浴火鸟

我看完之后有被剧情和画面震撼到，立马去官网看了下幕后导演故事，导演2011年看到了谢尔盖（电影主角原型）写的传记《关于罗曼的记忆》，读完非常喜欢然后决定写电影剧本作为自己的第一部电影作品，几年之后剧本完成，2014遇到了tom（饰演谢尔盖的演员），tom加入了剧本创作，2016年两人去俄罗斯和谢尔盖见面，又了解了大量的细节使剧本更加丰满，2017年演员确定开始排练，2021年在电影节上映。

电影的三角恋让我想起了之前看的《橘衫男子》，同样的军官和士兵，军官和女人结婚生子。

另外浴火鸟的取景摄像和画面调色都太厉害了，画面质感在同性片里面绝对超过了大部分的电影，改编自真实故事让电影里感情更加动容。

不得不说谢尔盖年轻的时候很帅，典型的俄罗斯长相，演员有些神似，不知道罗曼的原型是什么样子，应该和扮演他的演员一样英姿飒爽吧。

But what is there to consider?

但这有什么好考虑的呢，

I can’t choose for fear of hurting those I love.

我害怕伤害到我爱的人，所以我没有选择。

I can’t divide myself any longer and belong to everyone at the same time.

我不能把自己分开来同时属于所有人。

Please don’t wait for me.

请你不要等我，

Forget me.

忘记我。

I shall always think of you.

我会永远想念你。

No matter what life may bring,

无论生活变得如何，

I will always be there with you.

我会永远和你在一起。

From 《Firebird 》（2021）

那时候还太年轻，不知道所有命运赠送的礼物，早已在暗中标好了价格。

——题记

一位迷人有野心的基地指挥官秘书谢尔盖，以及一个胆大的年轻战斗机飞行员罗曼，他们的缘分似乎冥冥注定，很难不被对方吸引。

军营中的爱恋，总是应该青涩地试探和小心翼翼，更何况是在上世纪七八十年代。

虽然暗藏威胁，可他们的爱情似乎得到了幸运女神的庇佑总能不被发现。

看着爱人，少年的眼眸中闪烁着动人的光泽。

罗曼替谢尔盖抵挡着来自上层的压力，他不忍心破灭少年的激情，但也深感力不从心。

谢尔盖离开军营时，两个人也没能见一面。

他选择忍受世俗的制约去结婚生子，但仍留恋于曾经的牵绊。谢尔盖一直按照他们的约定，去戏剧学院努力学习表演，并期盼着罗曼来找自己。

日后再见，尽管世事难料，但他们一如既往地深爱着对方。在那些相依相伴的日子里，也许他们都十分感谢自己和对这份感情的坚定。

谢尔盖道明自己害怕失去他，罗曼笑着安慰他自己就在这里。

未来不可预测，起码这一刻我们是开心幸福的。虽然有些及时行乐的成分，但人生如果一直畏畏缩缩，那未免也活的太憋屈了。

新年时朋友聚会上两个人情不自禁跑到卧室拥吻，却被好友发现，好友说他们不是爱是恶心，谢尔盖悲愤交加却又无可奈何。

他想让那些偏见的人明白，爱一个人没什么可抱歉的。

罗曼爱谢尔盖，也爱他的妻子和儿子，他于心不忍伤害任何一方，辛苦地来回维持奔波，可不知不觉中两者却都被自己深深地伤害了。

圣诞节后，谢尔盖留下一封书信黯然离去，路易莎终于明白了真相和他大吵了一架。他们知道的是罗曼对不起他们，自己很心痛，可他们不知道的是，这是自己与罗曼的最后一次相见。

罗曼是那么温柔又有责任感的人，他两者都想兼顾可到头来两者都失去了，疲惫到再也没有精力去道歉挽回，他厌倦了尘世的挣扎，也知道他们已经不会原谅自己了，他也不再奢求什么了，知道自己拥有过幸福，就足够了。

