原文链接: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/rivette/OK/threecircles.html
A first circle appears (or a segment of one). Let's call it A, since it is first to appear, though it never ceases throughout the film. This circle is an old theater, which serves as a school where some young women are rehearsing the roles they will play (Marivaux, Corneille, Racine) under the direction of Constance (Bulle Ogier). The difficult thing here is for the girls to express authentic feeling -- anger, love, despair -- with words that are not their own, but those of an author. This is the first sense of play: Roles. One of the girls, Cecile, has left a house in the suburbs to four other girls. She has gone to live elsewhere with the man she loves. The four girls will live together in the house, where they will experience the repercussions of their roles, as well as end-of the-day moods and personal postures, the effects of their private love affairs (to which they only allude), and their various attitudes toward one another. It is almost as if the girls had bounced off the wall of the theater to lead a life which they vaguely share in the house, where bits of their roles are carried over, but spread out in their own lives, with each girl minding her own business. You no longer have a succession of roles governed by a program, but rather a haphazard chain of attitudes and postures following several simultaneous stories that do not intersect. This is the second sense of play: the Attitudes and Postures in their interconnected day-to-day lives. What ceaselessly inspires Rivette is both the group of four girls and their individuation: comic and tragic types, melancholy and sanguine types, graceful and clumsy types, and above all. Lunar and Solar types. This is the second circle, B, inside the first, since it partly depends on the first, by receiving its effects. But circle B distributes these effects in its own way, moving away from the theater only to return to it endlessly.
The four girls are pursued by a man whose identity is unclear -- a con-artist, a spy, a cop -- looking for Cecile's lover (probably a criminal). What's it all about? Stolen IDs, stolen art, arms trafficking, a judiciary scandal? The man is looking for the keys to a locked chest. He tries to seduce each of them in turn, and succeeds with one. The three other girls will try to kill him: the first will try theatrically; the second, coldly; and the third, impulsively. The third girl will in fact beat him to death with a cane. These three scenes are Rivette's greatest moments: absolutely beautiful. This is the third sense of play: Masks, in a political or police conspiracy that goes beyond us, which no one can escape, a kind of global conspiracy. This is the third circle, C, which has a complex relationship to the other two. It prolongs the second circle and is intimately intertwined with it, since it increasingly polarizes the girls' attitudes, providing them with a common measure as it casts its spell on them. But it also spreads out over the whole theater, covering it, perhaps uniting all the disparate pieces of an infinite repertoire. Constance, the director, seems to be an essential element in the conspiracy from the beginning. (Is there not a blank period in her life spanning several years? Does she ever leave the theater, where she hides Cecile's naughty boy, who is probably Constance's lover?) And what about the girls themselves? One girl has an American boyfriend with the same name as the cop; the other girl has the same name as her mysteriously missing sister; and the Portuguese girl, Lucia, who is the epitome of the Lunar type, all of a sudden finds the keys and possesses a painting which is probably real... In short, the three circles are interwoven, acting on one another, progressing through one another, and organizing one another without ever losing their mystery.
We are all rehearsing parts of which we are as yet unaware (our roles). We slip into characters which we do nor master (our attitudes and postures). We serve a conspiracy of which we are completely oblivious (our masks). This is Rivette's vision of the world, it is uniquely his own. Rivette needs theater for cinema to exist: the young girls' attitudes and postures constitute a theatricality of cinema which, measured against the theatricality of theater, contrasts with it and emerges as perfectly distinct from it. And if the political, judicial, and police conspiracies weighing on us are enough to show that the real world has become a bad movie, then it is cinema's job to give us a piece of reality, a piece of the world. Rivette's project -- a cinema that opposes its theatricality to that of theater, its reality to that of the world, which has become unreal -- rescues cinema from the theater and the conspiracies threatening to destroy it. If the three circles communicate, they do so in places which are Rivette's own, like the back of the theater, or the house in the suburbs. These are places where Nature does not live, bur has survived with a strange grace: the undeveloped parts of a suburb, a rural stretch of city street, or secluded corners and alleyways. Fashion magazines have managed to make perfect, frozen pictures of these places, but everyone forgot that these places came from Rivette, having been impregnated with his dream. In these places conspiracies are hatched, young girls live together, and schools are established. But it is also in these places that the dreamer can still seize the day and the night, the sun and the moon, like a great external Circle governing the other circles, dividing up their light and their shadow.
