塞尔玛

F37:《塞尔玛》～导演：艾瓦.德约烈～从色调到化妆，电影一开始，你有点分不清，这部，应该是什么时期拍摄的电影，当配乐出来，你才抓到，只有现在的电影，音乐本身的录音以及与电影的贴合，才可以做得这样细腻，明显，导演是想让观众去掉时间的距离，回原到美国的60年代，体会黑人人权运动的艰辛与不懈～马丁.路德.金，这位诺贝尔和平奖得主，在黑人人权运动中，时刻用着生命来努力，用生命来争取，以最大的能来追求人权所应有的平等与权力...～昨天刚看完日本编剧桥本忍的那本书《我与黑泽明》，今天电影，有了从未有过的体会，电影分成了段，段的由来以及形成，每一位的表情和台词，段与段的连接、推进，血与肉慢慢的丰满，支撑起一部感人的电影～音乐和电影，在这部里面，音乐也承担着重要的角色，它直接跟那个时代连接了起来，我想，美国人应该更有体会。

似乎听到了鲍勃.迪伦的歌声，可能不是，类似，60年代初期，他也曾经为有色人群呼喊助威，他们的那个年代，年轻人需要分辨、可以分辨，有不同的选择，试想那个年代中国的情况，一代人被混绕意志、转变意志，消弱意志，最后磨灭意志，那隔空的一代文化，成了永远无法弥补的空缺与遗憾...～说回音乐，影片里面黑人的音乐，你细细聆听，每一个字，都来自灵魂的申诉与渴求，代入电影，是电影的另一种语言。

有我经常听的贝拉方提卡耐基上的一首歌，这位歌手，也是黑人人权运动的积极者，虽然他们受着久远以来的不公平，但黑人音乐里面，着自由的韵律，音乐是平等的，人权，也应该是平等的～这部影片，配乐里面，我最不喜欢的，是那次游行过后，一位年轻黑人被枪杀，然后路德金去安慰这位80多岁的爷爷那个桥段，沉痛氛围里，钢琴中低的声音在那里连贯着，那个声音，这时候，过于的华丽，如果轻微的以点状方式配合对话出现，轻轻浮点，只要延续一点悲意与坚强，就足够了～最好的配乐，我也觉得，路德金在听她老婆放的电话录音那个桥段，只有对话，在静默中展现两人的无奈，深深地抓住你，完全空白的背景音，没有配乐，只有对白，有时候，少一点，比多一点更可贵，沉默，也是一种声音～导演艾瓦.德约烈，黑人女导演，她身上有我熟悉的影子，但是，我确实没有看过她的片子，非常不错，非常棒的导演！

The political lessons behind SelmaAll right, this is not going to be a review of Selma, not even a synopsis, as what 99% so called review in douban actually are. It touches on the hidden lessons of Selma. But don't expect I will talk about the obvious black-white conflict or current issues in Ferguson, Missouri.哈好吧，这不是一篇属于Selma的影评，连读后感都不是。

我说它是属于Selma的政治课，但是，它其实连黑人问题的毛都没动。

The shadowy political lessons Selma convolutes into the sub-consciousness of its viewer. They cast lights onto the current political issues, hence below the scenarios if we solve current issues with Selma wisdom: Be cautious that the content below may contain spoiler. 警告，以下内容脑洞大开。

1.Palestinian Israeli conflictWhat do you think would be the best way to solve Palestinian Israeli problem and bring peace into Gaza? Pressure onto Benjamin Netanyahu and his Israeli government to sign the peaceful treaty to acknowledge the two states solution, right? But the question is, how.. All right, don't tell me Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas are going to the ICC (International Criminal Court) for a reconciliation. Hamas and Palestinians are losing their golden opportunity when they fought back with terrorism against Israel. What can Palestinians do with a couple of human bombs when faced with the missiles and drones from Israel…. See what Martin Luther King was doing - inciting public anger against by provoking the opponents to act violently. George Wallace was a born fool to react against the Selma march with violent and tear gas. The televised violent scenes went viral, whites joined and the astonished and enraged public pushed President Lyndon Johnson to pass the bill to congress.The hotly discussed occupying central movement in Hongkong was another lively case. Killings with tanks as in 1989 did not occur, much to the western media’s disappointment. So the event went on calmly. True there are featured coverages for those curiosities from western world to find fulfilment. But as enthusiasm from both the outside and inside died, occupiers retreated. So I would say, good luck Palestine in the ICC…… 以上摘要，巴勒斯坦和Hamas是傻X，几个人肉炸弹斗得过以色列无人机和导弹么。

