Robert Altman’s inside-Hollywood meta-comedy THE PLAYER is shot with a shoe-string budget but reverberates with sardonic, rapier-like kicks, and affixed with a chilling frisson that defies ethics and our expectation thanks to Michael Tolkin’s trenchant script which brings Tinseltown's treacherous attributes to the forefront.
Altman’s much eulogized opening gambit, a nearly 8-minute long-take in the lot of a Hollywood studio, vocally pays tribute to Orson Welles’ counterpart in TOUCH OF EVIL (1958), is a coup de ma?tre to be rewound and repeatedly viewed for its sheer coordination of the ensemble and the camera’s agility in motion. Taking the center stage is Griffin Hill (Robbins), a young producer whose job is to listen to screenwriter’s pitches of their ideas and to assess whether they are marketable enough to merit a go, and this producer-writer correlation is put under scrutiny as Griffin is dogged by anonymous, invective-scribed postcards, which he receives on a daily base, and after combing through telephone records, he gets the idea it is sent from David Kahane (D’Onofrio, bristling with ire and contempt), a bitter writer who might be rankled for receiving the short shrift. But gauging from Griffin’s quotidian workload and the ratio of pitches he must disregard (the studio has a yearly quota of 12 to green-light), we don’t get why Griffin is so sure it is David.
Trying to bury the hatchet by renewing his interest in David’s script set in Japan (Sofia Coppola’s LOST IN TRANSLATION arrives a decade later in 2003), Griffin seeks him out and "accidentally" kills him when verbal vitriol escalating into physical violence, here Altman shrewdly predates the occurrence with Griffin calling David’s home, and getting instantly bewitched by the latter’s girlfriend June Gudmundsdottir (Scacchi), an Icelandic painter, under a voyeuristic spell. So whether the subsequent accident is a homicide or manslaughter, the answer is quite out there.
The rest of story is against all odds, how Griffin gets away with the killing and lives happily ever after with June, does it sound like a joke? Yes, but the engagé Altman is in no fickle mood of maxing out Griffin’s quagmire before the anti-climatic reveal: his current post is in a perilous state of being superseded by the new blood Larry Levy (Gallagher), a diligent detective (Lovett) breathes down his neck closely and the relationship with his colleague-cum-girlfriend Bonnie (Stevenson) turns sour as he courts June with tenacious guilt stuck in his throat, in the end of the day, he gets what he wants not what he deserves, and the final turnabout of the fictive movie starring Julia Roberts and Bruce Willis is such a slap in the face of those who harbor an airy-fairy ideology of retaining a writer's integrity in this rotten industry, only tempered by Altman’s tongue-in-cheek mordancy that tactfully keep both industry insiders and outsiders entertained but not miffed, not to mention its effervescent star-spotingg game of umpteen celebrity cameos.
Tom Robbins is the recipient of Cannes’ BEST ACTOR award but unjustly fails to nab an Oscar nomination (the film per se is a 3-times nominee including a well-earned BEST DIRECTOR bid for Altman), who takes us through quite a rollercoaster ride with his portrait of Griffin par excellent, smirky, craven, vulnerable, besotted and careworn, all these facets are contributory to such degree of ambiguity that viewers are inwardly battling against their own conscience in terms of his denouement.Greta Scacchi is given a sizable role to send up the ostensibly exotic, free-spirited type (she might not even hail from Iceland) who just cannot say no to an opportunity of comfort and wealth like anyone else, and whose inner state is tellingly belied in their torrid love-making/confession-denial sequences, a fine achievement. Among the peripheral players, no one stands out significantly in the fray, except for awisecracking Whoopi Goldberg, who duly earns her stripes with tart and hilariouscomedy chops.
In retrospect, THE PLAYER is a thrilling return-to-the-game comeback for Altman after his nadir in the 80s, and is among the most phenomenal works tackling the Hollywood hypocrisy and narrow-mindedness by lending an honest-to-goodness spin salted with tacit irony.
referential points: Altman’s 3 WOMEN (1977, 8.2/10), COOKIE’S FORTUNE (1999, 7.9/10), GOSFORD PARK (2001, 9.1/10).
