曾经沧海难为水

Alice让我想起了母亲的好朋友。那个阿姨从小生在富裕家庭，二十多岁结婚，在家当家庭主妇，老公后来当官，步步升迁。她知道老公在外面到处沾花惹草，但家庭还维系着。直到四十多岁的时候，老公忽然提出离婚，小学三年级的儿子扔给她，独自逍遥去了。
阿姨从来没有工作过，她高中毕业，一直懵懵懂懂待在家里相夫教子，忽然之间，一切崩塌。
她到处找工作，做过幼儿园阿姨，美国人家的保姆，宿管，艰难地抚养儿子，直到现在。
她老年时竟然开始漂泊，离开住了一生的城市，跟着儿子到武汉，又去广州，在哪里遇到个七十多岁的老人，算找到一个搭伙过日子的人。
前夫得了绝症，重病缠身时竟然想起她的好，追悔莫及地要复合，还想看看儿子。
报应不爽。
在变故发生前，她永远不知道生活会这么艰难，她会度过这一切。
Alice就是无数普通女人啊，当一无所有的她成为孩子唯一的依靠，她会成为世界上最坚强的人。
年轻的时候，总以为一生不会发生什么大事，听着别人的故事，感叹自己永远做不到那一步。当回过头时，才有些后怕，又会有些疑惑，那么多艰难地岁月怎么熬过去的？
其实生活本来就是琐碎的，大起大落放在每一天，第二天醒来又是新的日子。父亲常说，世界上没什么事是不能解决的。我不理解，现在好像有些明白了，回过头看过去的路总是难的，但身处其中，没有迈步过去的坎儿，不过是时间长短问题。
斯科塞斯那会儿还年轻，然而他如此了解女人，了解生活。Alice吵闹的孩子，不靠谱的男朋友，尴尬地表情，找不到工作的痛哭，一切都是那么细密入微。总会熬过去的，生活艰难，但像流水，只要有健康的身体，就会流淌。她还是找到了朋友，有了一个爱她的人。
人的归宿就是家庭。‘
普希金是对的“假如生活欺骗了你，不要悲伤，不要心急，忧郁的日子里需要镇静，相信吧，快乐的日子将会来临。“

在重新推出的DVD，馬丁史柯西斯和Ellen Burstyn艾倫鮑斯汀在幕後講評提到製片經過．女演員艾倫鮑斯汀演出賣作大片＜大法師＞之後，擁有極大的製片權力．她挑中這部女性主義的劇本，並請法蘭西斯．福特．柯波拉推薦新導演，他建議剛以＜殘酷大街＞聞名的馬丁史柯西斯．艾倫鮑斯汀喜歡他的作品，但不知道他能不能掌握女性題材，須女性主角合作？結果馬丁史柯西斯和艾倫鮑斯汀，不但讓幕前是女性的故事，連幕後工作人員都大量延任女性來擔任．

最重要的是兩位啟用許多優秀的演員，例如：哈維凱托和茱迪福斯特．讓這部影片彷彿是為下一部＜計程車司機＞而暖身．

茱迪福斯特在片中四個片段的驚鴻一瞥：http://orange-review.blogspot.com/2007/09/jodie-in-alice-doesnt-live-here-anymore.html

　萬一打不開,請用代理:　　
　　http://www.pkblogs.com/orange-review
　　http://www.10pod.com/
　　http://www.anonasurf.com/

   说起影后艾伦伯斯汀，最令人印象深刻的，可能就是她在《梦之安魂曲》里的震撼表现了，曾经浏览过时光网中对于她的“一句话影评”，其中绝大多数都提到甚至是专门为了《梦之安魂曲》而写的。尽管这从一个侧面说明人们对这位老影后的作品看的不多，但是更多的潜台词绝对是对其演技的充分肯定。不过由于年代稍远的缘故，尽管早有耳闻，却一直没有看过她的获奖作品，今天，终于得以欣赏了这部老马丁为数不多的以女性为主题的电影《再见爱丽丝》，略有所思，写一些想法。