学习人家MJK怎么激起群众 愤怒的，先挑起对方动手，打不还手，然后靠舆论压力迫使总统讨论选举法案。

这种时候，谁先动手谁就输了。

占中神马的大家多乖，西媒预期的坦克都没有。。

好桑心的样子，头条又没了，也只能三版了（哦我说的真的不是太阳报）。

2.The strength of non-violence and Charlie HebdoAs we have already touched on this subject, non-violence is key strategy to win over public support. So in the issue of Charlie Hebdo, the most sensible ways for islamic fundamentalists are probably – fight back, with another mockery on the mockery of disrespectful western infidel. However, the western rule is not played by the terrorists, for whom the offenders of blasphemy should face death. 对这个问题，有个神回答说，恐怖分子你肿么玩不起，人家骂你你干嘛打人，还把人打死了。

套用上边的范式，恐怖分子，这场舆论战，你先动手的，你输了。

恐怖分子可不是这个逻辑。

亵渎神灵就该死，不然你以为我恐怖分子是浪得虚名啊。

坏孩子逻辑知道吗，谁让你上课笑我做不出题，下课就要挨揍。

3.Two faces of terrorism and double standard Who doesn't have two faces of evil and divine? Who doesn't use double standard whenever personal feelings are involved? Such is the fact that ISIS has its modified Islamic law. Blasphemy is rewarded with beheading. Therefore the calmness and gentile of the Paris criminals were so shocking and disturbing. There are countless works depicting the complexity of human nature and thus sides of criminals and police. So there might one day the other face of terrorists. Such is the fact that the western governments have double standards on ethnic issues ranging from overreaction out of political correctness in criminal investigation of Dieudonné over his speech defending terrorists (which is obviously against free speech) to old fashioned discrimination in the dark Ferguson nights.Religious laws are seemingly in conflict with the democratic and humanitarian western systems. But what in deep rift is, as the most tragedy in the film, irreconcilable collision between various edges of human complexity. 以上提要：恐怖分子也能有血有肉，“正义人士”亦会两面三刀。

价值准则没有谁对谁错，人性惨淡才是悲剧根源。

4.States of failed public scrutinyThere are states with failed public scrutiny where the above public pressure doesn't exist anymore. Tight control on media freedom encourages social injustice and state terror of massacre of its own citizens. Tragedies stage unchecked in countries like Myanmar, Syria and Egypt to name a few. Ironically, when the suppressed do fight back, few sympathy would be felt by the victim this time…. Just like the Kunming massacre was coldly received in the international community. When no one can judge with confidence the nature of such a murder, it is the victim to be blame for inviting such a violence.Indeed, I am actually wondering why the terrorists attack did not occur in India, China or Russia where the Muslim population are miserably treated? Is it because these countries are too uninteresting to be attacked and cause public chaos, or is it because the control of religion is so tight that normal teachings are ruled out, let alone fundamentalism ideas? Therefore European is becoming the warm bed of extremists.. So should anyone wish to stay distant from the public, either stay strong and independent, or get ready to swallow the bitter part. For anyone wishing to stay in the community, a backfire might be ready.5.Executive power and failed democracyIt’s fairly strange that I am putting the cliche of failed democracy as the last lesson. It is simply because it is least relevant. Lyndon Johnson might have wanted to sign the bill already, but he could not persuade his congress to pass it. Poor mister president cannot force the passage of any state command unless he has the executive power. So Obama is hungry for executive power at such a low support rate from the congress. From the much failed Obamacare to the quarrel on Middle East action. Obama is distinctly a loser. But who isn’t? I don't believe David Cameron or Angela Merkel is having a sweeter time with their parliaments. The poignant love is cursed and, politicians in such democracy are doomed to fail themselves from the first day of their inauguration because they are just one against many.So what is the best antidote? Martin Luther King has taught you: make the public support for dear mister president. Chinese should be praised as they are unravelled masters of this dark art of gaming theory (水) and expectation management (军). If there is one leading third sector industry that Chinese can export with uncontested advantage, it is not the culture of charismatic and meritocratic autocracy, it is the manipulation of mass expectation. World’s leader matching on the Paris street, you will win your war against terror if you hire our 水军. It (魔) is (高) a (一) war (尺) of mentality and morality (道), you (高) know (一) it (仗). 上面正是：白宫一入深似海，黑奥空哀内阁远。

