Recent Comment

Archives

Turin Horse, The (都靈老馬, 2011)

The Turin Horse (都靈老馬, 2011)

導演
Béla Tarr, Ágnes Hranitzky
演員
János Derzsi, Erika Bók
連結
imdb link

 

 

簡介
 1889年, 意大利 都靈~ 哲學家 尼采 遊經 都靈 時看見一匹老馬被主人鞭打, 他上前捨身保護馬匹後倒地, 後來被證實患上嚴重精神病~ 這匹老馬原來屬於一位身體殘障的老農夫 Ohlsdorfer (János Derzsi 飾), 他跟女兒 (Erika Bók 飾) 住在一家破舊的小屋, 每天過著規律刻苦的生活~ 他每天驅馬車到城市, 但一天老馬不願拉車, 並開始不再進食, 農夫與女兒的生活頓入困境~

 

評語
少有電影比 “The Turin Horse” 更悲觀絕望~ 匈牙利導演 Béla Tarr 在這部自稱的封鏡之作, 回到 “Damnation” (煉獄人間, 1988), “Satantango” (撒旦探戈, 1994) 時期蒼涼而灰暗的風格 (片中父女二人都是 “Satantango” 的演員), 在黑白色的攝影下描寫一個沒有出路也沒有救贖的世界~

“The Turin Horse” 講述殘障老農夫和女兒在 (世界末日前?) 六天的故事, 每一天的故事大約只用六個長鏡頭拍成, 全片合共只有30個鏡頭~ 老農夫和女兒每天的生活是重複而痛苦的循環: 清早起來女兒提水桶打水, 梳洗後替老農更衣, 老農驅馬車到城市, 回來後女兒替老農更衣, 每人吃一個馬鈴薯充飢, 吃飽後靜坐在窗前看屋外狂風亂舞~ 這生活規律從老馬不再願拉車而開始被打破, 鄰人預告世界不斷墮落, 吉卜賽人聲言搶走土地和食水, 直至後來老馬再不願進食, 甚至連世界亦失去光明~

電影大部分時間就是上述不停重複的生活細節, 看女兒提水桶打水, 替老農穿衣更衣, 父女對坐進餐~ 每天相同的生活片段都會採用不同視點拍攝, 把整家小屋裡裡外外拍得通透, 卻更顯父女二人生活一窮二白, 每天被困在刻板的規律之中~ 屋外是從沒靜止的狂風, 聲軌上不是颼颼風聲便是配樂師 Mihály Vig 筆下旋律無止境地重複, 足以讓人抓狂的配樂~ 這一切加起來築成一個無從衝破的困局, 生命只是永無休止的折騰~

在這樣慘淡的世界, 人類的求生本能反而是最大的詛咒~ 老農每天狼吞虎嚥那個根本不足以果腹的馬鈴薯, 卻對鄰人的哲學論述和吉卜賽人留下的宗教書籍不聞不問, 甚至連世界失去光明, 他最初也只是堅持進食維生~ 老馬就像意識到世界的暗淡無望, 於是拒絕進食實行慢性自殺, 反而愚昧的人類卻用盡方法延續生命, 同時延續著痛苦~

16 comments to Turin Horse, The (都靈老馬, 2011)

  • [...] 含劇情描述 電影大部分時間就是上述不停重複的生活細節,看女兒提水桶打水,替老農穿衣更衣,父女對坐進餐~ 每天相同的生活片段都會採用不同視點拍攝,把整家小屋裡裡外外拍得通透,卻更顯父女二人生活一窮二白,每天被困在刻板的規律之中~ 屋外是從沒靜止的狂風,聲軌上不是颼颼風聲便是配樂師 Mihály Vig 筆下旋律無止境地重複,足以讓人抓狂的配樂~ 這一切加起來築成一個無從衝破的困局,生命只是永無休止的折騰~(…閱讀全文) [...]

  • 剛給你連結這篇:http://www.hkifflink.net/2011/04/02/5925/

  • I’ve only seen The Man From London (and fell asleep through it so I’m in no position to comment), and I have an unwatched copy of Sátántangó lying around somewhere, so I’m rather unfamiliar with Tarr’s works.

    So for the first hour, up to the point when the mysterious man gives his ‘universal debasement’/'evil reigns’ speech (and some of the audience scoffed at it), I felt increasingly apprehensive that the film was going nowhere (even though I’m fully aware of Tarr’s signature slow pacing and austerity, something which I’m sure not everyone in the audience was expecting). But it’s the scene where they try to leave but return that I realised that we’re not dealing with some indulgent pessimist who only likes to play with camera angles. Of course it’s bleak, defeatist stuff with a very annoying score, and I certainly can’t say I enjoyed it (is it possible?), but at the very least I appreciate the ‘methods’ he used, especially the final two scenes, in portraying a doomed humanity .Damnation would have been a better title, but he’s used that already and perhaps he wants to make the Nietzsche connection explicit- see Robert Koehler’s rather good review here.

