A cat is above all else...

A DRAMATIST




This mischievous Abyssinian cat is called memsahib, meaning Her Majesty in Indian

《少女香奈兒》浪漫嗎？

說起來不是不尷尬的。問我《少女香奈兒》好不好看，答：塔圖的小男孩扮相絕對標緻得過份，但正如我們的《梅蘭芳》跟梅老師本人的（創作）生涯幾乎毫無關係，看《少女香奈兒》也不見得會對香奈兒作為香奈兒（而不是作為一個浮浮沉沉小孤女）的了解加深多少。

《少女香奈兒》似一套扮法國片的蹇腳美國片（雖然它的導演是法國人），從第一個（我以為在看《簡愛》！）到最後一個鏡頭都是徹底荷里活格局，方方正正毫無驚喜；影片關心的亦不是香奈兒這個人，而是 Coco 與 Balsan 和 Boy 一段 Ménage À Trois ，管她叫 Coco Chanel 或者 AA BB 都一樣。要真的是 Ménage À Trois ，那是法國人的拿手好戲，倒也可以很好看，可惜《少女香奈兒》只是故作「浪漫」的三角關係。因此，改個 Coco Avant Chanel 的片名，並非就能瞞天過海（也掩蓋不了影片無頭無尾的毛病）。

說故作浪漫是因為它將一段並不高尚（ noble ）的愛情浪漫化：鏡頭非常依戀 Boy 先生那些放電眼神，天濛光在海邊看漁夫的場面，刻意求工的對白，甚至那戲劇化的死亡。好一個刻骨銘心的故事，魔力足以令觀眾對以下事實視而不見： Boy 先生是一個聲稱愛你但不會跟你結婚的男人，呀，是不會跟你結婚，但又會在結婚後偷偷出來跟你短聚的男人──對不起，我實在並不覺得這有甚麼浪漫。不要說甚麼階級／社會限制（電影早早安排 Coco 家姐與貴族苦刁刁的「越級婚姻」來為 Boy 開脫，以示 Boy 娶個富家女不娶 Coco 也無可厚非），愛一個人而「不能」跟她結婚，理由無非是虛偽和懦弱──當然（有些）女人喜歡相信男人有他的「苦衷」；不跟她結婚又不 honour 自己的選擇，繼續跟她維持一種模稜兩可的關係，就是自私兼不高尚。就是談情，電影也明顯放棄深究這段情的內裡，只津津有味地刻劃表面的浪漫。

倒是 Balsan 和 Coco 的感情來得真摯和踏實。 Balsan 這個 playboy 兼老粗給人的第一印象不會太好，卻有一份真率，也落落大方，他對 Coco 漸漸發展的疼愛與關懷，是在 Boy 身上完全找不到的。

我不敢說電影的 target audience 是對「戀愛」有（過份）甜美幻想的女觀眾，因為我不知道究竟有多少女觀眾真的看得「感動」──而影片要「打動」這批女觀眾的居心，卻是顯而易見。拿著這麼好的題材，卻服膺於荷里活品味，只能夠說是浪費。

＊　＊　＊

不過其實有一幕我看得很感動。

Coco 離去時，Balsan 扁著嘴說：「你不理我了」

Coco 說：「你可以來看我。」

然後兩人緊緊擁抱。萬般感覺盡在不言中，我覺得他兩個心靈相通。這也許是片中最法國的一刻。




純粹八掛：講。鏟。片：《少女香奈兒》港版海報三度變身事件
據我所知，並不只香港有這種情況

The Surrealists' Obsession With the Eye

Buñuel, An Andalusian Dog, 1929

"Upon my asking what the word urinate reminded her of, she replied: terminate, the eyes, with a razor, something red, the sun. And egg? A calf’s eye, because of the colour of the head (the calf’s head) and also because the white of the egg was the white of the eye, and the yolk the eyeball. The eye, she said, was egg-shaped."

Georges Bataille, Story of the Eye, 1928

I am amazed at this strict resemblance of the images and the text (which had not been directly pointed out by many). As for who was having an influence on who, I am not sure. But the surrealists all influence each other (and of course they all inherited a lot from Sir Freud...)

My Notes on Time Regained (the film)

It is certainly one of the most exquisite experiences on earth having finished reading In Search of Lost Time...

Raoul Ruiz is famous for his obsession with and his skill in representation of “remembrance of things past”, or “stream of consciousness” with his hypnotic, dreamlike cinematic images, and I started watching Time Regained with such expectation.

To say it is an adaptation of Proust’s literary work, I’d rather put it as a work inspired by it. There are certain Raoul Ruiz's own input and invention in it.

I appreciate the film’s being experimental in exhausting many kinds of film languages to capture the idea of “finding time again”, or “travelling through time”, its brilliant use of mise-en-scene (especially in those scenes where there is Marcel alone), slowly and rhythmically unfolding a deep melanchly in certain scenes, the beautifully exggerated lighting and high contrast cinematography that re-creates a dreamlike ambience, and its first-person narrative in disguise of a third-person narrative (or third-person in disguise of first-person) - because Marcel, the narrator, is always there - exactly corresponding to that of the Book’s.

