一切從音樂再開始(有少量劇透)

人生每一個階段都有不同的渴求、重視的原則。人與人之間的互動,往往因為各自的主次之分而出現矛盾、衝突。如何求同存異?『一切從音樂再開始』嘗試以不同角度檢視這些問題。作為一齣拍得浪漫而不落俗套的商業電影,處理得很得體。

Dan 係一個過氣唱片公司高層,因為老婆Miriam出軌而失婚,事業亦走下坡。在夜店買醉之時遇上與歌星男友Dave鬧翻、被朋友慫恿下上台唱歌的唱作人Gretta 。Dan被Gretta的才華吸引,進而遊說為她出唱片。事情發展下去,慢慢影響兩人在人生路上的方向。

導演John Carney(前作:『一奏傾情』)再以音樂人的故事為題材。兩齣戲相比,『一奏傾情』有點「無奈的結局」,而『一切從音樂再開始』則重於人們為保住關係而嘗試妥協,同時以Gretta為中心互相影響。故事主線以Dan和Gretta加上一群音樂人在紐約街頭巷尾錄製音樂為主,同時側寫各人物關係,原則和渴望。又因為女主角係唱作人而不忘借題發揮,暗諷唱片業對歌手的不公平對待。

選角方面,起用近期以『變形俠醫』『復仇者聯盟』電影大收的麥克雷法路飾演落泊星探,頗為入格。姫拉麗莉的Gretta由最初感情失敗到最後堅強獨立,一幕比一幕迷人。飾演的Maroon V主音亞當列維做返自己已經可以,發揮尚算自然。在『宇宙生還戰』中飾演主角胞姊的希莉施丹菲今次擔任情竇初開的主角女兒,亦是隨劇情推進而越見可人,更客串在其中一首歌中bass solo一番。另外,在『唱Opera的保羅』擔正的占士高登(飾演Gretta的好友)、飾演Miriam的嘉芙蓮堅娜,演出都恰如其分。

作為一齣音樂電影,Begin Again的音樂自然重要,亦頗有驚喜。全片音樂以人物分別,Gretta的歌充滿singer/songwriter的清新、歌詞發自人物內心。Dave的歌曲則流行曲味濃厚,反映他投向大眾皃走向,與Gretta風格大相逕庭。姫拉麗莉初次主唱,聲底明顯不足,但表現出奇地好,補足有餘。雖然只有四首歌,但已足夠令我離場後即上iTunes Store購買原聲大碟。(謎之聲:説好了的專輯呢??我:你肯補足其他歌,一定買!)個人心水:Like A Fool (歌詞直接到point,旋律簡單上腦),Tell Me If You Wanna Go Home屋頂版(有Dan同Violet父女對jam)。

無論你是否音樂愛好者,『一切從音樂再開始』都係一齣睇得開心、聽得開心的好戲,誠意推薦。

Everyone had priorities in their path down the stream of life. And people get together for various reasons. Different priorities can cause friction between people; how to resolve the differences? From my view, Begin Again is a pleasant yet poignant way in dealing with the messy reality of differing priorities.How to make a record

How to make an album

Dan (Mark Ruffalo) was a struggling record company executive that had his glory. Divorced and hardly productive, he walked in to a bar for a couple of drinks, where he saw a reluctant Gretta (Keira Knightley) performing on stage, singing a lonely song about hopeless people contemplating life. Somehow Dan saw talent in Gretta, strike up a conversation with her, and offered to produce an album with her music and the sounds of New York. Things went for an unexpected turn, which change both of their lives.

Director John Carney took up again a theme about music lovers, after his award-winning film “Once”. I found “Once” being more of “separate lives”. “Begin Again” was different, more about people stick together and tried to make compromises.

The plot was straight forward, and the director didn’t deviate from his way of handling love affairs of main characters (you would know after watching “Once”). As the main theme is Gretta’s record, a lot of scenes are dealing with the actual recording, which they do on the streets and parks of New York, and beautifully filmed. The interaction between Dan and his family, as well as Gretta with Dave, were decently presented, crossover through Gretta as the centerpiece, and provide contrast in terms of how the characters deal with betrayal and different priorities. And having Gretta being an independent singer/songwriter, the plot also took a jab at the recording industry, and Dan went along with the album project being independent.