In a certain way, Rivette has never filmed anything else bur light and its lunar (Lucia) and solar (Constance) transformations. Lucia and Constance are not persons, but forces. Bur this duality cannot be divided into good and evil. Hence Rivette ventures into those places where Nature has survived to verify the state in which the lunar and the solar subsist. Rivette's cinema has always been close to the poetry of Gerard Nerval, as though Rivette were possessed by him. Like Nerval, Rivette tours the remains of a hallucinatory Ile-de-France, tells the story of his own Daughters of Fire, and vaguely feels the conspiracy of an indeterminable madness approaching. It is not a question of influence. Bur this encounter makes Rivette one of the most inspired auteurs in cinema, and one of its great poets.
Originally appeared in Cahiers du Cinema, no. 416, February 1989. Reprinted in Two Regimes of Madness (MIT Press, 2006): p. 355-8.
戏剧表演课上,同住一个宿舍的四个女学生正在排练马里沃的戏剧《移情别恋》。从某一天起,一个神秘奇怪的男人闯入了她们的生活,他声称与她们的另一个同学塞西尔的男友安东尼相识,他告诉她们安东尼牵扯到一起犯罪事件,让她们保持警惕。当她们与这个男人的交往越来越密切,对他有了更多的了解,她们发现他的存在已经对自己的生活和情感造成了巨大的影响,她们不得不想办法除掉他……影片入选1989年《电影手册》十佳。
这部电影比较长,将近三个小时,节奏相对缓慢。其中穿插着许多戏剧排练的场景,人物要经常从现实状态切换到戏剧表演状态,她们所表演的戏剧与现实中的故事没有什么关联,但是到后面我们会发现两者并非完全是互不干扰的,她们的课程会因为现实中的种种因素受到影响,而戏剧也会在某种程度上为她们提供行动的力量和精神的慰藉,让她们更有勇气去处理生活中遇到的麻烦。
字幕根据英文字幕翻译,比较难翻译的地方是她们排演时的对白,这里附上来源网络的《移情别恋》的故事简介,以便更好理解她们排演的内容。
王子(Le Prince)狩猎时偶遇了美丽纯朴的女孩希雅(Silvia),对她一见钟情,便派人将她掳到了王宫。王子迟迟不露面,派王宫近侍特弗朗(Trivelin)出面游说希雅。不知内情的希雅其实已有了心上人——同村的阿尔勘(Arlequin)。王子仆人之女丽雅(Flaminia)自告奋勇派妹妹丽赛特(Lisette)讨好阿尔勘,拆散两人。谁知阿尔勘对丽赛特不屑一顾,反而和温柔大方的丽雅成了好朋友,对她言听计从。随后,王子与阿尔勘开怀畅谈,解开了心结,让阿尔勘醒悟了与希雅青梅竹马的感情与爱无关。(人名翻译与字幕不同)
电影囊括着表演空间和生活空间,戏剧的排练厅舞台与四人合居的房子,双重空间在互蚀。又是排的马里沃的戏剧,《双重背叛(La double inconstance)》,我记得在《阿黛尔的生活》里面也有提到他的作品,开头的法语课,老师在讲马里沃的《玛丽安的生活(La vie de marianne)》,讲到那种一见钟情的心理活动。
真是一种煎熬
集合四人力量,一同面對邪惡勢力
年少不知里维特的好,在密集的文本里捕捉对方的谎言所在,放大,利用,烟囱的钥匙犹如利刃,割开友谊与爱情,雅各布居然只有不到五句台词,可以看做早期的《欢乐时光》
"Je comprends. Vous êtes comme Saint Thomas. Vous voulez toucher."
