安乐乡2014

HD

主演:维果·莫腾森,迭戈·罗曼,格茜塔·诺比,马里亚诺·阿尔塞,维比约克·莫林·阿格尔,米萨埃尔·萨维德拉,阿德里安·方达依

类型:电影地区:其它语言:其它年份:2014

 量子

缺集或无法播,更换其他线路.

 剧照

安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.1安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.2安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.3安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.4安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.5安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.6安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.13安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.14安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.15安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.16安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.17安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.18安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.19安乐乡2014 剧照 NO.20

 长篇影评

 1 ) FIFF26丨DAY9《安乐乡》:那份美丽的传说终究只是一份泡影,一切都是你倒下之后熨开的一片虚无

第26届法罗岛电影节第9个放映日为大家带来无人知晓单元的《安乐乡》,下面请看场刊影评人的评价了!

大钊

这种画幅真的就和画框一样,是老式电视机的观感,加上内容的舞台化呈现,感觉更像在看舞台剧,一种完全间离的窥视,所以容易无聊,如果更换画幅应该会更好。

Michel_le

古典,一场寻女之旅,在迷失中寻找永恒

折射入网

来自荒野的神秘故事,到乡翻似烂柯人,在路程中模糊了家人、家乡、时间,走进了故事里。

松野空松

画面的质感和构图其实有揭晓其非真实性,问题是谁的梦境

神盾局仔龙

父亲的寻女之旅,乡野的广阔很美丽,最后突然看到现代城市的房间装饰的感觉很奇妙。

#FIFF26#第9日的场刊将于稍后释出,请大家拭目以待了。

 2 ) 在蛮荒中沉睡?抑或在文明中苏醒?

对这部电影早有耳闻,最近总算将其阅览完毕,笔者以为妥当的时间与相宜的心性是促成此次完美体验的伏笔。在这部电影里面,两段超现实的表达引人入胜,摄人心魄。笔者首先对情节或相关信息简单归纳,再则对两处核心段落予以分析。 对于《安乐乡》这样一部极简主义电影,影片不具繁复的戏剧性,情节交互谈如水,对白甚至极少。我们仅有从其大段落的长镜头与景深中摘取信息,平面之间从近及远的景致纵深,空间上呈现出的画幅即是内容。往往这类信息直观且暧昧,愈加隐晦与不可捉摸,这些信息的摘取,更多的,需要来自观众自身的经验参与、思考。归纳这部电影,大致叙述的就是一则失去与寻找的过程,原初在一行人的路途中,女儿与士兵相爱私奔,父亲继而踏上寻找女儿的过程,最终发生了一些神秘诡异的现象。解开影片的诉求核心,就在于此两段内容的分解。 第一幕父亲与年老“女儿”的跨时空相遇,两人相视被置于幽暗的空间内,触生出如同日式怪谈当中的幽玄诡谲、神秘莫测。随后在对谈当中,迎面而来的情感交融与意识之间无穷无尽的超验触碰,让人不禁为之惊悚颤栗。在历史的记载中,最早的人类文明发源于大河流域,水是生命之源,人需要守护一方水土得以生存。对于物质基础之外,爱则是人类精神世界的水源,是人得以继续存活的信仰依仗。老妪安身于泉水与洞窟,得以维持生存,狗的相伴,填补了情感世界的空白。老妪的遭遇,并不仅局限于父亲在找寻的女儿身份,他们的这种困境,具有普适性。荒诞残酷的是,老妪与父亲之间相互承受的是普天而下人类世界相似的惨淡遭遇,我们踏上征程,随即无处安身。诸如父亲在寻找女儿的途中,纵然徜徉于静谧永恒的星空之下,形单影只,万般皆空更无暇顾及,除了周身的寂寥与孤独,仅有以酒解愁,最终迷失在无尽的漂泊境地。 第二幕里女儿从睡梦中醒来,较于前戏恍若隔世。我们暂且先不分辨影片文本与时空的衔接是否顺畅,不论前戏是女孩的一场梦魇,或者两幕独立的分段互文而相得益彰。女孩既从沉睡中回归,她不再挣扎,向往远航,随即将“寻找信物”抛向湖底。诚然,今天人类的经验智识已经从曾经的蒙昧中惊醒,无数革命、思潮的演绎换就了现在相对的文明。但即便在现代社会,我们仍旧困锁在城市网络的工业世界,面向城市水泥堆砌的隔绝空间,人情的疏离感,承受工业侵袭的异化与来自心灵深处无法排解的现实焦虑。人类究竟是在蛮荒中沉睡?抑或在文明中苏醒?我们寻找的是什么?但凡体验了孤独之苦,通晓了人情厚泽,懂得简单而知足常乐,都不愿为那些虚妄、空泛的念想而踏上荒芜,颠沛流离。时间既往,流逝不复,明天的人即将形容枯槁,除了苍老,终将要面对人的孤独处境与生命悲凉的本质归宿。所以,再不愿无意义的消耗光阴、憧憬世俗,唯有守护内心的净土——有情之世界,当下的世界。

 3 ) 安乐有时,颠沛有时

“Los antiguos decían que Jauja era una tierra mitológica de abundancia y felicidad. Muchas expediciones buscaron el lugar para corroborarlo. Con el tiempo, la leyenda creció de manera desproporcionada. Sin duda la gente exageraba, como siempre. Lo único que se sabe con certeza es que todos los que intentaron encontrar ese paraíso terrenal se perdieron en el camino.”

