![]() |
|
| | 首頁 Home | 電影 Films | 評論 Opinions | 戲院 Cinemas | 資訊 Information | 網站地圖 Site Map |
首頁 ->
評論 -> 新片評論 ->
Home -> Opinions
-> Current Film Reviews ->
| 影評人 Critic | ||
| 評論日期 Review Date | ||
| 評分 Ratings | ||
| 劇本 Script | ||
| 演員 Cast | ||
| 製作 Production | ||
| 藝術性 Artistic Value | ||
| 娛樂性 Entertaiment Value |
It is a film from the famed master of the New Wave, Jean-Luc Godard and a de facto expression of the ideology (or inquiry as it may be) of duality of facets of events as well as the philosophy of anti-war. It is a heavy thematic exposition to the philosophical conundrum of life and death, ally and enemy, positive and negative, and the kindred antitheses in the human (and political, e.g., Palestine and Israel) community through (but not limited to) analogies of text and image, fiction and documentary and even shot and reverse shot in film study. The film is divided into 3 sections (Kingdoms, in Godard's term), namely, (1) Hell; (2) Purgatory and (3) Heaven. Godard places himself on-screen as a film teacher in the second section.
The Hell section is entirely made up of news footage and short clips of old movies (of very coarse texture) in alternate B/W and colour sequences. A voice-over of a female narrates some expressions and enquiry statements. Piano music with occasional chromatic and ominous chords in loud volume are played to underline several shots of violence and cruelty of war throughout this 10 minute section. Probably Godard attempts to escort the audience into a common ground of the negativity of war in section one as a lead-in to the second section.
The Purgatory section is dramatically composed. It explores a multiplicity of views around the theme of opposing facets of man-made events by use of carefully written (and very often illusionary and paradoxical) dialogues of the various characters (including Godard himself) attending a scholastic conference in Sarajevo. This part is apparently analytical and dialectical. The range of information is both objective and subjective in this section. A subjective element entails a meditated POV shot of the Indians from the journalist, Olga (Nade Dieu). Cross-editing of the events and dialogues is adopted in this 60 minute (longest) section and the audience have to be very attentive to the mise-en-scenes and vocals in order to follow the various plots.
The Heaven section is developed upon the preceding one and positions the camera in a meditated dimension (but still in a third party orientation) bringing Olga (already dead in section two) again into mise-en-scene (sequences of Olga in an Eden-like locale guarded by US Mariners). Orchestral music in a mild volume is played to complement the atmosphere of the scenes.
The film in its entirety embraces lots of filmic properties that are stylistic of Godard's products: abrupt pause of music in the same scene, complete silence, black out, use of flicks in transition, adoption of non-frontal shots (particularly of Godard himself) and crossing of the axis of action in shots/reverse shots. Some of these devices serve to draw attention of the audience in certain thematic vintages whereas some others are purely for stylistic purposes.
In rhetorical terms, Godard uses uncomfortable visuals of violence (hence pathos) in section one to establish a common ground with the audience for a philosophical examination (hence some logos/logic) of the nature of the human's social behaviours in section two. Section two is not conclusive but enlightening instead. Section three on the goodness of a harmonious entity, suggesting a Gordian Knob to the enthymeme, is meditative, idealistic, anticipative and implicitly futuristic. Yet the last section is particularly connotative and humorous in that the harmonious land is guarded by the international police - the US Marines. This 3-tier structure in narrative is in full compatibility with the progression of titles from the Hell (the history), through the Purgatory (the present), to the Heaven (the future). It is a film of depth (carrying meaning much deeper than what the audience is told) and a preponderance of filmic artifice but its decipherment is heavy and arduous.
註:本評論純屬影評作者個人意見,並不代表本網立場。
Note: This views presented in this review is solely the views of the critic
who wrote it and do not represent the stance of our website.
相關連結 Related Links
|
Copyright(C)
1999-2011 Hong Kong Internet Ventures. All rights reserved.
|