深知谢尔盖一直以来对感情的偏执，对此“我无法选择，因为害怕伤害我所爱的人。我不能再分裂自己了，同时属于每个人。”是他的回答。

他知道谢尔盖一定会责备他的离去，所以遗书中安慰自己的爱人——“我选择唯一的地方，在那里我仍然感到自由，是天空。”

谢尔盖那么爱自己，他一定会懂的。

“我将永远和你在一起”

罗曼对任何人都不够残忍，唯独对他自己。

大雪纷飞，渲染着生离死别。

命运好像总是爱和人开玩笑，对于美好的事物，人们都会想尽办法贪心地拥有。谢尔盖想和罗曼光明正大地在一起，罗曼想着顾及家庭和爱人，路易莎如愿以偿地结婚却怀疑着自己的丈夫。似乎每个人都不知足，可人生就是这样。要说什么下一世，生生世世，无穷无尽，都是如此，是人就会有欲望，只是像罗曼这样的人，下一世不管是作为丈夫还是作为情人，都莫要再让他受苦了。

可惜没有如果

第一次劫后余生

第一次，关系的深入。在边境突遇北约巡逻兵后，初次亲密接触，两人迅速站上“一垒”和“二垒”

“死里逃生”的Roman主动寻求爱吻，谢盖尔最初闪躲，最后十指紧扣深情拥吻

谢盖尔迎来了人生第一场波罗的海的“春雨”

海滩边 礁石后

两人赤身裸体，“坦诚相对”

两架飞机同时横空“发射”，迫不及待奔上“三垒”

一切都来得那么迅猛，让人根本无法招架热恋带来的悸动。

第一次被迫疏离

回到营中，却因匿名举报信被少校“盘问审查”，两人关系被迫第一次疏离

第二次死里逃生

第二次，关系的恢复。谢盖尔，寻找到“劫后余生”独处的Roman。Roman深情得吻着谢盖尔的手，像只无助的小动物，寻求安慰

两人关系进一步升华至“本垒”

开启彻底的肉体欢愉

灵与肉的结合，“负距离”的体验

连蹦跶带小跑，马上过上了二人夫夫甜蜜生活

第二次被迫疏离

少校的“突击检查”，却让两人的关系再次迅速冷却。

第三次双向奔赴

婚后，Roman对谢盖尔的“念念不忘”

双向奔赴

终于等来了两人，索契旅行的“终有回响”

此刻便是永恒

边境巡逻敌兵、执行飞行任务的险象环生、Roman世俗生活的“圆满”，一步步推动了两人关系和感情的深入。

少校的一次再一次威胁、Roman妻儿的“回归”，一次次使两人关系面对思考和时间，恢复理智后，两人的感情却无处安放。

终语

如果浴火鸟在自由的天空得以重生，Roman和谢盖尔的关系是不是会再度“升华”到极致，“死生契阔”，让他们再也不会分离。

就让他们定格在人生第一次约会的剧场里，彼此一见倾心，互相陪伴

人生若只如初见

------分割线------

“因为经典故事里的角色

不是完全理智的

他们是鲜活的、呼吸的、有感受的生灵

他们细腻而脆弱

也会因为一些事

心潮澎湃

我希望你们能够捕捉住这份悸动

用心和灵魂去感受”

正是电影里这样令人起鸡皮疙瘩的一段旁白，也是我最爱的一段台词，成就了Roman和谢盖尔最美丽的“双向奔赴”，成就了彼此人生的高光时刻。

有温度的共同生活

Firebird is an epic Queer love story set in a tense Soviet Union. This unconventional film followed the romance of Sergey, played by Tom Prior, and Roman, played by Ukrainian hunk, Oleg Lobykin.

Set in the 1970's Cold War, Firebird is an incredibly stylish film. The visuals feel authentic and true to its setting. But surprisingly, there are bouts of action, adding more thrill to a story that is already anxiety inducing.

Another twist is that the film explores a love triangle between Roman, Sergey, and Roman's partner, Luisa- played by Diana Pozharskaya.