片子运用了大量的景深长镜头,非常工整的风景画,有些像《哈利波特》里有魔法的照片或者简报,人物在里面走来走去。那里就是阿根廷,我第一次听是《晓松奇谈》里说那里有世界上最大最丰饶的草原。后来我来到了南美,了解到尽管如今已是科技时代,南美的工业与科技都还不发达,但这片土地所给予的丰衣足食以及流淌在人民血液里的及时行乐,它还是抚慰了现实震荡下的灵魂,并平添了一份魔幻的色彩。 影片至七十多分钟处才出现配乐,画面中是绚烂的星空,风尘仆仆行路的人终于在那底下沉睡,梦仍然是流动的。究竟是为什么放弃了家园去找寻“安乐乡”却迷失在了颠沛的路途之上?而“乡愁”终究是对放弃了原有家园的追思还是始终未能到达之地的妄念?就像有一首歌里唱的,“我们都是单行道上的跳蚤”,回不去也走不远。

苏珊·桑塔格在《中国旅行计划》中说“有什么穿过了供血充沛的胚胎外膜”,于我亦是,如若按“但求心安是吾乡”,阿根廷便是我的Jauja。在向往了十年之久后,我终于踏上了南美这片热土,又雀跃又紧张以为靠得有足够近了,却因为一场意外不得不重将自己流放一般于远方,几乎被打击得再也没有了一丝去渴望的力气。直到经历了如同影片中遇见拥有一只狗和一口井住在山洞里的“女巫”一般具有魔幻色彩的事,我暗恋了三年的男孩子在我几乎不能振作起来的时候突然邀请我去他的家乡,我开始相信“念念不忘,必有回响”。 许多人说我这样做叫“追梦“也好“随心”也罢,我自己清楚我只是选择了逃避现实,将自己放逐虚无。最近和几个“三十岁的女人”聊天,她们也都有着和我一样的迷茫,“安乐乡”究竟在哪里,在找寻的路上她们早也已经迷失。我们在小酒馆里喝了几杯,感到一种心灰意懒后的安稳,它即使短暂,即使明日我们又要再强打起精神。人生向死而生的路径之上,是永恒的寂寥与孤独,唯与你煮酒听雨方一解乡愁,另日又隔千里,但那路径之上,总算悲伤有时起舞有时,颠沛有时安乐有时。

那么,是否最终到达“安乐乡”还有什么重要。追到了也会再推远了。结尾处女儿从睡梦中醒来,较于前戏恍若沧海桑田斗转星移。不论前面是她的一场梦魇,还是与前完全独立互文的分段。那一刻的她都不再挣扎,向往远航,随即就将当初自己珍视的土著木偶抛向池底。我们寻找的是什么?什么也不是。为那些虚妄空泛的念想而流离失所是为了什么?不为了什么。这样的结局究竟是一种达观还是虚无的态度?还是说,时间一如既往的流逝中,唯有爱与知足常乐。

 4 ) People are an excuse to show locations

People are an excuse to show locations: Lisandro Alonso on Jauja from Film Quarterly by Megan Ratner

Ingeborg (Villbjørk Malling Agger) and Capt. Dinsen (Viggo Mortensen) see different futures

Few directors pit men against the elements like Argentinian Lisandro Alonso. In 《Jauja》 (2014) those elements include foreign conquistadors intent on aboriginal genocide in Patagonia. Set during the “Conquest of the Desert,” a late 1870s military campaign to wipe out the indigenous Mapuche population, 《Jauja》 is a tale of brutal folly and blinkered misery. For either side, existence is precarious. In a narrative less linear than digressive, with ironies abundant, Alonso implies but never states the film’s central theme: surrender versus conquest, awe versus fear.

As the film’s epigraph notes, “Jauja was a mythological land of abundance and happiness. People were undoubtedly exaggerating, as they usually do. The only thing that is known for certain is that all who tried to find this earthly paradise got lost on the way.” In the opening shot, Danish Captain Gunnar Dinesen (Viggo Mortensen) perches beside his teenage daughter Ingeborg (Villbjørk Malling Agger) on a boulder near a military outpost in Patagonia. Around them stray soldiers relax, feasting their eyes on Ingeborg. Dinesen tells his daughter they will soon return to Denmark, his stated plans visually undermined by their position: she faces the camera, he is turned in the other direction. She says nothing in return, later telling her father, “I love the desert. The way it fills me.” When Ingeborg subsequently decamps with one of the soldiers (Alonso regular Misael Saavedra), only Dinesen seems nonplussed.

