第7届##主竞赛单元第1个放映日为大家带来《八月的鲸鱼》,下面为大家带来前线慵懒闲人们恬静淡雅的评价了!
夕颜:
老气横秋。
不是兔槽:
激情和真理,我们有此足矣。
Pincent:
浮生若梦,人生理想住所之一。
贞洁烈女:
看哭了,演的太好了加上主题太贴我心了。
Her Majesty:
一个人老了,等待死亡就像等待八月的鲸鱼。
零星无名:
春去冬来,我们终于在最后把回忆编成了童话。
曲有误:
照片会褪色,故人不复见,有的只是一起携手走下去。
果树:
稍有怀疑全片的创作动机,因为看到几位老龄女神的卖力,我只能感觉到尬,而非感动。
麻雀:
老年的静默时光,在存有对生活的尊重中,回忆过去与直面死亡的碎语在夏天的温润里悄悄淌过。
晓风与你残月:
老去的时光其实就跟这部影片一样,平平淡淡、了无波澜。不再用思考未来,只用同过去以及现在和解,磨去棱角和锋芒,才发现拥有的只有彼此而已。只是,这样的影片对于现阶段的我们来说,毫无意义也更无存在的价值。
我略知她一二:
星空流转的念头像水母的飘荡,而我并不孤单,没有你才孤单,水光弥漫在防腐的哀伤里,像鲸鱼被淹没一样不作响,四季就是那四面白墙,寂寞是浓雾的暗光,空心砖在胸膛正中央发烫,那是彼此真空的地方。鲸鱼失去海洋,我失去梦里的心脏,要拿什么补偿,都一样被慢慢的盖上,然后一起重返儿时的梦乡。
了却烟硝:
本届电影节观看的第一部影片便是这样一部情节平淡、直击老年人生活的慢节奏电影,你不可否认的是影片确实想反应一些什么东西,但是还是过于古板和无聊了些。
主要情节就发生在这个海边小屋的两天的时间里,没有什么太大的矛盾凸显,就算有也只是争执几句之后就和好的小拌嘴,对于看惯了节奏紧密的电影的我而言确实催眠了些,不过一众老年演员“老骥伏枥,志在千里”,依然贡献出了精彩的演出。
有人吐槽“鲸鱼”这个意象根本就没出现,其实“鲸鱼”哪里就一定是指“鲸鱼”啊,我觉得,它指的更是电影中主人公们对美好生活的寄托吧。
##DAY1的主竞赛场刊评分稍后会在广播中为大家释出,请大家拭目以待了。
For any cinephile, thrills and veneration aplenty can be elicited from the sole banner“a movie starring Bette Davis and Lillian Gish”, to say nothing of THE WHALES OF AUGUST is both celluloid doyennes’ (quasi) swan song (Davis’ penultimate, and Lillian’s last film), plus in a lesser extent, it also features a fine Vincent Price in his twilight years and bookends veteran entertainer Ann Sothern’s six-decade long career (and surprisingly, it is she who is given an Oscar nomination for a rather prosaic impression, which only precipitates one’s reckoning it is a token validation of the film per se and her hitherto unheralded track record), lastly, it is the final theatrical feature of director Lindsay Anderson, the high priest of British New Wave.
It is only logical that THE WHALES OF AUGUST is an elegiac piece of work cogitating and reminiscing about time, mortality, past glory and reconciliation, two elderly widow sisters, Sarah (Gish) diligently attends to her blind, elder sister Libby (Davis) in theirseaward abode on Maine’s Cliff Island (In reality Gish was 93, 15-years senior of a 78-year-young Davis), while Libbyhas become ever so bitter and disagreeable to live with, Sarah is tempted to slough off the heavy burden and sell their house, encouraged by their common lifelong friend Tisha (Sothern), but after a visit from and sequentially a dinner with Nicholas Maranov (Price, still a handsome specimen of chivalry and proprieties, impeccably leaves a trace of hurt that otherwise, is beautifully hidden underneath his inscrutable facade), an old-money Russian expatriate who is forced to find a new lodging by his landlady’s sudden departure, the next morning, Sarah finds a new take on her and her sister’s status quo.
The sibling spat is endearingly a riff onWHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? 25 years earlier, but here, there is no vendetta in their history, only two sisters, living their autumn days, one is comparatively agile, buoyant, has learnt to be philosophical towards loss and oblivion, but also adheres to the carpe diem motto, whereas the other is deviled by her unsighted affliction and senility, trying very hard to be the devil’s advocate just to upheld her fragile dignity. It surely arouses strong pathos to see these two legends carry their lines strenuously and retain their poise with discernible effort (especially Ms. Davis for her stroke-impaired articulation and gaunt physiognomy), as if they also realize this is the curtain call, Gish takes her time sedately and handles every movement in minute nicety, in contrast to Davis' unvanquished spirit, who still aspires to hold court whenever the camera is on her, these two performances are sterling précis of their equally distinguished but radically disparate lasting screen images. But in the end of the day, it is Gish’s ingrain benevolence and cordial affection purveys us the ammunition of admiration and wistful nostalgia in this case.
From its daguerreotype-tinged opening to its repurposed finish, Anderson’s paean to dotage and all its trimmings is a rare bird belongs to a type of cinema endeavor neither beautifies or sentimentalizes its raw-nerve-touching subject matter, for all its banal simplicity and understated emotion, THE WHALES OF AUGUST is a miraculous entity even just for its own existence.
referential points: Anderson’s THIS SPORTING LIFE (1963, 8.2/10); Peter Masterson’s THE TRIP TO BOUNTIFUL (1985, 6.9/10); Robert Aldrich’s WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? (1962, 8.2/10).
豆瓣上的图片完全成为了我看这部电影的一大原因,看看奶奶红色的毛衣配上黄色的波点裙,另一位奶奶银白的头发,在闪耀的蓝色大海衬托下,真的非常美好,漂亮。
它似乎有点慢,叙事非常平缓,故事背景一点不花,就在海边一座房子附近打转,还有作为一个意向我们从未看到过的鲸鱼与picture window(不知道中文翻译过来是啥),铺述了老年俩姐妹之间的生活。白发奶奶的形象塑造非常真实丰满,shes a buzz killer,有点烦人,小小的恶毒,同时又非常没有安全感。剧本完美地搭建出前因后果,但场景又只在这幢房子附近。当我觉得它慢的时候,也许这是现在剧情类型的片子时常会让人感到的,它让我想到,也许这类电影的存在就是为了提醒我,电影,本身也可以是用来慢慢进行叙事的。不一定要宏大的背景,伟大的主题,不需要超级英雄,给过度娱乐的我们带来新的刺激,它的目的就是讲一个故事。
没有看演员表的时候,我还不知道原来两位奶奶都是非常了不起的演员(听白发奶奶的声音有点耳熟看了之后才知道原来是彗星美人的女主角)