Nolan vs. Nolan

2012年諾蘭新作《黑暗騎士崛起》熱映主卫，大衛(wèi)·波德維爾在當(dāng)月19日發(fā)表文章，結(jié)合諾蘭迄今在多部影片中展現(xiàn)的導(dǎo)演技巧虾宇，敘事風(fēng)格搓彻，影片主題等元素，旁征博引地進(jìn)行了“教科書(shū)式”的深入而全面的剖析嘱朽。

本文作者大衛(wèi)·波德維爾是美國(guó)重要的電影理論家旭贬，著有多部電影學(xué)專著。他與夫人克里斯丁·湯普森合著的《電影藝術(shù)-形式與風(fēng)格》至今已修訂再版7次搪泳，被公認(rèn)為電影文化研究的標(biāo)桿之作稀轨。他在廣大的電影愛(ài)好者以及專業(yè)人士心中地位甚高。

克里斯多夫·諾蘭是近年來(lái)最具票房號(hào)召力的導(dǎo)演森书。在十年前小試牛刀的《記憶碎片》里他便展現(xiàn)了引人入勝的敘事和編導(dǎo)能力，《致命魔術(shù)》和《黑暗騎士》等片讓他的地位得以鞏固，而在2010年創(chuàng)下史上多個(gè)票房紀(jì)錄新高的《盜夢(mèng)空間》則成就了他的事業(yè)巔峰凛膏。

2012年諾蘭新作《黑暗騎士崛起》熱映之際杨名，大衛(wèi)·波德維爾在當(dāng)月19日發(fā)表了本文，結(jié)合諾蘭迄今在多部影片中展現(xiàn)的導(dǎo)演技巧猖毫，敘事風(fēng)格台谍，影片主題等元素，旁征博引地進(jìn)行了“教科書(shū)式”的深入而全面的剖析吁断。波德維爾在文中字斟句酌趁蕊，在許多字句的使用上頗耐人尋味。這篇文章無(wú)疑將幫助包括譯者在內(nèi)的眾多影迷更全面透徹地理解諾蘭的電影仔役，同時(shí)對(duì)宏觀層面上的商業(yè)電影文化有更為深入的認(rèn)識(shí)和思考掷伙。

DB here:

Paul Thomas Anderson, the Wachowskis, David Fincher, Darren Aronofsky, and other directors who made breakthrough films at the end of the 1990s have managed to win either popular or critical success, and sometimes both. None, though, has had as meteoric a career as Christopher Nolan.

His films have earned $3.3 billion at the global box office, and the total is still swelling. On IMDB’s Top 250 list, as populist a measure as we can find, The Dark Knight (2008) is ranked number 8 with over 750,000 votes, while Inception (2010), at number 14, earned nearly 600,000. The Dark Knight Rises (2012), on release for less than a month, is already ranked at number 18. Remarkably, many critics have lined up as well, embracing both Nolan’s more offbeat productions, like Memento (2000) and The Prestige (2006), and his blockbusters. Nolan is now routinely considered one of the most accomplished living filmmakers.

保羅·托馬斯·安德森（《美國(guó)導(dǎo)演，作品有《木蘭花》又兵，《血色將至》等任柜，譯注）,沃卓斯基兄弟（《黑客帝國(guó)》），大衛(wèi)·芬徹（《角斗俱樂(lè)部》沛厨，《12宮殺手》）宙地，達(dá)倫·阿朗諾夫斯基（《夢(mèng)之安魂曲》，《黑天鵝》）以及其他的一些導(dǎo)演在上世紀(jì)90年代后期都取得了突破逆皮，他們要么受大眾喜歡宅粥，要么被影評(píng)人看好，有時(shí)候還能兩者兼收电谣。不過(guò)他們卻沒(méi)有人能像克里斯多夫·諾蘭那樣秽梅，成就如同流星般閃耀迅即的事業(yè)崛起。

諾蘭的電影在全球票房總收入達(dá)到了33億美元辰企，而且這個(gè)數(shù)字還在繼續(xù)攀升风纠。在“IMDB Top 250 List”這樣大眾化的統(tǒng)計(jì)榜單上，《暗黑騎士》（2008）排名第8牢贸，共獲75萬(wàn)張投票竹观，而《盜夢(mèng)空間》（2010）排第14名，有近60萬(wàn)張投票潜索〕粼觯《黑暗騎士的崛起》（2012）僅僅上映一個(gè)月不到，就已經(jīng)排到第18名了竹习。值得一提的是誊抛，很多影評(píng)人無(wú)論是對(duì)他早期更為特立獨(dú)行的作品（諸如《記憶碎片》（2000）和《致命魔術(shù)》（2006），還是對(duì)其近年拍攝的商業(yè)大片整陌，都贊譽(yù)有加∞智裕現(xiàn)在諾蘭儼然被公認(rèn)為成就最高的在世導(dǎo)演之一瞎领。

Yet many critics fiercely dislike his work. They regard it as intellectually shallow, dramatically clumsy, and technically inept. As far as I can tell, no popular filmmaker’s work of recent years has received the sort of harsh, meticulous dissection Jim Emerson and A. D. Jameson have applied to Nolan’s films. (See the codicil for numerous links.) People who shrug at continuity errors and patchy plots in ordinary productions have dwelt on them in Nolan’s movies. The attack is probably a response to his elevated reputation. Having been raised so high, he has farther to fall.

I have only a welterweight dog in this fight, because I admire some of Nolan’s films, for reasons I hope to make clear later. Nolan is, I think all parties will agree, an innovative filmmaker. Some will argue that his innovations are feeble, but that’s beside my point here. His career offers us an occasion to think through some issues about creativity and innovation in popular cinema.

但也有很多影評(píng)人非常不待見(jiàn)他的作品。他們認(rèn)為其電影思想淺薄随夸，劇情粗糙九默，技巧拙劣。據(jù)我所知宾毒，近年來(lái)還沒(méi)有哪個(gè)商業(yè)導(dǎo)演的作品受到過(guò)像Jim Emerson和A.D. Jameson對(duì)諾蘭影片那樣尖刻而細(xì)致的剖析驼修。那些對(duì)于普通影片中出現(xiàn)的敘事不連貫和情節(jié)東拼西湊嗤之以鼻的人，同樣也能在諾蘭的影片中挑刺诈铛。他們對(duì)于諾蘭的抨擊或許也是對(duì)其聲名鵲起的反應(yīng)乙各。此可謂捧得越高霍掺，摔得越重梆暖。

如果把這場(chǎng)辯論比作斗狗，那么我牽來(lái)的頂多是條中量級(jí)的斗犬窜司，這是因?yàn)槲倚蕾p諾蘭的一些影片妨退，個(gè)中原因我希望能隨后道明妇萄。我想正反各方都認(rèn)同諾蘭是一位有革新精神的導(dǎo)演。有人會(huì)說(shuō)他的革新微不足道咬荷，但我想討論的重點(diǎn)與此無(wú)關(guān)冠句。諾蘭的執(zhí)導(dǎo)歷程讓我們得以洞見(jiàn)流行電影文化中關(guān)于創(chuàng)意和革新的一些議題。

Four dimensions, at least

四層幸乒，至少?

（譯注：標(biāo)題似乎略有調(diào)侃諾蘭影片中的剪輯手法之意懦底，如《盜夢(mèng)空間》中的四層夢(mèng)境，詳見(jiàn)后文中對(duì)“交叉剪輯”的分析）

First, let’s ask: How can a filmmaker innovate? I see four primary ways.

You can innovate by tackling new subject matter. This is a common strategy of documentary cinema, which often shows us a slice of our world we haven’t seen or even known about before—from Spellbound to Vernon, Florida.

首先罕扎，我們?cè)O(shè)問(wèn)：一個(gè)制片人該如何革新聚唐？我認(rèn)為有四種方法。

你可以通過(guò)挑戰(zhàn)新題材來(lái)革新腔召。這是在紀(jì)錄片中所慣常采用的策略杆查，我們經(jīng)常在這類影片中看到世界前所未見(jiàn)或者前所未知的一面，從《拼字游戲》（2003）到《弗農(nóng),弗羅里達(dá)》(1981)等影片都屬此列臀蛛。

You can also innovate by developing new themes. The 1950s “l(fā)iberal Westerns” substituted a brotherhood-of-man theme for the Manifest-Destiny theme that had driven earlier Western movies. The subject matter, the conquest of the West by white settlers and a national government, was given a different thematic coloring (which of course varied from film to film). Science fiction films were once dominated by conceptions of future technology as sleek and clean, but after Alien, we saw that the future might be just as dilapidated as the present.

Apart from subject or theme, you can innovate by trying out new formal strategies. This option is evident in fictional narrative cinema, where plot structure or narration can be treated in fresh ways. Many entries on this blog have charted possible formal innovations, such as having a house narrate the story action, or arranging the plot so as to create contradictory chains of events. Documentaries have experimented with a film’s overall form as well, of course, as The Thin Blue Line and Man with a Movie Camera. Stan Brakhage’s creation of “l(fā)yrical cinema” would be an example of formal innovation in avant-garde cinema.

你也可以通過(guò)展現(xiàn)新主題來(lái)革新亲桦。上世紀(jì)50年代的“自由西部片”用“兄弟情義”主題取代了早前西部片中推動(dòng)情節(jié)發(fā)展的“命中注定”主題。白人定居者和政府對(duì)西部的征服依然是這類影片的題材浊仆，但在主題渲染上（當(dāng)然每部影片略有出入）卻有所不同客峭。科幻片曾經(jīng)充斥著對(duì)于未來(lái)科技優(yōu)美光鮮的構(gòu)想抡柿，但當(dāng)《異形》上映之后舔琅，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)未來(lái)也可能會(huì)和當(dāng)下一樣殘破不堪。

除了題材和主題洲劣，你還可以通過(guò)嘗試新的形式來(lái)革新备蚓。這在虛構(gòu)敘事影片中并不鮮見(jiàn)课蔬。在這類影片中，情節(jié)的結(jié)構(gòu)安排或者敘事可以用新的手法來(lái)處理郊尝。在刊載本文的博客上有不少文章都涉及到各種形式革新的可能购笆，比如讓一棟房子來(lái)作為故事的敘事者，或者安排劇情以便制造一連串矛盾的事件虚循。當(dāng)然，紀(jì)錄片同樣也對(duì)影片的整體形式做過(guò)革新實(shí)驗(yàn)样傍，比如《細(xì)藍(lán)線》和《有攝像機(jī)的人》横缔。Stan Brakhage(美國(guó)20世紀(jì)實(shí)驗(yàn)電影先鋒導(dǎo)演，譯注）所創(chuàng)造的“詩(shī)意電影”就是先鋒電影中形式革新的例子衫哥。

Finally, you can innovate at the level of style—the patterning of film technique, the audiovisual texture of the movie. A clear example would be Godard’s jump cuts in A Bout de souffle, but new techniques of shooting, staging, framing, lighting, color design, and sound work would also count. In Cloverfield and Chronicle, the first-person camera technique is applied, in different ways, to a science-fiction tale. Often, technological changes trigger stylistic innovation, as with the Dolby ATMOS system now encouraging filmmakers to create sound effects that seem to be occurring above our heads.