Casting was wonderful. Ruffalo as the depressed and out of work A&R man was spot on, while Knightley was becoming more and more attractive as the story progresses, and she shined brilliantly all the way the end. Levine got the rock star look just right, as he was just being himself. Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit, Ender’s Game) played well and adorable as Dan’s daughter, Violet, who yearned for her old man’s attention while they lead different lives. James Corden (lead actor in this year’s “One Chance”) as Gretta’s best friend, as well as Catherine Keener (Being John Malkovich, Capote) as Dan’s ex-wife, were also cast well.

And there’s the music. They were well written and produced by seasoned musicians, while the director and Glen Hansard (musician and lead actor of “Once”) pitched in for two songs. The lyrics were particularly good, with very strong emotion and storytelling elements, reflected the singer/songwriter genre that was dominant in the plot. Surprisingly, even though Knightley proclaimed her almost total lack of music training, her singing was pretty good. I found myself picking up the soundtrack from iTunes immediately after the end, and the playlist is now a regular on my phone, the music is that good. My favorite: “Like a Fool”, for the frankness in the lyrics, and “Tell Me If You Wanna Go Home”, the roof top version, for the jam by Dan and Violet. It might sound greedy, but if we can get the whole album produced, with the songs in the movie plus some more, I would not doubt snap it up the moment it were released!

As a music lover, I recommend this delightful, elegant movie to you, whether you like catchy music or not.

2013電影節心水

又到電影節時節。

今年中文片嘅陣容實在太誇張,令往常睇紀錄片、日本片為主嘅我都忍唔住要睇。暫時選擇如下:

胭脂扣:數碼化高清、哥哥、阿梅。Enough said.
大渡海:卡士強勁,小田切讓、宮崎葵、松田龍平,故事卻係講一班文人編辭典嘅經歷。有趣。
旺角卡門:當年無入場,家陣補返。
花瓣舞:主要係因為宮崎葵而揀,後311女性情懷,應該啱睇嘅。
大浩劫:應該會係最詳細講Holocaust嘅紀錄片,前、後篇九小時盤腸血戰。
沙漠梟雄:雖然屋企剛購入五十周年藍光版,但仍然會喺文化中心大劇院個大screen睇呢個8K修復版。相信感覺會比當年喺戲院睇更震撼。
閃靈237:寇比力克諸作品中,閃靈係其中一套心愛。紀錄片嘗試用唔同角度分析戲裏嘅細節,係陰謀論定係分析過度?觀眾自有定奪。
沒有蜜蜂的日子:一直有留意近年蜜蜂大量死亡嘅情況。呢套紀錄片以人類、蜜蜂、全球化生產去分析死亡事件嘅種種,值得一睇。
波蘭斯基的告白:入場原因只有四個字 – 波蘭斯基。
祖之根:日本311地震後,一個老災民嘅重建之路。

Podsafe音樂特區 #216 – 復活、改革

闊別五個月,終於回來。不辭而別,十分抱歉。

今集把考慮良久的改革實行,希望大家多多指教。

歌曲列表:
Hillary Reynolds Band – Good As New
Margo Rey – Get Back
Eric Doney – Sandbox
Matthew Ebel – State Of The Union (http://www.matthewebel.com)

電影足跡:評「狼的孩子雨和雪」
Audio Blog: 公僕的角色

在此下載本集節目
在此訂閱
除另外申明,所有歌曲由Music Alley提供
Jingle由Apple GarageBand提供
共享創意署名-非商業性-相同方式共享 3.0 香港 授權條款釋出。超出此條款範圍外的授權可於Mevio MusicAlleyAriel Publicity查閱。

2012電影節記事 – 我的選擇

已有多時未寫過電影節。過去兩年展期都比較忙,看不了多少戲,自然寫不了。今年希望會好一點吧。

今年有點貪心,選了共十五部。選擇方面,一如以往,紀錄片、小型制作劇情片、日本片、動畫。

G系機械人
破曉之海
舞動奇葩
相馬看花
空鞘武士
一命
藍藍的深海
壓制的森林
十三刺客
小桃の奇幻手紙
的士司機
英雄叛國記
幕末太陽傳
失樂園3之煉獄篇
無臉的眼

