美国 返老还童 影评
●剧情： ? Set in late 1930s Arezzo, Italy, Jewish man and poet, Guido Orefice (Roberto Benigni) uses cunning wit to win over an Italian schoolteacher, Dora (Nicoletta Braschi) who's set to marry another man. Charming her with "Buongiorno Principessa", getting the timing perfect every time and whisking her away on a green horse (don't ask!) ensures they soon live together happily in Guido's uncle, Eliseo Orefice's (Giustino Durano) house. Bringing up their 5 year old boy, Giosué (Giorgio Cantarini), the war continues without them noticing until one fateful day when the Germans arrest Guido and his son in their bookshop, and transfer them to a concentraction camp. Dora demands to be taken too, thus Guido is devastated to see his non-Jewish wife board the train.Protecting his son from the vile truth, Guido tells Giosué that they are just on a big hoilday, and he turns the camp into a big game for Giosué, claiming that they must win 1000 points to win a real tank and leave. His elderly uncle, however, is on a different "team" and is lead towards the showers first. Guido must complete "tasks" for the camp "moderators" (ie. the Nazi SS), while avoiding the impending fate with everything he can offer. His quick thinking saves Giosué from the truth when a German officer requires a translator. Despite not speaking a word of German, Guido steps forward and makes up the "Regole del Campo" from the German's body language, claiming that tanks, scoreboards and games of Hide and Seek litter the camp, while cleverly stating that Giosué cannot cry, ask for his mother or declared he's hungry, resulting in the loss of the "game", in other words, death.Giosué later refuses to take a shower, and unknowingly escapes being gased, so Guido hides him with the help of other Italian prisoners, since there are no other children. Playing messages over the tannoy for Dora, kept prisoner on the other side of the camp, the family build up hope, only to be diminuished by the SS. With the help of Guido's former German friend, Herr Lessing, Guido can hide Giosué amongst the German children, while waiting the German Officer's meals. With the days becoming steadily worse, Guido realises that time is short and that he must make certain sacrifices if his son is ever to see the tanks roll over the hills, and be reunited with his mother. Giosué is pessimistic, and doesn't believe that there are any real tanks or games.Hiding Giosué in a junction box for the last time, telling him that everyone is looking for him, Guido jeapordises his own survival to prevent the Germans discovering Giosué, while he attempts to free Dora, giving his own life away at the same time. The Americans break into the seemingly deserted camp the following morning. Giosué immerges just as a tank pulls around the corner. Hitching a lift out, Giosué soon spots his mother and the film closes. ? 