   说实话，对于影片的剧情，就我个人看来，真的是普普通通，没有太多的戏剧性，基本几句话就可概括（本段的以下内容均剧透，慎看）：一位名叫爱丽丝的女子，热爱歌唱，但却是一个普通的家庭主妇，全部的工作就是相夫教子，尽心扮演贤妻良母的角色，直到有一天，一次意外夺走了她的丈夫，迫于生计的她只得带着11岁的儿子远走他乡。她曾在酒吧卖唱，也曾在餐厅当服务员，受到过感情上的欺骗，不过最终还是重新找到如意郎君，过上幸福生活的故事。

   正如普遍的评论所言，尽管此剧在剧情上没有太大的戏剧性，但是却有两大看点：其一，老马丁执导的，以女性为主题的影片，在他的作品中绝对具有特殊性。其二，就是女主角艾伦伯斯汀的表演。对于马丁的导演方面，我完全是外行，没法做太多的评述，就是觉得此片的风格和我看过的其他的马丁的电影有较大区别。本片基本在平淡的叙事中结束，仔细品味也不乏温情。而对于女主角的表演，尽管我同样也是外行，但是却想简单写写自己的看法。本片的主人公是单亲母亲爱丽丝，影片对于爱丽丝之前那一段婚姻，仅用了十几分钟时间就一带而过，重点突出的，是之后母子二人相依为命，母亲一人支撑家庭的内容。不难想象，剧本的设计包涵了几乎所有的单亲妈妈可能遇到的困境：要养家糊口，要同时从生活上和心灵上给予孩子关照（孩子还偏偏被编剧设计的比较叛逆，增加了管理难度），也曾遭到感情上的欺骗，也曾疲于应付与同事之间的关系，最终还要处理和追求者的关系。不难推知，爱丽丝这个角色，虽然并不知道是不是专门为伯斯汀打造，但绝对是这部电影唯一的核心，甚至可以说，此角色的演绎质量对于本片的成败有决定性意义。不过艾伦伯斯汀的确做到了，她把一位单身母亲的敏感与脆弱、坚强与执着刻画的淋漓尽致（尽管和我想象中的还是略有差距，也许是我想象的太完美了吧）。在片中，她所饰演的母亲一方面要忙于生计，同时还要处理正值十几岁，同样处于敏感年龄的儿子的关系。所以是脆弱与坚强兼备，很多内心的情感必须处理的波澜不惊，稍有含蓄或者稍有过度都会影响对角色的塑造，观看此片过程中，基本没有看出什么刻意雕琢的表演痕迹，似乎平平淡淡，但是却让人觉得十分真实可信。而到了影片后半段，她努力在追求者和儿子之间寻求平衡。到了此时，她需要开始释放内心的情感，伯斯汀的表演在我这个外行看来，也算非常精准。并且隐隐地能够看到些许《梦之安魂曲》中表演的影子，毕竟是同一个人演的。不过话说回来，由于相比本片而言，她在《梦之安魂曲》中的表演更加爆点十足，所以个人还是觉得后者给了我更大的震撼（或许是因为业余人士更适合观看外放戏）。

   附带一提，影片中的两个小配角很吸引眼球。第一个是欺骗女主感情的小混混，由当时还年轻的哈维凯特尔饰演，之前之后反差巨大，几乎是一个人演了两个角色。不知为啥，看到他的表演，特别是后半段凶相毕露的时候，突然想起了德尼罗……囧。第二个就是爱丽丝儿子的玩伴，一个带有男孩子性格的早熟的十岁左右的小女生，甚至可以说是一个小混混。当时看的时候一度没发现她是女孩子，直到字幕出现“她”，才将信将疑。不过觉得这小孩子演的十分自然，当时就感叹，好可怕的演技，不知这孩子日后发展的如何，结果最后落幕时看了一下演员表，惊现朱迪福斯特，我彻底震惊了（好吧，我承认我孤陋寡闻了）。