    Two weeks and a bit of HKIFF, and I’ve merely seen 5 films- not good enough. Yet I still feel rather melancholic – what other chance could we watch arthouse films, or simply cinema that matters, at such a regular frequency? Has HKIFF actually encouraged a herd instinct (羊群心態), whereby it’s the only time of the year worth watching and showing films that aren’t pedestrian, that you need to think about, or that it’s the only ‘suitable’ time to try something new/’weird’/'camp’? I’m veering towards a rant here, so I’m gonna stop…

  • re: The DayDreamer
    I see “The Turin Horse” as Tarr’s “purest” film, it expresses his bleak, repetitive, and no-way-out worldview uniformly in terms of story, form and style~ If it is a final statement it’s a rather good one~

    as for hkiff, I think what matters is not how the festival is defined, but what you get from it~ there’s always someone who is just looking for “alternative entertainment”, jumping on auteurist bandwagons, or summarizing every film into a single word of praise/disapproval~ as long as they keep quiet during the screening, I have no complaints~

  • gNo Gravatar

    will you talk about “How far are we from madhouse?”

  • 我想不能夠只是說那些日常細節在重覆, 無了期無休止但又苦無出路, 當然這是一個面向, 但似乎那些細節本身也有可細味的地方, 這似乎更加重要, 因為這些東西畢竟佔了更大篇幅和更多著墨, 而且不能從缺, 否則就只令到本片只有重覆, 而不是重覆中更見日常細節的深度刻劃, 這種刻劃要富有實感是很難的。 比如第一天我們較從父親角度感受他們的生活, 第二天則從女兒處, 第三天因為受到吉卜賽人打擾而開始變成是兩人的配合:父親作主, 女兒居中配合…

    又如吃薯仔, 開頭會好奇為什麼父親要吃得那樣急, 又沒有好好吃完, 漸漸我們會發現這是常態, 是他們對食物的不同態度, 也許也是他們對生命的不同態度… 父親平常喝酒也有點精緻, 逐shot的haha, 但到後來他也顧不得, 整支就灌了, 當然那也反映了他當時的心理狀況…

    不知大家早兩年有沒有在電影節看牛皮一或二, 我只看過二, 整部戲就在做餃子煮餃子, 不斷重覆, 有時換一下角度拍, 畫外音就是人物在閒話家常, 對話比都靈老馬要豐富。看這兩片的其中很大趣味, 都是源於觀察這些重覆動作, 重覆生活小節, 這一次和下一次、今天和明天的對照, 然後這些對照又反映了些什麼

  • re: g
    這部我沒看…-_- 可以分享一下嗎?

    re: abjj
    雖說日常細節不停重覆, 但其實在這六日裡這些常規往往都遇上阻礙, 例如老馬拒絕拉車, 井底沒水, 酒全喝光之類~ 在運鏡上其實每天也有分別, 最明顯是進餐一幕, 一天是從父親視點出發, 一天是從女兒視點出發, 有時是二人對坐; 有一幕是從後面影女兒看窗外, 另一天是父親看窗, 另一天則是180度相反, 從窗外正面看女兒望出窗外, 諸如此類~ 這些細節也是這部電影在形式上的一點趣味吧~

    另外你也可以這樣看: 如果這些日常細節沒有出亂子, 父女二人便會一直這樣生活下去, 而且還會認為這種單調刻板的生活是 “好事”~ 任何轉變只會越變越差, 這種平凡的幸福只是延續著痛苦~

  • 當然有分別, 比如為何第二天會變得較認同女兒, 也因為在老馬拒絕拉車時她不是像她父親般一味使勁鞭打牠, 而是勸父親放棄, 讓馬休息, 而恰好這一天的運鏡也更多從女兒觀點出發, 我想強調的是這些很多時都不只是形式趣味而已

  • re: abjj
    你是說視點的轉換跟情節有關嗎? 這個我不太肯定, 要多看一次才敢說~ 不過女兒一直是比較 “中性” 的角色吧? 她至少不會反駁鄰居, 又會看吉卜賽人留下的書籍, 最後她對生存亦有懷疑 (不再進食), 老爸倒是很頑固很自我~

  • 是的, 又例如, 第一次看父親吃飯會覺得他為什麼會吃得這樣急, 真的那麼餓? 但其實他又沒有吃完, 是什麼原因呢? 但到第二天你看他這樣急性子對待馬兒, 吃飯時他又是這樣趕急 (這次鏡頭是正面對著女兒, 慢慢在吃, 有時看一下她的父親), 我們就知道他這樣急並不為什麼…… 這其實也在反映你和daydreamer所說的, 人這樣勞碌生活也並不為什麼

  • From your discussions both of you were far more observant than me, but I should qualify what I said previously.