评论：The Best Movie I've seen for a long long time, 6 December 1999 Author: kvonarx from Halifax, Canada I am surprised about the negative comments that some people made on this web-page. I can see how some people might not experience the same kind of uplift or joy that most of us lived through when seeing the movie. But that some viewers felt insulted and betrayed because the movie did not depict "reality" as it really was or is, is not fair.I must concur with my fellow proponents of the movie — it was a great and very satisfying movie. It provided me with something that everyone in one or another shape or form needs — Hope. The movie showed the cruelty of life and yet managed to shed some light and insight into the beauty of love and life in general.I urge anyone who has not seen La Vita è bella to go out there and watch it. If we all take with us just little bit of that hope and love that this movie is trying to convey; this world would be a much better place.Thank you for reading this and I hope you enjoyed or will enjoy the movie as much as I did.
●《美丽人生》英文内容介绍： Plot Summary for Vita è bella, La (1997) In 1930s Italy, a carefree Jewish book keeper named Guido starts a fairy tale life by courting and marrying a lovely woman from a nearby city. Guido and his wife have a son and live happily together until the occupation of Italy by German forces. In an attempt to hold his family together and help his son survive the horrors of a Jewish Concentration Camp, Guido imagines that the Holocaust is a game and that the grand prize for winning is a tank. 《美丽人生》英文影评： This is one of those movies that have a lasting effect on you. After watching it, I found that it has less to do with the Holocaust and more to do with the human feelings and the beautiful relationship of a father and his son. The holocaust provides the ultimate context, that brings and highlights the story and adds yet another deep dimension to the movie. No such piece of art has ever before combined laughter and tears of sadness in me before and that is the miracle of the movie. The realism of the movie is not its strong point, but then again it is not supposed to be; this helps in bringing the audiences to a state of mind away from reality, focusing on the feelings generated by forgetting about all external events and developments of the war. Despite that, the movie does not fail to point out an element of the nazi psychology demonstrated by the doctor who was obsessed with riddles. This portrayed the nazi 'state of mind' (if ever such an expression existed) as a sick mentally disturbed state. Life is really beautiful as you watch Guido's relentless efforts to make a lovely exciting experience of the concentration camp to his son. You get exhausted just watching him going through his painful day and yet you smile as he speaks to his son and makes him laugh. One can go on forever describing the creativity of this movie, but one will not be able to capture all its beauty in writing.