One Day – 人生本無奈

人生從來都是離離合合。如果在二十年間,不斷地與喜歡的人擦出火花,雖然叫人難耐,但亦是人生的常態吧。

我是在戲院看到預告片時才留意到One Day(港譯「情約一天」)這齣戲的。預告所能帶出的故事有限,吸引我的反而是女主角Anne Hathaway的造型。雖然一直並非她的影迷,她在這戲中的形象實在太合我心意,所以等不到和戲腳一起,就已經自己去看了。一向喜歡看愛情片,想必是受人生的愛別離牽動吧。這戲亦不例外。

Emma和Dexter在大學畢業禮後認識,酒後幾乎發生一夜情。清醒過後,兩人決定保持聯絡。出身平凡的Emma向夢想中的作家路發展,而家境富裕的Dexter則向娛樂圈進軍。一年又一年,Emma事業漸見起色,亦與笑匠Callum同居,但Dexter卻因為母親過身而日漸消沉,由小名星、暗星,到最後變為「冇星」,奉子成婚,成為平凡父親一個。事情當然不會如此下去…

故事以主角們每年的其中一日為主,第一印象可能會覺得散,但整體而言比想像中清晰,特別是Dexter喪母后,Emma的成長明顯了,而Dexter則停滯至身為人父之後。情節平凡而有點意料之內,但結局則出人意表。離離合合的情節營造不俗,看著他們倆總是有一方不在戀愛的心情時,不禁叫人「肉緊」不已。片中不乏精彩對白,Emma的一句”I love you, but I just don’t like you anymore”,入心入肺。

演員方面,兩位主角的表現洽如其份,演Dexter的Jim Sturgess的戲較少在香港上映,可能會較陌生。在初段他的少年輕狂、與父母的關係等,都有點外露,反而後段角色成熟,表現含蓄,感覺更佳。而Anne Hathaway的表現自然,由青年到中年的轉變流暢,造型亦討好。演Cullum的Tom Mison表現古怪而不失其有趣一面,片末與Dexter的對話於我而言印象不錯。Dexter的第一任妻子由在香港出生的Romola Garai飾演,戲份較少。

片中的愛丁堡只在戲的一部份出現,但拍得很美。

危機解密 – 科幻為副,人生為先

八月四日更新:鳴謝網友指出,主角是駐阿富汗美軍,而非伊拉克,特此更正。

作為科幻片,Source Code(港譯:危機解密)在人生處世上的著墨很多,故事又不落俗套,著實令作為觀眾的我一新耳目。

劇情是如此開展的:主角Colter Stevens上尉是一位在伊拉克阿富汗前線執行任務的直升機師。他忽然在前往芝加哥的列車上醒來,面對著素未謀面的Christina Warrens以及完全陌生的環境。當Colter在無所適從之下跑進洗手間時,竟然發現鏡中的並非自己,而是另一個男子的臉。未幾,火車發生爆炸。滿以為主角慘死,然後倒序之前的事,但觀眾會發現Colter再次醒來,場景變成有如太空艙的環境。

外面,Colleen Goodwin上尉正與在艙內的Colter通話。Colter由Colleen口中得知自己已經不在伊拉克前線,而是為一個叫Source Code的系統進行任務,需要利用人的短暫記憶(每次只有八分鐘),讓Colter以火車上的其中一位乘客Sean Fentress(剛好是Christina的同伴)的身份嘗試找出爆炸的真兇,從而阻止兇手再發動進一步的恐怖襲擊。在一次又一次回到爆炸前的火車上,Colter不但解開爆炸的真相,亦同意醒覺自身的情況,對自己的生命重新定位。

在劇情上,不難用偷天情緣以及東方快車謀殺案做比較,因為橋段上有相似之處(Time Loop/Whodunit)。但共通點亦只有這些而已。Colleen和她的上司Dr. Rutledge不斷催促Colter,最初亦不提供資料,令觀眾與Colter一般不知所措。每次八分鐘的段落重覆使用下,慢慢的讓主角理解事情的來龍去脈。雖然每次進入場景的起步點都相同,但拍攝手法上有小許分別,而每次Colter的著眼點和行動都不同,所以只有五個場景(火車、火車站、控制室、實驗艙、芝加哥Millennium Park),但感覺每次都新鮮。