With no idea even in what direction to search, Dinesen puts on his sabered dress uniform, saddles up, and lights out to find Ingeborg. For a while, the film follows both the runaways and the father, each party puny against a clearly indifferent and inhospitable landscape, replete with wild animals and bandits. But finally, it becomes Dinesen’s film and Dinesen’s nightmare, an oneiric expedition into confusion, disillusion, and dissolution.

Born in Buenos Aires in 1975, Alonso released his first film, 《La Libertad》, in 2001. In that debut and subsequent releases—《Los Muertos》 (2004), 《Fantasma》 (2006), and 《Liverpool》 (2008)—Alonso relied solely on nonprofessional actors, often people that he met in the far-flung areas of Argentina where he chose to shoot. Always, location precedes story for him. Shooting in the jungle, Tierra del Fuego, or Patagonia, his documentary-style semi-fictions track the ordinary work of rural survival: cutting down trees, slaughtering a goat, cadging honeycomb from a tree trunk. Intention and meaning are left up to the viewer. His loners do nothing to make themselves likable, yet are curiously compelling even while, say, maneuvering a rowboat or wielding an ax.

Alonso details the complexity of a mastered skill, a very different form of intelligence than intellectualism. His films insist on the validity of making one’s life in the wild as at least equal to the more customary modern settings of office or supermarket foraging. Protagonists such as an ex-con (《Los Muertos》) or a merchant seaman (《Liverpool》) convey complex backstories in the way they carry themselves and resist settling down. These men are restless, defined and impeded by a narrow masculinity.

Working from thumbnail scripts, Alonso often lives among those he films, guided by their customs and open to their ideas. Prior to 《Jauja》, each film was set in the presented and used minimal dialogue, extended takes, and virtually no explanation as to who the protagonist—always male—is or how he arrived at the juncture at which the film finds him. Each film relies on a form of collaboration contingent on Alonso’s clear ability to put nonactors at ease: they appear simply to live their lives on film.

Much of this technique remains in 《Jauja》, the period setting offering yet another facet to Alonso’s cumulative account of inwardly struggling men. Under the fancy dress, the characters are still doing all they can to survive. Murder, incest, alcoholism, and ditching responsibility have all figured in the earlier work, but the fact that Ingeborg rather than the soldier appears to have plotted their flight marks a distinct shift in the filmmaker’s focus. In 《Jauja》, Ingeborg and two other female characters have agency—a novelty for which neither Dinesen, the AWOL soldier, nor any of the other men are prepared.

The images in 《Jauja》 are painterly, sometimes reminiscent of what an official military artist might have made of the scene, but with a twist: their lighting is modern, the expected sepia traded for Kodachrome. Shots are composed with the landscape as star, the humans almost an afterthought. Particularly effective is a scene in which Mortensen rides at the camera, then away from it, a long traverse that may even be covering terrain where he has already been, that renders one part of the pampas indistinguishable from another. He persists, determined to find coordinates, to marshal an obvious chaos. In one subtle image after another, Alonso shows a man lost in time and space. The captain’s travails are cyclical problems repeating across nations and histories. In a different uniform, Dinesen could easily be appearing on tonight’s evening news.

Jauja》 screened at the New York Film Festival, where Alonso was filmmaker in residence and where this interview was conducted.

Lisandro Alonso

MEGAN RATNER: Can you remember when you first became aware that you wanted to work with images?

LISANDRO ALONSO: Wow! When I was six or seven years old my parents sent me to painting lessons. I didn’t know if I was good or not but I think I fell in love with the teacher. I took lessons for a year and a half, but once she decided to quit, I never went back to painting. That class could be the point when I started to look at images, colors, figures, and objects and whatever.

RATNER: In other interviews, you’ve mentioned your parents’ weekly trips outside Buenos Aires to their farm as formative.

ALONSO: Probably the most important thing to me was that in the first ten years of my life my parents took me every weekend out of the city. My father has a little farm about an hour from the city. I just remember being surrounded by people who were not from the city, surrounded by cows, pigs, horses, and eating grilled meat family-style. During the week I would still be thinking about things that happened on the weekend. I contrasted the city noise with the country sounds—and the silence. I think I really enjoyed that time more than life in the city. Maybe that was stuck in my mind when I had to decide what to study after high school. I got used to thinking more in green than in gray.

RATNER: What led you to filmmaking?

ALONSO: In a way, I just went back to images. I heard a rumor that there was a film school about to open and I decided, why not. I’m not a cinephile, I’ve never been a cinephile. But nevertheless I found a way to express some of my approach with outsiders, with people who live far away from civilization, who don’t have the same opportunities I do. I could express some of my ideas with the cinema.

RATNER: Did you encounter any resistance from your parents?

ALONSO: After I finished high school, my father told me do whatever you want but put some passion in it and be good at what you do. He was my grandparents’ only child. He grew up in the state of La Pampa, where I shot my first film (《La Libertad》, 2001). I think he lived there until he was five and then moved to suburban La Plata. He dropped out of school, gambled a lot, and lived on the street. He loves horses. After he met my mother he just started to relax and calm down. He moved to Buenos Aires and started a business career. I know some of my father’s childhood but I don’t think he wants to tell me a lot of things. It was not easy, I can tell.