除了色彩和穿搭都很无聊.看简介以为是四个艺术or文学相关专业的女大学生对生活,艺术,哲学,爱情等等话题的探讨,看之前特别感兴趣!觉得一定会有很多有不同角度的有趣观点,碰撞出非常多火花,但并不是,甚至还有悬疑的元素在,实在特别失望~只收女学生一直批评学生的老师;有问题不向朋友求助的Cécile;莫名其妙的英雄救美,多重身份的奇怪男人有邪恶感的警察;自己不开心别人也别想开心看起来巨攻的Claude竟然会沦陷于男人的"爱"中?能识破毒酒却蠢到被打晕?(是因为圣乔治屠龙才识破的吗?因为学费问题没能入学的女生再也没出现。印象深刻只剩有逻辑的人:遇见朋友,有鱼缸要加水,要养鱼,养鱼说明有爱心,有爱心就有爱人,遇见另一个:有鱼缸吗?没有..里维特该长不长该短不短Anna和Raphael太美了_
4.5。越来越被里维特的想象力折服
在这所房子里没有谎言,可内部藏起来的秘密引来了外部的阴谋,于是destruction and doubt,戏剧不断在往复中,作为命运提线orderliness的教师退场,蕴含着偶然性coincidence的四个女人继续在舞台上演绎。话说,Inês de Medeiros可太美了,这对姐妹真灵。
英文字幕看得混混沌沌,密集对话一再加重了阅读困境。作者本就不怎么对付观众,缺了共情基础,乐趣自然也就更难觅了。
在《疯狂的爱情》之后20年,里维特再次把戏剧和电影串起来。前一部电影里黑白镜头下阴郁和纠结的色调在这部里变成了颜色鲜亮的青春和成长,电影中排演的剧也从Racine变成了Marivaux;Bulle Ogier从当年剧团导演年轻忧郁的女友变成了本片中五十岁依然美丽优雅的导演本人;故事背景从巴黎的奥斯曼式建筑顶楼搬到了93省Montfermeil的阁楼里。四个女孩(加上Cécile其实是5个!)太优秀了,每个人的性格都有可靠的塑造,各自的故事都还算完整而且可爱,就凭这一点就很成功了。最后那个自以为是的普信男警察还是被一棒子锤倒在地,同时女孩们在老师缺席的情况下开始自己组织起了排练!(配角里有一个是Irène Jacob,特别单纯,完全看不出两年后她可以变成《两生花》中的Véronique……)
演员是不是在重复无穷尽的谎言,与此同时蒙蔽自己这是在追求真理?愤怒、低级的情感充斥的表演跟恋爱中女人的戏码又有什么差别?道貌岸然的人总是最能激起我的性欲,当时我就笑场了!
最后,当Bulle Ogier饰演的戏剧教师离开以后,女孩们开始了失去指导的表演,戏剧在继续。不知这是否某种程度上和Rivette与演员之间的关系相呼应,某一刻起演员们也会自己找到诠释文本的方式,即为某种即兴。PS,看的时候就一直在想有个角色是不是Irène Jacob,片尾看到演职员表,原来真的是她……我好喜欢她,她竟然在里维特的电影里打过酱油,呜~
稀释结构,单调空间,要讨论的问题却很大很多:艺术的功能,表演的真实性,身份的选择。但似乎哪一个点都没有留下什么深刻的印象。
几乎可算是“剧场类”电影的典范之作了——戏剧文本与画框内现实的紧密箍绕、互文、折射和影响,从表层的渗透逐渐演化为深度的沉浸,以致于三女围追的高潮段落宛如舞台表演的复现,场面调度的调性非常微妙地贴合被反复排演的戏剧,让她们在两个空间(舞台、宅寓)的行动逻辑得以流动、打通;四人结构并不恒定稳定,另有导演和搬出去的Cecile作为变量影响进程(结尾的确有点意外,但也正如导演的神秘前史一样作留白处理),“我喜欢巧合,但也喜欢秩序”——最终会形成一种无序后的新秩序。秘密与谎言,背叛和信任,爱情和阴谋,被纠葛在一团悬疑的迷雾中,鬼魂深夜击打着惶惑的灵魂,一切未解的迷戛然断尾;提早预告了《不羁的美女》。
开场很好 但叙事散 我不太喜欢的风格 很艺术
贯彻片中表演课的方法论:破坏、怀疑,创造、虚构。"I like coincidences, but I also like orderliness."这句话大概也是法国电影魅力之源。
似乎可以说是里维特之前几十年各种奇想的总结之作,布鲁·欧吉尔顺理成章地将火把传给下一代,电影虽混杂在真真假假的戏剧、鬼魂与阴谋之间,但女孩们的生活即便是谈谈天喝喝茶也美妙自如。
不止四个女人,闯入的男人滑稽不神秘。戏里戏外,难入戏,台上的人很僵化。黑色、幼稚、儿童化闹剧,献给狱中人。生活和排演怎么互相影响,表达不畅。预告了《不羁的美女》的诞生。
7.5/10。①五个(曾经)同宿舍的表演系大学女生的日常(学习)生活以及她们被迫卷入了一场犯罪风波后的生活。②运用戏中戏(舞台剧)互文+有力契合了影调的表演模式营造了虚实相交的有趣魔力。③精美且表意有力的高水平摄影美术;不少丝滑优美(契合角色们的精致气质)的高水准运镜调度。④作为角色导向型电影有很多想表达的主题,但整体上构建地并不清晰系统,而更多是一堆松散而笼统的概念与思考。
警察初次登场就奠定了全片的基调,车中他用谎言试探安娜时,全程只能看见他的嘴在微弱的灯光中喋喋不休,而他的眼睛始终藏于黑暗。眼睛传递着灵魂最根源的真实,演技再好的人往往也不免在眼神中透露线索,而嘴则是五官中最轻佻的存在,几乎可说是谎言的化身。遮蔽眼镜却暴露嘴,暗示谎言与假象的笼罩。