●The first half of the movie is a whimsical, romantic comedy and often slapstick. Guido (Roberto Benigni), a young Italian Jew, arrives in Arezzo where he sets up a bookstore. Guido is both funny and charismatic, especially when he romances Dora (Italian, but not Jewish; portrayed by Benigni's actual wife Nicoletta Braschi), whom he steals – at her engagement – from her rude and loud fiancé. Several years pass, in which Guido and Dora have a son, Joshua (written Giosué in the Italian version; portrayed by Giorgio Cantarini). In the film, Joshua is around five years old. However, both the beginning and ending of the film is narrated by an older Joshua.In the second half, Guido, Guido's uncle Eliseo, and Joshua are taken to a concentration camp on Joshua's birthday. Dora demands to join her family and is permitted to do so. Guido hides Joshua from the Nazi guards and sneaks him food. In an attempt to keep up Joshua's spirits, Guido convinces him that the camp is just a game – a game in which the first person to get 1,000 points wins a tank. He tells Joshua that if you cry, complain that you want your mother, or complain that you are hungry, you lose points, while quiet boys who hide from the camp guards earn points. He convinces Joshua that the camp guards are mean because they want the tank for themselves and that all the other children are hiding in order to win the game. He puts off every attempt of Joshua ending the game and returning home by convincing him that they are in the lead for the tank. Despite being surrounded by rampant death and people and all their sicknesses, Joshua does not question this fiction both because of his father's convincing performance and his own innocence.Guido maintains this story right until the end, when – in the chaos caused by the American advance drawing near – he tells his son to stay in a sweatbox until everybody has left, this being the final test before the tank is his. After trying to find Dora, Guido is caught, taken away, and is shot to death by a Nazi guard, but not before making his son laugh one last time by imitating the Nazi guard as if the two of them are marching around the camp together. Joshua manages to survive, and thinks he has won the game when an American tank arrives to liberate the camp, and he is reunited with his mother.
●I saw A.I. on the first night it ran here and I must say I was disappointed in the size of the audience. How strange to see so few people show up for a Spielberg film. This film did not enjoy the normal hype that most of Spielberg's films enjoy, I think I know why. Lack of product placement. They're may have been some somewhere but I didn't see them. A.I.'s story line and flawless visual effects reflect what I can only describe as the meeting of two great film makers. Kubrick (who started work on the project after he read the Aldiss book in '83),and Steven Spielberg who's long list of intelligent blockbusters made him the perfect person to bring this story to the screen. I could, I believe see the story boards and concepts Kubrick developed and I could also see the sensitivity that Spielberg added to scenes and