經(jīng)典就是經(jīng)久不衰
格里芬·米爾是一家電影公司的制片人,每天要從很多個劇本中挑選出極少的幾部拍成電影。早上來到制片廠他收到了一張恐嚇明信片,兩周內(nèi)一共收到了七張,加上??怂怪破瑥S拉里·李維和他之間的競爭,他變得忐忑不安。格里芬來見自己的老板,老板希望他能和李維成為一個團隊。回到辦公室后他又收到一張揚言要殺死他的明信片。他便開始調(diào)查,發(fā)現(xiàn)一個六個月前被他拒絕的編劇大衛(wèi)·卡恩于是給他打電話,但接電話的是大衛(wèi)的女朋友瓊,格里芬得知大衛(wèi)去看電影后便來到電影院找大衛(wèi),找到大衛(wèi)后,大衛(wèi)激怒了格里芬,格里芬殺死了大衛(wèi)。第二天格里芬上班后發(fā)現(xiàn)李維成為了自己的同事,制片廠的安保負責人因為格里芬和大衛(wèi)的死有關系和他發(fā)生了爭吵。隨后格里芬去參加大衛(wèi)的葬禮被瓊發(fā)現(xiàn)了,格里芬送瓊回家后回到制片廠,警察向他詢問了他和大衛(wèi)的一些事。格里芬和老板一起觀影時接到一通電話,他按照電話的指示來到約定地點,但突然出現(xiàn)了兩個編劇給他講劇本,最后那個人沒有出現(xiàn),格里芬開車離開,卻在車上發(fā)現(xiàn)了一條蛇。格里芬打死蛇后來到瓊的家中并向她表白。上班后格里芬把昨晚聽到的劇本推給了李維。晚上他帶著瓊參加影片捐贈會,警察也一直在監(jiān)視著他,格里芬送瓊回家后邀請她下周一起去墨西哥。第二天一早,警察把格里芬?guī)У搅司帧8窭锓覐木只氐街破瑥S,安保負責人建議他不要去墨西哥,但格里芬不聽。格里芬在機場發(fā)現(xiàn)了警察,于是改變計劃帶瓊去沙漠溫泉,格里芬在沙漠溫泉接到律師迪克的電話,要他去警局參加目擊證人指認,由于證人指認錯誤,格里芬僥幸逃脫。
一年后,格里芬在下班的路上接到李維電話,聽取了李維推薦的編劇介紹的劇本《大玩家》,回到了家中。
和奧爾特曼學拍平凡劇
明明有那么多巧合
你卻幾乎看不出編劇的痕跡
因為確確實實都是想不到的劇情反轉
誰會想到
明明是抱著一顆虔誠的心來和談的
卻把人殺了
這也許就是落差造成的吧
自己已經(jīng)降低了身價
卻被人奚落
加之工作又要丟掉了
自己卻是唯一蒙在鼓里的人
這樣過失殺人就顯得合情合理了
直到25字出來
有點像《兇案連載》
忘了這個人是不是就是一開始他的父親參與《奪魂索》的,如果是這樣,就太棒了
剛開始你看到了一個紈绔子弟
形成了刻板印象
接下來他的精明卻讓你意外
(刻板印象特別好做文章)
最后的部分
為什么可以流暢和自然
是因為鏡頭一直拉遠了
再說《大玩家》的時候他和新婚燕爾的妻子在擁吻
而懸疑編劇成了麥格芬
換個功力差點的導演
怕是會在兩邊的電話人物切特寫
那么就不容易
出現(xiàn)這種
靜水深流的感覺了
嗯
學習了
群戲大師Altman,開場一個長鏡頭帶過就讓人看得瞠目結舌,90年代的好萊塢真是出了不少類似影片,各種黑,黑政府、黑媒體,當然最多的還是黑好萊塢,在這種自我解構和自我嘲諷之中,對于觀眾來講,對好萊塢制片廠和明星制度都會有了或深或淺的了解,至于拍片過程,相信導演和主創(chuàng)們也會非常樂在其中。
一開頭就用一個超級長鏡頭介紹各人物真是糟透了,是在炫技么?這10來分鐘,一下子來這么多人,看的我云里霧里的,早沒了興致,特別是倆女的非要一起講話,啰里吧嗦的,不知道在講什么,哪還有心思興趣看下去啊。
前半段寫實,后半段劇情,看到Tim Robbins那張臉總是自動代入越獄劇情。。。囧。對好萊塢制片業(yè)的諷刺挺有趣,玩的究竟是電影還是電影人?客串配置太華麗了啊,還有很多好片沒看過,得加油惡補了!