I see other means of innovation—for instance, stunt casting, or new marketing strategies—but these four offer an initial point of departure. How then might we capture Nolan’s cinematic innovations?

最后你還可以在風(fēng)格的層面上進(jìn)行革新 ——通過(guò)對(duì)電影技巧和影音質(zhì)感的定型來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)茎刚。戈達(dá)爾在《精疲力竭》（1960）中的跳接便是一個(gè)顯著的例子，而在影片攝影撤逢，舞臺(tái)調(diào)度膛锭，取景，布光蚊荣，色彩設(shè)計(jì)以及音效中采用的新技術(shù)也可歸于其中初狰。影片《苜蓿地》（2008）和《超能失控》（2012）分別用不同的方法，將第一人稱視角的攝影技術(shù)運(yùn)用到了科幻敘事中互例。技術(shù)的變革經(jīng)常能觸發(fā)風(fēng)格的革新奢入，比如“杜比全景聲”系統(tǒng)（2012年4月24由杜比實(shí)驗(yàn)室推出，譯注）就促使制片人去創(chuàng)造出從觀眾頭頂上方發(fā)出的音效媳叨。

當(dāng)然還有其他革新的手段腥光，比如特技，或者新的營(yíng)銷策略糊秆，但上述的四點(diǎn)可以作為我們討論的出發(fā)點(diǎn)武福。那么我們?cè)撛鯓永斫庵Z蘭的電影革新呢？

Style without style

沒(méi)有風(fēng)格的風(fēng)格

Well, on the whole they aren’t stylistic. Those who consider him a weak stylist can find evidence in Insomnia (2002), his first studio film. Spoilers ahead.

A Los Angeles detective and his partner come to an Alaskan town to investigate the murder of a teenage girl. While chasing a suspect in the fog, Dormer shoots his partner Hap and then lies about it, trying to pin the killing on the suspect. But the suspect, a famous author who did kill the girl, knows what really happened. He pressures Dormer to cover for both of them by framing the girl’s boyfriend. Meanwhile, Dormer is undergoing scrutiny by Ellie, a young officer who idolizes him but who must investigate Hap’s death. And throughout it all, Dormer becomes bleary and disoriented because, ?the twenty-four-hour daylight won’t let him sleep. (His name seems a screenwriter’s conceit, invoking dormir, to sleep.)

總體來(lái)講諾蘭的影片不以風(fēng)格見(jiàn)長(zhǎng)痘番。認(rèn)為諾蘭影片風(fēng)格不顯著的人可以在《失眠癥》（2002）中找到佐證捉片，這部影片是他的第一部制片廠影片。下面有劇透夫偶。

影片講述一名洛杉磯警探和搭檔來(lái)到阿拉斯加的一座小鎮(zhèn)上調(diào)查一起少女謀殺案界睁。在霧中追逐疑犯的過(guò)程中，Dormer開(kāi)槍誤殺了他的搭檔Hap兵拢，隨后他撒謊為自己開(kāi)脫翻斟，試圖把搭檔之死栽給疑犯。但疑犯说铃，一名作家访惜，卻對(duì)真相了如指掌嘹履，而他的確殺害了那名少女。于是他向Dormer施壓债热，要他嫁禍少女的男友砾嫉，由此為他們兩人開(kāi)脫。與此同時(shí)窒篱，Dormer受到了一名年輕警官Ellie的調(diào)查焕刮，Ellie視Dormer為偶像，但她又必須盡職調(diào)查Hap的死因墙杯。而在這整個(gè)過(guò)程當(dāng)中配并，Dormer因?yàn)闃O晝導(dǎo)致的失眠，陷入了疲憊而紊亂之中高镐。（主角的名字似乎是編劇的暗喻溉旋，意指法語(yǔ)中的dormir，即“睡覺(jué)”之意嫉髓。）

Nolan said at the time that what interested him in the script—already bought by Warners and offered to him after Memento—was the prospect of character subjectivity.

A big part of my interest in filmmaking is an interest in showing the audience a story through a character’s point of view. It’s interesting to try and do that and maintain a relatively natural look.

諾蘭曾說(shuō)該片劇本吸引他的地方在于對(duì)于角色的主觀性塑造的可能——不過(guò)當(dāng)時(shí)華納公司已經(jīng)買(mǎi)下了劇本并在《記憶碎片》完成之后交給了他观腊。

我對(duì)電影拍攝的興趣很大一部分在于通過(guò)一個(gè)角色的視角向觀眾展現(xiàn)故事。在嘗試主觀性敘事的同時(shí)維持一個(gè)相對(duì)自然的角度是件有趣的事算行。

He wanted, as he says on the DVD commentary, to keep the audience in Dormer’s head. Having already done that to an extent in Memento, he saw it as a logical way of presenting Dormer’s slow crackup.

But how to go subjective? Nolan chose to break up scenes with fragmentary flashes of the crime and of clues—painted nails, a necklace. Early in the film, Dormer is studying Kay Connell’s corpse, and we get flashes of the murder and its grisly aftermath, the killer sprucing up the corpse.

他在影片DVD附帶的導(dǎo)演評(píng)論中說(shuō)他想把觀眾置于Dormer的頭腦中梧油。而在一定程度上，諾蘭已經(jīng)在《記憶碎片》中施展了這一招州邢，而他認(rèn)為用這種方法來(lái)展現(xiàn)Dormer逐漸走向精神崩潰也是合乎邏輯的婶溯。

但如何展現(xiàn)主觀性呢？諾蘭選擇的方法是將場(chǎng)景分解為行兇場(chǎng)面和各種線索的快閃片斷偷霉，比如涂抹過(guò)的指甲迄委，一串項(xiàng)鏈。在影片開(kāi)始不久后的一幕类少，Dormer在查看Kay Connell的尸體叙身，觀眾同時(shí)也看到謀殺案的片斷，以及隨后兇手整理尸體的悚然片斷硫狞。

At first it seems that Dormer intuits what happened by ?noticing clues on Kay’s body. But the film’s credits started with similar glimpses of the killing, as if from the killer’s point of view, and there’s an ambiguity about whether the interpolated images later are Dormer’s imaginative reconstruction, or reminders of the killer’s vision—establishing that uneasy link of cop and crook that is a staple of the crime film.

Similarly, abrupt cutting is used to introduce a cluster of images that gets clarified in the course of the film. At the start, we see blood seeping through threads, and then shots of hands carefully depositing blood on a fabric (above). Then we see shots of Dormer, awaking jerkily while flying in to the crime scene. Are these enigmatic images more extracts from the crime, or are they something else? We’ll learn in the course of the film that these are flashbacks to Dormer’s framing of another suspect back in Los Angeles. Once again, these images get anchored as more or less subjective, and they echo the killer’s patient tidying up.

一開(kāi)始這似乎是Dormer憑直覺(jué)通過(guò)Kay尸體上的線索來(lái)重現(xiàn)犯罪過(guò)程信轿。但影片在報(bào)幕伊始就有類似的兇殺片斷，似乎是從兇手的視角進(jìn)行呈現(xiàn)残吩，因此隨后我們看到的片斷究竟是Dormer想象中的犯罪重現(xiàn)還是兇手腦海里的殘像财忽，在這一點(diǎn)的判斷上就顯得模棱兩可了。而籍此諾蘭搭建起了警察和歹徒之間的聯(lián)系泣侮，這也是犯罪類型片著力描繪的部分即彪。

不連貫剪輯同樣也被用在影片過(guò)程呈現(xiàn)一組逐漸明朗的影像。在影片開(kāi)頭活尊，我們看到血浸過(guò)床單隶校，接下來(lái)的幾個(gè)鏡頭里我們看到有人用手仔細(xì)將血放到一塊布料上漏益。之后我們看到Dormer在飛往犯罪現(xiàn)場(chǎng)的飛機(jī)上驚醒的鏡頭。這些迷一般的影像究竟是犯罪現(xiàn)場(chǎng)的還原片斷深胳，還是另有其意呢绰疤？隨著影片的進(jìn)行，我們將發(fā)現(xiàn)這些片斷其實(shí)是Dormer腦海里對(duì)他在洛杉磯設(shè)計(jì)栽贓另一名嫌犯的閃回片斷舞终。再一次轻庆，這些影像的呈現(xiàn)多少帶有主觀性，并和兇手細(xì)心清理現(xiàn)場(chǎng)的片斷相呼應(yīng)敛劝。

Nolan’s reliance on rapid cutting in these passages is typical of his style generally. Insomia has over 3400 shots in its 111 minutes, making the average shot just under two seconds long. Rapid editing like this can suit bursts of mental imagery, but it’s hard to sustain in meat-and-potatoes dialogue scenes. Yet Nolan tries.

In lectures I’ve used the scene in which Dormer and Hap arrive at the Alaskan police station as an example of the over-busy tempo that can come along with a style based in “intensified continuity.” In a seventy-second scene, there are 39 shots, so the average is about 1.8 seconds—a pace typical of the film and of the intensified approach generally.

總體說(shuō)來(lái)榨了，在這些里影片片段里，諾蘭的典型風(fēng)格就體現(xiàn)在他所依賴的快速剪輯上攘蔽。《失眠癥》在111分鐘里有3400個(gè)鏡頭呐粘，平均每個(gè)鏡頭長(zhǎng)度不足2秒满俗。這樣的快速剪輯適合用來(lái)呈現(xiàn)迸發(fā)的心理意象，但卻很難用來(lái)交代最基本的對(duì)話場(chǎng)景作岖。不過(guò)諾蘭還是做了嘗試唆垃。

在平時(shí)的講課中，我用了本片中Dormer和Hap到達(dá)阿拉斯加警察局的那一幕痘儡，將其作為基于“緊湊連續(xù)剪輯”之上的超快節(jié)奏風(fēng)格的一個(gè)示例辕万。影片中一個(gè)長(zhǎng)達(dá)70秒的場(chǎng)景包含了39個(gè)鏡頭，平均每個(gè)鏡頭有1.8秒沉删，這是本片的典型節(jié)奏渐尿，也是這類緊湊剪輯手法的典型節(jié)奏。

Apart from one exterior long-shot of the police station and four inserts of hands, the characters’ interplay is captured almost entirely in singles—that is, shots of only one actor. Out of the 34 shots of actors’ faces and upper bodies, 24 are singles. Most of these serve to pick up individual lines of dialogue or characters’ reactions to other lines. The singles are shot with telephoto lenses, a choice exemplifying what I called the tendency toward “bipolar” lens lengths in intensified continuity–that is, either very long lenses or fairly wide-angle ones.