唐宁十号丫鬟乱，小卡莫妈讳莫深。

天下事，管我毛，洗洗睡觉是王道。

莫问博士研究啥，多请吃饭感情牢。

黑人的主旋律电影。

美国种族问题神马的从来都不是新闻，而估计是由于某些问题的考量，马丁路德金从来也没有在中国的教科书上大书特书过。

这电影，好的地方，是没有死抓马丁路德金不放，而把视觉也放在了其他普通被人身上。

不过，由于是黑人主旋律电影，白人的角色就...大家懂的。

反正金博士已经死了，或许也是好事，死于壮年，死于名望的巅峰，才能封神。

正得不得了的传记+历史的美国主旋律电影，当历史科普教材看还是不错。

几段演讲都挺赞的，无论是金的缅怀，鼓动，振臂还是州长的偏激，总统的淡定都各有风格，演讲调子和节奏有种歌唱的味道我走偏了。

还是由衷尊敬民权斗士，无论这句话看上去有多虚幻，有些事情远在天边近在眼前，真切感受过才知道可贵。

看完的第一感受是非常平和，这种平和在一部描述黑人平权的电影中能体现出来非常难得。

我们可以经常在网上看到许多关于黑人，同志，变性这些话题的讨论，美国最高法院也做出了同性恋婚姻合法的判决，我觉得这种现象非常好，很多生活在社会角落的人得到了承认，但是我看这部电影关注的不是塞尔玛这个事件的本身，而是电影对于这件事的表述手法，以一种娓娓道来，心平气和，不煽情，不做作的方式表现出来的历史态度，同时这是一位43岁的女导演的作品，我为这样睿智，大气的女导演鼓掌。

人不是神，不可能完美，电影中的马丁不完美，有心计，会出轨，但却最真实，他一定知道游行会有这样的后果，同样他也知道这样才能赢得舆论，获得关注，可以说是他把这些人送到对手的棍棒下，当然他们的牺牲赢得了民主的胜利，那么不把马丁路德金描述成一个完美的英雄，而是真实还原一个肉身的马丁，这一点本身就很难得，一个美国记者说，不感恩戴德是一个强大民族的性格，这部电影对马丁的刻画也表现了这位女导演成熟的电影态度。

影片中马丁非暴力的游行方式和整部电影的基调是吻合的，就是一种平和，不激进。

看完这部电影没有痛哭流涕或者震撼人心，但是电影表现出来的理智让我非常赞赏。

另外我想起梅厄夫人在联合国关于以色列建国时的演讲，她不是在哭诉犹太人这些年来的悲惨遭遇，而是把重点放在这个民族是如何在苦难中艰难前行，顽强生存的一面，博得别人的同情是最坏的一张牌，赢得别人的尊重是最好的一张牌。

Resentfulness, inspiration, sadness… Those feelings were mixed in my heart after watching the film, and I could hardly tell. It reminded me of the lines in the book To Kill A Mockingbird: “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view…Until you climb inside of his skin and walk around in it.” I was just a person living in the contemporary time, watching a period of the unfair past revealing in front of my eyes by means of a film, an entertaining tool. I guess I could never share the similar feelings with those people, black men or white men, living in those days. But I admire those who fight for equality, even lost their lives. The plot was simple. The film focused on the event of marching from Selma to Montgomery, which was led by Martin Luther King in year 1965. All they wanted was the right for the black men to vote. This path to right was paved by many people’s sacrifices. But it was also because of the power and unity of people that they made it to the destiny. I was impressed by how David Oyelowo interprets the role of Martin Luther King. He just got the point. During the speech, he possessed the invisible power that could drive the audience’s emotions and inspire them. Moreover, he depicted a vivid King in everyday lives, ordinary but real. The hateful mayor George Wallace was successfully played by Tim Roth. The only pity is that I think the role of Lyndon Johnson (acted by Tom Wilkinson) was not fully interpreted. I would recommend that more positive participation he took in this activity could be added into the film. If so, then the march may mean a lot more. Besides the round characters, those flat characters surely surprise me. The producer Oprah Winfrey played the role of a woman who wanted but couldn’t vote. Her first scene was so impressive and moving. When I saw her slowly and carefully filled out the form and wrote “negro” on the “RACE” blank, my heart nearly stopped beating. Other minor characters such as Jimmie Lee Jackson (by Keith Stanfield), Coretta King (by Marmen Ejogo) are all successfully portrayed. Because of them, I was touched to tears for more than one time. Every character and actor is worth respecting. In the film, Dr. King said one thing that left me with a deep impression. He said, “You young people believe in working in the community in the long term, and raise black consciousness. What we do is negotiate, demonstrate and resist. We raise white consciousness.” I couldn’t agree more with him. It was said that one-third of those taking part in the march were white men. When Dr. King made the well-known speech I Had a Dream, it was reported that among 250 thousand audiences, 25% were white men. I think the reasons those white men were present was not only because they showed sympathy with the black men and desired for equality, but also that they showed up for themselves. There was no invitation or website announcing this speech, but an ocean of people appeared. What you do proves what you believe. And what Dr. King said on the speech precisely touched the audience. He was not only arguing for the black men, but also those who wanted the right and democracy. The speech was I had a dream, not I had a plan. He inspired the nation. That was his glamour. The film didn’t talk too much about Dr. King himself. It was about things around him. His friends, his wife, the suffering black men, the enemy, the era he was situated in, and his belief. We didn’t see him as a super hero, but as an ambitious person fighting for the right to vote. I would say that there was an invisible hand behind him, pushing him, and accomplishing the merge and trust between all races and societies in America. Maybe who Martin Luther King is doesn’t matter. He was not worth talking about. Maybe during a peaceful period of time he would be an ordinary person with an ordinary life. But he was worth reflecting upon and contemplating about. To some extent it was because of the time and place he was in that made him a big name. No one is a born hero. Maybe we should focus more on the situation and era. In recent months, in America, a trial of news about white police gunshot black people has caused range among residents. Should we blame that it is the setback of the era? In China there is an old saying that “taking the history as a mirror can know the rise and fall of a nation.” The film came into the spotlight at the right time. It does remind us of the past. Perhaps it is the time to reflect on ourselves. For some time I would think it was because of the media that sensationalized such news and made it too big to be reversible. If instead a white man got killed in this way, the responses would not be so heated like it was now. So for a country, there are definitely some scares that can’t be touched on. Ultimately, there is no absolute in the world. No absolute democracy, no absolute equality. But there can be absolute in the world, as long as we see those exceptions as the flaws during progression and deal with them positively and in a proper way. This then can be the improvement and progression of mankind. The background music was appropriate and nice. It managed to express the emotion and meaning of the film, and in the meantime drive my emotions ups and downs. However I also noticed there were some shots that were shaking, which made me uncomfortable. I remembered that in the film when the lady was handing in the form, the white man ruthlessly said to her, “I say right when it is right. ” However we strive, there is no absolute equality and right. Power is owned by a majority of people, not all. But this film, Selma, tells us how to strive for that we are eager for. It is conveying a spirit. “They hate us because they aren’t us.” But we are the darlings in our own eyes. Be what we are. The film tells us.

