• 当前位置:首页 战争片 游击队

    游击队

    评分:
    0.0很差

    分类:战争片芬兰1963

    主演:马蒂·奥拉维斯托  Kauko Laurikainen  Paul Budsko   

    导演:Mikko  Niskanen   

    排序

    播放地址

    提示:如无法播放请看其他线路

    猜你喜欢

    • HD

      血战许昌

    • HD中字

      大逃亡1963

    • HD中字

      收件人不详

    • HD

      关于我妈的一切

    • 更新HD

      半条棉被

    • 正片

      浴血狙击

    • HD中字

      勇士连

    • 更新HD

      那一天的管风琴

     剧照

    游击队 剧照 NO.1游击队 剧照 NO.2游击队 剧照 NO.3游击队 剧照 NO.4游击队 剧照 NO.5游击队 剧照 NO.6游击队 剧照 NO.16游击队 剧照 NO.17游击队 剧照 NO.18游击队 剧照 NO.19游击队 剧照 NO.20

    剧情介绍

     长篇影评

     1 ) 看此片理解了新现实主义

    罗贝托·罗西里尼的经典作品。讲述二战意大利全境解放前夕的六个小故事。罗西里尼的镜头对真实的捕捉不是没有选择的,但他只靠拍摄下的真实内容来获取逻辑关联来讲故事,从而完成电影叙事的指涉,而不是依靠蒙太奇去“营造”一个故事来达成导演诉求。这取决两点,一是编导对现实发生的事情有着强烈的关注和巨大的情感;二是编导具有敏锐的捕捉现实细节的能力。

    而同时,编导的高明之处还在于(之所以强调编导,是因为这部影片的编剧是费里尼)他们并不仅仅满足于“纪录”。在电影叙事中,依然强烈渗透着他们对故事(现实)本身的思考。比如第一个故事里人与人之间的信任与仇恨的产生;第二个故事的人道主义普世情怀;第三个故事中爱情的娇嫩萌芽与它所产生的战争背景这样残酷反差;第四个故事中人面对爱时的不畏死亡;第五个故事则讲述了传统天主教在战争与现代宗教观念挤压下显现出的尴尬,渗透出身为意大利这个纯正天主教国家的编导对战争和宗教的深层思考;第六个故事,用完全写实的游击队员的全体牺牲,突出了意大利人民在二战中的英勇无畏,也是战火刚熄的意大利(影片拍摄于1946年)民心的真实写照。放在影片最后,在当时的语境下,也起到了激励人心的高潮效用。

     2 ) 无法写短评的凑字数

    这个不太知道怎么评分,妓女和教堂那两段挺有意思的。这电影属于战争全景??现在这部电影不能写短评了???不清楚为什么,感觉也没有政治不正确的地方啊???写那么多就是为了凑字数发长评。好害怕标记的电影被删,特别是那些不怎么有印象的电影,豆瓣就属于唯一的凭据了,如果被删了,可能就永远记不起这一部电影了,删除,很可怕。

     3 ) 原谅我给了一星

    好像说本片是大师罗西里尼的战后三部曲的第二部,里面有六个小故事(算吧我都不记得几个了),开始一个美兵和西西里菇凉语言不同,靠手部动作沟通,开始还有点期待剧情怎么发展,哪知道又来了一个小孩偷鞋的故事以为是支线。。。

    第三个故事是个爱情悲剧,一个美国大兵跟一个妓女过夜时聊起自己曾爱过的姑娘,殊不知这个妓女就是那个姑娘越看越乱,电影结构又松散。

    原谅我给了一星,水平有限不懂欣赏!

     4 ) 克拉考尔评《战火》

    Roberto Rossellini’s Paisan [Italy 1946] surpasses his Open City [Italy 1945] in breadth of vision and significance. Open City was still a drama; Paisan is an epic, comparable only to [The Battleship] Potemkin [USSR 1925, dir. Sergei Eisenstein], though profoundly different from it.

    This new Italian film consists of six real-life episodes which take place during the Italian Campaign. They seem entirely unconnected, except for the fact that their succession corresponds to the advance of the Allied armies. The first episode records the adventures of an American patrol immediately after the landing in Sicily. Led by an Italian peasant girl, the Americans explore a ruined castle—a nocturnal reconnaissance which culminates in a magnificent conversation between the girl and one of the soldiers. But this bilingual idyll does not last long. A few Germans emerg- ing from nowhere shoot the soldier and then kill the girl for having fired at them. When, alarmed by the shooting, the rest of the Americans return, they take it for granted that the girl has lured them into a trap, and her simple-hearted sacrifice passes unnoticed.