除了一個(gè)展現(xiàn)警察局全貌的外部長(zhǎng)鏡頭和四組手部特寫(xiě)鏡頭矾瑰，這一幕中角色的互動(dòng)幾乎全部用單鏡頭交代砖茸，就是說(shuō)每個(gè)鏡頭里面只有一名演員。在34個(gè)演員的臉部以及上半身的鏡頭里殴穴，有24個(gè)單鏡頭凉夯。這些鏡頭大多用來(lái)展示單個(gè)角色的對(duì)白或是角色的回應(yīng)對(duì)白。這些單鏡頭使用長(zhǎng)焦鏡頭拍攝的采幌，這種選擇也可以佐證我以前曾提到的在“緊湊連續(xù)剪輯”中鏡頭選擇的“兩極化”趨勢(shì)劲够，也就是說(shuō)要么采用長(zhǎng)焦距鏡頭，要么采用廣角鏡頭進(jìn)行拍攝休傍。

Fast cutting like this need not break up traditional spatial orientation. In this scene, there are a couple of bumps in the eyeline-matching, but basically continuity principles are respected. As Nolan explains on the DVD commentary, he tried to anchor the axis of action, or 180-degree line, around Dormer/Pacino, so the eyelines were consistent with his position, and that’s usually the case here.

The scene’s development and the actors’ line readings are emphasized by the cutting; the lighting and framing remain almost unvarying (though there’s also an occasional slight push-in during an establishing framing). These aren’t innovative choices, having become conventional, gradually but firmly, since the 1970s.

像這樣的快速剪輯無(wú)需打破傳統(tǒng)的空間定位征绎。在這幕中，鏡頭間角色在視線順接上有些不連貫磨取，但基本上遵守了連續(xù)性原則炒瘸。諾蘭在DVD附帶評(píng)論里說(shuō)他試圖圍繞Dormer/Pacino來(lái)安排動(dòng)作線/180度線淤堵，以確保角色間的視線關(guān)系和主角的位置相對(duì)應(yīng)，這一幕中的鏡頭關(guān)系基本如此顷扩。

這一幕的情節(jié)發(fā)展和演員的對(duì)白通過(guò)剪輯得到強(qiáng)調(diào)拐邪；布光和取景幾乎保持不變（雖然在定位鏡頭中偶爾會(huì)有一些細(xì)微的推進(jìn)）。這些拍攝手法算不上革新隘截，自從上世紀(jì)70年代起就已經(jīng)逐漸成為了常規(guī)手法扎阶。

I can’t illustrate all the shots here, but despite its more or less cogent continuity, the scene seems to me choppy, uneconomical, and fairly perfunctory in its stylistic handling. Nolan makes no effort to move the actors around the set in a way that would underscore the dramatic development. Because of the rapid editing, characters’ lines and gestures are cut off or unprepared for. There is no effort to design each shot, à la Hitchcock, to fit the line or reaction of the actor. Most shots are excerpted from full takes, all from the same setup. The most obvious example is the setup that pans to show Dormer as he comes in, stops, and reacts to the conversation. Thirteen shots are taken from that setup (not necessarily the same full take, of course, as the last frame here shows).

我無(wú)法在此展示所有的鏡頭，而這一幕的連續(xù)性雖然讓人信服婶芭，但在風(fēng)格上的處理我覺(jué)得顯得零碎东臀，不夠簡(jiǎn)潔并且頗為草率。諾蘭沒(méi)有花太大功夫通過(guò)調(diào)度演員來(lái)強(qiáng)調(diào)戲劇化發(fā)展犀农。因?yàn)榭焖偌糨嫷脑蚨韪常巧呐_(tái)詞和動(dòng)作要么被切斷，要么顯得準(zhǔn)備不足呵哨。諾蘭沒(méi)有像希區(qū)柯克那樣赁濒，設(shè)計(jì)每個(gè)鏡頭以配合演員的對(duì)白或反應(yīng)。大多數(shù)鏡頭都是從使用同一個(gè)布景的拍攝片斷中剪輯得來(lái)孟害。最顯著的例子就是一個(gè)展現(xiàn)Dormer入場(chǎng)拒炎，停下，加入談話中的鏡頭布景挨务。在這個(gè)布景中共有13個(gè)鏡頭（當(dāng)然并非全部都是從單次鏡頭拍攝中剪切出來(lái)击你，從上面的最后一個(gè)鏡頭就可以看出）

In Nolan’s recent films, this avoidance of tightly designed compositions may be encouraged further because he’s shooting in both the 1.43 Imax ratio and the 2.40 anamorphic one. There remains a general tendency toward loose, roughly centered framings.

Somebody is sure to reply that the nervous editing is aiming to express Dormer’s anxiety about the investigation into his career. But that would be too broad an explanation. On the same grounds, every awkwardly-edited film could be said to be expressing dramatic tensions within or among the characters. Moreover, even when Dormer’s not present, the same choppy cutting is on display.

諾蘭在近年拍攝的影片中回避仔細(xì)安排鏡頭間關(guān)系的做法或許是因?yàn)樗臄z的影片既有1.43：1的Imax屏幕比例也有2.40：1的全屏幕比例。而這兩者間折中的拍攝選擇就是往松散谎柄，不居中的取景方式靠攏丁侄。

有人肯定會(huì)說(shuō)這種緊張的剪輯是為了展現(xiàn)Dormer對(duì)于他自己遭遇的調(diào)查感到焦慮。但這種解釋太過(guò)空泛朝巫。按照同樣的邏輯绒障，每一部被剪輯得很狼狽的影片都可以用“表現(xiàn)演員自身或演員之間戲劇張力”來(lái)作為托詞。更有甚者捍歪，即使Dormer不在場(chǎng)時(shí)户辱，影片中同樣也有零碎的剪輯。

Consider the 23 shots showing Ellie greeting Dormer and Hap as they get off the plane. Again we have full production takes broken up into brief phases of action (it takes five shots to get Dormer out of the plane), with an almost arbitrarily succession of shot scales. When Ellie leaves her vehicle to go out on the pier, the action is presented in nine shots.

再來(lái)看看Ellie迎接Dormer和Hap下飛機(jī)時(shí)的23個(gè)鏡頭糙臼。我們?cè)俅慰吹綆讉€(gè)連續(xù)的拍攝段落被分解成了簡(jiǎn)短的動(dòng)作片斷（Dormer下飛機(jī)就用了5個(gè)鏡頭）庐镐，而片斷之間的鏡頭焦距變化幾乎是隨意的。Ellie下了車(chē)走到碼頭的一幕变逃，整個(gè)動(dòng)作用了9個(gè)鏡頭必逆。

We can imagine a simpler presentation—perhaps after an establishing shot, we track with Ellie down along the dock (so we can see her smiling anticipation), then pan with her walking leftward into a framing that prepares for the plane hatch to open. Arguably, the need to show off production values—the vast natural landscape, the swooping plane descending—pressed Nolan to include some of the extra shots. They don’t do much dramatically, and the strange cut back to an extreme long-shot (to cover the change to a new angle on Ellie?) may negate whatever affinity with her that the closer shots aim to build up.

我們可以設(shè)想一個(gè)更簡(jiǎn)單的呈現(xiàn)方式—或許在一個(gè)定位鏡頭之后，我們一路跟拍Ellie走到碼頭（從而我們可以看到她面露微笑期待偶像的到來(lái)），接著鏡頭隨她往左橫搖進(jìn)入一個(gè)靜止景框名眉，隨后可以從中看到開(kāi)啟的飛機(jī)艙門(mén)粟矿。當(dāng)然向觀眾炫耀制作成本的必要——廣袤的自然風(fēng)光，水上飛機(jī)滑翔降落等場(chǎng)景损拢，促使諾蘭加入了一些多余的鏡頭陌粹。但這些鏡頭并沒(méi)有什么戲劇效果，而且一個(gè)到遠(yuǎn)距鏡頭的回切（以此來(lái)掩蓋Ellie在鏡頭里的角度變化福压？）卻足以抵消之前中近鏡頭試圖對(duì)她建立的任何親切感掏秩。

Swedish sleeplessness

瑞典式失眠

（譯注：瑞典導(dǎo)演的失眠場(chǎng)面處理）

《神奇的邁克》劇照

Want an up-to-date comparison? Steven Soderbergh’s Magic Mike has a quiet, clean style that conveys each story point without fanfare. Soderbergh saves his singles for major moments and drops back for long-running master shots when character interaction counts. His cuts are just that; they trim fat. He doesn’t resort to those short-lived push-in camera movements that Nolan seems addicted to. He doesn’t waste time with filler shots of people going in and out of buildings, or aerial views of a cityscape. Soderbergh can provide an unfussy 70s-ish telephoto long take of Mike and Brooke walking along a pier and settling down at a picnic table in front of a Go-Kart track while her brother Adam materializes in the distance. In a single year, with Contagion, Haywire, and Magic Mike, Soderbergh has confirmed himself as our master of the intelligent midrange picture. To anyone who cares to watch, these movies give lessons in discreet, compact direction.

For a more pertinent contrast case, we can go back Insomnia’s source, the 1997 Norwegian film of the same name written and directed by Erik Skjoldbjaerg. Here a Swedish detective, vaguely under suspicion for an infraction of duty, comes to a town on the Arctic Circle for a murder investigation. The plot is roughly similar in its premise, but the working out is quite different, and I can’t do justice to it here. Let me mention just two points of contrast.

