為了讓大家更明白，我們來看看伯格曼的電影《羞恥》里面沒有一個(gè)演員暴露導(dǎo)演的構(gòu)思，即表演形象的概念、自己的理解，以及試圖以整體理念對(duì)其作出評(píng)價(jià)。形象完全隱蔽、融化在鮮活的角色中。

影片的主人公們被環(huán)境所壓垮，他們屈服于環(huán)境，從不試圖向我們傳達(dá)任何思想，不對(duì)影片中發(fā)生的事件下任何結(jié)論，一切留待電 影整體，留待導(dǎo)演的構(gòu)恩去解決。他們表現(xiàn)得何等出彩！我們不能簡單評(píng)價(jià)這些人執(zhí)好辣壞。我水遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)認(rèn)為主人公馮?敘多是個(gè)壞人。每個(gè)人身上都有好的一面和壞的一面。影片沒有作任何評(píng)判，因?yàn)檠輪T的表演中看不出任何傾向性。

導(dǎo)演在電影中的環(huán)境設(shè)置是為了研究在其中人性的各種可能，根本不是為了圖解某種頂設(shè)的理念。

馬克斯?馮?敘多這條線索拍得何等深刻。他是個(gè)很好的人，一個(gè)音樂家，一個(gè)善良而敏感的人。他貌似膽小。但不是所有勇者都是良善之人，懦夫也末必是壞蛋。誠然，他身體虛弱，性格軟弱。他的妻子比他強(qiáng)很多，她有足夠的力量戰(zhàn)勝自己的恐懼。而馮，敘多卻是無力的。他因自己的軟弱無能飽受折磨，他試圖隱藏，躲在角落裝聾作啞一一這么做如同一個(gè)孩童，真誠而幼稚。然而，當(dāng)生活與環(huán)境迫使他做出防衛(wèi)時(shí)，他馬上就成了惡棍。他失去了以往的善。戲劇性和荒謬性就在于，因?yàn)橛辛诉@種特質(zhì)，他反而為妻子所需要，她從他這里尋求支撐和救贖，同時(shí)一如既往地鄙視他。當(dāng)他扇她耳光，叫她“滾”的時(shí)候，她依然匍匐在他身后。這里就開始流露出某種消極的善與積極的惡的不朽理念。然而這理念表現(xiàn)得何等復(fù)雜！主人公在影片開頭連一只雞都不敢殺，一旦找到『防御手段，他就變成了殘酷的無恥之徒。他有點(diǎn)哈姆雷特式性格：以我的理解，丹麥王子并非死于同雷歐提斯的決斗，那只是肉體的死亡，他死于“捕鼠機(jī)”那場戲之后。他一旦明白，他那人道主義者、知識(shí)分子的生命法則，如埃爾西諾賤民的命運(yùn)一樣不可逆轉(zhuǎn)，他就死了。這個(gè)典型的憂郁者（我指主人公馮?敘多）如今什么也不怕：為了自救，他殺人不眨眼—他為了一己私利而行動(dòng)。問題在于，二個(gè)非常誠實(shí)的人才會(huì)在殺害和侮辱這種骯臟的事情面前感到恐懼。假如沒有這種恐懼，乍眼看上去的男敢實(shí)際上是人已喪失了精神與理性的良知，是與自己罪行的妥協(xié)。戰(zhàn)爭便是催生人類殘忍和無人道行徑的典型。在伯格曼的這部影片中，戰(zhàn)爭是用來幫助揭示人性的手段，就像《猶在鏡中》里女主人公的疾病一樣。

1968年，在越南戰(zhàn)爭的白熱化階段，英格瑪伯格曼制作了這部憤怒而絕望的電影，無站隊(duì)無立場，旨在表達(dá)反戰(zhàn)思想。早在1966年的《假面》中，伯格曼就在其中放入一組越南和尚自焚的電視畫面，目的是達(dá)到震驚女演員的效果，從而使其拒絕講話。而在這兩年間，發(fā)生了什么變化，以至于他不再有任何立場？