    Throughout the first hour, I really felt I was seeing the same thing again and again. It’s not the repetition that annoyed me, but I felt the minimal variations to the camera shots like angles and length, as well as variations to the characters’ movement, produced such slight rewards that really wasn’t worth my time and patience.

    Though stricty speaking it’s the ‘universal debasement’ speech that’s the first ‘intervening’ scene, but it was
    after the leaving-and-returning scene that I ‘awakened’ and started interpreting what I saw. In retrospect, I think that I thought I was seeing in the first hour a mere minimalist exercise and not a gradual progression (however small it may be) of ideas and mise en scene. I simply wasn’t in the mood to see some stringent experiment on formalism and technique- I guess this is why I didn’t ‘get’ 牛皮 I and II. But I guess it’s the later intervening scenes, providing some spare narrative to what we’re watching, that allowed me to form an interpretation and ‘justify’ what I saw in the first hour- the daily routine as ennui, the cruelty of existence and human life, a sense of impending doom that our characters are half-aware.

    Perhaps you can deduce from these paragraphs that I’m still attached to a sense of narrative or purpose in film watching, and that I’m probably not too receptive of the avant garde (though I’ve never seen any of James Benning’s films, just by reading articles about his work I don’t think I’ll ever ‘understand’ him). And ‘slow cinema’ isn’t for everyone nor enjoyable at every moment (I feel that Lisandro Alonso is simlar to Bela Tarr, but I’m not particularly fond of his films either). But from what I saw, I certainly won’t count Bela Tarr as some pretentious ‘artist’ (here used by the ignorant masses as an insult regularly).

    As for the HKIFF comments, I’m not saying that I mind casual filmgoers going to festival screenings, and as gar said as long as they have the manners then that’s OK with me. Fortunately this year I didn’t encounter any bad experiences- the closest incident I had was overhearing a pair saying before a screening in the Cultural Centre: ‘睇戲冇得食嘢好慘’. They then attempted to open a pack of chips but were thankfully stopped by an usher.

    What I’m frustrated about is that while every year the HKIFF boasts about how many tickets they have sold, and the fact that the HKIFF is still overall an arthouse event, there’s still a lack of arthouse new releases in HK cinemas. It’s unbelievable that Taiwan can accomodate limited runs of Mysteries of Lisbon and Uncle Boonmee but we, a city with a far stronger cinema heritage and international influences, could only come up mainstream fare from overseas as ‘world cinema’. We don’t even have a proper arthouse cinema in HK anymore (bc Cinematheque is an awkward brand, and 影藝戲院 is just a joke). There must be an audience in HK receptive to cinema outside the Hollywood norm, but it does seem to me that their coming out parade is only once a year. No one is pretending that it’s OK to lose money, and non-mainstream releases won’t be very (if at all) profitable, but I’m starting to think that it’s the reluctance of both the distributors and latent arthouse movie goers, coupled with the convenient ‘excuse’ that is the HKIFF (in fact, any ‘festival’ is really a marketing label), that have contributed to the dearth of arthouse films in HK.

    I’m ranting again, and I admit HK has it far better compared to other places. I guess passion and anger are intertwined :S

  • daydreamer: 我明白你的意思, 有時我也會被這種影片弄得很困擾, 比如今年王兵的無名者… 但為什麼會對都靈老馬有這樣不同的判斷, 也有幾個可能。第一, 如我上述, 都靈老馬真是在重覆中有不同, 那些variation直接點出影片主題, 第二, 是我看無名者時狀態不佳, 吸收不了, 沒有戲緣, 第三, 我對王兵看到的東西沒有共鳴。

    但你說在那段對話之後, 好像找到一點線索, 驅使你回想之前的片段, 好像開始make some sense, 好像有點謎團解開…… 我想很多看藝術片的朋友都會有這種快感, 被它吸引下去。但其實我想這個不是很好的狀況, 因為這其實代表了你只是被一種論述所吸引, 一種解謎的快感, 而不是你看到影片呈現某種你心裡的真實而得共鳴, 好像有人替你說了你藏在心裡, 終於有人把它展現出來那種感覺… 我想藝術應該要從這種「真實」出發, 而不是一組謎語

    gar談certified copy的時候我覺得也牽涉到這問題, 我喜歡這片但我不同意他的看法, 之後有時間我會再提出…大家也可以就那部戲再談一下呢

  • re: The Daydreamer
    Let’s continue the discussion on “The Turin Horse” in my reply to abjj below~ =)