But, as one can expect, much of the book's poetic beauty, sadness, and sense of disillusion is lost.

The major problem being it is an adaptation of only the last volume, with a vain attempt to (sometimes) explain (certain) things in brief. It is not feasible at all to depict the last volume alone, because it's true beauty could only be realized after you have experienced all the preceding volumes. BUT it would be another issue, if one aims more at visualizing certain moments than unfolding a story, which, sadly, does not seem to be what RR is doing.

I believe this film is intended only for those who have read the book – I have difficulty imagining people who never read the book being able to make sense out of this film, let alone grasping the significance of every scene and every single line being delivered. (Yet on the other hand, for those who have read the book, all these would seem too simplified, shallow, and out of place!)

This enclosed and no-so-care-to-explain-everything approach reminds me a little bit of Tian Zhuangzhuang’s The Go Master (《吳清源》). BUT the problem with Time Regained is exactly in the parts when it tries to explain (one and one's relationship, or what had happened in the previous volumes)! For example, the scene in which Marcel, as a child, meets the “lady in pink” in his uncle's place without yet realizing her to be the Odette who later plays a very important role in his life, was a key moment in the book, key only when it is recalled, and key being it brings Marcel to the realization that "the significance of an experience is not always immediately revealed"; but the scene only functions as a flashback (not to mention it is totally misleading: as if Odette knows Marcel being the little boy - she never does). Another scene being Marcel’s confrontation with Albertine which is awkward and never for one second succeeds in depicting the power struggle and the bizarre love-torture relationship between them. These two scenes may well left unshot!

Nonetheless, as a work inspired by the original work, it was a pleasure to re-experience some of the poetic moments in moving images – only those with Marcel alone.

Because Marcel is very Marcel (take a look at the screen captures below).

Whereas the rest of the cast, except Catherine Deneuve as Odette carrying her mysterious charm, is a little bit of a disaster: The gentle and caring Saint-Loup is too disappointingly ugly; Emmanuelle Beart is sensual and enchanting as always, but she is being too much herself than Gilberte and her acting is too modern for the role. Morel is way too ordinary-looking to be the homme fatale of the whole work. John Malkovich gave a fair performance as Charlus but he is still not the charming, elegant and at once sarcastic and loving Baron to me…And see how Albertine, the elusive little kitten, the sophisticated, sad, and mischievous kitten, and one who attracts and is attacted to women, is turned into a vulgar witch (should I be glad that she, Chiara Mastroianni, being really Deneuve's daughter, was not casted as Gilberte?)...

How cute that soaked-with-tear Marcel is...

《赤色天使》：男性、女性、佛性？

越是細味《赤色天使》，越覺得它的立場曖昧有趣。它是一套極男性的電影，亦是一套極女性的電影。男性在它對男性性能力（ potency ）的執著，增村保造控訴戰爭剝斷人性尊嚴，而他眼中的人性尊嚴即等同男性的性能力。因此控訴通過這三個男人的遭遇表達：因作戰而久未嘗性愛滋味士兵、四肢殘廢無法主動接觸女人（或令女人興奮）的傷兵，以及消極虛無吸食嗎啡致性無能的軍醫；全片瀰漫一種喪生性能力的恐懼──一種完全屬於男性的恐懼。男人的尊嚴，皆通過重新與女人發生性關係而恢復。

女性在它對女性情感（ sensibility ）的重視。若尾文子在片中並不是一具為恢復男性（性）尊嚴而設置的工具。由最初對強姦犯的寬恕，到對傷兵主動獻身，及最後的為愛獻身，儼然一個成佛的過程，再加上一筆她拒絕被侵犯的義正詞嚴，恰恰表示她的堅定與她的佛性，才是影片欲刻劃的終極：「她可以委身於任何人，但又不屬於任何人」還有最不能忘的這一句：槍林彈雨前夕，若尾文子在床上擁著軍醫喃喃訴說：「我想獨佔軍醫......」──一種完全屬於女性的渴望。

影片更深的一層控訴當然是尊嚴恢復之際，亦是男人殞命的時刻，濟世純是徒勞，虛無至極。

若尾文子的佛性與魔性

三島由紀夫在《金閣寺》裡論述南泉斬貓公案，談及貓時有「美可以委身於任何人，但又不屬於任何人」之語（我常覺得這是全書的最關鍵），說的是那貓，我以為既是說佛性，亦是說魔性。恰恰亦足以概括若尾文子的銀幕形像：《赤色天使》裡獻身予多個男人的濟世天使，與《刺青》或《卍》吸食男男女女鮮血以自肥的蛇蝎美人，行為其實沒有兩樣。本質也自一樣：無論跟多少個男人上過床，她依然只是她，一個自足且絕對的存在，拒絕任何的擁有，拒絕任何的征服。（參看〈若尾文子：風塵女子第一人〉）

