(多年以后的更新)
最近重看這部片,注意到了一些以前沒注意的細節(jié),例如在第一個障礙提出之前,馮提爾甚至不知道該給自己的老師設置什么樣的挑戰(zhàn),于是說隨便聊聊,結(jié)果由萊斯手中的雪茄即興聯(lián)想到南美,又問出萊斯沒去過古巴,當即敲定第一個障礙要設置在那里,似乎是純粹想惡心他哈哈。但這么做的結(jié)果是,討論第二個挑戰(zhàn)時,萊斯堅決不再透露任何信息,想要讓他抓不住自己的把柄。
后來他們討論到關(guān)于拍攝的道德,如果要拍攝可怕的事物(馮提爾給出的例子是拍攝死去的小孩),什么樣的距離是可以接受的,于是產(chǎn)生了第二個障礙,要在一個悲慘的地方完成拍攝,但萊斯顯然并不能在選擇了的情況下又忽視這種悲慘,因此破壞了規(guī)則,還是將其以一種自己認為“好”的方式展現(xiàn)了出來,馮提爾卻是堅決予以否定,“總是試圖做的太好”就是這里的評價
關(guān)于第四個障礙,兩人顯然都將動畫和“卡通”概念混淆了(其實很多人都是這樣),他們嘴上說著討厭“卡通”那種嘩眾取寵的形式,但實際上創(chuàng)作出了優(yōu)秀的藝術(shù)影片
——————————————————————————————————
看到有轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)的電影簡介中列出"五道障礙"并不準確,真正的五道障礙片中已經(jīng)寫明 其原文分別為: 1.obstruction #1 : 12 frames, answers, cuba, no set 2.obstruction #2 : a miserabel place, don't show it, Jorgen Leth is the man, the meal 3.obstruction #3 : complete freedom or back to bombay 4.obstruction #4 : cartoon 5.obstruction #5 : Lars Von Trier will make the last obstruction, Jorgen Leth will be credited as director, Jorgen Leth will read a text written by Lars von Trier 中文來講就是: 1.將影片由原幀速率變?yōu)?2幀速率(大大破壞原素材的連貫性和播放速度);回答原片《完美的人》中所有問題的答案;在古巴(完全陌生的國家)拍攝;不可設置佈景 2.去一個悲慘的地方;但不能展現(xiàn)它(挑戰(zhàn)萊斯的道德);反而要(在那個悲慘的地方)完成原片中的盛宴;原片中的角色缺席,導演只能自己演出 3.由于第二個挑戰(zhàn)萊斯沒有遵守“不能展現(xiàn)它”的規(guī)則,因此馮提爾給出的條件是,要不然就再去孟買拍一遍,要不然就不再設限,讓導演重拍自己的電影(進行過藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作的人都知道,完全的自由意味著多大的難度) 4.做一部卡通片──片中兩位導演都討厭也不熟悉卡通片的製作 5.影片導演署名"喬根.萊斯(本片的起因:作品 《完美的人》 的原作者)",並由他閱讀旁白,但掌控內(nèi)容的是馮.提爾 這個片子可以說是馮提爾給他的老師喬根·萊斯提出的“挑戰(zhàn)”。喬根·萊斯其實是馮提爾非常尊敬的大師,片中他不止一次說《完美的人》是完美的作品,非常喜愛。然而兩人間的恩怨看來也是頗有些糾纏,貌似是相愛相殺的情感。拉斯提出的挑戰(zhàn),聲稱目的就是要讓萊斯親手毀掉這部作品,方法就是設置障礙的再創(chuàng)作,好玩的是萊斯也十分配合。 其實所謂毀掉,也并非破壞,而更多是以一種實驗的態(tài)度去重構(gòu),這其中最有趣的問題就是:作為一個電影大師,要如何努力去制作一部“爛片”,否定自我?因此觀眾會看到,萊斯每一次“努力”創(chuàng)造爛片上交,馮提爾都表現(xiàn)的非常不滿 “你怎么總是做的這么好?” “完美的電影早已存在了(指原片完美的人),你還要做得這么好有何意義?” 馮提爾從來都是一個魔鬼一樣的導演,他的電影生涯及其作品在內(nèi)容上、形式上都不斷在制造顛覆,如果單純把它看成故事片導演,那真是狹窄了,他是一個真正的實驗者,這一次的五道障礙,怕也是其玩興所致,拉上老師喬根·萊斯入坑,即顛覆了他,也再次顛覆了電影。
Communications lab終于開始看電影了,寫完reflection決定來豆瓣改造一下自己最近語言單一的豆瓣主頁。
Before I write about the obstruction I am assigned to, I’d like to write some of my feelings of the original version of the Perfect Human at the first time. This short experimental documentary shot in 1967 really gave me a new experience of different types of images. Two people doing meaningless things in a boundless room, presenting this process makes itself meaningful. It is a little bit abstract and hard to understand, but also really cool and interesting.
