[新聞] 曼谷郵報白目影評認為賽德克巴來是愛國主義的產物

作者hansioux (竹板凳)

看板movie

標題[新聞] 曼谷郵報白目影評認為賽德克巴來是愛國主義的產物

時間Fri Sep 2 15:52:21 2011

曼谷郵報的影評連結： http://goo.gl/Su1Bq 這位Kong Rithdee先生說賽德克巴來整片充斥著愛國主義，最後還下了「看來愛國主義在世界很多地方仍是搖錢樹」的結論。以下是原文提到賽德克巴來的部份： On the contrary, the other competition film screened on the first night flaunts its nationalist politics to such a humorous extent, quickly raising the question if Venice is sometimes too indulgent in its programming. That film is Seediq Bale. Set during the Japanese occupation of Taiwan, the 150-minute film focuses on the passionate revolt of an aboriginal tribe of the island. The proud leader of the exotically costumed tribe is Chief Mouna, a hot-blooded warrior who hunts boars and dives into waterfalls and doesn't hesitate to shoot a child. When the Japanese army, portrayed as cartoonishly brutal and ignorant, begins its campaign of "civilising" the local savages, Mouna leads his people in a bloodied war against the well-armed invaders. Seediq Bale was directed by Wei Te-sheng, a young film-maker who made Ha'i-kak chhit-ho (Cape No 7), Taiwan's high-grossing film of all time. With more money at his disposal, Wei goes blithely over-the-top in a story that could've been less bombastic and more intense. It's neither Apocalypto nor Avatar, though the film's attempt to instill primal energy would remind you of those two superior films. The most interesting thing is the clear portrayal of the Japanese as an evil force; nationalism remains a hot currency in many parts of the world. 我有在那回復他，但是曼谷日報會先過濾留言才貼上去，所以可想見我的評語在那裡應該是永遠不見天日吧。不過底下是我回的： uh, the same director, Wei Te-sheng, made his name with "Cape No. 7" which is a movie about Taiwanese and Japanese romance across generations. That film caused politically charged people, especially politicians in China, to claim Wei is polluted by Japanese colonialism. now that he made a film about an actual historical event, all of the sudden he is way too nationalistic? That kind of conclusion only proves that you have predetermined that making Japanese the villain is nationalism. about the cartoonishly brutal nature of the Japanese depicted in the film, are you not aware there are other Japanese in the film who are anything but brutal? The truly brutal characters come from the Imperial Army. If you have any historical knowledge you'd know that before and during War World II, being cartoonishly brutal is their bread and butter. They were a modern army who shared the same passion for chopping off enemy heads with those they refered to as "savages". Your conclusion about a film, that's trying to be as authentic and historically accurate as possible, is only about Taiwanese nationalism, is about as valid as saying films about holocaust are all about Israeli nationalism. Look, this is "Bangkok Post", it's not like the Japanese weren't there in Thailand during WW2. Go watch Bridge over River Kwai or something. Or maybe go ask your family elders about how comically harmonious the Japanese Imperial Army was. -- "Don't confuse me with your reasonableness." -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.113.240.34