   还要说一下，尽管本片的剧情乍看上去乏善可陈，不过仔细思考，还是略有心得。此片以爱丽丝这一角色贯穿始终，并且涉及了诸多女性特有的境遇，在最后还略微带有女性自省的主题，可以说是一部较早的女性电影。不过拍摄此片时恰是上世纪七十年代，据说当时的米国，女权运动正进行的轰轰烈烈，反应女性的追求与生活的一类题材可能也在当时更受导演们的青睐。比如同一时期的《转折点》似乎就是，而《安妮霍尔》中戴安基顿塑造的那个个性鲜明的角色，几乎成了一个标志。看过此片，也想起了《时时刻刻》，片中都涉及了“生活在男人的世界中的女人”这一话题，不过与《时时刻刻》不同，尽管本片主人公经历了挣扎，追求和自省，最终还是回归到了男性的控制中……当然前提是她的追求者做出了一定的让步，但不得不说最终还是男性的胜利。但女主最终重新有了美满的家庭，偏偏是观众想要看到的，这或许也是老马丁导演的巧妙之处吧。其中有一句台词印象深刻，集中体现了女主的自我意识的显现，她对一同在餐厅工作的朋友说，她爱她的前夫，在前夫去世前，她每天所想的就是如何讨他欢心。前夫去世后她很伤心，因为尽管前夫性格火爆，却十分照顾她。但通过之后的经历她发现，他并没有照顾到她，只是她从内心中需要有一个坚实可靠的男性在身边才觉得有了归属感。台词基本是这样，一开始我还以为她要追求自主的生活了，结果话音刚落，追求者上门，说之前的部分争端听她的，她立刻就喜笑颜开了，女人都是这样的么。。。

   最后，想到了本片的标题，港译译作《曾经沧海难为水》，一开始觉得矫情，后来仔细一想，却也暗含一层深意。爱丽丝小时候梦想成为大歌星，甚至很自信的说她会比某某歌星更出色。后来，当她迫于生计在酒吧卖唱时，却丝毫不见当年的这份自信，更多的是勉强与怀疑，后来她迫于生计干脆当起了餐厅服务员。也算是梦想在现实前的苍白无力吧。影片行将结束之时，她对她的追求者说，希望自己可以回到小时候生活的城市，去实现当一名歌手的愿望，他表示支持和同意，但同样说了句意味深长的话，“这更多的是你的希望，现在的那座城市和你小时候的已经不同了，再也回不去了。”这句话绝对是真理，但却让人觉得一丝感伤，每个人都曾有天真的梦想，但是曾经沧海难为水，伴随着生活的残酷和时间的撕扯，又有几人能够真正如愿？不过之后便是释然，觉得倒也无妨，正如影片的最后一场，母子二人相依，有说有笑地走向远方好（正如《当幸福来敲门》的最后一场一样），平淡中满是温情，我们的生活尽管不可能事事如愿，但不也同样平凡并温情着么。

- Is the film proclaiming a feminist statement or mocking people who did? If not, what is the conceptual nucleus? What is it demythologizing?

