A. 1942删减什么了
张国立在讲述1942年拍摄幕后时说,由于时间的限制,老东家的戏也被剪掉了,包括和阿德里安·布洛迪的对手戏和与张涵予的重头戏。
张国立透露,在被删除的场景中,老东家去教堂找安西满托付,发现安西满疯了,“其实我觉得老东家和安西满这条线也很有意思。
安西满知道他的主人一直在怀疑和嘲笑他的主人,所以当他给大家传教布道的时候,第一件事就是和主人说话,老东家也很实用,说他信主没用,解决不了实际问题。
但最悲惨的是,老东家最后唯一的希望就是孙子能活下来的时候,他抱着孙子和人流一起跑到教堂去找安西满,说如果你能把这个孩子留下来,我从现在开始和你信主。
一个信主的人已经被眼前受害者的各种折磨折磨疯了,一个从不信主的人可以为了唯一的希望马上相信,这是一个很大的讽刺。”张国立还说,他和阿德里安·布洛迪的重头戏最终也没有保留,也很精彩,所以有点遗憾。
B. 1942:在历史洪流面前,个人的力量太渺小
看《1942》其实等了好多年。
电影刚上映的时候,我还在读大学,终日都是无羁的自由和无脑的欢乐,对于这种描述祖辈苦难的电影,仿佛有一种天然的排斥。
多年之后,生活让我知道了长大的艰辛,再想起这部电影时,仿帆森佛也没有多大的动力想看——都是苦难,戏里戏外又有多少分别。
直到近年,短视频的兴起,让我们的信息交流效率又空前上了一个台阶。我才又想起曾经有过一部电影,讲述的是我们祖辈苦难的故事。
那些短视频中,纷纷截取了张国立对身边跟随的长工的那个镜头:“我知道怎么从一个穷人变成财主,给我十年,你大爷我还是东家。”
因为片面地截取了这个片段,我也不能跳出已知的信息去揣测整部电影的主旨,于是便十分相信张国立这句话,并且相信他所演绎的角色也如这句话所诠释的一般,真的在1952年重新成为了东家。
直到我看到这部电影,并看完这部电影。
我相信张国立说的这句话的时候,他是发自真心的说给那个长工听,而不是在晃点对方。
只是张国立没有考虑到一点,就是他能不能扛过眼前这一场突如其来的大灾难。
日本入侵、军阀混战、官僚扯皮的同时,天灾袭来。在土匪冲进土堡打砸抢烧的时候,儿子先一步踏上了黄泉,随后一家沦为难民。
逃难的路上,儿媳为他续了香火,但是没有食物、没有营养,有的只是忍饥挨饿,饿死在床褥里;老伴随后也因缺少食物没了气息;孙子没有奶喝,连小米粥都是奢侈,没有坚持几天,便在人世走完了一遭;女儿趁着自己还有力气,把自己给卖了,换了小米给他,然后便杳无音讯。
跟在身边最后的长工因为弄丢了邻居托付的小孩儿态贺亩,与他分开。在找孩子的路上,被日本兵抓到并杀死。
张国立饰演的这个东家,最后孤家寡人地往回走,那驮着的背、沧桑的脸庞,无一不在诉说着命运的不公、生活的凄惨。
我相信只要给这个人一个重新开始的机会,他一定能够东山再起。只是、只是,他还有多少希望和寄托呢?
一个人再有能力,在滔滔大势和历史的车轮面前,似乎都显得极为渺小,他们不是没有梦想、不是没有动力,只是那个时代,已经不再给他们做梦的床。
《1942》
(战争/【中】张国立/2012)
简介:一九四二年,因为一场旱灾,河南发生了饥荒。老东家叫范殿元,大灾之年,战争逼近,他赶着马车,马车上拉着粮食,粮食上坐着他一家人,也加入往陕西逃荒的人流。三个月后,到了潼关,车没了,马没了,车上的人也没了。这时老东家特别纠结,他带着一家人出来逃荒是为了让人活下来,可是到了陕西,自己的亲人全死了。于是他决定不逃荒了,开始逆着逃荒的人流往回走。老东家此时没想活着,就想死得离家近些。
老东家转过山坡,碰到一个同样失去亲人的小姑娘正爬在死去的娘的身上哭。老东家上去劝小姑娘别哭了,小姑娘对老东家说她并不是哭她娘死,而是她认识的人都死了,剩下的人她都不认识了。一句话让老东家百感交集,老东家要小姑娘叫自己一声爷。小姑娘仰起脸,喊了一声“爷”。于是,拍嫌老东家拉起小姑娘的手,往山坡下走去。漫山遍野,开满了桃花。
C. 电影《1942》里张国立饰演的东家为什么要逃荒
1. 在电影《1942》中,张国立饰演的东家范殿元之所以要逃荒,是因为他所拥有的粮食无法抵御 surrounding bandits and starving peasants. In such dire times, protecting his grain reserves was futile; everyone was desperate for survival. Additionally, he had the advantage of being able to transport his grain with him ring the exos, which cushioned some of the hardship.
2. The war era was characterized by depravity, where desperation drove people to commit acts they normally wouldn't. Staying behind would have been a death sentence, especially given his responsibilities. His son-in-law was expecting a child, and it was his ty to ensure they had a future.
3. The全家人的生命安全也面临着巨大威胁。 His diminishing influence and dwindling resources made it clear that if something unexpected happened, there would be nothing left. The survival of his loved ones depended on his leadership and decision to leave.
4. His journey took a tragic turn when his family perished, leading to his resignation and return home. Reflecting on his ordeal, he sums up his existence: "I didn't want to live; I just wanted to die close to home." This poignant statement speaks volumes about the desolation brought upon by the catastrophic environment.
5. The core message of the film, beyond depicting the drought and starvation, is the erosion of human morality in the face of adversity. It slices through the layers of reality, revealing the minimum threshold of human decency under extreme conditions.
6. The Nationalist government's neglect and apathy exacerbated the disaster. The lieutenant governor's lies about the disaster's severity were for his own political gain, further displacing and starving the people.
7. The movie is a vivid account of the real-life calamity in Henan in 1942, following two parallel narratives: one of the refugees and another of the Nationalist government's indifference and corruption.
8. The film's graphic portrayal of human depravity is unsettling, leaving a lasting impression of the worst aspects of human nature. It is a powerful movie, made even more impressive by the actors' dedication to their roles, showcasing the harsh realities of life and leaving viewers deeply反思ing.
9. It raises a chilling question: Could humanity ever descend to such depths of madness? The film serves as a stark reminder of our potential capacity for darkness and the importance of Remembering history to prevent its repetition.