This part of the world has always been incredibly hostile to LGBT+ people. It is common to see an attempt to erase Queer people from the histories and identities of post-Soviet countries. From the 'LGBT free zones' in Poland; the Gay Propaganda Laws in Russia - to the toxic political discourse in Hungary - 'Firebird' is a symbol of Queer existence throughout history. It is a statement that Queer love is not a modern and Western construct, but it is imbedded in the fabric of humanity. And this piece of history- beautifully shown in the film- is a shining example that the #TheNewEastisQueer, and it always has been.

In this interview, the writer/lead actor, Tom Prior and director/writer Peeter Rebane talk about the true story of 'Firebird', its making, and what it was like to meet the real Sergey.

EAST: Where did you first meet each other?

TOM: I was doing some work in Los Angeles, and a film financier that I was meeting- by coincidence- mentioned that she heard about the story of Firebird- which was under a different name at the time- and promised to introduce me to Peeter. Then we basically connected and I read the script, and fell in love with it instantly. It was when the draft of the screenplay was at a very early stage, and that’s really where it began.

EAST: Peeter, when did you first discover the story?

PEETER: That was over 10 years ago. A friend of mine- who founded the ‘Black Nights Film Festival’ in Tallinn- she received the original story from a Russian journalist showing it around at the Berlinale, and she knew that I was looking for material for my first film. So I read it over a weekend at home, I literally cried and decided that I have to turn this into a film and then started writing for the first time ever.

EAST: ’The New East is Queer’ is a campaign to debunk the myth that Queer people don’t exist in Eastern Europe and Post-Soviet States. Yet here is a queer love story set in Soviet Russia. Were you conscious of this when deciding to make the movie? Did you feel a sense of duty to tell the story?

PEETER: Foremost, I was taken a back by the universal love story. I was also fascinated and really surprised when I read the original manuscript that such a relationship could have actually existed in the Soviet airforce. Then we went on to interview people who served in the Soviet military in the 1970’s and found out that many such relationships existed, and we were also fortunate enough to interview Sergey in Moscow. But at the same time I do feel also that it is important to share this story in light of the real horrors that are going on in Russia and especially in Chechnya today. It is important to remind people about the importance of love and how such relationships have existed throughout the ages.

TOM: For me its really important to share these messages. But we were very true when we said we made this film- not for political reasons- but for about love, love wins. Sergey’s character in the film is really about following his heart. There are terrible atrocities happening, but being able to make movies like this, we are effectively being that very change that we want to see in the world.

EAST: How was Roman cast?

PEETER: That was a really long process. We set a very clear intention to find the most authentic actors that are believable to the true story. So we did a world wide casting, and got 2,500 submissions for the role of Roman. For months we were casting in Europe and the UK, to Moscow. One day in Moscow, Oleg walked in the room and everyone was like: “That’s our Roman”.

EAST: How was it working with Oleg?

TOM: It was a really fascinating process as Peeter said. We just knew from the minute he walked in the room that it was right, this kind of presence. When you talk about casting in a film, you really are casting a person as you are a performer. He had this real presence and he was the nearest person that we felt was Roman, and so, our journey began. Because he is not a native speaker, at all, in fact he had a very small amount of English when we began the project. It has its challenges, and in some ways it actually helped, to a degree, because it meant that we couldn’t communicate as freely as we would, say in a modern day context in English- which serves the story in an amazing way. Because at the time there was no language around the subject matter. Today we are in a very liberal society where we can begin to scale that in a very easy and transparent way, but at the time there wasn’t that. So it bought a really interesting dynamic to the film. Working with Oleg was a real pleasure but it of course it had its challenges as well: cultural background differences, and things like that. But it was a really beautiful working relationship.

EAST: Tom, you were a writer as well as an actor in ‘Firebird’. How did this come about?