    The second episode, in Naples, features a street urchin and a Military Policeman—an American Negro who is thoroughly drunk. The boy, set on stealing the Negro’s shoes, guides him to a rubble heap among the ruins, where his prospective victim raves about the hero reception prepared for him in New York and his home town. But the word “home” provokes a sudden shift of moods in him. He says he will not go home; and in a state of despondency he falls asleep, an easy prey for the boy. Shortly later, the Negro captures the thief and makes him return the shoes. The boy is a war orphan living in a cave crammed with ragged women and children. Overwhelmed by pity, the Negro leaves the shoes behind in the cave. Colorful street incidents round out the brilliant thumbnail sketches of these two stray creatures. The scene in the marionette theatre in which the frantic Negro climbs the miniature stage to defend a Moor is a veritable gem sparkling with Quixotic spirit.

    The subsequent Roman episode is a somewhat literary love story, with a touch of Maupassant. Six months after the fall of Rome a drunken Ameri- can soldier follows a prostitute to her room. He is no drunkard but a sensi- tive boy appalled by the ever-increasing corruption around him. Instead of simply sleeping with the girl, he tells her about Francesca, the first girl he met on entering Rome on the day of liberation. A flashback, rich in charming details, renders their innocent flirtation and its premature end. Why did you never go back, asks the prostitute. He mutters that he could not find the house. The prostitute, trembling, describes it. He dozes off, vaguely realizing her identity. Next day, she despairingly waits for him, while he himself, on the point of leaving, tears up the slip of paper with her address. He mounts a truck, and the armies move on.

    The fourth episode shows the Allies in the outskirts of Florence, pre- paring the last assault on the city, in which the Partisans are already at grips with the Germans and Fascists. An American nurse, eager to join her Florentine lover of prewar days, learns that he is “Lupo,” the legendary Partisan leader. The whole is a pictorial report on what happens to her and an Italian friend as they slip through the front lines into the Partisan-held sector of Florence. They walk past two British officers, portrayed in all their languid fastidiousness; they pass along the corridors of the abandoned Uffizi, catching a glimpse of three German soldiers who slowly advance deep down on the street. When they finally reach a bullet-swept street corner, one of the few Partisans defending this position is fatally wounded. His comrades liquidate two Fascists on the spot. Before dying in the arms of the nurse, the wounded Partisan says that Lupo has been killed that very morning. “God,” says the nurse.

    In the fifth episode three American chaplains in search of shelter enter a remote Franciscan monastery in the Apennines and are accommodated there for the night. The naive unworldliness of the monks is characterized in scenes born out of respect and highlighted by an imperceptible smile. No sooner do the monks find out that one of their guests is a Protestant and the other a Jew than they involve the Catholic chaplain in a sort of religious disputation. Thesis stands against thesis: the worried monks insist that those two lost souls must be saved, while their urbane coreligionist believes them able to attain a state of grace outside the Church. This duel in pious dialectics is the more exquisite since battles are raging in the neighborhood. The end comes as a surprise. The zealous monks impose a fast on themselves for the sake of the Jew and the Protestant, and the Catholic chaplain praises their humility, instead of reaffirming his stand on tolerance. It is a strange conclusion, somewhat reminiscent of the spiritual note in Silone’s novels.1

    The last episode is a terrible nightmare unfolding in the marshes of the Po Valley, where flat land and sky fuse into a monotonous universe. A small group of Italian Partisans, British flyers, and American O.S.S. agents engage in a hopeless combat action behind the enemy lines. You do not see the Germans at first; you see only the corpse of a Partisan floating across the water. The reeds are filled with threats; unknown dangers lurk around the lonely house which in its isolation deepens the impression of monotony. Then, after an eternity of unbearable suspense, the massacre takes its course. The people in the house are killed indiscriminately, except for a little child who, outside the house, screams and screams, deserted by the dead on the ground. The Partisans, bound hand and foot, are thrown into the water. The horrified English and American prisoners see them, one by one, disappear, unable to stop the clockwork process. Another witness is left: the Partisan leader hanging behind the prisoners.

    “This happened in the winter of 1944,” a commentator says at the very end. “A few weeks later, spring came to Italy and the war in Europe was declared over.”

    All these episodes relate the experiences of ordinary people in a world which tends to thwart their noblest efforts. The dead Sicilian girl is cal- lously slandered by those who should have honored her; Francesca, the fresh Roman girl, turns prostitute, and her decent lover sinks into emo- tional inertia. It is the war which dooms them. Yet it is not always the war: in the case of the Negro, his fate results from circumstances entirely unconnected with events in Italy.

