用户名: 密 码:  [注册用户] [忘记密码]
您的当前位置:吾爱娱乐网 > 影视 > 影评人 > 正文

《少年时代》没有得奥斯卡,很好。

http://www.52yle.com 时间:2015-03-21 19:08 来源:未知 作者:梦璃
IMDB上,支持数量最多的一篇影评给了《少年时代》一颗星。如下:
=====================================================
By far the most disappointing film of the year!
Author: hulot83 from Switzerland
Seldom has there been a film where the critic's opinions and its true quality diverge so seriously. "Boyhood" is empty because it lacks content and form. It celebrates the ordinary and mediocrity instead of aiming at something extraordinary. As a result, it embraces nothingness and is in that sense deeply nihilistic and even depressing. Anybody with the same camera and some actors could have made this movie or (more likely) a better one.
Those who praise the film always point out the same circumstance (the only thing they can say) which is: This film is like "real life". I have to say: This is true (on the most superficial level imaginable). But I may ask: Is that a good thing? Is this, if film history has taught us anything, what a film should be? "Real life", according to Linklater, means a lifespan during which nothing happens. The Boyhood-experience is the equivalent of your experience waiting in line at the supermarket. Yes, this is the "real life" Linklater presents us. NOTHING HAPPENS IN THIS MOVIE! Nothing, no story, no interesting characters, just ordinary situations from "real life". Of course, there are films in which nothing or very little happens and they can be great (Tarkovsky's "Mirror", Antonioni's "L'avventura" or Tarr's "The Turin Horse" come to my mind), but you need ideas (you got that, Linklater?), you need a style or form which cannot be separated from the content, you need a capable director that can create a form of visual communication. Boyhood offers none of those things. The film gets praised especially by those who have never seen an art-house movie and mistake it for an art film. People are misled so easily. Boyhood is pure blankness, shallowness, superficiality, nothingness.
To praise Boyhood as a masterpiece is actually a slap in the face of all those directors who put a real effort into creating works of art that have real value.
Boyhood is in fact an anti-film in the sense that it stands against everything film should be - be it an artistic masterpiece or just an entertaining, fun movie. The film is neither a work of art nor entertaining. In that regard it can be called a non-film. It celebrates its own non-existence and drowns in its nihilism. I doubt this was Linklater's intention but it certainly is the result of what he created.
Be warned: This is NOT a drama. The movie is the opposite of a carefully constructed work of art. It's nothing but a re-enactment of memories, a collection of unmeaning scenes we may or may not know from our own lives (bowling, playing video games, reading Harry Potter etc.). I think it is only fair to ask: What is the point? I went to see this film having high hopes and (having read all the raving reviews) expecting a masterpiece from Richard Linklater, the director of the great "Waking Life". I liked the trailer which makes the movie look much more interesting than it actually is (actually, everything that "happens" in the movie is already in the trailer!). The basic idea of filming a boy growing into a young man during twelve years is interesting, yes, but sadly the film offers nothing more than that. This is not enough! Sadly, many critics seem to have liked the basic idea so much that to them it didn't even matter if the director would be able to make it interesting or not.
The film which is much too long follows an unstable family and focuses on the life of Mason, a character that has absolutely no interesting characteristics whatsoever. The intelligent viewer will be unable to connect with such a person. Mason walks through this film as if he was in a coma or half asleep; he has no ambitions. At some point he gets his first kiss, gets interested in photography (the ultimate art form for unimaginative lazy people) during high school (haven't we seen that already too many times?), goes to college at which point the film ends. I kid you not, this is the whole movie. The mother becomes a teacher at a local college and always seems to attract the wrong guys. The father is an unemployed loser who only talks about pop music and ends up being a square. Mason's sister (the director's daughter) grows up too and that's pretty much all you can say about her.
It is actually impossible to spoil this film because nothing happens (unless you consider the fact that Mason finishes high school a spoiler). Linklater completely fails to dramatize his ideas. As a result, following this movie feels like watching family home videos of a family you do not care about - just with better picture quality.
Instead of using form (or content/drama) to make the film interesting, "Boyhood" refuses to do just that and therefore remains superficial.
You don't get to the essence of "real life" by only showing the surface of things. Everybody could do that!
It is really hard talking about this film because there isn't a single interesting character or scene in it. You just follow ordinary events in the lives of these people. Stay away from this movie!
Yes, this review will get negative votes, just because I didn't like the film, unlike the critic's union. Well, none of those "critics" were able to offer a single insightful argument that would speak for this non-movie. In fact, many even admitted the film lacked interesting characters or style! But because of the 12-year-gimmik, they call it a "masterpiece". Give me a break. I would be willing to debate any of these pseudo-intelligent "critics" and tear them into pieces. Over and out.
=====================================================
在IMDB评论的前几页,给这部片子打低分的评论比打高分的多接近一倍,而且大多是一颗星的“极差”,这在IMDB前250名里面是唯一的奇不雅,有大量的不雅众并不认同评论的一片喝彩,而且极其厌恶这部片子。反不雅豆瓣,五星是绝对的主流,总分也比IMDB还高,考虑到豆瓣算分没有加权,《少年时代》在中国的认同远胜本土。这个现象很故意思,社会心理学甚至可以用这个出篇论文来讨论文化差异。
我个人不喜欢《少年时代》。除却十二年的拍摄周期,我没看出这部伪记载片的优秀地点。片子切实其实是光阴的艺术,但要说光阴成了最重要的演员,倒有点儿让人狐疑这部片子的“戏剧性”还剩若干,如同安迪沃霍尔的《帝国大厦》一样,八小时事后的唯一变更便是灯泡们亮了。至于什么从哈利波特和诺基亚换iPhone看人生,其格折衷那些“只有90后能力看懂”的月经帖实在看不出什么区别。在环球化的本日,只要童年不是在巴格达街头躲子弹或者少管所里蹲监,你必然可以从中收获一些冲动,究竟太阳下无新鲜事,人与人的发展进程其实没有太大不一样,基因层面就决定了什么时候长胡子什么时候发情,其它一切都是附属变量。真正有趣是为什么所有人都淡淡哀伤中的无聊中走过了无聊中的淡淡哀伤,却成为了各类各样的人,即使普通,依然各别。如果必要寻找发展的终极共相,往上抽象可以靠哲学,往下探源可以靠科学,实在用不着片子来充当一个地图炮式的冲动触发器,而且这个片子还长达两个半钟头。