TOM: When Peeter and I met- and fell in love with the story- at that time we didn’t have the financing in place to make the film. So we made a teaser for the film, and the scenes that we selected for the teaser. I made some suggestions about how we might improve the script a bit, and the lines and the nature of the lines. I have a real sensitivity to being able to produce texts or language of how people actually speak- as oppose to how people one would think people speak- this is something I am quite sensitive to. So I made these few suggestions on how we might improve the script and that ended up several pages of notes and ended up as several weeks of work, which ended up being overall significant rewrites and redrafts and restructures- and doing lots and lots more research. Then by that point, the script was completely a different animal to what I first came to. So we took the strong elements of that and then imbedded in a lot more research.

EAST: Thats an interesting point. After stalking your Instagram its quite clear that you are a spiritual person and quite centred. Did these qualities help you in your writing or acting?

TOM: Most definitely. For me this project has been quite extraordinary, in the sense of the level of depth that I have been able to get to. Writing the content, for sure, is a whole other level as a performer. Then also meeting the real Sergey, we interviewed him in Moscow, we also very tragically went to his funeral. He passed away in the time that we were developing the story, and it was a very surreal moment for me, to be at the funeral of a person whose life you have extended in the literary form, and who you will play in real life. So there were very strong moments during the time filming that there was this awareness that Sergey was with us, or certainly the energy. For me, having a real level of emergence within the project meant that the emotion came easily, or the stream of conscienceless, lets say. It was very profound and beautiful for the opportunity to do that as a performer.

EAST: And when you met Sergey Fetisov, what were your impressions of him, and did these impressions influence the way you played or wrote about him?

TOM: Very much so. It was an honour to meet him, and he was so very full of heart. He was a very heart-led man. You could tell that he had such a sunny persona, and despite having had a lot of trials and tribulations in love, he was bold and happy. So I bought that level of following your heart, and that bounciness to the performance- where I could - without making it seem to out of context at the same time.

EAST: And for you Peeter, how was it meeting Sergey Fetisov, and did this impact the way you directed the film?

PEETER: As Tom said, he was an amazingly warm and heartfelt person, considering what he had gone through in his life, and how these experiences had made him loving and not hating. I think he definitely informed how we developed the character, and it was an amazing treasure trove speaking to him about actual details, like: what were their favourite pieces of music; what were their favourite foods; which music they would play to each other; which books would they read; which theatre plays they went to see. It all kind of built a world, and helped us to be very authentic in directing and staging the film.

EAST: Peeter, being from Estonia, was there anything about your heritage and personal identity that you bought to the project?

PEETER: Definitely, when I was a very young boy I still recall the Soviet occupation, and our summer house was actually the airforce base where this story takes place. I have this distinct memory of my friend being on this bicycle and these two MiG’s (Mikoyan-Gurevich) flying overhead at maybe 150 feet, and us literally falling off the bicycles because the noise was so deafening. So I have a very strong personal connection, besides having grown up with this feeling of shame about ones sexuality, having to hide your true identity, and the surrounding environment lacking understanding and being ignorant. So, a lot of parallels for me.

EAST: How much history is in the story?

PEETER: I think its, well I don’t dare to say 100%, but I think its 99% historically correct. The events happening, the small details of the airforce base, the setting, we really made our upmost to make a film that looks and feels like the 1970’s could have looked and felt like.

EAST: And there seems to be a big military presence in the film.

PEETER: From the directing perspective, we had amazing consultants. We had a retired airforce base, a retired Soviet airforce base commander, flight pilot, a person who worked in the command centre, who directed all the flights. We had a lot of people who literally went through the script, went through the dialogues, who were on the set with us, telling us to do it like this, or do it this way. We put trust in not making a Hollywood version of what someone envisages, but in thorough research.

TOM: The intricacy of the details is very particular, I mean, even when it comes to the radio announcements, and things like that, and the calling in’s to the planes and the lights from the command centre and everything- its all very accurate. We did the best research to our knowledge, to make sure that it was as real as possible, and the same really with the job titles, the job roles. The military consultants in particular were very useful and an intrinsic part of the training for the performance: the way we would walk; the hand salutes; all this military realism that actually happened, and making sure that the attention to detail- our costume department were really great around that also. So, the military aspects of the film, even this accident, there was an accident sequence within the film as well, which was in the original story, and I was absolutely adamant we had to put it into the film, to give it this military flare, instead of having it simply as a backdrop, but actually as an action sequence, this was really paramount and important to me, to ground it into the real world.