    What endears these people to us is their inborn dignity. They have dignity in the same way that they breathe or eat. Throughout the film, humanity appears as a quality of man’s nature, as something that exists in him independently of his ideals and creeds. Rossellini’s Partisans never refer to their political convictions; rather, they fight and die in a matter-of- fact way, because they are as they are. And the Negro is simply a humane creature, filled with compassion, love of music, and Quixotic reveries.

    This emphasis on the reality of good nature is coupled with a marked indifference to ideas. Of course, the Nazis appear as hateful, but it seems they are hated only for their acts of savagery and their vulgar conduct. All judgments are concerned with human dignity, and what goes beyond it is completely omitted. There is in the whole film not a single verbal statement against Fascist rule, nor any message in favor of democracy, let alone a social revolution. And the surface impression, that Paisan advo- cates pacifism, must be dismissed also, for it is scarcely compatible with the experience of the Catholic chaplain, to whom the war has been a great lesson in tolerance. This deliberate disregard of all “causes,” including that of humanity, can be explained only by a profound skepticism about their effects. Even the most praiseworthy cause, Paisan implies, is bound to entail fanaticism, corruption, and misery, thus interfering with the free flow of a good and meaningful life. Significantly, the Sicilian peasants are suspicious of American liberators and German invaders alike; and the Roman episode bears out their suspicions by highlighting the demoraliza- tion wrought upon the liberated in less than six months.

    The attitude behind Paisan is in keeping with the film’s episodic struc- ture. In stringing together six separate episodes, Rossellini manifests his belief in the independence of human dignity from any overarching idea. If humanity materialized only under the guidance of an idea, then a single, well-composed story might suggest itself to express the latter’s significance (viz. Potemkin). But humanity is here part and parcel of reality and there- fore must be traced in various places. The six isolated episodes indicate that streaks of it are found everywhere.

    Since Paisan confines itself to real-life experiences, its documentary style is most adequate. The style, cultivated by D.W. Griffith, Flaherty, and the Russian film directors, is genuinely cinematic, for it grows out of the urge, inherent in the camera, to explore the world of facts. Like Eisenstein or Flaherty, Rossellini goes the limit in capturing reality. He shoots on location and prefers laymen to professional actors. And instead of working from an elaborate script, with each detail thought out in advance, he lets himself be inspired by the unforeseeable situations that arise in the process of filming.

    These techniques become virtues because of Rossellini’s infatuation with reality and his gift for translating its every manifestation into cin- ematic terms. He masters horror scenes no less expertly than moments of tenderness, and the confused street crowd is as near to him as is the abandoned individual in it. His camera angles and twists of action owe their existence to sparks of intuition ignited by the closest touch with the given material. And directed by him, most people play themselves without seeming to play at all. To be sure, Paisan has its weak spots: parts of the Sicilian episode are shot in slapdash fashion; the Roman love story is too much of a story; the nurse and her companion in the Florentine episode are strangely flat; and the Catholic chaplain is not entirely true to type. But these occasional lapses amount to little within a film which sets a new pattern in documentary treatment. Its wonderful freshness results from Rossellini’s unflinching directness in formulating his particular notion of humanity. He knows what he wants to say and says it as simply as possible.

    Are examples needed? Far from capitalizing, after the manner of The Last Chance [USA 1945, dir. Leopold Lindtberg], on bilingual dialogue to sell the idea of international solidarity, Paisan presents the mingling of lan- guages in wartime Italy without any purpose. In the opening episode, the conversation between the Sicilian girl and the American soldier in charge of her is a linguistic dabbling which, born out of the latter’s boredom and loneliness, does not lead up to anything. Yet precisely by recording their pointless attempts at mutual understanding with infinite care, Rossellini manages to move and fascinate us. For in the process these two people, left speechless by their mother tongues, increasingly reveal what as a rule is buried under conventional phrases.