The biggest difference between obstruction 1 shot in Cuba and the original version is that obstruction 1 is colored. It is really interesting that how significant different impact these two skills bring to us. The black-and-white version conveys less subjective emotions and establishes a space with sense of outer space. The colored version is more like a documentary. And by giving answers to the questions, audience has less open space to think about the movie itself, instead, they are presented by the director’s view.
However, Leth still used trick in this obstruction. He left enough time between the answers and questions, which helped the audience to think more.
And because it was shot in Cuba, the characters were changed and style of the set was more exotic. Images wit high saturation combined with the 12 frames skill created a strange asthetics. It was more like a supplement of the original version. People in different races can all be perfect human. There are different types of perfect human.
The most difference between obstruction 1 and other obstructions is that this obstruction is relatively representational. The narrative (although a little bit hard to understand) still plays bigger role than the technical skills or formats. I think it’s to some extent an advantage. But it is also necessary to try new techniques for experimenting and keeps the industry of movies developing and alive, which reminds me of the newest movie of Ang Lee. I really love the idea of using a half transparent screen to divide the real life and the obstruction 2. And the asthetic style of obstruction 4 also attracts me. Using cartoons to create transitions through so many scenes quickly, it enables us to show what we cannot show via cameras.
And the obstruction I like most is obstruction 5. Leth is reading the transcript Trier wrote for him in his tone. The transition of their roles finally expresses the aim of Trier. He wanted his idol fail, but Leth never failed and gave surprising outcomes. He was the perfect human himself, and this is how perfect human falls.
8分,大膽又精細,邪惡又崇高,哪怕是拍紀錄片,他也還是那個讓我癡迷的拉斯馮提爾
Freedom should be the most horrible obstruction.
求個中字
很有趣,打破了對“紀錄片”的概念
拉斯設置的五道障礙之反射自己,可以作為解讀反傳統(tǒng)反規(guī)則反人類甚而反自己的天生反骨拉斯馮之啟示小品
拉斯·馮·提爾絕對是控制狂。
Lars可太壞了w
沒怎么看懂。最后的旁白簡直是詩??!
喜歡這種游戲。我跟他們一樣不喜歡動畫片。。。哈哈
很有趣的超長電影挑戰(zhàn),不僅僅是紀錄片??吹絼?chuàng)作過程的點滴,兩個人的對話溝通,以及同一個概念下五種形式的創(chuàng)作。作為電影人的自我拷問自我突破,學習意義。三星半。
完美電影在規(guī)定情境下的拍攝難題~從側(cè)面來解釋電影拍攝的困境
A self-finding projet
三星半,可以看作電影創(chuàng)作者的自我反省。
"This is how the perfect man falls." 莫名其妙的精彩?。?!從未看過這般設置的紀錄片,甚至說是電影也不為過。You really see Leth in his eyes and never know how he ends the section. Obstruct, Deconstruct, and construct. Chris
喜歡第三個!我覺得這樣的游戲恰恰要求了提問者的機敏與品味。私以為第四個確實不怎么樣……尤其是這種畫風的動畫 真的很容易拍成屎哈哈哈哈哈
已自制中字,去微博搜索即可 | 調(diào)皮。
捉對廝殺
很難想象相同的文本在不同的場景下竟有了完全不同的解讀。五道障礙,是人生的障礙,是愚弄世界的障礙,是脫離這愚蠢世界走向觀察者身份的障礙,是創(chuàng)造藝術(shù)的障礙。你走向獨立的每一步都有其障礙。拉斯對約爾延愛的深沉。
anti-anti
將五部片子連起來看 相當有趣味性