EAST: Any personal highlights from onset?

Peeter: I think for me one of the most amazing shots was the last shot of the film. Without giving away too much, it lasts about 1.5 minutes, and the camera is going into Sergey, and technically it was huge challenge for our team to pull it off, but also performance wise, for Tom to act out all the different emotions, truthfully, being surrounded by 50 or 60 extras, and knowing that we can’t cut, and that this is all real time, one very long take.

TOM: Its a very unforgiving shot, lets put it that way. I’m very proud of that moment, and what came through. It was one of those moments that I was speaking out earlier, where there was this profound connection. I started experiencing some very curious things, emotionally. It was like being show the end of ones life, but I was experiencing it in the real time, which was quite curious. For me, the highlight and more significant highlights of the film was really my personal growth. That to me is a huge success. As a measure of success, it challenged me emotionally, physically, spiritually, and now its a sort of standing point, as a physical manifestation of what one can achieve when there are so many odds against you and challenges and time limiting factors, and all those kind of things. So yeah, we can have a whole other discussion of that for the highlights. But we were so blessed, to have such a wonderful committed and loyal team who were willing to go way above standard hours, the commitment was astounding.

EAST: Peeter, did you learn anything about yourself personally or professionally during this project?

PEETER: Absolutely, first of all it was my first full length feature. I have done documentaries, but that’s a whole different game. Learning all the nuances of directing on the set of the feature, and actually doing a pretty challenging script. We shot in the air, under the water, in the baltic sea, staged Hamlet in theatre, staged the full production of Firebird, including costumes and choreography, dancers and sets- a lot of very specific scenes. It was very challenging and I had a lot of personal growth during this process, over the last couple of years.

TOM: I think for me also, as I mentioned, the physical challenges, the stamina, keeping up your health, mental clarity and sharpness through longer days, and resilience through that. Some days there would be, 5, 6, 7, 8 costume changes, multiple different set environments, we would have to change them very quickly as well. I would be sitting on the train, where we would shoot the train sequences, and moving from one emotional state to another, within minutes, and the whole world of the character has changed and gone upside down in that time. So, to be able to tune in to that energy, that emotional change very quickly, was really amazing. And to also play a lead in a film, there is this overwhelming pressure that you can put on yourself, and to scale that, was for me, a real joy and a real challenge, at times. To stay centred, to stay focussed, and to know what we have got to do and what we are there to do, and yeah, this was a really beautiful example of change and growth, and long hours, knowing that you can do it, and you have got to get through it.

EAST: How relevant do you think the story is for todays audience?

Tom: For me, the story is very relevant in terms of following your heart. We live in a world which is probably more divided than ever, with regards to health, with regards to beliefs and perceptions. It is a standing point for following your heart. Actually, if you choose to walk that path, its not necessarily going to be the easiest route, but its probably somewhat the most rewarding- in terms of being able to feel and develop as a person. The film is about following ones heart and ones desires against all the odds, and against the laws of the country and the environment in which somebody grows up in. I hope this is a standing point of inspiration to follow your heart, to love daringly, that would be my wish and hope for its relevance today.

EAST: Do you have any plans to show this to Eastern audiences?

Peeter: Absolutely, we will distribute the film across the world. We trust we will be at some festivals in the summer, also Autumn, late October- and end of the year we will have a wider distribution across the region. So, I guess we will see how the world is as we open, and depending on how much we will be in cinemas. But definitely, we will be on all major platforms across Europe.

'Firebird' premiered at the 2021 BFI Flare Festival on 17th March 2021 and is available to stream on the BFI Player until 28th March 2021.