    Each episode abounds in examples. When the drunken G.I. tells the Roman prostitute about his yearning for Francesca, he is seen lying on the couch, with his legs apart in the foreground—a shot which renders his physical disgust and moral disillusionment to perfection. Though long shots are ordinarily less communicative than close shots, Rossellini draws heavily on them in the last episode to picture the marshes. He does so on purpose, for these shots not only convey the impression of desolate monotony, but, through their very flatness, they make the ensuing mas- sacre seem more dreadful. A model of artistic intelligence are the street scenes in the Neapolitan episode. First it is as if these loosely connected shots of performing jugglers, ragged natives, blackmarketing children, and idling G.I.’s were inserted only in the interest of local color. Shortly, however, it becomes evident that they also serve to characterize the Negro. As he reemerges from the marionette theatre, his companion, the wily boy who does not want to lose him, begins to play a harmonica; and, enticed by these heavenly sounds, the Negro follows the little Pied Piper through streets teeming with the crowds and diversions that have already been impressed upon us. So we are all the more struck by the impact of the trickling harmonica music on the Negro.

    This last example well illustrates the way Rossellini organizes his mate- rial. There is a veritable gulf between his editing style and the “montage” methods used in Potemkin and other early Soviet films. For Rossellini deliberately turns his back on ideas, while the Russian film directors aim exclusively at driving home a message. Paisan deals with the human assets of ordinary people; Eisenstein’s Potemkin shows ordinary people wedded to the cause of revolution. All editing devices in the Eisenstein film are calculated not only to render a historic uprising, but to render it in the light of Marxist doctrine. In Potemkin, the priest’s face, besides being his face, stands for Tsarist oppression, and the sailors are made to appear as the vanguard of the proletariat. Nothing of that kind occurs in the Italian film. On the contrary, Rossellini so composes his narrative that we never feel challenged to seek symbolic meanings in it. Such instances of oppres- sion or humanity as Paisan offers are strictly individual facts which do not admit of generalization. Rossellini patiently observes where Eisen- stein ardently constructs. This accounts for the thrill of a few shots which represent border cases. I am thinking in particular of the documentary shot of the three German soldiers in the Florentine episode. Reminiscent, perhaps deliberately so, of similar shots in official Nazi documentaries, it is inserted in such a manner that it affects us as a true revelation of German militarism. The allusiveness of this shot is sufficiently strong to drive us beyond the bounds of immediate reality, and yet too unobtrusive to make us lose contact with it.

    Paisan is all the more amazing as it defies the traditional patterns of film making in Italy. The Italian prewar screen was crowded with historical extravaganzas and beautifully photographed dramas that displayed inflated passions before decorative settings—a long progression of glossy products, led by d’Annunzio’s world-famous Cabiria, of 1914. Taking advantage of their audience’s love for theatrics, these films reflected both the glitter and the hollowness of the regime under which they flourished. . . . It is a far cry from d’Annunzio to Rossellini, from the spectacular to the real. The sudden emergence of such a film as Paisan indicates that many Italians actually loathe the grand-style manner of the past and all that it implied in allegiances and sham beliefs. They have come to realize the futility of Mussolini’s conquests and they seem now determined to do without any messages and missions—at least for the moment.

    And this moment is a precarious one for the Italians. Fascist rule has ended, the new government is weak, and the country resounds with inter- nal strife. During this interregnum the Italians might feel completely lost, were it not for a compact cultural heritage which protects them from dis- integration. Theirs is an articulate sense of art and a tested way of putting up with the tragedies common to mortals. And under the undiminishing spell of custom they knowingly enjoy the rites of love making and the gratifications of family life. No doubt, the Church has played its part in shaping and civilizing these people throughout the ages. That they are aware of it perhaps accounts for the surprise ending of the Monastery episode in Paisan—that scene in which the American chaplain bows to the religious ardor of the Italian monks, thus disavowing what he has said about the inclusiveness of true tolerance shortly before. His deliber- ate inconsistency can be considered a tribute to Italian Catholicism and its humanizing effects.

    Italian everyday life, then, is rich in meaningful outlets for all imagin- able needs and desires. So the Italians do not sink into a vacuum when they refuse, as they are now doing, to let themselves be possessed with ideas. Even without ideas they still have much to rely upon. And since their kind of existence, mellow and sweet as it is, has long since become second nature to them—something that seems to them as natural as the blue sky or the air they breathe—they may well believe that their repudiation of ideas relieves their lives of excess baggage. What remains, in their opinion, is humanity, pure and simple. And in their case, as Paisan demonstrates, humanity assumes all the traits of self-sufficient reality.