表演方面都还不错,可能有风雅打磨过的台词助推的原因。伊桑霍克的老爸切实其实配得上一个奥斯卡提名,但帕特里夏阿奎特居然能得奖让我感觉匪夷所思,或许他们都是实质演出,只不过一个有魅力一个很憋屈罢了。其它方面实在是难以评价,因为实在无从说起,如果说本日的人只能靠片子来明了一些基础得不能再基础的生活的原形的话,那还不如去多关心一下近邻你看着诞生和长大的小弟弟和小妹妹,或者多回家陪陪父母说说话,因为他们再怎么无聊,也比《少年时代》鲜活和真实。

转载请注明链接:http://www.52yle.com/a/yszx/yingping/2015/0227/12131.html

    奔跑吧!兄弟——粉丝经济催生的

    自从杨幂主演的《孤岛惊魂》用400万的投资换回了跨越9000万的票...

    三亚爱情故事——《求爱嫁期》

    作为一种主流的类型片,恋爱片已经成为了市场上的核心,且不...

    《霍比特人:五军之战》:讲述g团

    时隔一年,霍比特人终于又回来了。看前两部吐槽的请戳下面。...

    向学习社会科学的朋友推荐《真相

    保举这部由《三傻闹宝莱坞》的主演阿米尔汗主持的印度访谈节...

    ·吾爱娱乐网版权所有,未经授权禁止复制或建立镜像
    ·请严格遵守互联网络法制和法规
    ·严禁一切有损本网站或本公司合法利益的行为
      吾爱娱乐网综合娱乐资讯网站,专注娱乐健康生活和游戏资讯!引领时尚娱乐生活潮流,汇集最新游戏资讯,树立现代娱乐、游戏信息新平台...
    • 联系地址:中国·北京 Beijing China 朝阳区
    • 手机/Mob:???号码不在服务区
    • E_mail:admin@52yle.com
    • 腾讯微博:http://t.qq.com/web-52yle

    Copyright © 2014-2015 52yle.吾爱娱乐网 版权所有
    返回顶部