characters. These two things are not entirely separate in good Science Fiction. All good science fiction has some human sensitivity in it otherwise it would just be a horror film. The script reflects some of the darkness and coldness that sometimes underlies each character human and machine, there is no fear of this in the story. This darkness draws us on in the story. The visual effects are stunning and come darn close to genius. The story line takes us in and the visuals make it almost real. A.I. Is a good union of two great film makers., 1 July 2001 Author: John R. Armstrong (Jafredderf@aol.com) from Chicago I wish I had Mr. Mannings grip of syntax, but all in all at the end of the day it's good science fiction and a good story too. I beleve that Stanley Kubrick's choice of asking Steven Spielberg to make this film was the kind of genius that Kubrick showed in all his work. It is a tribute to both men that they saw a vision of something and worked toward it's creation. I think they came to a great place in film making. Future classic…?, 26 September 2001 Author: Chris Harrison (email@example.com) from Wiltshire, England First of all, once again I think the critics have got it wrong. Like Blade Runner and 2001, this is a film that will be properly judged in 10/20 years or maybe more. Its way ahead of its time, the combination of Kubrick and Spielberg is unique, its unlikely we will ever see anything like this again. Did I like it? The answer would have to be yes, the mix of styles will put many people off, but I found it to be unlike anything I have ever seen, and all the better for it. The story is by no means original but everything else about the film is so different that this can be forgiven. To get one thing straight, Kubrick decided Spielberg would be the better man for directing it, and I think this was a very wise decision, many of the ideas are pure Kubrick, but Spielberg has the neccassary attributes to direct such a film, and great credit has to go to Kubrick for handing it to him. Haley Joel Osment is amazing, the robot/human emotion must be amazingly difficult to pull off effectively, but Osment does it with such relative ease to the point where you do believe he is a robot, not that he is just acting as a robot. Jude Law is excellent, and so to is Frances O'Conner. As for the ending, as brave as an idea it may of been to end on a downbeat note at "the first ending" I think the slightly upbeat ending is much more appropriate. All in all I would say A.I is a wonderfully unique film that should be judged for what it is, a film. Forget everything about the Spielberg/Kubrick "issue" and just sit back and take in a truely amazing film. You may hate it, you may love it, but no matter what, it will effect your emotions in some way and you will discuss the film afterwards. This film will be truely judged in 20 years or so, when it can be assessed purely as a film, as with 'Blade Runner', '2001', and even 'The Thing', it will get better with age. A.I.