    This is a mirage, though, which may appear as more than a mirage only at a very particular moment, such as the Italians are now going through. Paisan is delusive in that it virtually makes the triumph of humanity dependent on a world released from the strain of ideas, or “causes.” We cannot feel this way. As matters stand, we know humanity would be irre- trievably bogged down if it were unsustained by the ideas mankind breeds in desperate attempts to improve its lot. Whatever their consequences, they hold out a promise to us. Rossellini’s film dismisses the audience without any such promise. But this does not invalidate its peculiar greatness. And precisely in these postwar years with their tangle of oblique slogans and propaganda artifices, Paisan comes to us as a revelation of the steady flow of humanity beneath the turmoil of sheer ideology. So, if Paisan does not kindle hopes, yet it reassures us of the omnipresence of their sources.

    原文出处:Siegfried Kracauer's American Writings Essays on Film and Popular Culture

    Paisan (1948) P156

     5 ) 《战火》:比真实更真实

    罗伯托•罗西里尼的第二部战后电影在美国的发行片名是Paisan,对美国人而言,该词有“朋友”或“同胞”之意,用在这部反映博爱之美德的电影身上,倒也合适。其意大利片名则是Paisà,在那不勒斯方言里,它是同村人的亲切称呼。电影以6个发生在意大利真实地点的故事,勾勒出意大利解放期间的国家面貌。6个独立的虚构章节,从南到北,追随了意大利解放的历程。各章节之间,在主题和气氛上,并无密切联系。有的是可怖的悲剧,比如第一节,西西里年轻姑娘卡梅拉的死;或者最后一节,德军对波河游击队员的集体屠杀。有的则是不安的喜剧,如第二节里,那不勒斯街童偷了醉酒的军事警察的鞋子;或者第五节,一个新教徒和一个犹太教徒(美军)进入了意大利北方的方济各修道院,而引起了一些震动。但电影的主题是一以贯之的,那就是在1943-44年间的苦难岁月里,盟军进入亚平宁半岛后引起的语言和文化上的冲突。

    比起罗西里尼的第一部战后电影《罗马不设防》来, 《战火》在资金投入方面有很大改善。前者是用零星资金和废旧胶片拍成的,但它取得的成功却让罗西里尼有能力实施一个有十倍预算和美国资金支持的拍摄计划。拍出来的《战火》成就非凡。法国大影评家巴赞认为,《战火》之于欧洲电影,正如《公民凯恩》之于好莱坞。它大大提升了电影捕捉现实的能力。巴赞认为,奥逊•威尔斯的创新,是形式和技法层面的。 他使用三十年代的新镜头,制造景深,使观众得以从复杂的影像中自由提取意义。 而罗西里尼的影像复杂性和对现实的强大捕捉能力,却是通过纪录片技巧和剧情片手法的神奇混合取得的。最为明显的就是对非职业演员的使用;在《战火》中,城镇的街道显得如此生动,其原因就在于其中生活着不是演员,而是在战后意大利的可怕现实中苦度的男人,女人,孩子,以及混迹其中的美国大兵。 这一表演最让人动容的一幕发生在开篇故事里,那个为了寻找父亲和哥哥而为美军带路的卡梅拉是由一个未经训练的15岁小姑娘扮演的,而整个开篇故事的悲悯气氛却主要来自她的出色表演。

    如果认为巴赞所谓的这种混合是把真实简单地叠加到虚构上的结果的话,就大错特错了。分析卡梅拉的例子,我们会发现罗西里尼在摄影机前制造现实的过程是何等复杂。卡梅拉其实不是西西里人,而是罗西里尼从那不勒斯的一个村子里找来的。从她那里可以发现的“真实”并不是某些简单的确实性,而在于她精神的独立性以及她与周围的西西里村民的切实的距离。这给了她力量,可以不顾别的村民,而和美国兵一道出发。但如果村民和外乡人之间的互动是电影要捕捉的真实的一面,要进入的生活的一部分的话,这却给影片中另一个更为现实的元素——意大利人说着的各式方言——造成了一个问题。意大利不是一个国家,而是许多小国家的集合,每一个小国都有自己的官方语言。 卡梅拉的那不勒斯方言西西里人听不懂,因此给她使用了配音。在修道院那一节里,又一次使用了配音,因为故事里的修道院位于意大利北方的里米尼内陆,而电影拍摄的修道院却在南方的萨勒诺。那些讲着那不勒斯方言的修道士的对话,都要用罗马方言来配音。