拿眼下其他導(dǎo)演的作品來(lái)作個(gè)比較如何？Steven Soderbergh(譯注：美國(guó)導(dǎo)演荆姆，憑借《販毒網(wǎng)絡(luò)》獲得2000奧斯卡最佳導(dǎo)演獎(jiǎng)）的《神奇的邁克》有著安靜蒙幻，簡(jiǎn)潔的風(fēng)格，其中的每個(gè)情節(jié)要點(diǎn)的都沒(méi)有被大勢(shì)渲染胆筒。Soderbergh只在一些重要的時(shí)刻使用單鏡頭敘事邮破，而在角色互動(dòng)的場(chǎng)景里又用回了主鏡頭。這就是他的剪輯方式仆救；不留臃腫抒和。他沒(méi)有采用那種短促的推進(jìn)式鏡頭，對(duì)此諾蘭倒是樂(lè)此不疲派桩。他沒(méi)有用諸如人們走進(jìn)走出建筑或是城市的航拍等填充鏡頭來(lái)浪費(fèi)時(shí)間。Soderbergh可以用一個(gè)70年代常見(jiàn)的長(zhǎng)焦長(zhǎng)鏡頭來(lái)展現(xiàn)Mike和Brooke沿著碼頭一直走到Go-Kart外面的野餐桌前蚌斩，而她的弟弟逐漸從遠(yuǎn)方走來(lái)铆惑。Soderbergh憑借一年里推出的三部作品：《傳染病》，《致勝一擊》和《神奇的邁克》向我們證明了他是中等成本情節(jié)片的大師送膳。這三部電影像我們展現(xiàn)了低調(diào)而簡(jiǎn)潔的導(dǎo)演技巧员魏。

如果要做一個(gè)更貼切的對(duì)比，我們可以回到《失眠癥》的源頭叠聋，1997年由挪威導(dǎo)演Erik Skjoldbjaerg編寫(xiě)并執(zhí)導(dǎo)的同名影片撕阎。在本片中，一位被懷疑有瀆職行為的瑞典警探碌补，來(lái)到了位于北極圈中的一座小鎮(zhèn)調(diào)查一起謀殺案虏束。兩部影片的情節(jié)大致類似，但展現(xiàn)的手法卻大不相同厦章，而在本文中無(wú)法對(duì)此做全面分析镇匀。我只想提及兩個(gè)不同點(diǎn)。

First, the cutting is less jagged. Skjoldbjaerg’s film comes in at ninety-seven minutes, about fifteen minutes shorter than Nolan’s, and its cutting rate is much slower, around 5.4 seconds. That means that many passages are built out of sustained shots, particularly ones showing the detective Jonas Engstr?m walking or sitting in a brooding, self-contained silence. Also, this version finds ways to convey several bits of information concisely, in carefully designed shots. For a straightforward example: We see Engstrom’s eyes open, as he’s unable to sleep, and then he lifts his head. Rack focus to the clock behind him.

首先袜啃，原版影片的剪輯更為流暢汗侵。Skjoldbjaerg的版本時(shí)長(zhǎng)97分鐘，比諾蘭的版本短了約15分鐘，而原版里的剪輯頻率也要比諾蘭版本慢了不少晰韵，大概平均每個(gè)鏡頭耗時(shí)5.4秒发乔。這就意味著許多片斷是由連貫的鏡頭構(gòu)成的，特別是展現(xiàn)警探Jonas Engstr?m坐立不安雪猪，若有所思栏尚，沉默不語(yǔ)的那些鏡頭。而且原版影片通過(guò)仔細(xì)設(shè)計(jì)的拍攝鏡頭浪蹂，以頗簡(jiǎn)練的方式向觀眾傳達(dá)信息抵栈。舉個(gè)最直接的例子：我們看到Engstrom睜著雙眼，無(wú)法入睡坤次，而當(dāng)他抬起頭以后古劲，畫(huà)面聚焦到了他身后的電子鐘。

Nolan uses several shots to get across a comparable point.

諾蘭則用了數(shù)個(gè)鏡頭來(lái)表達(dá)同樣的內(nèi)容缰猴。

As for subjectivity, Skoldbjaerg is just as keen to get us inside his detective’s head as Nolan is. At times he uses the sort of flash-cutting Nolan employs, so we get fragmentary reminders of the fog-clouded shooting. But Skoldbjaerg doesn’t tease us with unattributed inserts (Nolan’s flashbacks to Dormer’s framing of a suspect), and he never suggests, via images of the murder and its cleanup, that his detective can imagine the crime concretely. Instead, Skoldbjaerg often evokes his character’s unease through camera movements that upset our sense of his spatial location. The camera shows Engstrom striding into a room…and then swivels rightward to show him in his original location, as if he’s sneaked around behind our back.

而在主觀性這一點(diǎn)上产艾，Skoldbjaerg和諾蘭一樣，迫切想把我們拉進(jìn)偵探的頭腦中滑绒。片中他有幾次也像諾蘭那樣使用了閃回的剪輯來(lái)向我們呈現(xiàn)霧中槍擊的片斷闷堡。但是Skoldbjaerg沒(méi)有用指向不明的片斷來(lái)吊我們胃口（比如諾蘭片中Dormer對(duì)另一起案件中設(shè)計(jì)嫌犯的閃回），而且他從來(lái)沒(méi)有通過(guò)謀殺案的畫(huà)面和善后清理的鏡頭來(lái)暗示偵探能切實(shí)想象出謀殺過(guò)程疑故。Skoldbjaerg轉(zhuǎn)而籍由調(diào)度片中主角在畫(huà)面中的位置來(lái)呈現(xiàn)出令觀眾不安的觀感杠览，并由此讓觀眾感受到主角的不安情緒。（如下圖）鏡頭中Engstrom走進(jìn)了一個(gè)房間…接著鏡頭向右搖轉(zhuǎn)展現(xiàn)他站在最初的位置纵势，仿佛他悄然走到了我們觀眾的背后踱阿。

Then Engstrom turns, and we hear a footstep. Cut to a shot showing that the sound is made by him, walking in another room.

接著接著Engstrom轉(zhuǎn)過(guò)身，然后我們聽(tīng)到了腳步聲钦铁。影片跳到下一個(gè)鏡頭软舌，我們看到這是他在另一個(gè)房間踱步發(fā)出的聲音。

I’m not going to suggest that Skoldbaerg innovates more radically than Nolan does, though most viewers probably are more startled by these devices than by Nolan’s. I think that the original Insomnia’s stylistic gamesmanship owes something to other precedents, going back to Dreyer’s Vampyr. What I find more interesting is that Nolan had available the prior example of these strategies from his Nordic source, and he still chose to go with the more conventional, cutting-based options.

The ?editing-driven, somewhat catch-as-catch-can approach to staging and shooting is clearly Nolan’s preference for many projects. He doesn’t prepare shot lists, and he storyboards only the big action sequences. As his DP Wally Pfister remarks, “What I do is not complicated.” Comparing their production method to documentary filming, he adds: “A lot of the spirit of it is: How fast can we shoot this?”

我不會(huì)因此就表示相比起諾蘭牛曹，Skoldbjaerg所做的革新更為極端佛点，即便對(duì)比起諾蘭的快剪手法，大多數(shù)觀眾或許會(huì)更驚訝于Skoldbjaerg在此的呈現(xiàn)方式黎比。我認(rèn)為原版《失眠癥》在風(fēng)格上的高明把控也借鑒了其他的電影前輩超营，早至Dreyer的《吸血鬼》（1932）。更讓我感興趣的是諾蘭在北歐原版影片中可以借鑒到這些拍攝方法阅虫，但他仍然選擇了更為常規(guī)糟描，基于后期剪輯的表現(xiàn)形式。

諾蘭在很多影片中顯然更喜歡運(yùn)用這種依賴剪輯书妻，有點(diǎn)像瞎貓逮死耗子(catch-as-catch-can)的手段來(lái)進(jìn)行場(chǎng)面調(diào)度和影片拍攝船响。他不會(huì)事先準(zhǔn)備拉片分鏡表躬拢，而他只會(huì)為一些大場(chǎng)面的場(chǎng)景準(zhǔn)備故事板。正如他的攝影導(dǎo)演Wally Pfister所言见间，“我要做的事情并不復(fù)雜聊闯。”Wally把他們的攝制方法與紀(jì)錄片拍攝做類比米诉，他還說(shuō)：“其中的主導(dǎo)思想在于：我們多塊能拍完菱蔬？”

Throwing it against the wall

往墻上扔過(guò)去

We can find this loose shooting and brusque editing in most of Nolan’s films, and so they don’t seem to me to display innovative, or particularly skilful, visual style. I’m going to assume that his strengths aren’t in the choice of subjects either, since genre considerations have kept him to superheroics and psychological crime and mystery. I think his chief areas of innovation lie in theme and form.

The thematic dimension is easy to see. There’s the issue of uncertain identity, which becomes explicit in Memento and the Batman films. The lost-woman motif, from Leonard’s wife in Memento to Rachel in the two late Batman movies, gives Nolan’s films the recurring theme of vengeance, as well as the romantic one of the man doomed to solitude and unhappiness, always grieving. If this almost obsessive circling around personal identity and the loss of wife or lover carries emotional conviction, it owes a good deal to the performances of Guy Pearce, Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, and Leonardo DiCaprio, who put some flesh on Nolan’s somewhat schematic situations.

在諾蘭大多數(shù)影片中，我們都能看到到這種松散的拍攝手法和唐突的后期剪輯史侣，因此在我看來(lái)拴泌，這些都沒(méi)有展現(xiàn)出革新的或者是特別有技術(shù)含量的視覺(jué)風(fēng)格。我猜想他的強(qiáng)項(xiàng)也不在題材的選擇上惊橱，他拍攝的影片主要是超級(jí)英雄蚪腐，心理犯罪以及懸疑這樣的類型。我認(rèn)為他革新的主要領(lǐng)域在于影片的主題和形式税朴。

諾蘭影片的主題層面不難考察回季。其中包含“身份不明”的話題，這在《記憶碎片》和《蝙蝠俠》系列中顯而易見(jiàn)正林∨菀唬“缺失的女人”這個(gè)主旨，從《記憶碎片》中Leonard的妻子到前兩部《蝙蝠俠》影片中的Rachel觅廓，使得諾蘭影片一再出現(xiàn)復(fù)仇主題鼻忠，以及男主角注定孤獨(dú)悲傷這種浪漫主題。如果說(shuō)這種對(duì)于個(gè)人身份近乎癡迷的糾纏以及愛(ài)人缺失的主題在情感上能讓觀眾認(rèn)同杈绸，那也要多虧Guy Pearce, Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale以及Leonardo DiCaprio等明星的演技帖蔓，他們讓諾蘭這種按部就班的影片場(chǎng)景變得鮮活。

You can argue that these psychological themes aren’t especially original, especially in mystery-based plots, but the Batman films offer something fresher. The Dark Knight trilogy has attracted attention for its willingness to suggest real-world resonance in comic-book material. Umberto Eco once objected that Superman, who has the power to redirect rivers, prevent asteroid collisions, and expose political corruption, devotes too much of his time to thwarting bank robbers. Nolan and his colleagues have sought to answer Eco’s charge by imbuing the usual string of heists, fights, chases, explosions, kidnappings, ticking bombs, and pistols-to-the-head with sociopolitical gravitas. The Dark Knight invokes ideas about terrorism, torture, surveillance, and the need to keep the public in the dark about its heroes. Something similar has happened with The Dark Knight Rises, leaving commentators to puzzle out what it’s saying about financial manipulation, class inequities, and the 99 percent/ 1 percent debate.