When I told him, “I think I’m going to study cinema,” he said (head in hand), “It’s not a good thing for a living. You will not make any money.” But actually, at that time in Argentina, lots of doctors and architects were driving taxis. The future isn’t set: nobody knows what will happen, especially in countries like the one where I live.

I started studying cinema but didn’t finish my studies. I used to work as a sound assistant in short films and features, but I didn’t make enough to survive doing that. So I went back to the farm to work in my parents’ business with my brothers. Working there I discovered Misael Saavedra, who became the main character of 《La Libertad》.

Ingeborg and her soldier (MisaelSaavedra) before their escape

RATNER: Can you talk about your relationship with Misael, who has been in many of your films and in 《Jauja》 plays the soldier who the captain’s daughter runs off with?

ALONSO: He’s a friend. He’s more than a friend to me. He represents much of the luck that I feel I have making films. He’s part of it. He’s part of—how can I say it—my film life, or film career or whatever. So I really appreciated the chance to meet him. He’s like a symbol to me.

RATNER: Can you talk about the beginnings of 《Jauja》? Poet and writer Fabián Casas played a big part, right?

ALONSO: Actually I stopped making films in 2008 because... I just got bored repeating the same kind of questions in the film. So I went back to the farm. I got married, I have a kid. I just changed my life completely for four or five years until I felt that I had a reason not to completely get away from films. I started writing with Fabián and he brought me crazy ideas about crazy Indians. He’s writing a novel in parallel with the film where the main character is a dog. But I didn’t want to make a film about the dog—it would not be easy. So I used characters and dialogue from his novel and put it in this script. Then Viggo got on board.

RATNER: Was Fabián, your co-scripter, on the set?

ALONSO: Yeah, for maybe half of the shoot, near the end. Fabián is a very close friend of Viggo. In a way, Viggo is in the film through Fabián. I don’t trust words. I don’t like too many in a film. But Fabián’s poetic point of view changed how I look at things through dialogues and words.

RATNER: Until 《Jauja》, you worked only with nonprofessionals, but this time there were professional actors and an international star: Viggo Mortensen. Was it a tricky transition?

ALONSO: Having the chance to mix actors like Viggo and nonactors like Misael made me happy. Even if Misael didn’t know who Viggo is. For me it represents mixing someone who has no education, who’s been working with an axe all his life, with Viggo and together we construct something in the fantasy of cinema. There are also theater people in the cast, and some crew members, people I’ve been working with for ten or fifteen years.

RATNER: All those different life experiences are a kind of undercurrent to the film. Was there any tension around the differences?

ALONSO: There was real tension and I used it. Being around Viggo, you feel nervous because he knows a lot. In a way he had to slow down to let the other people follow. It’s a good thing, especially for this film which is about a foreign guy from Denmark trying to get make contact with the soldiers, the Indians, and that part of the land where nobody rules. It was a time when people were not so civilized, especially in our place.

RATNER: His posture and attitude have a northern European formality, more appropriate to Denmark than the pampas.

ALONSO: Yeah, he doesn’t want to take off his sword, his medal, and his jacket. He is trying to understand. He thinks if he understands he will get answers. That’s his logical way of thinking because he came from some other place. But it doesn’t help him to find the answers that he’s looking for, with his daughter, or to understand what is happening in that place. And I guess that Viggo did it in a very good way.

Looking for Ingeborg, Capt. Dinesen only manages to lose himself

RATNER: Even off his horse, he moved around as if he were trying to map the territory, to get a fix.

ALONSO: He’s trying to organize things that cannot be organized.

RATNER: Certainly he’s not the first invader to try that! Your previous films were more observational, less overtly fictional; not least because of the historical setting, 《Jauja》 seems to mark a new direction.

ALONSO: The themes of 《Jauja》 are very different from my previous films. In the other ones I just worked more with real time and with observing real people doing things that they do every day. In this film there’s more fiction. In the way, it looks and in the way people deal with each other—and it’s much more artificial. I think that is partly because of Timo Salminen (Aki Kaurismäki’s cinematographer). Timo is Finnish and has a particular way of looking at nature and his own way to approach the picture lighting. So much in Kaurismäki films is fake and artificial. If you see my work, it’s completely the other way around, so for me it was a good collaboration, just to get out from my point of view and connect with... classical narrative. And it helps to remember that there are so many ways of doing things. Many times I didn’t understand, but Timo told me: you just have to create an illusion. This is cinema; it doesn’t have to be real. For me, that is kind of like committing suicide. But little by little I started to enjoy that this is an illusion and you just have to make the audience believe a little bit in that and it will work well.

RATNER: That feeling of an illusion, or maybe better, delusion, starts with the extraordinary opening shot of the father and daughter, nestled together but facing opposite directions. Was that how you planned to begin?