推 adiemusxyz:曼谷?不就前陣子軍隊鎮壓殺人紅杉軍的國家? zzzzzz 09/02 15:54

推 leochang:泰國的電影工業比台灣強很多很多...樓上真有常識 09/02 15:57

推 rishi:繼金獅獎都是悶片吳宇森把片剪壞新增一項:曼谷是白目地區 09/02 15:58

→ angolmois:泰國啊，拍拍拳霸和鬼片就算了吧。 09/02 15:58

→ gunng:白目是真的沒必要加每個人的看法本來就不一樣 09/02 15:59

他認為整片充斥愛國主義的唯一原因是日本人被描寫成壞人，然後他們為魏德聖把日本人描寫得太暴力。

推 shryuhuai:泰國拍純愛片也比台灣強啊...... 09/02 15:59

→ rishi:拜託賽粉大家都會去看賽德克巴萊啦別再攻擊別人了... 09/02 15:59

→ talan:況且你還不知道這120分鐘的版本剪成什麼樣 09/02 15:59

推 MSme:我以為我看錯，標題真的寫白目= = 09/02 15:59

推 DesertShield:愛台灣^____< 09/02 15:59

→ MSme:在台灣上映的泰國純愛片都很有水準 09/02 16:00

→ shryuhuai:賽粉XDDD,電影版到時候又要大亂了,fajohn加油 09/02 16:00

→ talan:文戲不足武戲太多不都是大部分影評的感想 09/02 16:00

推 circus7788:這種就像每次蜘蛛人或蝙蝠俠推續集，大家都說美帝英雄 09/02 16:00

→ circus7788:主義一樣! 09/02 16:00

→ angolmois:而且民族主義本來就能在全世界賺很多錢，這點都看不開 09/02 16:01

→ angolmois:還是說電影就是要沒注意沒信仰的後現代虛無主義才叫高級 09/02 16:02

→ angolmois: 主義 09/02 16:02

推 circus7788:不過泰國的電影後製蠻強的也是真的 09/02 16:03

推 kzzoz80:真的很奇怪我覺得台灣影評人都幾乎沒給各國電影負面評論 09/02 16:03

噓 ldstar:選這體裁想走國際路線真的很難架空說不定更有賣點 09/02 16:04

噓 loverxa:你可以不認同說人白目是憑啥根據？你看完了？ 09/02 16:04

推 leochang:"鬼影"也很好看啊...泰國電影的產業鏈比台灣完整太多,也 09/02 16:04

→ leochang:養得起專業影評人,你看台灣有人靠寫影評維生嘛?大報會開 09/02 16:05

推 rishi:民族主義的確是有效的票房靈藥看看被台灣人批的多慘的葉問 09/02 16:05

→ ASTERSEA:錯的人看對的戲，對的人看錯的戲，所以產生了酸民。 09/02 16:05

→ ASTERSEA:至少看看新聞也很嗨http://zzb.bz/W4wi5 09/02 16:05

→ leochang:影評的專欄嗎? 說人白目是無知啊... 09/02 16:05

→ rishi:大陸還不是賣的爽爽爽賽德克在台灣票房一定不會差啦 09/02 16:06

※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:07)

推 miikal:kzzoz80 可以看看壹周刊影評，怎麼可能不罵外國片 09/02 16:06

推 kusanaki:不過怎麼會認為愛國主義?以為賽德克人是台灣主要民族? 09/02 16:07

→ angolmois:nationalism一般都是翻「民族主義」吧。 09/02 16:08

→ miikal:有多少好萊塢片在壹周刊拿60幾70被嘲笑到極致的ex慾望城市 09/02 16:09

※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:10) ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:16)

推 miikal:回原po，愛國是事實啊，還沒有上映前就先買預售票，滿心期 09/02 16:12

→ miikal:待能成功，希望台灣電影能揚眉吐氣，覺得自己人要挺自己人 09/02 16:13

→ miikal:這不就是愛國嗎？而這的確是賺錢的途徑啊 09/02 16:14

噓 CREAY:白目?你也差不了多少 09/02 16:14

→ CREAY:人家也不過寫了她的影評罷了..你憑甚麼說人白目 09/02 16:15

→ miikal:這也很正常，為什麼要說人家白目？ 09/02 16:15

噓 ronale:你還沒看過正片就在批評別人白目？等上映後再來護航也不遲 09/02 16:15

→ emorlasar:不是愛國主義支持啥國片﹖ 09/02 16:15

→ CREAY:你可以不接受.不能詆毀他人吧 09/02 16:15

→ ronale:要護航可以但是不要這麼盲目好嗎 09/02 16:15

你真的有看他寫的內容嗎？還是不管他說什麼我評人家白目就不行？那他說這片是荒謬的暴力化日本人就可以？他都這樣評別人了，我評他他也不會受不了。說我盲目隨便，你們確定你們自己不是以標題取人就好了。 ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:18)

