲中，太陽(yáng)投下金光，撕開層層云霧，圣彼得為他打開了大門。

Troy是復(fù)雜的，他曾經(jīng)在拿到弟弟的撫恤金后將其趕出家門，卻又一次又一次保釋他，真誠(chéng)地希望他能自由；他深愛著Rose，卻為體驗(yàn)一種不同的生活而出軌；他多么希望兒子能成才，卻用烈火般的父權(quán)燃盡了他剛剛長(zhǎng)成的、就要結(jié)出成功果實(shí)的樹。我們永遠(yuǎn)不能給一個(gè)人貼上善人或惡人的標(biāo)簽，因?yàn)樵诿苤袙暝?、成長(zhǎng)、追求幸福亦或是毀滅，才是人的常態(tài)。