ALONSO: It was in the script. The script was only like twenty pages. After we shot all the pages, the soundman Catriel Vildosola approached me—he’s like a brother to me—and said: I think we’re still not feeling the relationship between the father and the daughter, maybe there is something we can do to get the melancholic feeling about those two across. I started talking with Viggo. The next day Viggo came to me and said can we do this: he wrote the lines.

RATNER: You are open to ideas from the actors?

ALONSO: Everybody has a say. I don’t like to decide many things, so everybody can suggest an idea. I pick the crew very carefully. Not just anybody can be in it, but once you are part of the family, everybody can talk and say whatever they want. It’s like a friends-and-family thing. And we live like that during the shooting. I like it that way.

RATNER: Just to stay with the opening a bit, I was struck by how much you communicate about the father and daughter. And Ingeborg is already escaping, if only into a book.

ALONSO: The book might have been there because Villbjørk Malling Agger is not an actress and maybe needed something to hold in her hands. You need lots of luck in making a film. For instance, we couldn’t put Viggo’s full-face on camera because of continuity problems with the beard. It wasn’t full enough yet. Viggo said let’s try it with my back. You focus more on the girl’s presence and not on Viggo. And it’s like a painting you know.

RATNER: There’s a sun-washed feeling in the film, a kind of overexposure.

ALONSO: Actually, I didn’t make that decision. I just picked the locations. Timo made the color correction. He’s the one who decided to saturate the colors. But most of that was already printed in the film. He just adjusted some of the color temperatures, you know, and that’s one of the things that I really liked about his work. If you saw the last Kaurismäki film, there is a non-naturalistic way of lighting and using color which I like a lot. Especially in a period movie that it should be lit by the fire, or by candles, and you can feel that Timo put this big light on the scene, creating a great distance between what you expect and what you see. It’s ambiguous in a way, no?

RATNER: It makes it feel less specifically of one era or another because of its geographical and temporal disorientation.

ALONSO: The color worked to create a unique world that only functions inside the movie. It doesn’t come from books or history. That’s why the main couple is Danish. The more conventional choice would be English, but I don’t want people to start comparing things to books. Only three or four million people speak Danish so it’s a kind of exotic language. I like how it sounds. It also references the Scandinavian or Nordic Viking colonizadores. You know they were the first ones.

RATNER: You bewilder the viewer. There’s no clear sense of where we are or what these outsiders are up to in Patagonia.

ALONSO: You want to know what they’re doing there. Even at the beginning, Captain Dinesen says to his daughter: we don’t belong here, we should go back, soon we will leave this place. I don’t know what the hell they were doing there. I think they’ve been contracted by some government. Or they just ran away. There were people who had committed all sorts of crimes who were sent away rather than being put in jail. We don’t know what happened to the girl’s mother. It’s an open question that doesn’t matter for the film.

RATNER: You worked with two editors. Did they edit while you were shooting or only after?

ALONSO: First of all, I shot the whole thing and developed the film. Then I waited a couple of months to edit the film in my own home with Gonzalo del Val, a relative of my mother’s who’d just finished cinema studies. Six months later, I still wasn’t feeling secure about everything, so I Skyped with Natalia López. I needed an outside view about the editing, about whether or not the film worked. It’s about 120 scenes, that’s all; not so many, though a lot for me. The film creates its own space and time, a reality based on rhythm and timing. It’s almost a hypnosis. And then you can use whatever happens: whether it’s a little toy or whatever, it can create a big impact on the audience. You go “real, real, real” and— suddenly—something happens which is not real. The contrast makes you pay more attention. You see that things can change in a radical way in a minute.

RATNER: You place demands on your audience.

ALONSO: I make it for me. That’s the audience.

RATNER: You’ve talked about using long takes to give viewers time to be in the film, to think about something else and then come back into the film they’re watching.

ALONSO: I don’t think that they are long. I like to have the time to think about what is happening onscreen, to have the sense of someone behind the camera telling me the film. Otherwise, I feel that somebody wants to take me by the nose and make me smell different things in different situations, and that’s all. I get bored with that. I really enjoy not understanding what is happening in front of my eyes. I’m uncomfortable because it forces me to pay attention, to put myself in someone else’s shoes, and to learn something about myself. Sometimes I just get bored, but that’s not bad. I may not enjoy a film, but I can be curious about it. I can ask myself: why did it take so long to tell me about this little thing? An idea may stay with you through all the movies you see after this one. For me, that’s how cinema works. Just to feel some excitement, that there are still mysterious ways to tell things.

RATNER: Each image is about more than its current context, right? Each time anyone views something, they are bringing their experiences, both of other films and of life, to it.

ALONSO: I like to feel some kind of aesthetic pleasure. Probably it’s more like painting than narrative. I like to have the time while I’m watching a film to understand what is happening inside the main character’s head or what I would do in his situation. Maybe I’m very slow, but I need time to understand. But people are secondary. The location is central.