因為每次只有八分鐘,而在現實時序中炸彈魔的下一個襲擊亦步步逼近,在氣氛上形成壓力。導演做到九十分鐘全無冷場,值得一讚。另外,主角不斷回到火車上,從乘客的言行,以及對自身情況的逐步理解,領悟到生命中重要的事情。這在Colter致電老父表白思念之情一幕,特別明顯。同時,導演把這一個分支,與故事中的愛情線相互配合,令Colter對Christina發生興趣,再每次加深瞭解,亦加深Christina原本已存在對Sean的好感,處理手法相當討好。

從世界觀而言,劇本的設定並非全無破綻,但整體上並沒有show stopper,亦能以平衡宇宙的理論自圓其說,合格有餘。由於文戲居多,特技只能有限制地使用,並未影響故事流向。故事到最後留下一條很小的伏線,可能會有續集(雖然個人意願並不希望如此)。

角色方面,Jake Gyllenhaal表現出色,最少三分一場次是他的獨腳戲。作為悲劇英雄,他表現出的悲涼,以及在無可再差的形勢下盡力,演活了影片的tag line:Make every minute count。Vera Farmiga由公事公辦到同情主角,個人認為演得比女主角Michelle Monaghan的love interest角色更好。Jeffrey Wright的瘋狂科學家角色是劇情必須,但並不討好。

個人評分:90/100

2010香港國際電影節觀影 (其之一) – 國際短片競賽節目(二)/京都太秦物語

今年只是買了五場的票,明顯比往年少。年紀漸大,已没有精力應付一日三場的戲。又因為事忙的關係,買了票卻錯過了米高堅的Harry Brown,有點可惜。總觀只能看四場。

反之,由美國總領事館和藝術中心合辦的AFI Project 20/20,我卻已經留了三場的位子。難不成是因為免費的關係?

無論如何,前天看了兩場:國際短片競賽節目(二)京都太秦物語

國際短片競賽節目(二)

看這一齣的動機很簡單:我是為了看同場加映《香港四重奏》之一,邱禮濤的《生炒糯米飯》而來。結果並沒有令我失望,拍出香港風味,亦能帶出吾等七十後對街邊小食的懷念。畫面穿插當年香港六七暴動、保釣運動的剪影,導演在之後的問答環節時說只為帶出時代背景(但大家可以自行想像 – 這是我加的)。故事的街景在永利街拍攝,導演指拍攝時已知有同業在同一地點取景,但並不知道是羅啟銳歲月神偷

抱著只看加映作品的心態,入場前對其他短片自然未有多大的注意,可是其中有驚喜,亦有看得一頭霧水的。《Mr Sakurai at the Ticket Counter》和《Mira》,我實在看不懂。《Beast》所提及的家庭暴力,以至小主角對父親暴虐的反抗,令人心寒,因為同樣的事,天天都在發生。《Paradise Later》以印尼的一條「垃圾河」為背景,對盲目發展提出控訴,訊息強而有力。

個人最喜歡Thomas Lo的《Cocktail Definition》和Eric Gross的《The Fortune Writer》。《Cocktail Definition》中的髮型師和酒保,一起尋找能形容不同女性特質的雞尾酒,爆笑而言之有物。順帶一提,因為片子在香港拍攝,導演找來的女性扮演不同雞尾酒形容的女性特質。這群女角,比起Bijin Tokei香港版找來的女性們,漂亮多了~

《The Fortune Writer》所探討的是fortune cookie(幸運簽語餅)的問題。有些人會說,簽語餅的內文是很直接地和你身邊的事、人有關係。有沒有想過這是為什麼?這片子為你帶來其中一個可能性。很喜歡廚房員工Kirby的細心,以及面對心上人的勇氣。