    As for the dearth of arthouse films in Hong Kong, I generally share your frustration/anger~ I pessimistically think that the “audience in HK receptive to cinema outside the Hollywood norm” AND habitually willing to seek out the latest arthouse releases is rather small~ BC is a very careful distributor and they release only the most prestigious arthouse films around, but still public reception is often lukewarm~ I wonder if the majority of HKIFF goers are only causal viewers who are willing to try out some “weird stuffs” once or twice a year, with little concern or interest for arthouse cinema in general~

    On the positive side, there are so many mini festivals in Hong Kong these days that should keep any film buff very busy all year round~ French May is coming and then there is HKSIFF, as well as retrospectives held by the Film Programmes Office~ By the way, the Grand Cinema is showing “Honey” this Thursday (along with a Reha Erdem retrospective), please see if you can make it~

    re: abjj
    對於 “都靈老馬” 的看法, 我想我多少是受到導演之前的作品影響~ 相信你還記得 “撒旦探戈” 那幕有名的超長酒館探戈舞吧? 那一段的重覆感就很難用個別角色的心理描寫來justify~ 導演之前作品很多都有這種空洞的重覆感, 例如那些極長的走路鏡頭, 不斷重複的環境聲音等, 這無疑是一種有效地呼應其 “人生作為痛苦和困局” 人生觀的手段, 所以相對下最是 “乾淨利落” 的 “倫敦來客” 反而不太出色~

    我想一部電影某程度上就是一種論述吧? 當然, 理解方法和角度可以是無窮無盡的~ 對於你所謂的 “真實” 我有點保留~ 我不認為電影的價值在於 “求真”, 我個人並不很認同 貝拉塔爾 的人生觀, 不認為那種極度悲觀是 “真實”, 正如我不太認同 Roy Andersson 近乎憎惡人類的態度, 或是早期 蔡明亮 對現代人孤獨的描寫, 但我仍能欣賞他們以新鮮獨特的手法去表達他們的想法~

    我不會說這些在形式上和風格上跟內容相輔相承的手法只是 “謎團”, 而是把一些想法或態度昇華成為藝術的門徑~ 其實很多電影要說的東西都很簡單, 一兩句便說完, 但怎樣利用電影這種媒介表達出來才是令它們與眾不凡之處~

    另, 即使脫離實際內容, 單純在形式和風格上的遊戲, 其實亦有它的美感, 這就是一些實驗電影的可愛之處~ The Daydreamer 提到 James Benning, 不過今屆的 “Twenty Cigarettes” 倒是他迄今最可觀有趣的作品之一, 很大程度是因為鏡頭下是活生生的人, 比起藍天和湖水都要豐富和人性化得多~

    你提到 王兵, 今年我只看了他的 “夾邊溝”~ 那是個很平鋪直敘, 寫實地講述文革時期被流放邊疆勞改的知識份子的故事~ 沒有 “和鳳鳴” 一類大膽的處理手法 (完全沒有資料和佐證, 單靠口述訪問), “夾邊溝” 相比下震撼力反而有所不及, 雖然內容同樣是文革時期種種慘無人道的往事, 但以寫實電影手法表達就不算新鮮, 只能留下一些駭人畫面 (吃嘔吐物, 遍地屍體) 的印象~

    至於 “Certified Copy” 也請兩位留言談談, 我認為這電影討論和理解的層次很多, 值得深入談談, 當然也想聽聽別人的看法~

  • gNo Gravatar

    What The DayDreamer said was really true about how HKIFF boosted about how fast the ticket sales go and the number of tickets. I really did forget what was it like many years ago. However the ‘commercial taste’ about this event grows stronger and stronger. But eventually this is a ‘must not fail too much’ because it receives fund from govt, all eyes are on them. For this there’s no more complaints from me.
    I guess HKIFF is passive when it comes to venues selection, they took wherever is available & as much as possible. The closest art-house type of venue should be AC & Film Archive, as least personally I agree they are. I do not see the death of arthouse film markets in hk if it is only the limitation of venues, through out the year there are a lot of mini-festivals of retrospectives and different types of alternative / world cinema movies. I feel it is busy enough for movie lovers.

    gar – difficult for me to describe “how far are we from madhouse” as in the meet the Director section, Director Li HungQi also didn’t explain much about the movie as well. His interview with ARTDA reveals more:
    李红旗凭《寒假》获洛迦诺电影节金豹奖杯
    http://www.artda.cn/www/20/2010-08/4152.html

  • re: g
    I think the Daydreamer’s complaint is that Hong Kong lacks a cinema that is willing to screen arthouse films on a regular basis~ Yes, there are enough festivals that would keep film lovers busy, but films in these festivals are often screened twice: does it imply that the total arthouse audience in HK can be fit into merely two screenings?

    Thanks for the link about Li’s film~!

  • [...] 畫面漆黑一片儼如象徵道德淪喪, 讓人想起 “The Turin Horse” (都靈老馬, 2011) [...]

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>