就這樣老去
日複一日的老去，但每天還是有一點點不一樣的經曆，一點點不一樣的心情，一點點不一樣的感受。。。
正文
昨天晚上終於把血色浪漫看完了，有點小感想。
前兩天說了，我最討厭寫觀後感，因為很多感想都是感性的，模糊的，真要一條條清清楚楚的列出來，還得好好想一想。
我懶得費這個勁。
所以在這裏我就當個小蜻蜓，點著水麵，隨便胡說幾句。
一般來說，我是不太喜歡看這類電視電影的。有那功夫還不如看周星星，忙碌一天之後開懷大笑，不用費腦筋去想東想西，心情也不會無端的沉重。
但這部電視劇真的很不錯。
情節緊湊，自然，流暢，台詞精采。原著我沒看過，但一定寫得很好。演員的表演也很出色。某些同學的偶像劉燁演得不錯，不過我覺得他更適合演農村青年。
昨天晚上看到倒數第二集的時候，李奎勇得了晚期肺癌，命不久矣，鍾躍民去看他，兩個人坐在桌邊說話，我覺得那場戲特別的精采。
一個普通的胡同老百姓，用普通的老百姓語言，淡淡的幾句話，就勾畫出來了他的普通的一生，他的家庭，他的經曆，他的愛情，他跟鍾躍民的友誼，等等。特感人。
當然，這部電視劇並不是完美無缺的。
我不喜歡對寧偉的處理。一個生死與共的朋友兄弟，陰差陽錯成了黑道上的殺手（殺的都是黑道上的壞人），換了我，我至少會睜一隻眼閉一隻眼讓他亡命天涯，而張海樣和鍾躍民卻一付正義凜然的麵孔，非要置別人於死地不可。氣憤。
華特．班哲明，現代的記錄者，要求曆史放進現在時，必須要能救贖過去。他描繪的曆史天使被吹向未來的殘骸時，臉是朝向過去的，這個形象有也可以用在紀錄片工作者身上，他們隻能在曆史上的此刻拍片，即使拍的是曆史事跡也是如此。紀錄片通常是一種建構－是為不同觀眾所做的另一時空的重現，利用電影影像和錄製的聲音為現在描繪曆史。
一九四五年，聯軍軍隊進入Bergen-Belsen和Dachau的集中營時，攝影師拍下了令人悚然的景觀。有些片段後來被英國宣傳部剪接起來，變成一部驚人的電影，《集中營的記憶》（Memory of the Camps），或者更長的版本，《痛苦的提醒》（A Painful Reminder）。由於這些影像太悲慘，這部影片始終沒有發行，而原先它是預備用來放映給德國人看，做為反納粹宣傳的。影片中萬人塚被挖開，裏麵填滿屍骨，這類令人困擾的畫麵被認為對英國政府在戰後全力促成的新成立的聯盟而言太過刺激，影片於是被放進帝國戰爭博物館，一直到八零年代中期，才被另一個世代的電影工作者發現，並且終於搬上銀幕，做為一部有關該片拍攝過程的紀錄片的片段，也成為《前線》（Frontline）中的曆史，由崔沃．霍華（Trevor Howard）擔任主述。
這些影片原打算給那些堅決不肯「知道任何事」的德國人看，因此有意誘使一般人產生自責情緒。這些影像是那麽可怕，如曳引機推著殘破的屍骨等等，因而特別令人難忘，幾近於一首挽歌。宣傳部部長席尼．伯恩斯坦（Sidney Bernstein）不知如何將此素材轉變成一部電影－紀錄膠卷可不同於紀錄像片－他向敘事電影、驚悚、恐怖片大師希區考克（Alfred Hitchcock）討教，請他提供一個建構這部電影的方法，結果產生了一個定景鏡頭∶金發兒童在半隱於森林裏的巴伐利亞田野屋舍中戲耍，攝影機從樹叢中橫搖而過，拍到倒鉤鐵絲和成堆的人骨。這個希區考克式的開場有可能引發官方的電檢，橫搖鏡頭建立的敘事－在德國人身體裏跳動的黑暗之心－比集中營影片更清楚有力，而後者已有破壞戰後聯盟的潛力。
這部紀錄片的重點乃是一部記憶的電影，攝影機的任務是記錄一件曆史的錯亂。拍攝一件基本上轉眼即逝的事件，一個消失中的習俗，一隻快絕種的生物，紀錄像像背後的動機多半是因為它稍縱即逝。紀錄片為不斷變動的真實世界提供一種穩定性，將影像凍結在景框內，供作稍後的教育用途。《痛苦的提醒》及其誕生的曆史正是環繞本章的三大紀錄片主題的縮影∶曆史、紀錄片與電影。該片顯示影像本身如同瑪莎．羅絲勒（Martha Rosler）對攝影的意見，是“愚笨的”；其意義建構在我們透過科技－諸如聲音、蒙太奇等等－所給予的解讀，藉此傳達上下文脈絡、敘事和主觀性。3剪接蒙太奇表現的農場和集中營影像交錯的狀況，依華特．班哲明的說法，各個影像都是等同於一個“標題”。
What is the history of this film?