京都太秦物語

京都太秦物語 》原本叫《京都太秦戀物語》。我覺得後者都不錯,雖然老土了一點。顧名思義,故事以京都市郊的太秦為舞台。故事講述在立命館大學任職圖書管理員的東出京子,她的男友、初哥棟篤笑藝人梁瀬康太,大學客座教授榎大地,以至太秦大映通り商店街的街坊們的日常故事。

一眾街坊由真人扮回自己,連主角角色的父母亦是真人上陣。另外,除了骨幹的工作人員以外,其餘人員均為導演之一的山田洋次的學生,所以除了是一齣商業電影之外,亦是一眾學生們參與商業製作的黄金機會,加上太秦的市民們,完全是一個集體創作的實驗。亦因為有學生們參與訪問商店街的商户,得來不少細節,如兩位主角的家庭其實都有子女各一,亦面對和主角所面對有關前途、繼承家業與否的決擇問題。

雖然導演阿部勉明言另一位導演山田洋次的角色是指導為主,但不難發現戲中滲入了一些寅太郎式的幻想/狂想,如:教授對京子學生時代的(性)幻想、康太的Michael Jackson上身一人tap dance等,都很「搞笑」。

由於是比較輕鬆的愛情喜劇,看得蠻開心的。教授的分支比較沉重,因為他比較冒失而對事物太想當然,變得很衝動。他對京子的一見鐘情亦是十分地突兀,和整體故事有點不搭配。但回心一想,教授的衝動,和康太的「唔嗲唔吊」1 成了強烈對比,亦能解釋京子的決定的基礎。

太秦我沒有去過,只是在往返嵐山的路上經過幾次。以前的太秦是電影王國,今非昔比,現在最為人熟悉的只是太秦影畫村。但太秦的市街,和日本一般小鎮一樣,有點說不出的鄉土味,很舒服。下次去京都時,一定要去太秦一次。

如果不是昨天看了《蟹工船》,可能《京都太秦物語》會是今年電影節最喜歡的戲。晚點再談。

  1. 即吊兒郎當 []

29th HKIFF Series : Hotel Rwanda and Gunner Palace – Some thoughts (originally posted on 29/3/2005 2:10:00)

For this year’s Hong Kong International Film Festival, there are quite a bit of movies and documentaries that reflect on topics that did not make it to the news. Hotel Rwanda and Gunner Palace are two of them.

Gunner Palace – an Oxymoron?

Mike Tucker has arrived Baghdad right after Bush declared end of “major combat” in Iraq. He has joined the 2/3 Field Artillery, First Armor Division, US Army, a.k.a. “Gunners”, for an insider look at what is like to be an American soldier in Baghdad. Surrounded by a nation of people who see the US military, as a collective, as the evil conqueror of Iraq, their job has turned from being artillerymen to security guard, drill sergeant, police detective and target rolled into one. For the Gunners, in the surreal world that is Iraq, their billet was a former pleasure palace of Uday Hussein, son of Saddam Hussein. Hence the name of the documentary, Gunner Palace.

The style of the documentary is from the same perspective that the troopers had, since Tucker followed them out on patrols, as well as catching glimpses of the soldiers’ life inside the palace. There was little music to constitute a score, but that wasn’t necessary. The soldiers’ rap talk, poetry and their guitars playing provided a musical perspective to their frustration and opinion on the war, like Rumsfield’s refusal to provide armor upgrade kits for Humvees.

This is very much a “behind-the-scene” view of the days after Second Iraqi War, from the eyes of grunts that are living the scenes. There was no blood and gore, no fighting scenes, yet as an audience you know those things happen every day, and the troopers are always aware of the consequences of these incidents. Telltale signs such as explosions in the distance, radio communication of attacks and roadside bombs sightings, as well as verbal accounts from the soldiers themselves, told a grim story for the predicament of their mission. And their mission changed day-by-day: one day it is a patrol around their sector, the other day might be a raid for insurgents or weapon caches, yet another day might be answering an emergency call for support. Just by being outside their complex means mortal danger for them, no matter from a stone, rifle, RPG, or a roadside bomb.