–A Film With Heart And Brains, 6 July 2001 Author: virek213 from San Gabriel, Ca., USA Steven Spielberg's latest movie A.I.: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, which he took up at the encouragement of the late, great Stanley Kubrick, has caused widely divergent comments. And I can't help wondering if the most scathingly negative reviews of this movie aren't just an open desire to see Spielberg crash, as he had with "1941" and HOOK. For my money, Spielberg has done it again with this futuristic science fiction drama, regardless of what the negative reviews say. Its story of a robot boy (Haley Joel Osment) who desires to be a real boy in a far future in which humans (Orgas) and machines (Mechas) exist side-by-side but not always in harmony is very much modeled on the Pinocchio story, though it is actually based on a 1969 short story by Brian Aldiss. It raises some interesting and sometimes unsettling moral dilemmas that few films of late have done. Can a parent love a child, even if that child is not real? What might happen if that child desired to be real? How will Man and Machine be able to co-exist? Like all intelligent science fiction, such as Kubrick's own 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and Spielberg's own CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, A.I. forces us to ponder where we've been and where we might be going. It's an incredible combination of Kubrick's icy intellectual and clinical mind and Spielberg's emotional heart; and I think it works exceedingly well. But it forces the viewer to not leave their heart and brains at the door, which I think is why it is being so negatively received in this season of mindless summer movie fare. It may be too intelligent for its own good, and many don't have the 145 minutes of patience needed for the movie. I did, however; and I would call this an absolute masterpiece. Out of ten stars, give this one a 10. A mind-blowing movie that will grow in stature, 6 March 2002 Author: Magnus (firstname.lastname@example.org) Wow! That was all I could say when I walked out of the theatre after my first helping of A.I. I wasn't sure whether I loved the movie or was disappointed by it, I just knew it had had a huge effect on me. Having seen it a further three times at the cinema, I still find fault with it, but I keep returning to it, thinking about it, discussing it, and it has left me with a feeling that, five months later, I've still not shaked. In many regards, this movie reminds me of Fight Club, not in terms of theme or emotional content, but due to it's level of craft, the daring nature of it's execution and the fact that I keep re-evaluating it. All the things that are possible to comment objectively on (if anything ever is) are handled expertly. The performances are top-notch, especially Haley Joel Osment as David, the little robot child that longs to be human. The effects are not only very impressive, but are integrated into the story rather than calling attention