電影《羞恥》沒有給出答案。影片并不直接向觀眾灌輸任何作者意圖，它只負(fù)責(zé)展示人物的生活，而把決定權(quán)留給觀眾。兩部電影均由麗芙·烏曼主演，她與伯格曼的合作多達(dá)9部，第一部就是《假面》。與她搭檔的演員是馬克斯·馮·敘多夫，從《第七封印》（1957）開始就在伯格曼的電影中出現(xiàn)。烏曼和馮·敘多夫【此處原文為伯格曼，應(yīng)為作者筆誤】扮演一對(duì)備受折磨的夫妻，他們在《豺狼時(shí)刻》和《安娜的情欲》同樣也扮演了夫妻。從某個(gè)角度來說，這三部電影里的夫妻是一回事，改變的只是故事外殼。

影片中的他們都曾是交響樂團(tuán)的音樂家，如今卻住在一個(gè)島上的風(fēng)干小屋里，以耕作為生。屋里的東西似乎沒有一樣能用的，包括那臺(tái)收音機(jī)，對(duì)于這場似乎永無休止的戰(zhàn)爭，他們只能聽到一些流言。伊娃（烏曼）總在擔(dān)心他們的生命安全，并且時(shí)?？释苡幸粋€(gè)孩子。而她的丈夫楊（馮·敘多夫）則自信戰(zhàn)爭不會(huì)波及到他們。直到有一天，他們的平靜生活被打破。噴氣飛機(jī)低空劃過房子，跳傘飛行員被殺，敵方部隊(duì)突襲盤問，以及另一方部隊(duì)將其關(guān)押拷問（看似代表本地的部隊(duì)，實(shí)則民心不再）。

夫妻倆被嚴(yán)厲地審問，一份竄改的伊娃受訪視頻讓他們吃盡苦頭。隨后他們被送回家，卻只能眼睜睜看著家園被惡意破壞。伊娃和上校發(fā)生了性關(guān)系（古納爾·布約恩施特蘭德，與伯格曼第一次合作是在1944年的電影《折磨》）。她這樣做是為了救他們自己嗎？或許，但很難說。但她的婚姻痛苦無常也是事實(shí)。上校走后不久即被敵對(duì)勢力捉住，楊將那筆可能贖回上校的錢藏了起來，他這么做是為了懲罰他們的通奸嗎？很難說他到底是否知道這件事。

所有這些（我已經(jīng)忽略了很多細(xì)節(jié)）刻畫出一對(duì)飽受摧殘的夫妻，他們安寧的生活被撕碎，被迫進(jìn)入一個(gè)恐怖而絕望的新世界。戰(zhàn)爭時(shí)刻考驗(yàn)著他們的人性，他們是誰，他們真正的感受又是什么。影片結(jié)尾眾人淹沒在茫茫無際的大海，隨之鏡頭轉(zhuǎn)向天空，其荒涼孤絕在伯格曼電影中實(shí)為少見。

《羞恥》被美國影評(píng)人協(xié)會(huì)評(píng)為年度最佳影片，在四十年后的今天卻缺乏關(guān)注——相對(duì)于《假面》來說。如果他肯在影片中直接指射越南戰(zhàn)爭，或許該片能產(chǎn)生更深刻的影響。相反地，他對(duì)影評(píng)人將《假面》解讀為反越戰(zhàn)的做法感到不悅，尤其是僅僅因?yàn)槠渲械囊粋€(gè)片段。應(yīng)當(dāng)說，《假面》所要表達(dá)的遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不止這些。在這部影片中，你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)他刻意隔離外界信息，從而將關(guān)注點(diǎn)聚焦在人性上（正如他在神之沉默三部曲里做的那樣）。這并不是意味著他變成了現(xiàn)實(shí)主義者或是傳統(tǒng)的故事作者，而是證明他擺脫了意識(shí)形態(tài)的束縛。