Nolan and his collaborators are doubtless doing something ambitious in giving the superhero genre a new weightiness. Yet I found The Dark Knight Rises, like its predecessor, unable to bear the burden. It seemed to me at once pretentious and confused in a manner typical of Hollywood’s traditional handling of topical themes.

你也可以找茬說(shuō)這些心理主題不是格外具有原創(chuàng)性蝇棉，尤其是那些基于懸疑的情節(jié)讨阻，不過(guò)《蝙蝠俠》系列倒有些新意芥永〈垡螅《暗黑騎士》三部曲吸引人的地方在于以漫畫(huà)故事的素材來(lái)呼應(yīng)現(xiàn)實(shí)世界。Umberto Eco（意大利著名學(xué)者埋涧，小說(shuō)家板辽，評(píng)論家，譯注）曾經(jīng)就質(zhì)疑說(shuō)像超人能力驚人棘催，他能改變河流流向劲弦，避免地球遭受隕石撞擊，揭發(fā)政治腐敗醇坝，但他卻花了太多時(shí)間來(lái)對(duì)付銀行搶劫犯邑跪。似乎是為了回應(yīng)Eco的指摘，諾蘭和同事們把影片中一連串平淡無(wú)奇的搶劫，打斗画畅，追逐砸琅，爆炸嘶摊，綁架昂羡，炸彈倒計(jì)時(shí)乎完，頭頂槍口的場(chǎng)面再摻入了社會(huì)政治層面的沉重感猬膨「咛《暗黑騎士》讓人思索恐怖主義砸烦，虐待搂擦，監(jiān)視以及幕后英雄不必為人知曉等話題崭孤。而在《暗黑騎士的崛起》中類似的思考同樣被勾起雳灵，讓一眾評(píng)論家去糾結(jié)影片關(guān)于金融操控棕所，階級(jí)不平等以及99%/1%財(cái)富分配這些問(wèn)題究竟想表達(dá)什么。

諾蘭和他的合作者們無(wú)疑在超級(jí)英雄類型片中野心勃勃地加入了新的砝碼细办。不過(guò)我認(rèn)為《暗黑騎士的崛起》和系列前作一樣橙凳，無(wú)力承載過(guò)重的意指。我很快就感覺(jué)了其中裝腔作勢(shì)笑撞，含混不清的呈現(xiàn)方式岛啸，這也是好萊塢在處理這類話題性主題時(shí)的典型而傳統(tǒng)的方法。

The confusion comes into focus when journalists, needing an angle on this week’s release, look for a coherent reflection of that elusive, probably imaginary zeitgeist. I think that most popular films don’t capture the spirit of the time, assuming such a thing exists, but simply opportunistically stitch together whatever lies to hand. Let me recycle what I wrote four years ago.

I remember walking out of Patton (1970) with a hippie friend who loved it. He claimed that it showed how vicious the military was, by portraying a hero as an egotistical nutcase. That wasn’t the reading offered by a veteran I once talked to, who considered the film a tribute to a great warrior.

這種含義不明茴肥，令人理解混亂的情況凸顯在記者們對(duì)影片各自不一的解讀坚踩。他們都需要琢磨出影片中那令人迷惑，甚至或許只存在于想象中的時(shí)代精神瓤狐，從而能寫(xiě)出本周影評(píng)瞬铸。如果時(shí)代精神真的存在，那我認(rèn)為絕大多數(shù)大眾電影都沒(méi)有將其把握—這些電影不過(guò)是投機(jī)地把手中的話題拼湊到一塊础锐。讓我來(lái)看看自己四年前寫(xiě)的東西嗓节。

我記得和一位嬉皮朋友看完《巴頓》后走出影院。他喜歡這部影片皆警，認(rèn)為影片通過(guò)刻畫(huà)一個(gè)自我主義的頑固派英雄拦宣，表現(xiàn)了軍隊(duì)的丑惡。但當(dāng)我和一位退役老兵談到該片時(shí)信姓，他的觀感卻不盡相同鸵隧，他認(rèn)為影片是向一名偉大的戰(zhàn)士致敬。

It was then I began to suspect that Hollywood movies are usually strategically ambiguous about politics. You can read them in a lot of different ways, and that ambivalence is more or less deliberate.

A Hollywood film tends to pose sharp moral polarities and then fuzz or fudge or rush past settling them. For instance, take The Bourne Ultimatum: Yes, the espionage system is corrupt, but there is one honorable agent who will leak the information, and the press will expose it all, and the malefactors will be jailed. This tactic hasn’t had a great track record in real life.

從那時(shí)起我開(kāi)始懷疑好萊塢電影通常策略性地把其政治傾向模糊化意推。你可以從不同角度來(lái)解讀豆瘫，而這種含混曖昧或多或少是刻意為之的。

好萊塢電影傾向于呈現(xiàn)出尖銳的道德兩極菊值，然后又語(yǔ)焉不詳外驱，或者回避討論育灸，或者草草結(jié)尾。拿《伯恩身份3》來(lái)舉個(gè)例：沒(méi)錯(cuò)昵宇，間諜系統(tǒng)是腐敗的描扯，但還是有一個(gè)品行高尚的特工愿意透露出內(nèi)幕，而媒體也會(huì)將其全部曝光趟薄，然后壞人會(huì)被抓進(jìn)監(jiān)獄绽诚。但在真實(shí)世界里，這名特工的選擇可不會(huì)有什么好結(jié)果杭煎。

The constitutive ambiguity of Hollywood movies helpfully disarms criticisms from interest groups (“Look at the positive points we put in”). It also gives the film an air of moral seriousness (“See, things aren’t simple; there are gray areas”). . . .

I’m not saying that films can’t carry an intentional message. Bryan Singer and Ian McKellen claim the X-Men series criticizes prejudice against gays and minorities. Nor am I saying that an ambivalent film comes from its makers delicately implanting counterbalancing clues. Sometimes they probably do that. More often, I think, filmmakers pluck out bits of cultural flotsam opportunistically, stirring it all together and offering it up to see if we like the taste. It’s in filmmakers’ interests to push a lot of our buttons without worrying whether what comes out is a coherent intellectual position. Patton grabbed people and got them talking, and that was enough to create a cultural event. Ditto The Dark Knight.

好萊塢電影這種觀點(diǎn)構(gòu)成上的模棱兩對(duì)其消解來(lái)自各利益團(tuán)體的批評(píng)倒是大有裨益的恩够。（“看吧，我們?cè)诶锩嬉布尤肓苏鎯?nèi)容的哦”）羡铲。這種含混還讓影片有一種道德上的嚴(yán)肅感（“看嘛蜂桶，事情沒(méi)那么簡(jiǎn)單；還有些灰色地帶呢”）也切。

我不是說(shuō)電影不能傳遞一些意味明確的信息扑媚。Bryan Singer和Ian McKellen就認(rèn)為《X戰(zhàn)警》系列批評(píng)了對(duì)于同性戀和少數(shù)群體的歧視現(xiàn)象。我也不認(rèn)為如果一部電影觀點(diǎn)模糊雷恃，就是因?yàn)橹谱魅丝桃庵踩肓烁鞣N相互制衡的信息疆股。有時(shí)他們可能會(huì)這么做。更多的時(shí)候我覺(jué)得電影制作者們是投機(jī)地把各種文化符號(hào)攪到一塊然后端出來(lái)倒槐，看大家是否喜歡旬痹。能勾起我們觀眾的各種想法，又不用考慮其觀點(diǎn)立場(chǎng)是否連貫同意讨越，電影制作者們肯定是樂(lè)于此道的两残。《巴頓》吸引了各種觀眾并引發(fā)了他們的討論把跨，這就足以制造一次文化事件∪斯現(xiàn)在的《暗黑騎士》也是如此。

Since I wrote that, Nolan has confirmed my hunch. He says of the new Batman movie:

We throw a lot of things against the wall to see if it sticks. We put a lot of interesting questions in the air, but that’s simply a backdrop for the story. . . . We’re going to get wildly different interpretations of what the film is supporting and not supporting, but it’s not doing any of those things. It’s just telling a story.

我當(dāng)時(shí)這么寫(xiě)道着逐，而今諾蘭映證了我的猜測(cè)崔赌。他自己對(duì)新蝙蝠俠影片的看法如下：

我們把很多元素扔到墻上，看他們能不能粘上去滨嘱。我們提出了很多有趣的問(wèn)題峰鄙，但這只是影片的故事背景…關(guān)于影片支持什么浸间，反對(duì)什么太雨，我們會(huì)得到很多迥異的解讀，但電影本身并不參與其中魁蒜。電影只是講個(gè)故事囊扳。

Just to be clear, I don’t think the just-telling-a-story alibi is bulletproof. The cultural mix on display in a movie can still exclude certain ideological possibilities, or frame the materials in ways that slant how spectators take them up. My point is only that we ought not to expect popular movies, or indeed many movies, to offer crisp, transparent visions of politics or society. Thematic murkiness and confusion are the norm, and the movie’s inconsistencies may reflect nothing more than the makers’ adroit scavenging.

確切地說(shuō)吩翻，我不認(rèn)為“只為了講故事”這種托詞是無(wú)懈可擊的。一部影片中的文化大雜燴仍然會(huì)排除某些意識(shí)形態(tài)上的可能性锥咸，或者素材選擇的范圍也會(huì)影響觀眾的解讀狭瞎。我的觀點(diǎn)只不過(guò)是我們不應(yīng)該指望大眾電影，或者說(shuō)包括大眾電影在內(nèi)的很多電影搏予，能對(duì)于政治或者社會(huì)提出清晰熊锭，明確的觀點(diǎn)。主題上的模糊含混是很尋常的雪侥，而影片缺乏連貫性也不過(guò)是反映了制作者機(jī)靈到了來(lái)者不拒的程度碗殷。（原文為adroit scavenging，前者為聰明機(jī)智速缨，后者意指從垃圾堆里撿東西锌妻，饑不擇食，Bordwell對(duì)諾蘭的奚落可見(jiàn)一斑旬牲，譯注）

Subjectivity and crosscutting

主觀性和交叉剪輯

Nolan’s innovations seem strongest in the realm of narrative form. He’s fascinated by unusual storytelling strategies. Those aren’t developed at full stretch in Insomnia or the Dark Knight trilogy, but other films put them on display.

One way to capture his formal ambitions, I think, is to see them as an effort to reconcile character subjectivity with large-scale crosscutting. Nolan has pointed out his keen interest in both strategies. But on the face of it, they’re opposed. Techniques of subjectivity plunge us into what one character perceives or feels or thinks. Crosscutting typically creates much more unrestricted field of view, shifting us from person to person, place to place. One is intensive, the other expansive; one is a local effect, the other becomes the basis of the film’s enveloping architecture.