to themselves. Januz Kaminski's photography is, as one has come to expect, impressive, and the movie is unusually unpredictable for such a big-budget experience. In my opinion, John Williams' score is among his most impressive. I listened to it on CD for three weeks before seeing the movie, and thought it was fantastic, but once the movie started rolling I completely forgot about the music. That says a lot about both the score and the film itself. I also liked the three-act structure, in which the tone and feel of the movie changes drastically as the story progresses. Part one, as one reviewer noted, feels like a cross between E.T. and The Shining, an odd, but very effective combination. The second part of the movie is awash with Spielbergian imagery, but with the darkness and coldness of a Kubrick movie. And the last part is a head-scratcher that has the intellectual resonance of most Kubrick-films, and the emotional tone of something like Cinema Paradiso. I purposely refrain from saying that it is as emotional as Spielberg-films, because I think the director's complexities, the dark aspects of his style, and the occasional subtleties of his work are often overlooked by critics. It's difficult to discuss the themes of the movie without spoiling it, but while many people criticised the movie from having several false endings, I felt that each continuation added layers of though and complexities that the movie would have lacked had it ended sooner. I have come to the conclusion, over the past months, that I do love the movie and that it is my favourite film of 2001, even ahead of The Fellowship of The Ring and Amelie. In other words, buy it on DVD, it's more than worth it. ============================================================== All of the above from IMDB.
●绝经后见“红”，这是常见的 老年妇女疾病之一，并不是一些人 宣传的“返老还童”现象。绝经后出血可能是由外阴、 阴道、子宫、卵巢和输卵管等疾病 引起的，它的致病因素可能是炎 症性、内分泌性（内源性或医源 性）、外伤性、异物性，甚至全身 性出血性疾病，这些疾病既可能是 良性，也可能是恶性和非器质性疾 病。另外，绝经后宫内节育器久置 不取，也可致阴道流血。
●李碧华名作，曾获戛纳还是什么奖的《霸王别姬》，我没看过原著，只看了电影。之前东鳞西爪地听人讲过这故事，略有了解。又在电视里瞥到几眼片段。一直耿耿于怀。为了表示对这部向往已久的好片子的尊重，破天荒地买了正版影碟。然后在一个冬夜裹着棉被捧着红茶看完。 如一切李氏作品，于沧桑倒转岁月轮回的幻丽之外，片中爱恨刻骨，人物鲜明，似欲乍生生活在眼前。张丰毅的小楼自是力拔山兮气盖世的刚了，张国荣的蝶衣却是令人心髓俱碎的柔。红氍毹上，霸王别姬，刚柔相济，侠骨柔情，怕不迷得多少女子，万劫不复？阿弥陀佛。 看完之后我独自窝在暖热的黑暗里沉迷。思想依然深陷，一波一波巨大冲击剧撼，乍梦乍醒。正是又一次不巧路过高人居处，被那高空坠物，当头砸倒，脑震荡又不知要若干天。但于如此剧烈震撼之中，好色之徒如我仍有余暇将片中男子拿来一个个在脑中过滤，陡然发现，最后剩在心坎上，滴溜溜一颗夜明珠，可不是霸王，也不是蝶衣，而是袁四爷。 ——对，就是那个由葛优扮演的有些獐头鼠目一笑露出两颗大门牙的津津垂涎于男旦蝶衣最后遭人民政权镇压的反动戏霸袁世卿，袁四爷。 且莫认为我是穷极生疯一心想着要当反动会道门头子的小老婆。领导说，世界上没有无缘无故的爱（也没有无缘无故的恨）。待我细细将四爷的诸般好处，一一道来。 袁四爷首次出场，是在小楼蝶衣一折满堂彩的《别姬》演出之后。那时节霸王虞姬，正是月朗花香，溶溶脉脉，镜里双双望定，更不知戏外别有天地。 四爷便在此时闯入这二人世界。亮相先是“一点薄礼”。蝴蝶盒子里白晃晃全套珍珠钻石头面。好。有钱人捧戏子，挥金如土，也是常情。不过见得一份豪奢气魄。正如戏院经理所说：“都说当年太后老佛爷，她老人家赏戏，有这样的手面吗？——没有吧！” 四爷是冲着蝶衣来的。目的很明确，并不遮遮掩掩。但蝶衣眼里没有他。“舍下小坐”的要求，先是小楼的生硬，再是蝶衣的委屈，两次被拒。四爷是经场面的人，这一小场戏里头，自己是个惹厌的反角，当然心明眼亮。当下脱帽躬身，彬彬而退。更无半句废话。他没有当场暴跳，并不奇怪——这点涵养总还是有的，不然也混不到这份儿上。稀罕的是那份从容里头自有一种笃定，拿准了那只蝶，飞不走。并无老谋深算的阴险。只是一种淡然却坚定的自信。或许他相信除了钱，自己亦有其他，值得一个人被掳获。 这一小场中，霸王与戏霸，五七步之争第一次埋下伏笔。 他不焦，不燥，不馁。由此我相信他并不是只知最后到手的一刹肉体之欢，那“皮肤滥淫的蠢物”。他亦懂得享受追求过程中的种种坎坷苦乐，不为人道的细腻感受。 