Ebert states that "...I think it belongs somewhere outside ideology, maybe in the area of contemporary myth and romance." I don't quite understand this sentence, but the film is certainly much more interesting than a speech of ideologies, the kind of speech Alice doesn't want to hear.
Scorsese's film is always about questioning, and always has so many levels of meaning. On the surface, this movie looks like a melodrama demythologizing the family value and women's social responsibility by an undefeated lady fights for her dream, but underneath this it is actually Scorsese demythologizing the whole process of women pursuing for dreams and independence. It seems to me that Scorsese is always exploring different genres and themes, while how he display his exploration is to demythologize whatever coat he is putting on.
I agree that not knowing what you want is a universal problem (Scorsese stated that it is not a feminist tract but "a human picture"). By addressing this to a widow, Scorsese is not trying to display the weakness of women, but more like to dramatize the problem, as he uses the stage of chaotic Little Italy to question whether a person can hold on to his belief while make a living (Mean Streets).
More than three reviews I've read said that Alice has always left in the care of others until her husband dies. While this sounds like a good reason of why a woman doesn't know what she wants, it is a misinterpretation. In the brilliant bathroom scene, Alice once says (in a very melodramatic way): "maybe I just felt like he was taking care of me." While back to another brilliant scene when she is sunbathing with Flo, she says: "I just like the idea of man, you know, strong and dominating." (thanks for the subtitle! Really helps a lot, I don't remember a single line from Mean Streets) Maybe in Scorsese's eyes feminism is a modern myth. There is no material power that is against women's free will, Alice is Alice since the very beginning.
In this film, Alice looks like a girl who has wandered a bit too far into Wonderland. She likes to sing and buys sexy dress while she is actually not a good singer and not that sexy. There are about four times she turns to her left and talks to the air: "you are a smart-ass kid", "It ain't Peggy Lee", whispers in Mel's cafe, etc.. It is certainly cute, but also daydreaming. She has a flat and childish fantasy of man: strong, beard, dominate. She is always self-contradictory: "I want to kill Tommy!" "He sometimes could be very mean." "No he is not mean...he is just too loud..." in the bathroom: "I don't love him! I do..." How Scorsese portrays her is cruel, but very interesting. A real woman is very interesting, honestly fool, realistic (when she says "I don't have to show off my emotion all the time", it might because she really does not have that much emotion at that point, women have the ability of being extremely anesthetic in order to solve the immediate problem), warm and undefeated. I actually don't want to use the word "undefeated", Ebert uses it, lots of critics use it. It is almost an eternal feminine charm (what we called Ying): to be undefeated, while blunt enough to make mistakes again and again. Overall the film does looks like a tender story about a woman being waking up from inside, but I can't help wondering if Scorsese has a crueler angle of viewing it.
We mentioned about the kids- adults comparison in class. The three men Alice met are traditionally masculine: Don an "ass" that prays sincerely (demythologizing religion/belief); Ben a sexy, passionate sadist (whom is almost a masochist in Mean Streets; he did the shooting gesture again in this film when Alice ignores him. Tommy also did that to Alice and David. Scorsese's suicidal obsession?); David a perfect farmer figure who punches kids. While Alice as the only female protagonist is very feminine. Compared to these adult conformists, kids in this movie are ground-breaking and intriguing. Besides Tommy and Audrey's ruleless words, Scorsese visualizes the complexity of their personalities by making Tommy blah blah blah all the time like an old lady (with some very funny feminine gestures when telling Alice the story in car), and Audrey acts like a total boy.
This film has too many things I want to talk about... Going back to that bathroom scene. As I said in class it is demythologizing "melodrama": she cries, "I don't love him...I do!" She turns her face around melodramatically, but the bathroom is too small that she knocks her head on the toilet paper box. While they are having the most serious conversation through out the movie, Vera is out there waitressing desperately. Look how much people pay in order to leave you time to be melodramatic. The sunbath scene opens up with a beautiful shot of two women's side faces. The framing and color (blue sky, sweat, white skin displays different shades under sunshine) make it looks like a postmodern painting. Suddenly it jumps to an establishing shot of them sitting on crappy chairs, saying what a nice weather/sunshine, then the next second a flurry of dust and sand comes towards them. For me this looks like a demythologization of Scorsese's blondes. He occasionally focuses the lens on woman's face, but this time is more intriguing.
Seems I haven't touched the conceptual nucleus...This film is complex! To sum up in a simple way, by demonstrating a modern The Wizard of Oz, Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore shows how far a person can go for her dream and how undefeated he/she would be. And as ironic as The Wizard of Oz, no matter how brave she is, how far she goes, the protagonist will finally come back, and all she learned from the journey is to cherish her life in Kansas. This doesn't sound like conceptual nucleus...help.

所有评论都会提到这是马丁难得的温情脉脉的电影。其实温情主要体现在结尾，让所有人如释重负的团圆。稍加改动，这电影还是会让人绝望悲惨的故事。
有不少提到这片子的镜头没那么的让人劲爆，我不很赞同。电影中大部分镜头都在运动中，即使在家里的戏，摄影机也会缓慢的横向移动。这也是这部片子看起来一点不觉得烦闷的原因。而另外一下运动是通过画面内容了。人的运动，车子的运动……总之画面中的运动无处不在。例外的地方是女主角和咖啡馆朋友晒太阳时……最后跳到大远景，风沙掠过荒凉的镇子，两个女人在路当间晒太阳。这绝对是导演的趣味……
明显的新好莱坞风格，不由得想起了《逍遥骑士》，哪里像又说不太出来。
这电影给自己最大的影响是关于怎么才“像电影”。经常和朋友聊起XX电影看起来像是电视剧……怎么才像电影？我觉得关键就是运动。不论是摄影机运动，还是人物运动……始终要在一种动态中。这样才能始终抓住观众的眼睛，将他们死死按在椅子上。
PS：另外的一种动是心动。诸如小津，杨德昌，利用画外的空间，在银幕上形成一种缺失感的构图，然后这种对于画面中缺了点什么（通常是人）的想法引导人去想怎么了（人呢？）？发生了什么？