諾蘭的各項(xiàng)革新似乎在敘事形式領(lǐng)域最顯著仿粹。他著迷于與眾不同的敘事方式。在《失眠癥》和《暗黑騎士》三部曲中原茅，他的敘事手法未能得以全面展現(xiàn)吭历，但是在其他作品中有所體現(xiàn)。

要理解諾蘭在形式上的雄心壯志擂橘，我覺(jué)得不妨將其看作是他為了調(diào)和主觀性敘事和大規(guī)模交叉剪輯所做的努力毒涧。諾蘭對(duì)兩者都展現(xiàn)出了強(qiáng)烈的興趣。但乍看起來(lái)贝室，這兩者卻是相互對(duì)立的契讲。主觀性敘事的技巧把觀眾推進(jìn)影片角色的視角或者思維出發(fā)點(diǎn)。而交叉剪輯則典型地被用來(lái)制造更自由的視角滑频，讓觀眾在不同角色和不同場(chǎng)景間游走捡偏。前者是集中視角，后者是發(fā)散視角峡迷；一面是局部效果银伟，另一面卻是包裹整部影片的基礎(chǔ)。

The Batman trilogy has plenty of crosscutting, but as far as I can tell, subjectivity takes a back seat. Nolan’s first two films reconcile subjectivity and crosscutting in more unusual ways. Following takes a linear story, breaks it into four stretches, and then intercuts them. But instead of expanding our range of knowledge to many characters, nearly all the sections are confined to what happens to one protagonist, and they’re presented as his recounted memories in a Q & A situation.

Likewise, Memento confines us to a single protagonist and skips between his memories and immediate experiences. Again what might be a single, linear timeline is split, but then one series of incidents is presented as moving chronologically while another is presented in reverse order. Again, the competing time trajectories aren’t presented as large blocks but are fairly swiftly crosscut.

《蝙蝠俠》三部曲里面運(yùn)用了不少交叉剪輯绘搞，但在我看來(lái)彤避，主觀性敘事仍然是影片的基調(diào)。諾蘭前兩部影片在調(diào)和主觀性和交叉剪輯上采用了不尋常的方式夯辖。諾蘭的處女作《跟蹤》（1998）把一個(gè)線性的故事情節(jié)分解成四段琉预，然后進(jìn)行交叉剪輯處理。但這種交叉剪輯并沒(méi)有拓展觀眾對(duì)各個(gè)角色的認(rèn)知蒿褂，相反幾乎所有的片斷都局限在一位主角的經(jīng)歷圆米，而且是以主角在問(wèn)答對(duì)話場(chǎng)景下以復(fù)述回憶的方式呈現(xiàn)卒暂。

《記憶碎片》也用類似手法將觀眾的視角局限在單個(gè)主人公身上，并且在他的回憶和當(dāng)下經(jīng)歷之間切換娄帖。原本是單一也祠，線性的時(shí)間線再次被分割，然后一系列的事件以時(shí)間先后順序呈現(xiàn)近速，而另一串事件又以相反的時(shí)間順序來(lái)呈現(xiàn)诈嘿。又一次，影片中各條對(duì)立的時(shí)間軌跡不是被整塊展現(xiàn)出來(lái)削葱，而是通過(guò)快速的交叉剪輯來(lái)呈現(xiàn)永淌。

In The Prestige, dual protagonists, both with a secret, take over the story, but the presentation remains steeped in subjectivity. Now much of the action is filtered through each magician’s notebook of jottings and recollections, translated into voice-over commentary. One character may be reading another’s notebook in which the writer reports reading the first character’s notebook! And of course these tales-within-tales are intercut, with one man’s frame story alternating with the other’s past experience. You can work it all out diagrammatically, as I tried to do in my notes (on right).

With Inception, subjectivity takes the shape of dreaming, and the crosscutting is now among layers of dreams. The embedding that we find in The Prestige is now carried to an extreme; in the long, climactic final sequence a group dream frames another dream which frames another, and so on, to five levels. Once again, these all get intercut (although Nolan wisely refrains from reminding us of the outermost frame too often, so that our eventual return to it can be sensed more strongly).

《致命魔術(shù)》有兩位主角，各自有一個(gè)秘密佩耳，但影片敘事仍然偏向主觀性的手法遂蛀。影片中故事通過(guò)兩位魔術(shù)師各自在筆記本上的記錄和回憶被過(guò)濾，然后再由畫(huà)外音轉(zhuǎn)述干厚。片中一個(gè)角色可能讀到另一人的筆記李滴，而其作者又在其中記敘他閱讀對(duì)方的筆記！當(dāng)然這些戲中戲是被交叉剪輯過(guò)的蛮瞄，由其中一人的故事情節(jié)來(lái)替代敘述對(duì)方之前的經(jīng)歷所坯。你可以將影片的結(jié)構(gòu)以圖表形式勾勒出來(lái)，就像我在上面自己的筆記里面那樣來(lái)勾勒挂捅。

在《盜夢(mèng)空間》中芹助，主觀性以夢(mèng)的形式呈現(xiàn)，而交叉剪輯是在各層夢(mèng)境中完成闲先。而我們?cè)凇吨旅g(shù)》中看到的疊加被運(yùn)用到了極致状土；在那幕最后的高潮片斷中，一個(gè)集體夢(mèng)境套入了第二個(gè)夢(mèng)境伺糠，而第二個(gè)夢(mèng)境再套入第三個(gè)蒙谓，以此類推到了五層夢(mèng)境。而這些夢(mèng)再一次被

交替剪輯（不過(guò)諾蘭明智地避免讓觀眾過(guò)多回想到最外一層夢(mèng)境训桶，這樣一來(lái)我們最后的逐層回歸才會(huì)顯得更為震撼）累驮。

Kristin and I have written at length about these strategies in earlier entries (here and here). To recapitulate, Kristin found Inception‘s reliance on continuous exposition a worthwhile experiment, and I argued that the lucid-dreaming gimmick was simply a motivational strategy, a pretext for connecting multiple plotlines through embedding rather than parallel action. My point in the first essay is summed up here:

As ambitious artists compete to engineer clockwork narratives and puzzle films, Nolan raises the stakes by reviving a very old tradition, that of the embedded story. He motivates it through dreams and modernizes it with a blend of science fiction, fantasy, action pictures, and male masochism. Above all, the dream motivation allows him to crosscut four embedded stories, all built on classic Hollywood plot arcs. In the process he creates a virtuoso stretch of cinematic storytelling.

在之前的博客文章中，我和Kristin用了很長(zhǎng)篇幅來(lái)討論這些形式策略舵揭。歸納起來(lái)谤专，Kristin認(rèn)為《盜夢(mèng)空間》依賴連續(xù)闡述（形式動(dòng)機(jī)）是有其實(shí)驗(yàn)性價(jià)值的，而我則認(rèn)為清醒夢(mèng)境的把戲只是用來(lái)推動(dòng)情節(jié)發(fā)展的策略午绳，是為了通過(guò)疊加而非平行敘事的方式來(lái)連接多條情節(jié)的邏輯前提置侍。我在第一篇文章中的觀點(diǎn)可以總結(jié)如下：

有抱負(fù)的電影藝術(shù)家們爭(zhēng)相設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)間線索清晰的敘事和耐人尋味的電影，而諾蘭則把籌碼加得更高，不過(guò)他是依靠著復(fù)興故事疊加這種非常古老的敘事傳統(tǒng)來(lái)參與競(jìng)爭(zhēng)墅垮。他通過(guò)夢(mèng)來(lái)推動(dòng)情節(jié)發(fā)展，并且利用科幻耕漱，幻想算色，動(dòng)作片以及大男子主義等元素賦予其現(xiàn)代感∶唬總而言之灾梦，夢(mèng)作為動(dòng)機(jī)讓他可以交替剪輯四個(gè)疊加的故事，而故事本身都是基于經(jīng)典的好萊塢情節(jié)套路妓笙。在這個(gè)過(guò)程中他創(chuàng)造出一段電影敘事的炫技演出若河。

My later thoughts tried to survey the breadth of Nolan’s development of formal strategies. Here’s my conclusion:

From this perspective, Inception marks a step forward in Nolan’s exploration of telling a story by crosscutting different time frames. You can even measure the changes quantitatively. Following contains four timelines and intercuts (for the most part) three. Memento intercuts two timelines, but one moves backward. Like Following, The Prestige contains four timelines and intercuts three, but it opens the way toward intercutting embedded stories. The climax of Inception intercuts four embedded timelines, all of them framed by a fifth, the plane trip in the present. For reasons I mentioned in the previous post, it’s possible that Nolan has hit a recursive limit. Any more timelines and most viewers will get lost.?

我在當(dāng)時(shí)的文章里還試圖考察諾蘭在形式策略上的一些發(fā)展。我的結(jié)論如下：

從這個(gè)角度來(lái)看寞宫，《盜夢(mèng)空間》標(biāo)志著諾蘭通過(guò)對(duì)不同時(shí)間片斷的交替剪輯從而對(duì)敘事的探索上更進(jìn)一步萧福。你甚至可以量化這種變化”哺常《跟蹤》包含四條時(shí)間線鲫忍，（在影片大部分中）交替剪輯了三條≡壳《記憶碎片》交替剪輯了兩條悟民，但有一條是回溯的。和《跟蹤》一樣篷就，《致命魔術(shù)》有四條時(shí)間線射亏，交替剪輯了三條，但在片中出現(xiàn)了交替剪輯的疊加故事竭业≈侨螅《盜夢(mèng)空間》的高潮部分交替剪輯了四條疊加的時(shí)間線，而這四條時(shí)間線由第五條時(shí)間線承載未辆，即影片中的現(xiàn)實(shí)長(zhǎng)途飛行旅程做鹰。在我之前的博客文章中提到過(guò)，諾蘭可能已經(jīng)觸到了這套循環(huán)結(jié)構(gòu)的極限鼎姐。如果再加入更多的時(shí)間線钾麸，那么大多數(shù)觀眾將會(huì)摸不著頭腦了。

The Dark Knight Rises hasn’t dulled my respect for Nolan’s ambitions. Very few contemporary American filmmakers have pursued complex storytelling with such thoroughness and ingenuity.

Nolan has made his innovations accessible, I argued, by the way he has motivated them. First, he appeals to genre conventions. Following and Memento are neo-noirs, and we expect that mode to traffic in complex, perhaps nearly incomprehensible plotting and presentation. He has called Inception a heist film, and what many viewers objected to—its constant explanation of the rules of dream invasion—is not so far from the steady flow of information we get in a caper movie. In the heist genre, Nolan remarks, exposition is entertainment. Further, the separate dreams rely on familiar action-movie conventions: the car chase that ends with a plunge into space, the fight in a hotel corridor, the assault on a fortress, and so on.