That said, since the barracks IS a palace, there are some really weird R&R for the Gunners, like a dip in the pool with a Snapple (no alcohol is officially allowed), or a poolside party after a successful raid, or risking one’s life for a whopper at the Burger King outside the complex. While the audience is free to place whatever judgment on the as they see, ultimately the troops are fighting the war for the survival of themselves and their buddies, not for WMD or the ousting of Saddam or even oil. Besides, the troops live in that set of the ‘show’, which most people would perceive when they watch their daily news and went back to their dinners. I guess those who will feel the most watching this film will be Americans with a conscience; that will give them something to chew on while they consider what had happened ever since their people voted G.W. Bush into office.

Hotel Rwanda – the genocide that comes with your main course

Unlike Iraq, Rwanda was somewhat different. The genocide of Tutsi people in the nation of Rwanda had horrified the world in the year 1994, yet due to the retreat of all western support and failure of UN and US from providing official sanction in stopping the massacre, people got killed, and the media moved on to other stories less dangerous to cover. While this is not intended to slam on the media, one of the characters in the film Hotel Rwanda, says the truth of people on the debacle: “If people see this footage, they’ll say, ‘Oh my God, that’s terrible,’ and they’ll go on eating their dinners.” Everyone, the media, the wealthy countries, all of us, lent a hand in allowing Tutsi people being killed in that bloody year.

Hotel Rwanda started with a peaceful scene with an uneasy undertone. Paul Rusesabagina was the manager of a Belgian luxury hotel in the Kigali, the capital city of Rwanda. He was well paid, has a lovely wife and three children, he did interesting work serving wealth westerners, built relationship with powerful people in the country with wit and cunningness for protection and procurement, and lived a comfortable life. But something isn’t right. Hutu and Tutsi people in the country was at war, settling blood feud that went back to German and Belgian colonial time. The actions of Tutsi rebels has not affect the everyday life of Tutsi citizens, but that is about to change. When Hutu started to systematically kill off Tutsi from the country, UN and America has refused to provide diplomatic and military support to intervene. All they did was evacuation of westerners; all the Tutsis has was a token force of UN peacekeepers that were mere doorstops against the Hutu mob. Somehow, the refugees has learnt that some Tutsis has seek refuge in the hotel, as Belgium has threatened retribution against the country on damage for Belgian property in Rwanda. Thus, refugees flocked to the hotel for safety. Paul has to make a choice: should he leave the refugees to die, which basically means he would had to drive his Tutsi wife away, or should he try his best and risk everything to save these people?

People compare this movie with Spielberg’s Schindler’s List. Yet, even though the feats that Rusesabagina pulled off is as great as Oscar Schindler’s, he was subjected to even greater odds, as his family and himself, as well as the lives of the refugees were at risk, comparing with Schindler, who was a member of Nazi, thus safe during the whole process of the rescue. By comparison, while Paul’s action is less of the selfless sacrifice that Oscar did, there was a necessity that Paul must address.

Directing wise, Terry George, as the director, is not Spielberg. Not that he had to be, because he has created a masterpiece in vivid image of how the Rwandans were abandoned by the west, and how Rusesabagina save the flock that he had at the hotel. Exercising less on graphic details of the Hutu atrocities, George relied more on the interaction of between the nervous yet calm Rusesabagina, played by Don Cheadle, and the rest of the cast, which included Nick Nolte as the Canadian UN officer, Joaquin Phoenix as Jack the camera man, and Jean Reno as the Belgium company president, which Rusesabagina served. The pace of the movie was tense, as the hotel was constantly under threat and the hint of impending disaster taxed the nerves of the refugees as well as the audience.

At the end, Hotel Rwanda is not a movie that you see for fun. You have to be in a certain mood to see it, or you will be in for a real shock. But that can be a good thing, as both films are works that questioned: how the abundance of information in this age has nullified the senses of the mass on man-made disasters, reducing such tragedy into news items that become history in a relatively short timeframe. How come people can do such horrible things to fellow countrymen, where hate and old feud played a major role. How the lack of initiative from the mass has failed to stop atrocities, when you and me and him and her choose not to care and help about things that are far from our immediate interest. And people die because of all these. Hotel Rwanda, as well as Gunner Palace, was the epitome of these things that we, as a human being, had to consider, for humanity as we know, rest upon our stance on such issues.