意識(shí)形態(tài)是《羞恥》里的一個(gè)敵人，楊和伊娃遭到懲罰是因?yàn)樗麄儽粦岩墒菙硨?duì)勢力的支持者，但是影片沒有顯示任何關(guān)于戰(zhàn)爭的信息，發(fā)生在哪里，兩方分別是誰以及他們各自代表什么。對(duì)于影片里那些被抓捕的平民而言，他們沒有出路。楊和伊娃既不是另一方的支持者，也不是這一方的愛國者。在某種意義上，影片指射的是伊拉克戰(zhàn)爭中的普通平民——或者是任何你能對(duì)號(hào)入座的戰(zhàn)爭。

原文：

In 1968, at the height of the Vietnam war, Ingmar Bergman made this angry and bleak film that was against all war, and argued that it didn't matter which side you were on. In 1966, in his "Persona," he had used the famous televised footage of a Vietnamese monk burning himself alive to shock an actress into ceasing all forms of speech. In the two years between, what had changed, so that he no longer took sides?

It is a question without an answer in "Shame," which does not deliver a message in any formal way, but simply offers people and their lives and leaves us to conclude what we choose. Both films star Liv Ullmann, his actress in nine films starting with "Persona." Her co-star is Max von Sydow, who had worked with Bergman since "The Seventh Seal" (1957). Ullmann and Bergman play a tortured couple, as they also do in "Hour of the Wolf" and "The Passion of Anna." In a strange sense, all three films are about the same couple; only their narrative changes.

They were once symphonic musicians. Now they live in a weathered house on an island, growing fruits and vegetables. Nothing in their house seems to work, including the radio, so they hear only distant rumors of a war that has been waged seemingly forever. Eva Rosenberg (Ullmann) is concerned with the danger to their lives and to her desire to bear children. Her husband Jan (von Sydow) believes the war will pass them by. Their serenity is interrupted by jet planes flying low over their house, the killing of a parachuting airman, the arrival of troops, their inquisition, and eventually their incarceration by the other side (which seems to be the local side, but loyalties are divided).

They are questioned harshly. A falsely doctored video of Eva is used against her. They are sent back to their home, only to witness its wanton destruction. Eva has sex with the colonel in charge (Gunnar Bjornstrand, who first worked with Bergman in a 1944 film he wrote, "Torment"). Does she do it to save them? Probably, but hard to say. Her own marriage is painfully uncertain. Later, Jan conceals money that could have bought the colonel's freedom from the other side. Does he do it to punish their adultery? Hard to say if he has actually witnessed it.

All of this (I have left out many details) paints a portrait of a couple torn from their secure lives and forced into a horrifying new world of despair, testing them both to discover who they really are what they really feel. The overwhelming concluding passages, interrupted by shots of the sky, are among the most desolate Bergman ever filmed.

"Shame" was named best film of the year by the National Society of Film Critics, but is not much talked about 40 years later--certainly not in comparison with "Persona." It might have made a greater impact if he'd made it specifically about Vietnam, but I believe he was unhappy that "Persona" had been decoded by critics as being against that war, all because of one image; it was about, and against, a great deal more. In this film you can see him shifting away from message and toward the close regard of human behavior and personality (as in his "Silence of God" trilogy). That did not turn him into a realist or a conventional storyteller, but it freed him from ideology.

Ideology is one of the enemies in "Shame." Jan and Eva are punished because they are suspected of being "sympathizers," but the film lacks any information about where it takes place, who the two sides are, and what they stand for. To a civilian caught in the middle, there is no way out. Jan and Eva are not sympathizers for the other side, but neither are they patriots for this side. In a sense, the film could be about the ordinary non-combatant people of Iraq--or, pick your war.

"Shame" is available on DVD, alone or packaged with "Hour of the Wolf" and "The Passion of Anna."