→ ichirukia:我也覺得這樣說人家評論不好= = 09/02 16:17

噓 invigorator:那也不至於罵白目這麼難聽 09/02 16:18

推 miikal:題材上，即使魏導再中立那仍然是一個比較激發愛國心的題材 09/02 16:18

推 Crazyfire:要護航真的不要那麼盲目 09/02 16:18

噓 hu6111:護航不是這樣的，寫個白目只有反效果 09/02 16:19

→ miikal:在各方面用愛國形容它我覺得沒錯，也沒必要生氣 09/02 16:19

推 AHMD:日本人當時是真的很殘暴阿 09/02 16:21

推 MSme:至少那位影評看過。搞不好他看完就是覺得魏導暴力化日本人@@ 09/02 16:21

推 gjo:我覺得你的英文回應內容很好 09/02 16:22

感謝 ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:23)

推 miikal:日本人的殘暴比中國電影拍的要嚴重，可是我還是可以覺得葉 09/02 16:23

噓 CREAY:你可以不接受他的論點..但用"白目"形容.也蠻低下的 09/02 16:23

推 han72:台灣愛國不會用仇日表達的 09/02 16:23

→ miikal:問在賣愛國如果泰國影評看了覺得只覺得日本人的殘暴是誇張 09/02 16:24

→ miikal:的，那麼這就是他的心得，不管他本身知不知道日本人很殘忍 09/02 16:25

→ monismile:為~了~部~落看2.5版不能全怪記者說白目言重 09/02 16:28

推 sleepyrat:影評把"賽德克巴萊"視為搖錢樹??? 09/02 16:28

影評把醜化日本人視為搖錢樹 ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:29)

推 AHMD:只能說日本人現今形象大好拍德國人殘暴好像就沒有人說是愛國 09/02 16:30

差不多就是我回他的論點。不過當時日本人就是這樣殘暴，難道那個影評認為美化歷史才不算愛國主義？ ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 16:32)

→ AHMD:另外葉問的電影劇情除了葉問本人外故事情節是虛構的吧 09/02 16:31

→ AHMD:葉問沒有真實在某種場合打敗日本人吧? 但賽片是真實歷史 09/02 16:31

推 miikal:電影葉問連他的身世經歷都是虛構的啊XD 09/02 16:32

→ AHMD:如果葉問打敗日本人是歷史我就不會覺得是愛國主義片子 09/02 16:33

→ AHMD:就像珍珠港我也不覺得是美國的愛國主義片子 09/02 16:33

→ miikal:但我的意思是，拍的時候手法要注意不然連真實都不太對勁了 09/02 16:34

→ miikal:我相信日本警察絕對很囂張講話嘴臉很討厭，但是讓人覺得他 09/02 16:35

推 AHMD:這要等看過才知道但外國影評都說過於血腥我想比較可能很寫 09/02 16:36

→ miikal:很可惡而不是很臉譜的壞人，是需要敘事技巧的，我覺得沒有 09/02 16:37

→ miikal:不好的體材只有看你會不會說故事而已，我覺得剪輯版不意外 09/02 16:38

推 AHMD:賽片裡不是有個日本人跟原住民很好嗎?該不會也剪掉了? 09/02 16:39

噓 ishimaru: 09/02 17:38

→ cappa:我們也不全然懂泰國阿他只是用一個影評的眼光罷了 09/02 17:57

推 tookouw:二次大戰時，泰國是日本在亞洲的唯一盟國... 09/02 18:01

→ tookouw:沒有經歷過二戰的耗劫，泰國人當然無法理解那種狀況 09/02 18:12

噓 zerowingtw:不是嗎？而且愛國主義不好嗎？ 09/02 18:32

是不是愛國主義不重要，重點：不是劇中日本人是壞人就叫荒謬的暴力化醜化日本人。日本人是壞人也不代表就是愛國主義或民粹或是民族主義。就和不是描寫集中營的片就只是要拍以色列人的愛國片一樣。 ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 140.113.240.34 (09/02 20:07)

噓 O0OO:有沒有大學生和小學生一樣幼稚的八卦? 09/02 22:12

我只有研究生和小學生一樣幼稚的八卦 ※ 編輯: hansioux 來自: 118.160.67.17 (09/02 23:45)

推 exrickey:推推 09/03 03:45