奇妙的時間

越是接近期待的一天，越覺得時間漫長，難過。

恍如隔世

"A stout lady greeted me, and during the short time she was speaking the most varied thoughts thronged my mind. I hesitated for a moment before replying to her, afraid that, recognizing people no better than I did, she might have thought that I was somebody else, then her confidence made me, on the contrary, out of fear that this might be somebody whom I had known extremely well, exaggerate the friendliness of my smile, while my looks continued to search her features for the name I could not find. As a candidate for the baccalaureate, in his uncertainty, fixes his eyes on the examiner's face and hopes in vain to find there the answer for which he would do better to look in his own memory, I fixed my eyes on the features of the stout lady. The seemed to be those of Mme Swann, so my smile took on a more respectful quality, while my indecision began to diminish. Then a second later I heard the stout lady say: “You thought I was Mama, it's true I am beginning to look very like her.” And I recognized Gilberte."

Marcel Proust, Finding Time Again (In Search of Lost Time, Book 6)

看到這裡，深深吸了一口氣。

地獄變

嘿，興奮！那個我相信是促使我入院（別慌，還不是精神病院）的最大元兇：X X X ──啊呵，與其說是它，不如說是管它的夜叉們──，在夢中成了一個 biohazard hell ！魚缸裡三數條鮮黃鮮橙色的雞泡魚，發脹、反肚，瞪著滾圓無神的黑眼睛；水面積了一層薄薄的塵垢，底下的水卻無比清澈，死掉的魚也益發鮮艷奪目，這才夠詭異呢。打開甲房的門，漆黑的牆身開了一個洞，滲出沖淡了的血水──粉紅色的渾濁的，直覺它是沖淡了的血水──，流到牆腳縫中一堆深赤色的肉裡，每下一滴，那肉便顫一下，哈哈我的天，那必然是有生命的，快要甦醒。關上門到乙房，有一個更大的洞，這邊滾出褐紫色毛蟲大小濕潤發亮的肉，跌到地上蟄伏的大肉團裡，肉團不知是否受到人氣的感召，巍巍然弓身站起來，走向我們。這時男下屬掏出手鎗轟了一下，肉碎開了一地，肉們喧鬧的翻動。他再開一鎗，著起火來了。這時我說：「還不逃？！」大伙尋走火通道散去，遠遠聽到火警鐘鳴……嘿嘿，嘿嘿……

曖昧‧幽深‧玄秘

無論看多少次，都無法不折服於這一幕的場面調度。儘管折射、倒影與鏡像在六十年代已經不算是電影語言的神來之筆，你仍不可能不驚歎於幕初那個鏡頭──當然，還包括那一場戲，一整部戲──的 complexity 、安東尼奧尼的場面調度、攝影角度、影機移動和構圖：他先通過玻璃拍蒙妮卡維蒂，花園裡的樹影空凳與大廳裡她的身和她的影重疊交融，你以為，她就在玻璃後面；然後反射中的馬斯杜安尼悄悄進入畫面，你以為，他就在攝影機後面，再不然是一旁；然而當鏡頭隨著他的步伐緩緩右移，銀幕上他的方向和她的所在，完全不是你所期待的，擋在鏡頭與人物之間的枝幹，令你更加困惑──之前看到的樹影，並不是花園裡的樹，卻是蒙妮卡身後的畫，你迷失了……一種「只恐夜深花睡去」的幽深玄秘驟然而來。那是安東為我們創造的曖昧而神秘的空間，假如 M.C. Escher 的迷宮真能建造出來，那便是這一個鏡頭了。

Related: 夜吟

褒曼與安東尼奧尼

1.　原來《秋日奏鳴曲》，就是我（曾經）想對你講的一切。但，那也已經不再重要了。真的不再重要了。

2.　現在想對你說的，大抵是《哭泣與低語》裡， Erland Josephson 對 Liv Ullman 講的一番話。但也不是真的想說，只是，每一個字都是我想的呀！

3.　假如褒曼的魔力是以聲音和語言──不論是受折磨之肉身的喘息，還是痛苦的靈魂之沉吟──，解剖人的情感，以排山倒海的力量向我進逼；那麼安東尼奧尼的魅力則是以無以言傳，亦不必言傳的感性，捕捉人的失落，將我完全納入於他的影像中。

4.　也就是說，假如褒曼（除卻《芬妮與阿歷山大》）不停教我思緒糾纏（絕對，絕對是 masochistic 的），則安東尼奧尼就讓我忘卻，把我帶進純粹屬於電影的境界。

5.　但那並不是說，我喜歡安東尼奧尼比褒曼多。

6.　A 問我迷上於蒙妮卡維蒂的甚麼，我一時語無倫次，他以為甚至我自己也以為我想說的是飄忽──還好我仍然很清醒的馬上否認她似她。不不不，不是飄忽，她是脆弱、寂寞、哀傷。

這隻咖啡杯則是自己買的