    因此,罗西里尼的现实主义,不能简单理解为现实的再现, 而是一些并置的元素,当它们被摄影机捕捉时,才变为真实的。这非常明显地体现在他置虚构元素于真实地点的方式中。第三节(美国兵弗雷德没有去找六个月前爱上的女孩就离开了罗马)最后一个镜头的大部分力量来自他在体育馆外等卡车来接的事实。第二节那不勒斯故事的震惊力量,来自街童居住的 Mergellina贫民窟。当罗西里尼发现这个贫民窟后,就放弃了原始故事构想,而采用了我们在电影中看到的这个。对于地点的最为惊人的使用出自第四节,一个英国护士和一个意大利男人穿越弗洛伦萨市中心的著名街道,去寻找爱人和孩子。这些著名的街道在电影里变成了德军和意大利游击队的战斗前线,而Uffizi Gallery则成为平平常常的掩身之处。把历史名城转变为战场,在如下场景表现的最为生动:一个英国军官在查看导游图,想知道他正在看的是哪一个著名钟楼,而他身边的那个弗洛伦萨本地人,正为妻儿的安全忧心如焚,只是简单的回答说我不知道。

    这种彼此误解的谈话在电影里是很典型的,在这里,语言的作用不是显明真相,而是使之模糊。在开篇乔和卡梅拉的对话里,双方都不会说对方的语言。影片强调了谈话中意图和接受之间的距离。即使在谈话双方彼此听懂的情况下,这种距离也常因意外而产生。第四节结尾就是一个绝好例证:濒死的游击队员告诉英国护士说卢波死了,而完全没有意识到护士就是卢波的情人。 对于语言的误传特性的强调似乎与电影要传达的人类博爱精神相矛盾,罗西里尼没有解决这一矛盾,而是让它一直存在于影片的内核。

    最初的宣传材料把《战火》描述成一部庆祝美军解放意大利的电影,但当罗西里尼在电影拍摄中找到了真正的主题(1943-44年间意大利人的真实生活)后,就抛弃了早期的剧本。不过电影确实是以诚恳表现游击队和美军在波河并肩作战来收尾的。普遍认为,这最后一节是各章节中最具真实感的,是整部电影的宏伟总结:波河湿地的单调景色,无垠的地平线,严酷的冲突,以及对农民生活的朴素呈现,都在观众记忆里萦回。它没有像一开始设想的那样关注美军在意大利的胜利,而是聚焦于德军的残酷屠杀。比起军事胜利来,在对困难和失败的共同担当中,有着更为打动人,也更为真实的东西。

    对《战火》的任何简单描述都会让电影显得痛苦绝望,但是故事的活力,镜头好像面对新世界般的对现实的感知能力,使其成为最为激动人心,最有活力的电影之一。影片在威尼斯获奖,但在意大利不同政治阵营,对它的接受是复杂的:对于共产主义者来说,它过于基督教了;而对于基督教徒而言,它又过于共产主义了。但在国际上,它得到了评论界的一致推崇,尤其是在法国,巴赞把它作为关键影片来阐释意大利新现实主义的重要性。

    (by Colin MacCabe 《戈达尔·七十岁艺术家的肖像》的作者)

     6 ) 每个人都认为自己是正确的

    1. 像一篇篇短篇小说,没有形容词,只有动词和名词的那种。

    2. 虚构和非虚构镜头的无缝衔接,真实的战争感。

    3. 英语,意大利语,两种语言的隔阂和互通。

    4. 六篇故事的主旨:每个人都认为自己是正确的。

    5. 故事梗概:一. 西西里。将意大利女人当成敌人是错的。二. 那不勒斯。我们美国人富裕善良。美国人炸死了孩子的爸爸妈妈。 三. 罗马。你们女孩全变了。纯真的姑娘靠自己抵御饥饿,她们是好姑娘。四. 佛罗伦萨。狂奔。乌菲齐,雕塑,废墟。在将死之人口中听到爱人的死讯。五. 哥特线。五百年的修道院。派发好时巧克力和罐头的美国神父,不同教派。每个人都以为自己走在正确的道路上。(自认为的)美好心灵必然获得平静。六. 北部湖区。意大利游击队+美国士兵+英国空军,被杀,被推进水里。德国人说,建千年政权先得毁灭一切。1944年冬天。来年春天战争结束。

     7 ) 战火

    二战期间的六个故事.1、美国士兵和意大利女孩在不通语言情况下的交流,有着想通的对战争厌恶的情感。2、美国黑人士兵在醉酒后被小男孩偷去衣物,再次遇到男孩看到男孩居住环境时离开。3、被迫沦为妓女和一个美国士兵的故事。4、一个苦寻前线作战的爱人的故事。5、教堂里的人与美国士兵的故事。6、游击队在穷苦环境作战的故事。影片记录了战争中不同环境人们的处境。罗西里尼只是用镜头让我们静静的跟随这些故事,然我们自己去看战争所带来的惨境。

     短评

    随着战争的推进见识到了什么?军人、妓女、孤儿、僧侣、游击队员......一切的感情欲喷薄而出之际而又戛然而止。这就是战争!