平等不应该只是口头上的，不应该只是形式上的，无论你的肤色如何，只要你属于人类，都应该具有平等的权利。

在社会文明已经如此进步的现代，这本应是毋庸置疑的。

可即便到了今天，真正意义上的平等也从未存在。

因为总是有很多很多思想意识根源里就就暗藏歧视毒瘤的人们，即便有更多更多愿意挺身站出来为平等奋战的斗士。

一边高呼众生平等，一边端着猎枪恣意的任行歧视、强权、霸权，这是自由最大的悲哀。

总是把马丁路德跟马丁路德金搞混了，为了加深自己对这个美国著名民权人士的印象，很高兴的看了他的自传式电影。

有关美国黑人人权的电影也很多了，在这里也要提到一个人马克西姆X，也在本片中露脸。

关于马克西姆也有一部自传式电影《黑潮》，原名就叫马克西姆X。

马丁路德金是个温和派的领导者，虽然他们俩被暗杀的命运是一样的，但是我觉得马丁路德金是正确的。

仇恨和冲突并不能让彼此的关系变得更好，就像今日缺乏马丁路德金这种领袖的美国，也依然不断爆发出种族矛盾的骚乱。

在这里更要提到一部电影《美国X档案》爱德华诺顿主演的，就是对仇恨所产生的原因进行了反省，就是因为白人和黑人之间没有真正的和解。

在当前的国际社会风云变幻下看这部电影，莫名感慨。

自由民主平等博爱貌似在慢慢进步了，突然，有那么个特殊时点特殊地点特殊事件，温情脉脉的面纱乍然撕开，狰狞的真相刺瞎了世人的双眼。

人性要战胜兽性是不是一场没有尽头的拉锯战，衣食无忧世界太平时候是一副光景，利益冲突你抢我夺时候又是另一副光景。

那些莫名优越霸凌同类者们请把此片当作每日的圣经吧，一日三省，尤其是身居高位者别干蠢事别说蠢话，生而为人要善良。

大赞金博士，冷静理智勇敢坚定地引领弱势群体争取正当权利。

今日的华莱士州长又回血重生，今日的金博士你在何方。

记得是在看转播的奥斯卡颁奖，表演了电影《塞尔玛》的原创歌曲《Glory》，黑人演员们重现了毅然决然的走过大桥时的坚定与勇气，气势磅礴，歌曲结束全场起立鼓掌，扮演剧中马丁路德金的演员泪流满面。

后来过了好久找了电影来看，前前后后看了三遍，永远都无法忘记，居住在塞尔玛的黑人居民，明知道走过大桥，桥的那一端就是人间炼狱，等待他们的是警棍，是催泪瓦斯，是令所有人都无法容忍的滔天罪行，甚至是死亡，但是他们还是坚定的走了过去。

这个场景至今无法忘记。

《塞尔玛》。