RATNER: At a recent press conference, you spoke about filmmaking as a means to spend time with people you would not ordinarily encounter, because it took you out of your familiar surroundings. Your earlier films were contemporary and observational, but in 《Jauja》 you’ve made a period piece. I wonder whether your own sense of disorientation in the earlier films influenced this project?

ALONSO: It’s a complicated question. I put the crew, the actors, and myself in unexpected places. We didn’t know what we would get or how I would use a particular image or frame. But that’s fine, it’s enjoyable. With my first film, I realized that I didn’t control more than twenty percent of what was going on, but nevertheless everybody was really excited. In 《La Libertad》 we took some risks, we didn’t control the images but I really like that sensation when I’m making a movie, knowing I will learn a lot from the movie or the image. There are actually a lot of questions people ask me about my films for which I don’t have answers. I’m not trying to be an idiot or an arrogant guy. I really don’t know how I choose this or that. When you see some painting you never ask why this blue or red, or what is this triangle or circle. It is what it is.

RATNER: Did you do all the shooting at once?

ALONSO: The last part of the film was the first thing that I shot, in 2012. We stopped for a year waiting for Viggo to confirm. Then he had room in his full schedule. It was a risky structure. I enjoy that: if the films are good at the end, that’s wonderful, but if they are bad, they’re not going to kill anyone. If I learn something during the shooting that’s the most important thing to me; that, and to be working with other people. When you get out of your home and you spend two months just living like gypsies, you depend on others. There’s no phone, no internet. It feels like a nice family.

RATNER: A functioning family?

ALONSO: Or dysfunctional. But to share that feeling with a guy like Viggo and with nonprofessional actors made me feel like we are all on the same level. We were working in a serious way on the film. There’s no boss. And I really like to feel that way, as if everything could be that way.

RATNER: Did having such a big star throw things off balance?

ALONSO: Viggo was the first to wake up at seven in the morning. He got the tripod and started knocking on all the doors and said: it’s time, let’s go. During dinnertime, he’d just disappear. We said: where the fuck is Viggo? He was doing the dishes for thirty-five people! So that was quite an experience for me and for the people I worked with. They thought that since Viggo is a star he was going to be a pain in the ass. At first, everyone judged him. But by the second week, everybody was having drinks with the guy, completely in love. He took a risk being in the film. He told me he liked my films, especially 《Los Muertos》, but he worried because he read that I never know how they will end. I will appreciate his risk for my entire life. I feel very lucky to get to know an actor and a producer like Viggo.

RATNER: Do you have ideas for what you might do next?

ALONSO: (Shrugs) I don’t know. Am I going to shoot with some professional actors again? I don’t know, probably yes. Am I going to a wild location? Probably yes. Should I make the next movie more artificial or go back to the more observational contemplative way? I don’t know. I’m curious to keep getting farther from the way I live, so next time I hope to be near the Amazon. It’s like a dream for me to get inside of the real jungle and see what happens.

RATNER: Have you been there already?

ALONSO: No. I only go [to a location] once I’m shooting or I get blocked. But once I finished 《Jauja》, I immediately began thinking of the jungle, probably because in this film there were no trees. I like to be surrounded by green and trees, to get a sense of what it must have felt like four hundred years ago.

RATNER: You open 《Los Muertos》 with a view of trees, in and out of focus, very much like a child’s view. It’s certainly not a city dweller’s view.

ALONSO: I prefer not to shoot in Buenos Aires, but I keep asking myself why in every film I choose to shoot people far from civilization, far away in time. But I guess we are not that different from those guys. It might seem like there’s a lot of difference between a New Yorker and an Indian guy who doesn’t know how to read, but they’re not all that different.

Author’s Note

Special thanks to John Wildman of the Film Society of Lincoln Center for help in arranging this interview.

 5 ) 一段匪夷所思的心灵之旅

充满极简主义风格的故事本身可以让人联想到《米克的近路》或者《盖瑞》,一个人漫长的旅行变成一段心灵历程。影片使用了奇特的“幻灯片”式的画幅,同阿基•考里斯马基合作多次的摄影师将影片拍摄得色彩饱满且充满怀旧意味。然而抛开这些外在形式,影片的内在却含糊不清难以梳理,故事线索是一位军官寻找自己的女儿,而依托在线索是上的诸多情节则让人匪夷所思。

影片有四个关键点:第一正是电影的名字,这个所有人都想寻找的富饶之地,人们却迷失在寻找的过程中。富饶之地既可以理解为他们远渡重洋而来征服的南美,又可以直接理解为片中寻找的目标——女儿。第二则是消失的司令官Zuluaga,一个失去理智的殖民军官;第三则是洞中的与狗相依为命的女人,可以看作是老年的女儿,因此父亲与女儿形成一种超越时空的相遇;当这看似漫无目的的寻找即将失败的时候,结尾女儿梦醒,看望一只受伤的狗狗。