This documentary on the liberation of the German concentration camps in 1945 was assembled in London that year, but never shown until FRONTLINE first broadcast it -- 40 years later -- in May of 1985. Five of the film's six reels had survived in a 55-minute fine-cut print without titles or credits. (The quality of the print reflects the fact that the negative was lost and it was made from a nitrate positive cutting copy, the equivalent of a work-print today.)
In 1952 the five reels, together with an undated, unsigned typed narration which closely matched the edited film, were transferred from the British War Office film vaults to London's Imperial War Museum. The Museum gave the film the title "Memory of the Camps."
At the time the film was transferred to the Museum, a shot list, dated May 7, 1946, suggested that the missing sixth reel comprised Russian film of the liberation of Auschwitz and Maidanek. But this reel had been left in Moscow in the hands of the Russian cameramen who shot it.
"F3080" was the name given to a project to compile a documentary film on German atrocities. The project originated in February 1945 in the Psychological Warfare Division of SHAEF (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force). It was there that Sidney Bernstein, chief of PWD's Film Section, began preparations for producing a film using material shot by the service and newsreel cameramen accompanying the British, American, and Russian armies.
As the Allied forces advanced in the final weeks leading up to the German surrender, cameramen of the British Army Film Unit and of the American Army Pictorial Service began to make a systematic record of the newly liberated concentration camps. By early May 1945, the British Ministry of Information and the American Office of War Information began collaborating on the collation and rough-cutting of the film material.
+ Why was it made?
It was made to document unflinchingly the conditions of the death camps and show this to the German population. It was proposed that the filmmakers make three separate versions, one for showing to Germans in Germany, the second to German prisoners of war, and the third to "audiences, perhaps specialised, in neutral, liberated and allied territories."
As defined by Bernstein, the object was to shake and humiliate the Germans and prove to them beyond any possible challenge that these German crimes against humanity were committed and that the German people -- and not just the Nazis and SS -- bore responsibility.
+ Why was the film never released?
An incomplete file in the British Public Record Office chronicles delays and difficulties in the film project from February to July 1945. Progress was held up by the Army Pictorial Service's slowness in providing the British with duplicates of American material, by bottlenecks in the London film laboratories, and by the search for an editing machine.
By June 1945, impatience grew between the British and American partners. London still had not appointed a director, producer or writer and the Americans suggested that Billy Wilder complete the film in Munich. The project was also slowed down by the British determination to build a quasi-legal case proving German guilt and authenticating the evidence beyond any possibility of future denial.
Finally, on July 9, 1945, the Americans withdrew from the film. This came just a few days before the dissolution of the Psychological Warfare Division and SHAEF. The project now was the responsibility of the British Ministry of Information which quickly assembled a production team.
Although there was a flurry of activity in July, the film was still unfinished in September of 1945. By then, the new post-war climate interfered with the film's completion and release.
The British military command who screened the film-in-progress felt the need for a more congenial approach to improving Anglo-German relations. Their local military authorities in the liberated territories were arguing that the priority was to rally Germans out of their apathy. A film that would instill a collective guilt on the German population would only increase the chaos and demoralization.
Another factor should be noted regarding the shelving of the film: there already were Allied films on German atrocities. The Americans had Billy Wilder direct their concentration camp film "Die Todesmuhlen" which was released in the American zone in January 1946. And, a large amount of the material used in the Wilder two-reeler as well as in "Memory of the Camps" had already been exhibited to German audiences in the joint Anglo-American newsreel "Welt im Film" No. 5 released on June 15, 1945.