長鏡頭開場長鏡頭床戲蒂姆羅賓斯一瞬露鳥一堆熟臉一堆戲諷and a fuck‘in ending。that's the reality。別錯過。
很棒的群戲,導演用長鏡頭深刻記錄一眾亂世佳人的命運,娓娓道來。
開場長鏡著實驚艷,不愧群像多線高手,穿堂入室、行云流水的鏡頭穿梭,串起人物關系,調(diào)度功力驚人。對好萊塢式大片極盡諷謔之能事——但凡擁有懸疑、驚悚、性愛、裸體、HE結局的影片,才能踏準觀眾心理、票房大賣;在這個圓融到滴水不漏的工業(yè)體系里,編劇作為奠定影片的核心要素,故事梗概的販賣亦成為一門高級營銷藝術,魚龍混雜的電影販子們各顯神通,各種內(nèi)幕黑得有趣又隱秘?!干摺棺鳛檎T惑符號出現(xiàn)并不新鮮,更高級的安排則是出于現(xiàn)實與想象之間的幻象,包括警察反常行為仿若是男主混亂而焦慮的腦海情緒投射;戲中戲的結尾處理非常反諷,而最后一個故事點子既有解構性,亦不乏黑色幽默;各種海報與劇情有互文作用。
3.5 可能是翻譯的版本不好,又或者是不喜歡這種風格,兩個小時的片三次在前20分鐘看不下去,兩次睡著……對男主玩的“高級游戲”高明在哪里也不是很理解。不過開頭的長鏡頭技巧很好。
一向擅長多線索多人物的奧爾特曼用一個超級長鏡頭介紹各人物真是帥透了。對好萊塢的諷刺,各種大牌客串。點點滴滴的各種壞。
開頭那一段懸疑的序幕神贊,百看不厭。M打死蛇之后來到June家,地上是一幅曲蛇將M團團圍住的畫,鮮紅的蘋果在一旁。沙漠別墅一場,另有男女赤身裸體游入仙境之中。伊甸原罪是內(nèi)核,弄罪近娛便是玩家。Altman鏡頭之冷,到最后也沒有釋放觀眾的呼吸,玩家在一息中蛇魅般鉆游,更加冷酷,自由自在。
我看的第一部羅伯特奧特曼作品。又想文藝又想商業(yè),結果有點高不成低不就的意思(還挺炫技,不知道這是不是為了契合影片主題),這是否是奧特曼的既定風格?我也不知道,反正這片我是橫豎都喜歡不起來
奧特曼野心勃勃的回勇之作,獲戛納最佳導演&影帝。1.關于制片人與編劇間的緊張關系,一邊對好萊塢電影業(yè)自嘲、戲仿與解構,一邊通過片中片與本片的大團圓結局認可、固化了業(yè)界傳統(tǒng)。影片本身亦符合主角總結的成功必要元素:“懸疑、笑料、暴力、希望、情感、裸露、性及快樂結局”。2.片頭8分運動長鏡調(diào)度完美,是奧特曼典型手法:搖移跟拍與變焦推拉結合,流暢串起群像,又及時聚焦到細節(jié)。長鏡以[大玩家]場記板起首,此后更借角色之口批評過度剪輯,自比[歷劫佳人]。3.眾明星客串,電影海報(希胖、普雷明格,及多部冷門黑色片)參與敘事,或預表或反諷,最有力道的是兩人剛確認“沒有好萊塢結局”,關門后即露出[Hollywood Story]海報。4.最讓我震悚的是蘇珊·薩蘭登的唯一鏡頭,竟預言到[死囚漫步]。5.終未現(xiàn)身的幕后恐嚇人與無用明信片。(9.0/10)
作為最后一個見到David的人,Griffin成了警方的嫌疑人,更讓他恐懼的是,他還是收到匿名的恐嚇信,甚至在他的車上發(fā)現(xiàn)了一條蛇......接下來,Griffin該怎么玩這個游戲
不是很喜歡這種群戲
懸疑,暴力,明星,裸體,性欲,快樂結局
真正的Reality是:好萊塢在92年從五萬個電話中千挑萬選了一個叫“大玩家”的本子,導演從來不商業(yè),制片人也沒涉案,更不是幸福結局,卻獲了大獎?!@就是以電影形式自我反諷揭弊電影圈的循環(huán)悖論――如果問題屬實,那本片為何會被允許問世?火熱新聞表明:真要控訴制片,跳出圈外發(fā)推特!
領教奧特曼一個鏡頭,勝看五百部片子~~看了一個小時只看到第8分鐘,沉醉于開場8分鐘情不自禁一遍遍倒回去重看~~還真是新鮮的體驗~~
7.0/10。風流韻事+編劇風云+美滿結局,這就是好萊塢的故事!大牌客串的還真不少。敘事比較拖踏,扣半星。
講述好萊塢制片的故事,很多當年的大明星來捧場客串。除了開頭長達8分鐘的長鏡頭外,沒什么看頭。不喜歡更多影評,我的博客:blog.sina.com.cn/bluesliver
開場的長鏡頭是怎么做到的啊,厲害!難道就真的一個吊臂晃來晃去。。?故事其實是懸疑片里面混了點黑色幽默,制片廠辦公室墻上各種海報真是有意思。哈哈,好萊塢里的人自己的人生也過得跟電影似的。以及,數(shù)不盡的醬油們!
奧特曼的調(diào)度和群戲真的是無出其右,一出辛辣的諷刺故事,陣容實在強勁,連打醬油的都是大牌!