电影开篇父女的对话我们就知道,女儿想要一只一直陪伴她的狗。而从结尾处管家与女儿的对话来看,我们可以大胆假设,将前面寻找女儿的父亲与后面等待主人的狗等同起来,因此与其说前面是女儿的梦境,不如说是狗的前生。司令官的失踪是“意义”的丧失,而女儿的失踪则是“爱”的丧失,而对于一只狗“意义”则等同于“爱”。因此对于“富饶之地”的寻找,则是丧失意义和爱的过程,人们也因此而迷失。

 6 ) 安乐乡

“Los antiguos decían que Jauja era una tierra mitológica de abundancia y felicidad. Muchas expediciones buscaron el lugar para corroborarlo. Con el tiempo, la leyenda creció de manera desproporcionada. Sin duda la gente exageraba, como siempre. Lo único que se sabe con certeza es que todos los que intentaron encontrar ese paraíso terrenal se perdieron en el camino.” 片子运用了大量的景深长镜头,非常工整的风景画,有些像《哈利波特》里有魔法的照片或者简报,人物在里面走来走去。那里就是阿根廷,我第一次听是《晓松奇谈》里说那里有世界上最大最丰饶的草原。后来我来到了南美,了解到尽管如今已是科技时代,南美的工业与科技都还不发达,但这片土地所给予的丰衣足食以及流淌在人民血液里的及时行乐,它还是抚慰了现实震荡下的灵魂,并平添了一份魔幻的色彩。 影片至七十多分钟处才出现配乐,画面中是绚烂的星空,风尘仆仆行路的人终于在那底下沉睡,梦仍然是流动的。究竟是为什么放弃了家园去找寻“安乐乡”却迷失在了颠沛的路途之上?而“乡愁”终究是对放弃了原有家园的追思还是始终未能到达之地的妄念?就像有一首歌里唱的,“我们都是单行道上的跳蚤”,回不去也走不远。 苏珊·桑塔格在《中国旅行计划》中说“有什么穿过了供血充沛的胚胎外膜”,于我亦是,如若按“但求心安是吾乡”,阿根廷便是我的Jauja。在向往了十年之久后,我终于踏上了南美这片热土,又雀跃又紧张以为靠得有足够近了,却因为一场意外不得不重将自己流放一般于远方,几乎被打击得再也没有了一丝去渴望的力气。直到经历了如同影片中遇见拥有一只狗和一口井住在山洞里的“女巫”一般具有魔幻色彩的事,我暗恋了三年的男孩子在我几乎不能振作起来的时候突然邀请我去他的家乡,我开始相信“念念不忘,必有回响”。 许多人说我这样做叫“追梦“也好“随心”也罢,我自己清楚我只是选择了逃避现实,将自己放逐虚无。最近和几个“三十岁的女人”聊天,她们也都有着和我一样的迷茫,“安乐乡”究竟在哪里,在找寻的路上她们早也已经迷失。我们在小酒馆里喝了几杯,感到一种心灰意懒后的安稳,它即使短暂,即使明日我们又要再强打起精神。人生向死而生的路径之上,是永恒的寂寥与孤独,唯与你煮酒听雨方一解乡愁,另日又隔千里,但那路径之上,总算悲伤有时起舞有时,颠沛有时安乐有时。 那么,是否最终到达“安乐乡”还有什么重要。追到了也会再推远了。结尾处女儿从睡梦中醒来,较于前戏恍若沧海桑田斗转星移。不论前面是她的一场梦魇,还是与前完全独立互文的分段。那一刻的她都不再挣扎,向往远航,随即就将当初自己珍视的土著木偶抛向池底。我们寻找的是什么?什么也不是。为那些虚妄空泛的念想而流离失所是为了什么?不为了什么。这样的结局究竟是一种达观还是虚无的态度?还是说,时间一如既往的流逝中,唯有爱与知足常乐。

 短评

除了美国西部、苏格兰高地,电影里阿根廷荒漠也美得醉人。影片有点《皮囊之下》的调调,一个人的漫游,找寻某种意义,《安乐乡》比软科幻的《皮囊之下》更可感知。结尾狗与玩偶虽与前面剧情有所呼应,导演明显想升华,反而画蛇添足。近景中景远景搭配的构图美不胜收,赞摄影!

9分钟前
  • 帕拉
  • 推荐

时间无涯的荒野,深绿浅绿中,阴沉碧潭水,人生天地间,忽如远行客,愁多知夜长,仰望众星列,误入烂柯洞,芳华己老朽,四顾何茫茫,竦峙丘与坟,投石问潭水,时间又涟漪

12分钟前
  • 丁一
  • 还行

4:3画幅内前景与背景形成有张力的透视感,极少正反打,人物移动出景框,留下空荡的旷野,四下阒寂,风过草窸,云翳渐浓,遮没星辰,追寻的路途拍得好似聂隐娘,然后是沧海桑田、镜花水月的翻转,当目标已缈不可及,踽踽独行的身影便浸入朦胧如梦的原野,“我梦见我的血液漫过峭壁,流入大海”。

17分钟前
  • censored dump
  • 力荐

7分。初极狭,才通人,复行数十步,更趋近于“桃源”的Jauja。丰茂无定-荒忽洞穴-古堡葱郁三段,古典构图配色。前半拖沓节奏有害整体表达,后半开放性和隐喻性赞,家国没落与现代身份困惑。“焉知非鱼”与“不知周也”的思路,或许东方可更彩。