+ Why was there no mention of Germany's policy to eliminate Europe's Jewish population?
The film was assembled in London within a few months after the Allied liberation and thus reflects what the filmmakers knew at the time. They had not yet grasped the full scale of Hitler's Final Solution for Europe's Jews.
Another factor in this omission was the tactics of propaganda. A principle of war propaganda was to make its target identify with the victims. Thus, the film's aim was to universalize Hitler's victims; they would be defined by their humanity and innocence, and not by race or religion. The film's narration mentions men, women and children "from every European nationality."
A revealing 1941 British Ministry of Information guideline advised war propagandists that to make the Nazi evil credible, they must deal with "the treatment of indisputably innocent people, not with violent political opponents and not with Jews."
+ What was Alfred Hitchcock's role?
Sidney Bernstein, the film's director, persuaded his friend Alfred Hitchcock to leave Hollywood and come to England to collaborate for several weeks in the making of the film. Hitchcock arrived in late June, after the Belsen material (the first three reels of the film) had been assembled. He left in late July, two months before work on the film appears to have stopped. According to Bernstein, Hitchcock would not take a fee for his work.
Hitchcock is credited as "treatment advisor." He acted as a consultant in organizing the footage, along with writers Colin Wills and Richard Crossman (both of the London News Chronicle) and editors Peter Tanner and Stewart MacAllister.
In an interview before he died, Lord Sidney Bernstein explained that Hitchcock's contribution was to help shape the way the material was presented. "He took a circle round each concentration camp as it were on a map, different villages, different places and the numbers of people -- so they must have known about it...Otherwise you could show a concentration camp, as you see them now, and it could be anywhere, miles away from humanity. He brought that into the film."
Another known contribution was Hitchcock's including the wide establishing shots which support the documentary feel of the film and showed that the events seen could not have been staged. According to Peter Tanner, one of the film's editors, Hitchcock's concern was that "we should try to prevent people thinking that any of this was faked...so Hitch was very careful to try to get material which could not possibly be seen to be faked in any way."
+ What did FRONTLINE do with the film?
FRONTLINE acquired "F3080" in 1985 and commissioned the late actor Trevor Howard to record the original typed narration script.
FRONTLINE broadcast the film just as it was found in the Museum's archives, unedited, with the missing sound tracks, and with the title given to it by the Imperial War Museum: "Memory of the Camps."
The first broadcast was on May 7, 1985 to mark the 40th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camps.
Bibliography:
"The Fate of F3080" by Elizabeth Sussex, "Sight and Sound," British Film Institute, April 1984. (This is a well-researched article on the film's history and the contributions of all involved. The author drew on her access to Lord Sidney Bernstein's files. Quotes in this web site summary are from her article.)
"Films for liberated territories. Investigation of War Atrocities. Factual Film Report on German Concentration Camps." File INF 1/636 (F3080) in Public Record Office.
"Todesmuhlen" Brewster S. Chamberlin in Vierteljahrsheft fur Zeitgeschichte, pp 420-436, Heft 3, 1981.
"Portrait of an Invisible Man. The Working Life of Stewart McAllister, Film Editor" Dai Vaughan, British Film Institute, 1983.
"Der Fruhling war es wert. Erinnerungen" Hanus Burger, C. Bertelsmann Verlag, 1977.
至於周星馳，飛鳥年青是很不感冒，最近倒是看出點味道來了。
還有親愛的小聽，昨晚你給飛鳥扣的漂亮帽子太沉啦，壓的脖子好疼啊，嘿嘿。心大令，你的好文筆，千萬不要戒網啊！！！
我覺得是點睛之筆。嗬嗬。
而，那個寧為的故事應該拍成另一個電視劇。偶同意你，偶會放朋友一馬的
嗝常委，不好意思，我就是太懶了，懶得寫什麽梗概，所以我點的水都是給看過電視的人看的。嗬嗬
嗬嗬，跟你搗亂來著，偶有10幾年沒看連續劇了。
不是剛寫的,昨晚寫的.早上起來說話不利索!我是夜貓子.