今年最喜欢的电影。

70年代的苏联已进入一种非常微妙的社会，虽然克格勃的监视无处不在，但全方位的松动是真的，年轻人可以像欧美青年一样穿着古巴领大谈西方哲学与戏剧，人们可以在婚宴上毫不违和地鼓动新人亲吻，军队的图书馆里也借得到莎士比亚的书，甚至二人在部队时的情感被上尉看得一清二楚也当做看不见……这些都给“欲断未断”的同性情感提供了潜在的机会。

二人独处洗胶卷时，军官对谢尔盖产生了好感，特别是听到他说“当你拍摄照片时，有一些东西就永远消失了，一个永不再现的时刻”，那一刻，可以称之为：“心动”。

他说“叫我罗曼”。他扶着有点微醺的谢尔盖，四目相对，很想抱一抱他，但显然此时还为时尚早。于是，他开始反复试探谢尔盖：在车上听到谢尔盖讲述和同年玩伴的故事，听到他们互相在信上署名“Valentine”时有那么一瞬的错愕，旋即又放松；在草坪上问他“你有女朋友吗？”，对方回答“No”时，心中似乎有了点信心。直到躲避边境警察的巡察时，他满怀希望地望向他，忍不住靠近、嘴唇相抵，谢尔盖先是惊讶，不过几秒也开始接纳并给予回应，双手相扣，迎接一场波罗的海的大雨——罗曼不知道的是，从接过那卷他送他的胶卷起，谢尔盖也已对自己动心：在车上偷偷瞄这位新来的年轻、英俊的上级，听他谦逊却不谦卑地回应同僚的质疑，也看到他不经意间瞥见自己的眼神；冲洗胶卷时，些许紧张地一边看自己的手被对方轻轻握着，一边听他在耳边像电流般说话。但是他还是想逃走——这样做的风险太大了，即便已明显从对方望向自己的眼神中看到了相同的气质与味道。

然而，除了克格勃外，这种艰难维持的情感在后期遭遇了更普世、也更软性的考验：来自妻子、家庭，以及内心的矛盾，等等。

婚后，罗曼的很多行为放在当代中国或其他任何社会，都会被贴上“渣男”标签，他可以在结婚当晚面对谢尔盖的靠近依旧止不住将嘴唇靠近，可以在四年后告诉妻子前往莫斯科进修实则只是想见见谢尔盖，可以塞给对方一张火车票说“我有一个礼拜的假期”言下之意即邀请对方与自己偷情，可以在三人过圣诞时拼命地察言观色不让自己妻子瞧出真相……一切都太熟悉了，似乎是所有已婚Gay都会做的事情。所以越到最后，他越是无法接受自己在路易莎和谢尔盖之间不断寻求平衡与周全，他前往阿富汗战场，直接原因是谢尔盖的离开且说“不要再来找我”，但根源还在于内心深处长年积累下来的悔意：“我害怕去伤害我爱的人，我害怕再分裂自己了，同时属于每一个人”。

同样之于谢尔盖，或许很多行为也会被人冠以“男小三”的称号：他可以一边在剧场说狄德罗的台词：“欺骗自己，同时也欺骗他人，这种活在欺骗中的人会慢慢地不去尊重任何人、任何事”，一边又忍不住跑去火车上与罗曼相见，并前往索契偷情。路易莎来莫斯科时，他可以一边怨恨罗曼把自己当做一个普通演员，甚至就差赶自己走，一边又去买圣诞树并且回到那个不属于他的家，假装只是个客人。而他相比罗曼唯一的光辉，或许是从未结婚，从未去伤害另一个女子，而是独自终老。

二人都是过于矛盾的人，也都是不够干脆的人，站在局外人的角度，这种当断不断的情感处理方式让我很不喜欢，但他们有其他选择吗？或许从道德上讲，把这些关系捋捋清楚很简单，但要从情感的角度，把所有的思念和爱都狠狠割断，非当事人并不能轻易置喙。毕竟当谢尔盖在犹豫之后选择去火车上相见，望着对方，两个人都喜笑颜开时的眼神，除了“爱”，没有什么可解释。