    8分钟前
    • 操蛋的教父
    • 推荐

    120分钟居然看得有点累~六个故事水平太参差了,故事和结构倒是都不差,但有些内核不过知音水平,而且演员太水~最后一个故事除了漂亮的悲剧结局完全是祖国白洋淀抗日故事的意大利抗德版,罗马妓女故事好像日本电影~另,深刻觉得米国人民某种意义上被黑了,各路意大利人演英美人民,英语完全听不懂~

    11分钟前
    • Woodring
    • 还行

    二战胜利前夕美军进军意大利时的六个故事,每个故事自成一短片,反应出当时社会生活的方方面面,充满了爱与遗憾。每个短片都做到了足够的留白,使得文本之外存有更多的思考空间。影像上比罗马不设防提升了不少,纪录片式的拍摄手法使本片获得了史料价值。

    12分钟前
    • 微分流形
    • 推荐

    8/10。在每个篇章开始的拟纪录片中,街头行驶的坦克队列与城市废墟、高耸的古罗马斗兽场遗迹形成一种忧伤的对望,被破坏的历史文明以相互凝视的方式重回视野,如木偶戏片段中代表基督教的白色木偶与象征异教徒的黑色木偶决斗,台下观众们为高喊正义的白色木偶振臂欢呼,一名酒醉的黑人军警冲上舞台,又被愤怒的观众拉下来,无独有偶的是亚平宁修道院的故事,意大利教士为信仰新教、犹太教的美国随军牧师到来而恐慌不已,甚至在窗前跪祈,十字军东征和美国占领军的文化管制、新教与天主教的历史宿怨,当下与历史的边界都在间接喻指中渐渐模糊。罗西里尼采用全景拍摄自然,展现人物时却转换为视角很有限的中近景,使观众迷失了历史与文明的方位,就像火山山丘中迷路的美国大兵无法与村民顺利沟通,就像黑人军警迷失在交错的道路里,被引入复杂的历史语境。

    16分钟前
    • 火娃
    • 推荐

    罗西里尼 战后三部曲的第二部,第一部是《罗马,不设防的城市》,最后一部是《德意志零年》。

    18分钟前
    • 只抓住6个
    • 还行

    知道为什么费里尼这么喜欢这部电影了。我被每一个故事感动。

    21分钟前
    • 把噗
    • 力荐

    二战结束次年就拍出这么真实的战争片子不容易 第三段和最好看 其他几个故事不是太精彩

    22分钟前
    • 我TM是党员
    • 还行

    罗西尼当时一定有种迫切感,这部六个故事组成的电影,相当于战时/战后意大利的纪录片。我最喜欢小男孩和美国黑人那部(黑人唱歌太美),还有教堂那部,修士们感觉太真实了。

    25分钟前
    • Adieudusk
    • 推荐

    除了第四段都挺喜欢的。尤其前三段,不拍战火,但把战火中的二人关系拍得情感力量十足,悲天悯人;全是一美一意的组合,沟通不畅,但慰藉、温存、错过、遗憾、悲伤的情绪在英语和意语的错落交叉中饱满相融。最后一段也有这样的意味,只可惜真正拍起「战火」本身来,反倒露怯了。

    29分钟前
    • 神仙鱼
    • 推荐

    #SIFF# 罗西里尼的本质就是悲观中透出一种难以名状的compassion,几个故事都能看得出来。弗兰切斯卡太动人,山中教士一段很受触动。除了对战争与人的描写,更让我印象深刻的是他对于“沟通障碍”的刻画,无论是语言、社会阶层、思想观念、宗教信仰都有涉及,深度惊人。

    31分钟前
    • Lycidas
    • 力荐

    SIFF2014 6.21 15:45 和平四厅 六段式结构,关于人道主义的经典母题,堪称WW2十日谈。

    35分钟前
    • g9421
    • 力荐

    已下avi 很有意思的小故事,语言交流之外的情感沟通,在特殊背景下的感情故事,人物即普通又典型,最后的结局很有感觉,整片在平静下有一种潜动的力度。看得出有某些费里尼的影子,比起新现的其它作品少了些许悲催与悲悯,多了很多温暖与小趣味。表演虽然僵硬但有时代特色。很舒服的一部短篇集。