过程就是结局。除了求爱，求欢，于这漫长曲折的人生，四爷当亦比他人获得更多过程中的印象与滋味。 第一回合的照面，四爷是个丰富敏锐，懂得咀嚼生活的男子。是在世道中打过滚来的人，因此学会平淡处之。 四爷不曾使甚卑鄙手段，因此也不曾在二人之间造成裂痕。相信他在追求（不管是男人还是女人）之中，纵是满心渴望，亦保留有所不为的原则。反倒是小楼方面，横里插进来一个菊仙。这才是真真的男欢女爱。蝶衣那“与师哥演一辈子别姬”的鸳鸯畸梦，终于化作云烟。 在小楼与菊仙定亲的时候，蝶衣独自仰躺在椅上。未卸的妆艳丽凄迷，一头长发散落，满目漆黑。是盲目绝望的永不可能的恋。面前是那面曾映照过霸王与虞姬身影的镜子。霸王不再。他已是别人的丈夫。互为形影的日子永不回头。此刻的镜子，代表的是蝶衣空洞的心。 于是四爷再现。镜头里我们看到一根长长的翎子，斜斜伸入镜中。四爷企图进入蝶衣的心。 “这双翎子，是从活雉鸡的尾巴上，生生收取的。当真是难得。”——也不知他是在说蝶衣难得还是在说自己这份心难得。从活雉鸡的尾巴上生生收取的翎子，残酷地叠印片中交缠一世，不得救赎的爱恨，也叠印乱世里屡遭摧折的绝美的京戏艺术。——一时多嘴，跑题了，回来再说四爷。 在四爷的宅中，蝶衣看到那把年少时许下心愿要送与师哥的剑。于他，那剑是关于他的爱人的威严，关于一份自幼固执的信念，关于虞姬对霸王的全部理解与寄托的信物。他要得到它。一个眼神，四爷已知其意。他说：“此剑是张府败落时费了大周折弄到手的。”又说：“你我之间不言钱字。那个字眼实在不雅。”这样张扬的狂傲，却未令人觉得他在市恩。缓而沉的语调，狂得有资格，傲得有资本。——由此亦可见，敢说“那个字眼实在不雅”，必得坐拥若干身家，不然便得是尝过富贵浮云滋味的过来人，否则，不是实在不食人间烟火（这种人我还没见过），便是故作清高，要么就是不知疾苦、更不知死活的狂言。 于是，宝剑赠佳人。 蝶衣是四爷心目中一顾再顾，倾城绝世的佳人难再得。对于蝶衣自己，男儿郎与女娇娥的身份颠倒一生，始终就没弄清楚过。对于四爷，蝶衣是男是女，也已经不重要。重要的是，在蝶衣身上，他看到所谓完美的化身。 相信四爷对于蝶衣，欣赏的成分远多于情。情是一种不可理喻的深陷痴缠，要疯狂，要占有，妒恨煎熬，抵死缠绵。就像蝶衣对小楼。我们可以完全挑不出一个人好在哪里而依旧爱他，也可以相爱一世却依然彼此陌生。情是不需要懂，只需要服从它的安排。但四爷对蝶衣，不是。蝶衣的好处，蝶衣的美，大众看到的，他懂，大众看不到的，他也懂，就连蝶衣自己不知道的，他亦看到。四爷是如此敏感的人。他把蝶衣灵魂里美好的东西，看个通透。 一笑万古春，一啼万古愁。此境非你莫属，此貌非你莫有。当四爷说出这句话的时候，指的绝不仅仅是蝶衣的容貌。根本上，四爷与蝶衣一样，是个艺术疯子。于京戏（还有昆曲）这门艺术，他浸淫一生，奉献了全部的心与魂。正像蝶衣所说，京戏全在情境二字。因为情境，两三个龙套穿梭，便是千军万马。因为情境，空无一物的舞台上，这些人分花拂柳，翻山越岭，攻城掠地，活生生演尽才子佳人帝王将相一生的悲欢离合。京戏实在是心的幻术。而情境这个东西，看不见摸不着，可遇不可求。所以当四爷与蝶衣，台上台下，两个对京戏几近入魔的戏痴乍一相逢，电光石火间，便有云垂海立的震撼。那一刻他们的灵魂是相通的。他们都是情境中的人。 所以对四爷来说，蝶衣绝不只是一个美貌的戏子。在蝶衣身上，他看到京戏的化境。那是他一生痴狂的东西。对他来说，蝶衣已是艺术完美的象征。四爷这一生没机会登上红氍毹为他理想中的艺术奉献自己，他必须在俗世名利中打滚，这是无可选择的。但是在蝶衣为戏而痴的灵魂里，他可以看到另一个自己，纯粹的倒影。四爷对蝶衣的爱恋，实际上是有着自恋的成分，和对自身完美的期许。这样狂热的痴迷，已经分不清爱的是艺还是人。但是他对蝶衣的态度，仍是节制的。并未陷入爱之便欲毁之的极端。 事实上蝶衣的性别真的已经不是这一场爱欲的焦点。四爷并不是真正的同性恋。他爱蝶衣不是因为他是个美好的男人，而是因为他是个美好的人。代表理想中极致境界的人。相信如果蝶衣是一个女子而具有同等高超的艺境，四爷照样会爱上她。又想象，如果四爷真的爱上了某个女子，也必定会比这个女子自己更懂得她的美，她灵魂的本质——除非棋逢对手，被他遇到一个同样敏感至极的女子——不过这概率不大啊。终究这种人不会太多。 他是真正懂得蝶衣的人。他说，在看蝶衣演出时，有那么两三刻，他有所恍惚，疑为虞姬转世再现了。——其实，在这部影片的本义中，蝶衣被赋予的本来就是虞姬的灵魂。为霸王生，为霸王死的从一而终的一颗燃烧的灵魂。四爷看到的，恰正是蝶衣的本相。 不疯魔不成活。这是小楼两次用以评价蝶衣的一句话。说这话的当时，一次是在蝶衣发疯似地凄喊：“我要跟你唱一辈子戏。少一年，一个月，一天，一个时辰，都不是一辈子！”一次是在文革中，实行“现代戏大改革”之时，坚持“情境”的蝶衣在讨论会上独排众议反对现代戏（实际上反对的是对京戏的粗糙化和政治化），然后闭门不出。当小楼说“你一辈子就知道唱戏，你也不出来看看这世上的戏都唱到哪一出了”的时候，门里传来蝶衣幽幽的声音：“虞姬她为什么要死？”——小楼骂出了那句话，愤然离去。 那个时候，我在想，倘若四爷在，他一定会懂得。蝶衣的坚持。对感情的坚持，对艺术的坚持。蝶衣是这样执著于理想的，纯粹的人。他的灵魂就是一股火，认准了一个方向便一路烧下去不回头，哪怕玉石俱焚。 小楼不懂。小楼与蝶衣并不相同。他是世俗的霸王，期许的是一些物质的，着实的，平凡的幸福。对这个人世，他并不隔膜。他也懂大势所趋，也懂顺应潮流。他是常人。正常，也平常。而蝶衣是疯子。终其一生，蝶衣只生活在自己的心中，只遵循自己内心的声音。他们不是一个世界的人。 而四爷，我相信四爷如果在，会懂得蝶衣。不疯魔不成活。但真正的爱情与真正的艺术，原本就是一种疯魔。蝶衣是做到极致的人。他凭借一种天赋的狂热抵达了感情和艺术的真义。 在外部行动上，四爷或许不会如蝶衣那般绝然。但，他会懂他。他们是一类人。因为过度的敏感和唯美，而经受焚炼。 四爷曾问蝶衣：“你愿作我的红尘知己吗？”——实际上，在这个红尘里（在这部电影中），蝶衣真正的知己，唯四爷一人而已。不论蝶衣答不答应，承不承认，他与四爷都已经是一对孤独的红尘知己。 小楼不是。他始终未曾进入蝶衣的内心世界。他眼中只看到一个过度痴迷于戏、过度痴迷于他的师弟。而蝶衣，是虞姬。为了内心完美的坚持而死的虞姬。小楼是寻常的人。蝶衣与四爷，是两颗熊熊的灵魂。 影片中有个细节令我非常感动（令我感动的细节也太多了，姑且拣一个说）：日军占领北平。在悬着大东亚共荣条幅的戏院里，蝶衣于台上贵妃醉酒。霓裳羽衣，飘飘旋转着绝世的风华。头顶忽地撒下无数抗日传单。灯骤灭。台下喧哗。没有人再顾及台上的贵妃。一片混乱之中，唯有蝶衣，独自于黑暗之中，传单之下，继续着未尽的绝美舞步，丝毫未曾停滞。一片混乱之中，也唯有四爷，独自于楼上包厢继续目不稍瞬地注视黑暗中的蝶衣，丝毫未曾分神。 这便是艺德和艺魂罢。不问外界风云突变，不问这世上如今是谁主沉浮，也不管有没有人在看。上了舞台，是虞姬便是虞姬，是贵妃便是贵妃，黑暗中，也要坚持演完那场戏。那已经不是演给任何人看，是一场，对艺术的献祭。而四爷，即使看不见，他知道蝶衣在继续。