22分钟前
  • mecca
  • 还行

前面一大半是原始的风景展示和主角孤独的身影,后面一刻钟突然又像从梦里醒来(或者是进入了梦?)。我不知道,因为——引用莫滕森“你今天可能没有看懂,但电影的最后十分钟一定给你留下了深刻的印象。你可以睡一觉,再起来可能就发现自己的理解会不同了。很久以后相信你还会记得这感觉。”

25分钟前
  • 米粒
  • 推荐

第一次包场……马克一下。虽然看到最后已经糊了。这个电影的画幅是圆角矩形的!感觉逼格很高……

30分钟前
  • 猫猫
  • 还行

孤独是乡愁的梦乡。

33分钟前
  • 力荐

方形画框总给一种从窗口窥视的感觉,再加上不是远景就是全景的镜头,观者和这部片子的间离感简直不要太强烈。不可否认取景的精妙带来的很美的视觉体验,但诗意有时也是一种催眠,趋于零的叙事和台词很考验耐性,似梦亦或是现实的结尾给我补了最后一刀。我,看不懂

36分钟前
  • Arzach
  • 还行

逼格太高,后半段完全看不懂,跟老塔比诗意。

37分钟前
  • 牛腩羊耳朵
  • 推荐

【沉睡在星空下,迷失在荒芜中;追随流浪的狗,遇见未来的我】本届一种关注单元最喜欢的影片。结局有点画蛇添足了。

38分钟前
  • 陀螺凡达可
  • 推荐

懂得又如何?

40分钟前
  • 徐若风
  • 推荐

#HKIFF# 圆角、4:3画幅。极简而诗意的阿根廷电影。父亲草原寻女的故事,到后半段遁入意想不到的转折。视角的转换巧妙,把现实变作意象,把一个故事变成另一个故事。

43分钟前
  • btr
  • 推荐

复古画幅中的独角戏比群戏要迷人得多,超长镜再多都不觉得浪费时间。星空下的升华感充盈身体后,究竟是历史还是梦还是另一个世界,最后都不重要了。

44分钟前
  • CharlesChou
  • 推荐

星空下那场戏是我今年的最美观影瞬间,配乐一响起,让人有种想定格在那一秒的冲动。这是个可以用弗洛伊德有支配欲的父母那套来解释的片子,渐渐的这也不再是一个故事,而成了心理解析,像是一场清明梦,超越了时间,甚至像某种生命的轮回。片子大多数时间处于失语状态,最后十分钟用力太猛。★★★

46分钟前
  • 亵渎电影
  • 还行

阿根廷版蔡明亮,“找不着北”版老塔

49分钟前
  • 文森特九六
  • 推荐

古典摄影之美,那一抹红绝了!https://kickass.so/usearch/Jauja/

53分钟前
  • kulilin
  • 推荐

没有末尾的“梦醒”,前面的寻找就会变成无病呻吟的风光之旅。正是点破这是个梦境——女儿梦见自己变成父亲(或者不需要这么工整对应,变成“上代人”),女儿/观众/摄影机才会变成一体,前面的画面中才只有纯粹的大他者之凝视。其中,万物都回到无差别状态——文明被抽走,人像动物在世界跋涉。这和“庄周梦蝶”的机制一样,我们在梦境不知道(到最后才可以揣测)女儿和父亲是不是一个意识,我们无法作为意识存在,从而抵达了原初状态的同一性。梦醒之后,女儿扔掉了爱情信物,似乎完全忘记了她在梦境中作为父亲/动物的原初状态,挣脱了束缚,决心打破维持已久的平静(涟漪泛起)。这也是现代社会人们对待“恒久”“永远”“寻找”“坚持”“不变”这些概念的态度。

54分钟前
  • Derridager
  • 还行

静默之中窸窣,风吹草摇依稀可闻,雅致构图比例,澄澈碧丽摄影,漫长静默凝视中的无限诗意;原是乌有安乐乡,岂闻世外桃花源,浮云悠悠南柯梦,恍如隔世斧柯烂;鞑靼人的沙漠,另一时空的戈多;撇去特写之后的超长镜头,在广袤时空中有永恒的意味。

59分钟前
  • 欢乐分裂
  • 推荐

非常不阿隆索又非常阿隆索的一种转向

1小时前
  • 鬼腳七
  • 还行

好坏参半吧。有令人惊叹的摄影技术,以近乎正方形的圆角比例探索广阔的绿色风景。我欣赏它在美学上的独具匠心,但效果往往有点勉强。导演显然是在给自己施加压力。前面又漫长又乏力,尽管最后半小时对绝对虚无的阐述扳回一城,也于事无补了。电影给人的感觉就像一段失传已久的童话,依靠梦幻般的氛围来营造出一种美感。它是风格大于内容的。

1小时前
  • 大奇特(Grinch)
  • 还行