    36分钟前
    • U 兔
    • 力荐

    #资料馆留影#看完后也算大致了解Italia的二战生活,用纪录片的手法(很多珍贵史料,类比《印度》),六个小人物的边缘小故事,关于爱恨关于信仰关于战争,也都与美国大兵有关,作为“战后三部曲”之二,Rossellini的深刻与人文哲思在本片几乎达到一个顶峰,只是这也恰恰成为本片观赏性不强的原因,前几个还好,但等到讲游击队的第六个故事出现时,我几乎有些不耐烦了,但等“FIN”的字幕出现,又忍不住回味,才明白这是怎样一部杰作,Rossellini是怎样一位伟大先驱,他的勇气与创新,直接影响法国“新浪潮”,鼓舞后来影人把摄像机带上街头,对准时刻鲜活又残酷的生活。

    39分钟前
    • 瑞波恩
    • 力荐

    罗西里尼战后三部曲第二部,选取了盟军登陆意大利后在西西里,那不勒斯,罗马,佛罗伦萨,教堂和游击队的六段故事。美国人戏都很多,通过他们与当地人的接触和对抗纳粹德军折射诸多语言文化阶级信仰的不同以及劫难经过带来的创伤和改变。资料馆4K修复版。

    40分钟前
    • seabisuit
    • 推荐

    勉强及格。六个短片的合集,呈现了盟军登陆意大利后的种种情状,六个故事的时间背景比较散乱,风格也不一样。一是帮美国兵带路的意大利姑娘死在孤堡,二是美国黑人兵和偷鞋孩子的交情(这些小孩还玩起了卖黑人的把戏),三是美国兵与已做了妓女的意大利姑娘重逢,二人曾一见钟情最后还是戛然而止(这是全片唯一令人动容的时刻),四是寻找昔日画家如今的游击队领导却听闻对方死讯,五是美国随军牧师与意大利教士达成理解,六是44年胜利前夕一支悲壮抵抗至死的游击队的故事。借46年真实世情的帮助,镜头里有不少残垣断壁,还雇了战斗机出镜,临场感尚可,六个故事基本都有乍起旋灭、仿佛从现实上挖取一块下来的纪实倾向,姿态感十足,但并无趣味,反倒是第三、第四个故事在奇情、奇景的通俗路线上走的稳当,摄影也更开阔透亮(第六个的河拍的也挺美)

    43分钟前
    • 左胸上的吸盘
    • 还行

    其实六个故事都可以变得很煽情,但罗西里尼的妙处就在于点到为止,更加产生一种真实感。战争容不得人们在情感那里停留过长。结尾真是伟大。随着德军溺毙游击队员的河水的动荡波纹,传来了报告1944年冬天二战胜利的话外音。

    48分钟前
    • movingdust
    • 力荐

    确实三部曲最佳(虽然Open City我只看了一半),看完有种虚脱感;就像罗西里尼自己说的,Open City里还有很多“old ingredients”,Paisan真的是pure and new,而且更动人,尤其是那些日常的细节。要拍现实主义,你必须要有对爱的信念。脱离studio,即兴,但仍保有强大的控制力和技术创新,伟大之作。

    52分钟前
    • 力荐

    罗西里尼的战后三部曲的第二部,剧本由导演和费里尼共同完成,里面有六个小故事,分别表现二战期间意大利的不同层面。演员多数是非职业,而且即兴表演的成分很浓。影片具有纪录片的视觉风格,故事结构尽管松散,但欧亨利小说的痕迹依稀可见。影片赢得1946年威尼斯影展的最佳剧情片奖。

    56分钟前
    • stknight
    • 推荐

    战火纷飞,一点又一点地照耀各个阶层、身份与角落。新现实主义冷眼旁观,却又焚心似火,枪眼刀尖下的残酷一览无遗,但一些一擦即着的信任与英勇,如梦似幻的情愫与念想,随风而去的芥蒂与羞赧,总是战争长卷里闪亮的美好。当施暴者被妄念洗脑,希望和平的大势能将他们碾压得体无完肤。@资料馆

    60分钟前
    • Mr. Infamous
    • 推荐

    三部曲补全了。小故事的简单连缀,中近景自然光,每个城市每个阶层的人们在战争到来之时的细微情感,和罗马不设防很像,新写实的特点,无头无尾,无言旁观。不过故事本身还是带着一点人情冷暖的诗意。

    1小时前
    • 鬼腳七
    • 推荐

    Copyright © 2023 All Rights Reserved

    电影

    电视剧

    动漫

    综艺