他们对艺术如此敬重，对自己的心如此忠实。片中具有这等艺德与艺魂的，有科班的关老爷子，有蝶衣，有四爷。 当四爷孤独地在黑暗中为蝶衣鼓掌，他们之间的关系早已不是出卖身体的戏子与买笑追欢的大爷。那是两颗相通的纯粹的灵魂，在这个浮躁的世界上，值得惺惺相惜。 当骚乱的众人终于随着四爷的掌声望向黑暗中独舞的蝶衣，灯光复明，掌声四起。那辉煌的一刻。（我在被窝里攥着茶杯把激动不已）。 在国民zf掌权，蝶衣因曾替日本人唱堂会而以汉奸罪受审的时候，四爷又有惊人表现。 先是小楼与那经理拜访四爷，恳求出手相救蝶衣。小楼说救出了蝶衣，他们兄弟俩（忘了是几年）的包银全归四爷。四爷道：“没你的包银，你当我就喂不起这几只鸟了？”——可以想象，时移世易，四爷大约亦没落了。虽然，余威尚在。但这句淡淡的话，并不令人感到负气，亦不似死要面子的强撑。四爷清楚自己的底子和实力，亦懂得在渐进的没落中，如何不失尊严。也是看过了大起大落的人，知道这世上，你方唱罢我登场，兴衰原是寻常事。所谓“守得贫，耐得富”，淡眉静目之间，便是气度。 四爷当然并非贵族。但骨子里，那一种超脱于蝇营狗苟的世道之上的高绝，不是天生的贵秉，至少是强者，是智者。世路里磨出来的明净。 他仍未忘记多年前那一个“霸王回营见虞姬，到底是该走五步还是走七步？”的回合。于这危急时机，切切地提出。这是四爷于艺术的认真，亦是四爷作为一个有血有肉的人，一份任性与妒忌的心思。要折倒那个男人，折给不在现场的蝶衣看。通部电影，四爷吃醋耍性子，仅此一处，不动声色的流露。 小楼终于屈服。紧跟着是菊仙的精彩加入。痛快泼辣的言语，一字一句无不有背面文章。这一场心理速战，人性抽丝剥茧，层层尽现，好看至极。 在法庭上，面对检察官“程以淫词艳曲，辱我民族尊严，灭我民族精神”（原文记不大清，意思如此）的指控，四爷从容站起，开言：“方才检察官所说之淫词艳曲，”——静寂片刻，突然用力猛拍栏杆——“实为大谬！”全场被震得无一丝声息。四爷又说：“当晚程所唱者，牡丹亭游园一折，众所周知，乃国学文化中之最精粹。何以在检察官口中，竟成了淫词艳曲了呢？如此污蔑国剧精粹，不知是谁专门辱我民族尊严，灭我民族精神？”咬文嚼字沉沉道来，竟于法庭之中，赢得满场掌声。 这一场是四爷性格中硬、烈、猛、威的一面，最正面淋漓的一次展示。偏是用了极缓极慢，又极掉书袋的语言。正是龙虎精神，原不必大呼小叫。整部电影中，四爷没干过正事。从朝到晚，捧戏子，讨好，诱惑，调情，直至堕落畸变的肉体欢爱。但于此一场，我们就可想见这个男人若处大事，临大节，该是何等的从容不乱，何等的中流砥柱。是性命交关处，可托以大局的人。 四爷最耀眼的一刻完美地展现。正像昏睡的猛兽，平时看着也不见得怎样，偶一睁眼，便有夺星替日的光华。 跟着的，就是结局了——并非电影的结局。是四爷的结局。 四爷的结局是死。解放后，在镇压反革命分子的运动中被枪毙。 电影中看不出来四爷都干了些什么罪大恶极的事。我们只能听到一些抽象空洞的罪名，类似鱼肉百姓这样的词语，却不知他是怎样个鱼肉法。他最终的定名是“戏霸袁世卿”。在一片“打倒，打倒，打倒……”声中，被宣判以“不杀不足以平民愤”——五花大绑，推出去枪毙了。 四爷死得很惨。但在江山易色权力更迭的大时代里，那样的结局，也是寻常。政治历史，翻云覆雨，不问苍生。谁是谁非都不好说，无辜被牺牲，也只能认了。四爷冤枉与否，我们无从得知。但那样的死法必不好受（实际上怎么死也好受不了）。正是众叛亲离，英雄末路。在时代的巨力下，盖世的豪杰也只是芥尘，眼睁睁看着自己，碎为齑粉。 生命的最后一刻，充满唾骂与侮辱。被剥夺了作为一个人死去的基本尊严。没有同情的眼光。没有留恋的声音。甚至可以预知自己死后，不会有人为自己掉一滴眼泪。四爷站在高高的台上，瘦长的身子被用力摁低，颈后插着代表耻辱的姓名牌。他的名字，打了血红的叉。作为“人”的资格，已经被取消。最后几分钟的残喘，他不过是一具供人任意折磨轻侮的行尸走肉。 他被迫卑微地低下头去。 死亡只是一刹，并不可怕。但之前这精神上的摧残，令人崩溃。他必须眼看着自己孤独地走向死亡。已经被全世界唾弃。 洪亮的声音宣判了他的死亡。群众撕裂了他的姓名。在一片扭曲的人脸与沸腾的骂声之中，四爷昂然抬首，迈着四方步被押赴刑场。他的戏结束了。 四爷痴爱戏剧的一生，始终与舞台无缘。但生命的最后一幕，他终于能够在台上完成。他以最完美的姿势退出了人生。那是一种王者的步伐。那是漫长的演出里，最终的，绝世的一折。尘埃落定。 人生如戏。最终，四爷不负这戏，戏，不负四爷。 他一生追寻的情境，终于以这样的方式得到了完成。 我相信当四爷迈着四方步退出，抬起头见到台下振臂高呼打倒的人群——那一瞬间，他心里对他们，是没有怨恨的。四爷心中，世情已是如此透彻，他当知道，这些人和他一样，在时代里是不能够自主的。他也当知道，这些人未必真的相信他的罪名，也未必真的恨他。他们喊，他们骂，他们打倒他，最终，他们杀了他——也不过是为了自保。而——已。浮沉乱世，人人都被诅咒。苍茫的——中国，已经没有慈悲。他一定知道。 繁华落尽。功过无言。四爷最后的脸，是一片平静。他从容赴死，不是勇敢，只是看透。 世界既已癫狂。不如，归去吧。 影片将人置于极度混乱和残酷的境遇中。于是在这样灭裂的碾压倾轧中，人性的卑劣被逼出来，人性的高贵也被逼出来。极端的环境像榨汁机，榨出人的鲜血与泪水，让银幕下的我们，闻到生命最深处的血腥和芳香。 四爷终于是归去。他退场的时候，我在心里为他打着属于一个英雄的锣鼓点。 不知道在生命的最后时刻，四爷的心里在想着什么。是这一生纷红骇绿的奢靡，是曾经的罪孽，是京戏昆曲，还是那个电闪雷鸣，于大雨中持了宝剑勾了脸谱与蝶衣对演别姬的夜晚。或许，他什么也没有想。 雨水中，蝶衣溶化了的凄艳妆容。凤眼朱唇，胭脂红泪。定格成四爷心中的永恒。 看到后来文革的戏，小楼在逼迫下屈服，为求自保当众揭发蝶衣。又与菊仙划清界线。我知道那乱世人性，无可厚非。但，我也知道，倘若四爷还活着，倘若四爷遇到相同的境遇，必不如此。 小楼始终是平凡男子。京戏于他，只是谋生的技艺。感情于他，亦只是人间幸福的寄托。因此受到外界巨大的压力，他可以放弃这一切。但是对蝶衣，对四爷，那是生命的终极归宿。不必刻意坚持，已是共生共存。研丹擘石，赤不可灭，坚不可夺。 虽然，在疯狂的社会里，是否忠实于自己的灵魂，一样都没有好下场。小楼随波逐流，蝶衣与四爷坚持追寻，到最后，玉碎，瓦亦不能全。在多少追问与挣扎之后，电影留给我们的，只是一片荒凉。 这一生，小楼竟不是蝶衣的知己。他只是一个舞台上的霸王。一个渴望寻常茶饭、妻小天年的男子，承受了一段强烈的宿命的感情。他所求的平淡生活，终于被这段感情毁灭。 其实真正的霸王，是四爷。一掷千金的看重。刻骨的了解。相通的灵魂。直至最后末路英雄式的退场。他全部具备了。 我对四爷最后的定义是，他是一个悲哀的霸王。没有被虞姬爱上的霸王。 霸王别姬。这一世，霸王与虞姬在轮回中错过。 片中几个主要人物，小楼，蝶衣，菊仙，性格在开始时都是模糊不定型的。在影片的演进中，他们的个性亦在情节里一点点同步成长起来。随着际遇的跌宕，他们也在不停地变。唯有四爷，从出场便已经是一个完成的生命。所经历的一切，不过是这里那里地将这个灵魂展