《暗黑騎士崛起》依然顯示了諾蘭的雄心炕桨，而我對(duì)此的敬意也不曾麻木饭尝。當(dāng)今的美國(guó)電影制作者中鮮見(jiàn)有人對(duì)復(fù)雜敘事進(jìn)行如此徹底而機(jī)智的求索。（譯注：原文中献宫，respect后接的不是Nolan而是Nolan’s ambitions,似乎表明Bordwell頗有保留钥平，都不愿意直接肯定他；而后一句姊途，原文中用了Very few這樣頗極化的表達(dá)來(lái)說(shuō)明美國(guó)導(dǎo)演數(shù)量之少涉瘾，似乎也并非在展現(xiàn)Bordwell對(duì)諾蘭的贊許之意知态。因此在這一段上，以及通觀前文中的許多類似的表達(dá)立叛，可以看出Bordwell對(duì)諾蘭持有相當(dāng)保留的意見(jiàn)）负敏。

我認(rèn)為諾蘭通過(guò)在影片中不斷地為其革新賦予動(dòng)機(jī)來(lái)幫助觀眾理解。首先他借助常規(guī)的電影類別劃分秘蛇∑渥觯《跟蹤》和《記憶碎片》都是新黑色電影，我們印象中這種類型的電影就應(yīng)該有復(fù)雜到近乎無(wú)法理解的情節(jié)和表現(xiàn)形式赁还。他還把《盜夢(mèng)空間》稱為“盜竊片”妖泄，而很多觀眾不太喜歡影片中反復(fù)對(duì)盜夢(mèng)機(jī)制進(jìn)行的闡釋，這種大量鋪呈的輔助信息的確和“獵奇片”中的敘事手段差別不大艘策。在盜竊片這種類型中蹈胡，諾蘭認(rèn)為闡釋形式邏輯是看點(diǎn)所在。更進(jìn)一步說(shuō)朋蔫，《盜夢(mèng)》中各個(gè)夢(mèng)的敘述都采用了各種我們熟悉的動(dòng)作片手法：汽車(chē)追逐飛到半空审残，賓館走廊上的打斗，要塞攻堅(jiān)斑举，等等搅轿。

But I should have mentioned another method of motivation–one that helps make the films comprehensible to a broad audience. In some cases the formal trickery is justified by the very subjectivity the film embraces. It’s one thing to tell a story in reverse chronology, as Pinter does in Betrayal; but Memento’s broken timeline gets extra motivation from the protagonist’s purported (not clinically realistic) anterograde memory loss. (We’ve already seen a lot of amnesia in film noirs.) Subjectivity is enhanced by the almost constant voice-over narration, reiterating not only Leonard’s thoughts but what he writes incessantly on his Polaroids and his flesh.

In The Prestige, each magician’s journal records not only his trade secrets but his awareness that his rival might be reading his words, so we ought to expect traps and false trails. And in Inception, the notion of plunging into a character’s mind becomes literalized as a dream state. Once we accept the conceit of controlled dreaming, we can buy all the spatial and temporal constraints the dream-master Cobb sets forth. As with Memento, Nolan creates a set of rules that allow him to crosscut many different time lines. In each film, the subject matter—memory failure, magicians’ enigmas, controlled dreaming—serves as an alibi for both subjectivity and broken timelines.

但我還要提及諾蘭另一種為形式賦予動(dòng)機(jī)的方法，以此來(lái)幫助大眾看懂他的電影富玷。在很多情況下璧坟，敘事形式上的花巧是由電影所采用的主觀性視角來(lái)支撐。用倒序的形式來(lái)講故事并不鮮見(jiàn)赎懦，比如Pinter在《背叛》中的敘事雀鹃；不過(guò)《記憶碎片》中，主角反復(fù)出現(xiàn)（臨床上不真實(shí)的）的順行性遺忘為影片破碎的時(shí)間線賦予了額外的動(dòng)機(jī)（我們?cè)诤谏娪爸幸呀?jīng)看到了許多的失憶場(chǎng)面）励两。此外影片中幾乎時(shí)刻存在的畫(huà)外音黎茎，反復(fù)重述著Leonard的想法；他不停地在“拍立得”照片上和自己身體上所寫(xiě)下各種線索当悔，依靠這些元素傅瞻，影片的主觀性也得到了加強(qiáng)。

在《致命魔術(shù)》中盲憎，魔術(shù)師各自的日記不僅記錄著他們的秘密嗅骄，其中也透露了他們知道其對(duì)方或許也能讀到自己的日記，因此觀眾就應(yīng)該能設(shè)想到其中可能存在著陷阱和假線索饼疙。而在《盜夢(mèng)空間》中溺森，進(jìn)入角色的思維是通過(guò)夢(mèng)境來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)。一旦我們接受了夢(mèng)境控制的這個(gè)前提，那么我們對(duì)于造夢(mèng)大師Cobb所設(shè)下的所有空間和時(shí)間的限制也就可以全盤(pán)接受了屏积。而在《記憶碎片》里医窿，諾蘭創(chuàng)造了一套規(guī)則讓他可以在許多不同的時(shí)間線中交替剪輯。諾蘭每一部電影里的主題——失憶炊林，魔術(shù)師的秘密姥卢，受控的夢(mèng)境——是用來(lái)為主觀性敘事和支離破碎的時(shí)間線進(jìn)行辯解的。

Synching story and style

故事和風(fēng)格的同步

Can you be a good writer without writing particularly well? I think so. James Fenimore Cooper, Theodore Dreiser, Sherwood Anderson, Sinclair Lewis, and other significant novelists had many virtues, but elegant prose was not among them. In popular fiction we treasure flawless wordsmiths like P. G. Wodehouse and Rex Stout and Patricia Highsmith, but we tolerate bland or clumsy style if a gripping plot and vivid characters keep us turning the pages. From Burroughs and Doyle to Stieg Larsson and Michael Crichton, we forgive a lot.

Similarly, Nolan’s work deserves attention even though some of it lacks elegance and cohesion at the shot-to-shot level. The stylistic faults I pointed to above and that echo other writers’ critiques are offset by his innovative approach to overarching form. And sometimes he does exercise a stylistic control that suits his broader ambitions. When he mobilizes visual technique to sharpen and nuance his architectural ambitions, we find a solid integration of texture and structure, fine grain and large pattern.

不依靠好的寫(xiě)作能力铛铁，你能否成為一個(gè)好作家隔显？我覺(jué)得可以却妨。James Fenimore Cooper, Theodore Dreiser, Sherwood Anderson, Sinclair Lewis（以上幾位均為19世紀(jì)中期至20世紀(jì)早期的美國(guó)作家饵逐，譯注）還有其他一些重要的小說(shuō)家有很多優(yōu)點(diǎn)，但行文優(yōu)雅卻不是他們的強(qiáng)項(xiàng)彪标。在通俗小說(shuō)中倍权，像P.G.Wodehouse, Rex Stout, Patricia Highsmith這些字斟句酌，力求完美的作家令人肅然起敬捞烟，但只要情節(jié)扣人心弦薄声，角色栩栩如生，那即便某位作家在敘事風(fēng)格上有些笨拙乏味题画，我們也還是可以接受的默辨。從Burroughs（美國(guó)“垮掉的一代”作家，譯注）和Doyle（柯南道爾苍息？譯注）到Stieg Larsson（《龍紋身的女孩》系列作者）和Michael Crichton（美國(guó)暢銷書(shū)作家缩幸，《侏羅紀(jì)公園》作者），我們?cè)徚瞬簧僮骷摇?/p>

同樣的竞思，諾蘭的作品表谊，即便在鏡頭與鏡頭間的層面來(lái)看缺乏美感，不夠連貫盖喷，仍然是值得關(guān)注的爆办。我在前文中所提到他那些風(fēng)格上的瑕疵，以及他與其他作家類似的一些不足课梳，都不足以掩蓋他在搭建宏大敘事形式中所采取的革新手段距辆。而有時(shí)他也會(huì)進(jìn)行風(fēng)格上的操控以配合他實(shí)現(xiàn)其他目的。當(dāng)他調(diào)用視覺(jué)技巧來(lái)彰顯他在影片結(jié)構(gòu)上的野心時(shí)暮刃，我們能發(fā)現(xiàn)畫(huà)面質(zhì)感和構(gòu)圖上的切實(shí)統(tǒng)一挑格，即細(xì)膩的顆粒感與大幅構(gòu)圖的統(tǒng)一。

Here’s a one-off example. Nolan has remarked that he’s mostly not fond of slow-motion simply to accentuate a physical action, or to suggest some mental state like dream or memory. Inception motivates slow-motion by another of its arbitrary rules, the idea that at each level of dreaming time moves at a different rate. Here a stylistic cliché is transformed by its role in a larger structure, as Sean Weitner pointed out in a message to us.

Memento displays a more thoroughgoing recruitment of style to the purposes of guiding us through its labyrinth. The jigsaw joins of the plot require that the head and tail of each reverse-chronology segment be carefully shaped, because they will be reiterated in other segments. Within the scenes as well, Nolan displays a solid craftsmanship, with mostly tight shot connections and an absence of stylistic bumps.

舉個(gè)例子說(shuō)明沾歪。諾蘭曾表示他大多數(shù)時(shí)候不喜歡用慢動(dòng)作來(lái)強(qiáng)調(diào)肢體動(dòng)作或是用來(lái)表示夢(mèng)境或者回憶這類心理狀態(tài)漂彤。《盜夢(mèng)空間》中對(duì)慢動(dòng)作的運(yùn)用則是遵循電影中的一條規(guī)則即每一層夢(mèng)境中的時(shí)間以不同速率流逝這個(gè)規(guī)則。于是一個(gè)風(fēng)格上的老把戲因?yàn)槠湓谟捌Y(jié)構(gòu)中所起的作用而起了變化挫望，Sean Weitner對(duì)此也有相關(guān)討論（Sean Weitner的具體觀點(diǎn)可參見(jiàn)原文中的鏈接立润，譯注）。

《記憶碎片》展現(xiàn)了諾蘭為了實(shí)現(xiàn)引導(dǎo)觀眾穿越影片的結(jié)構(gòu)迷宮這一目的媳板，對(duì)影片風(fēng)格更為透徹的運(yùn)用桑腮。因?yàn)楣适虑楣?jié)被打散成很多塊拼圖，因此每一塊倒敘情節(jié)拼圖的首尾都必須被仔細(xì)打磨蛉幸，才能與其他的情節(jié)拼圖能契合破讨。諾蘭對(duì)影片的各幕也精心打磨，鏡頭間的連接緊密奕纫，風(fēng)格連貫提陶。

He can even slow things down enough for a fifty-second two-shot that develops both drama and humor. Leonard has just shown Teddy the man bound and gagged in his closet, and Teddy wonders how they can get him out. In a nice little gag, Leonard produces a gun from below the frameline (we’ve seen him hide it in a drawer) and then reflects that it must be his prisoner’s piece. This sort of use of off-frame space to build and pay off audience expectations seems rare in Nolan’s scenes.

他甚至可以把節(jié)奏慢下來(lái)用一個(gè)50秒的鏡頭來(lái)展現(xiàn)戲劇和幽默。Leonard向Teddy展示他房間衣櫥里那個(gè)五花大綁的男子匹层，而Teddy則盤(pán)算該如何把他弄出旅館隙笆。接著諾蘭玩了一個(gè)小把戲，他讓Leonard從畫(huà)面之外的下方掏出一把手槍（我們?cè)谥翱吹剿褬尣卦诔閷侠铮┤缓驦eonard意識(shí)到這一定是那個(gè)人質(zhì)的武器升筏。這種利用畫(huà)面之外的空間來(lái)搭建并滿足觀眾的期待的方法在諾蘭影片中是很少見(jiàn)的撑柔。（譯注：仔細(xì)閱讀這一段，仿佛更像是Bordwell對(duì)諾蘭影片的連貫性在挑刺您访，之前在抽屜里的手槍是怎么被他突然從畫(huà)面下方掏出來(lái)的呢铅忿？）

The moment is capped when Leonard adds, “I don’t think they let someone like me carry a gun,” as he darts out of the frame.

The straightforward stylistic treatment of Memento‘s more-or-less present-time scenes, both chronological and reversed, is counterbalanced by the rapid, impressionistic handheld work that characterizes Leonard’s flashbacks to his domestic life and his wife’s death (in color) and his flashbacks to the life of Sammy Jankis (in black-and-white). Nolan shrewdly segregates his techniques according to time zone.

在這幕的結(jié)尾Leonard說(shuō)了句“我不認(rèn)為他們會(huì)讓我這種人有一把手槍，”然后他就沖出了畫(huà)面灵汪。

《記憶碎片》中的正序或是倒序的現(xiàn)代時(shí)場(chǎng)景里檀训，風(fēng)格處理比較直接，而與之對(duì)應(yīng)的則是展現(xiàn)Leonard家庭生活以及妻子逝世（均為彩色畫(huà)面）的閃回片斷以及他對(duì)Sammy Jankis生活回憶的閃回片斷（黑白畫(huà)面）识虚，在這些片斷的處理上諾蘭采用了快速且頗具印象主義的手法肢扯。諾蘭在不同的時(shí)間區(qū)域里面巧妙地區(qū)分利用了他的風(fēng)格技巧。

If anything, The Prestige displays even more exactitude. Facing two protagonists and many flashbacks and replayed events, we could easily become lost. Here Nolan doesn’t use black-and-white to mark off a separate zone. Instead he relies more on us to keep all the strands straight, but he helps us with voice-overs and repeated and varied setups that quietly orient us to recurrent spaces and circumstances. Here Nolan’s preference for cutting together singles is subjected to a simple but crisp logic that relies on our memory to grasp the developing drama.

I’ve discussed these stylistic strategies in another entry and in Chapter 7 of Film Art. More generally, they serve the larger dynamic of the plot, which creates a mystery around Alfred Borden, hides crucial information while hinting at it, invites us to sympathize with Borden’s adversary Robert Angier (another widower by violence), and then shifts our sympathies back to Borden when we learn how the thirst for revenge has unhinged Robert. To achieve the unreliable, oscillating narration of The Prestige, Nolan has polished his film’s stylistic surface with considerable care.

《致命魔術(shù)》則展現(xiàn)了更為精準(zhǔn)的控制技巧担锤。在觀看兩位主角的戲份蔚晨，以及很多閃回片斷和重復(fù)的事件時(shí)，我們很容易會(huì)跟丟情節(jié)肛循。在本片中諾蘭沒(méi)有用黑白畫(huà)面來(lái)區(qū)分單獨(dú)的故事铭腕。他更多是依靠觀眾自己能跟上故事的脈絡(luò)，不過(guò)他運(yùn)用了畫(huà)外音以及故意重復(fù)或是有意調(diào)整的場(chǎng)景設(shè)置來(lái)引導(dǎo)觀眾適應(yīng)反復(fù)出現(xiàn)的空間和情景多糠。在本片中諾蘭對(duì)單鏡頭的剪切處理依循的邏輯很簡(jiǎn)單明了累舷，那就是寄望觀眾的記憶力跟上劇情的發(fā)展。

關(guān)于這些風(fēng)格策略夹孔，我在另一篇文章以及《電影藝術(shù)》第7章都做過(guò)討論被盈∥瞿酰總體而言，他們都是服務(wù)于劇情發(fā)展的需要只怎，而《致命魔術(shù)》的劇情圍繞著Alfred Borden建立起了謎團(tuán)袜瞬，把關(guān)鍵信息隱藏起來(lái)，但又不時(shí)暗示其存在身堡，讓我們對(duì)Borden的對(duì)手Robert Angier產(chǎn)生同情(他的妻子也死于非命)邓尤，然后當(dāng)我們發(fā)現(xiàn)復(fù)仇心切的Robert已經(jīng)喪失理智時(shí)，諾蘭又把我們的同情心轉(zhuǎn)移回到Borden身上贴谎。為了在《致命魔術(shù)》中展現(xiàn)這種來(lái)回?fù)u擺汞扎，捉摸不定的敘事效果，諾蘭對(duì)其影片的風(fēng)格外衣做了精心打磨擅这。

Midcult auteur?

中產(chǎn)階級(jí)文化的作者導(dǎo)演澈魄？

Trying to specify Nolan’s innovations, I’m aware that one response might be this: Those innovations are too cautious. He not only motivates his formal experiments, he over-motivates them. Poor Leonard, telling everyone he meets about his memory deficit, is also telling us again and again, while the continuous exposition of Inception would seem to apologize too much. Films like Resnais’ La Guerre est finie and Ruiz’s Mysteries of Lisbon play with subjectivity, crosscutting, and embedded stories, but they don’t need to spell out and keep providing alibis for their formal strategies. In these films, it takes a while for us to figure out the shape of the game we’re playing.

We seem to be on that ground identified by Dwight Macdonald long ago as Midcult: that form of vulgarized modernism that makes formal experiment too easy for the audience. One of Macdonald’s examples is Our Town, a folksy, ingratiating dilution of Asian and Brechtian dramaturgy. Nolan’s narrative tricks, some might say, take only one step beyond what is normal in commercial cinema. They make things a little more difficult, but you can quickly get comfortable with them. To put it unkindly, we might say it’s storytelling for Humanities majors.

我在本文中一直試圖明確指出諾蘭電影中的革新之處，不過(guò)我知道有人讀了前文以后或許會(huì)如下反應(yīng)：這些革新都太過(guò)于謹(jǐn)慎了蕾哟。他為自己影片中的形式實(shí)驗(yàn)賦予動(dòng)機(jī)一忱，但他甚至做得有些過(guò)頭了莲蜘√啡罚《記憶碎片》中可憐的Leonard，他不光對(duì)每個(gè)他遇到的人訴說(shuō)自己的失憶問(wèn)題票渠，他其實(shí)也是在對(duì)我們一再重復(fù)解釋逐哈，而在《盜夢(mèng)空間》中，盜夢(mèng)機(jī)制被不斷地闡釋问顷，這就好象是做了太多的道歉昂秃。像Renais的《戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)結(jié)束》或者Ruiz的《秘境里斯本》這樣的電影也對(duì)主觀性，交叉剪輯以及故事疊加進(jìn)行把玩杜窄，但他們不用將這些形式策略都點(diǎn)明肠骆，也不必時(shí)刻為這些策略尋找借口。在這些電影中我們需要花點(diǎn)時(shí)間才能弄清楚導(dǎo)演和我們玩的把戲塞耕。

我們現(xiàn)在似乎處在Dwight Macdonald很早以前對(duì)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)文化所劃定的范疇：這種庸俗化的現(xiàn)代主義把形式實(shí)驗(yàn)做得太平易近人了蚀腿。Macdonald所舉的例子之一是《我們鎮(zhèn)》，這部戲劇隨和易懂到了有些討好觀眾程度扫外，講述的亞洲主題故事帶有簡(jiǎn)化版的布萊希特風(fēng)格（20世紀(jì)德國(guó)著名劇作家/戲劇導(dǎo)演）莉钙。有人或許會(huì)說(shuō)諾蘭的敘事技巧只比常規(guī)商業(yè)片向前多邁了一步。這種敘事技巧會(huì)讓故事顯得稍微不那么易懂筛谚，但你很快就會(huì)樂(lè)在其中磁玉。如果要說(shuō)得不客氣點(diǎn)，我們不妨說(shuō)這是為“人文專業(yè)”的學(xué)生打造的敘事方式驾讲。

Much as I respect Macdonald, I think that not all artistic experiments need to be difficult. There’s “l(fā)ight modernism” too: Satie and Prokofiev as well as Schoenberg, Marianne Moore as well as T. S. Eliot, Borges as well as Joyce. Approached from the Masscult side, comic strips have given us Krazy Kat and Polly and Her Pals and, more recently, Chris Ware. Nolan’s work isn’t perfect, but it joins a tradition, not finished yet, of showing that the bounds of popular art are remarkably flexible, and imaginative creators can find new ways to stretch them.

盡管我尊重Macdonald蚊伞，但我不認(rèn)為所有的藝術(shù)實(shí)驗(yàn)都必須艱澀難懂席赂。同樣還有“輕現(xiàn)代主義”的存在：Satie, Prokofiev以及Schoenberg (以上為現(xiàn)代音樂(lè)家，譯注)时迫，在文學(xué)領(lǐng)域有Marianne Moor以及T.S.Eliot, Borges以及Joyce氧枣。在大眾文化的范疇，我們能看到像《瘋貓》以及《波利和她的伙伴》這樣的優(yōu)秀漫畫(huà),更近一點(diǎn)還有Christ Ware的漫畫(huà)作品别垮。諾蘭的作品并不完美便监，但也屬于這一路延續(xù)下來(lái)的傳統(tǒng)之列，這表明了流行藝術(shù)的界限非常地靈活碳想，而具有想象力的創(chuàng)造家們總能找到拓展其疆土的新方法烧董。

參考資料

[1]原文：http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2012/08/19/nolan-vs-nolan/

[2]參考翻譯：http://select.yeeyan.org/view/222670/313752