Joaquin Phoenix and Pedro Pascal Square Off in Ari Aster’s Brazenly Provocative Western Thriller, Set During the Pandemic the Film Says Made America Lose Its Mind
華金·菲尼克斯與佩德羅·帕斯卡在阿里·艾(ài)斯特公然挑釁的西部驚悚片中一決雌雄(yī jué cí xióng)——背景設(shè)定于該片所稱(chēng)“讓美國(guó)(měi guó)陷入瘋狂”的特殊時(shí)期
It’s all too common today to see ambitious filmmakers turn their movies into “statements” that fit all too neatly into preset ideological boxes. But in “Eddington,” his teasingly audacious, bracingly outside-the-box cosmic sociological Western thriller, writer-director Ari Aster (“Beau Is Afraid,” “Midsommar”) gleefully tosses any hint of liberal art-house orthodoxy to the winds.
當(dāng)今影壇，懷抱(huái bào)野心的創(chuàng)作者將作品強(qiáng)行塞入預(yù)設(shè)(yù shè)意識(shí)形態(tài)框架的現(xiàn)象屢見(jiàn)不鮮。但在阿里(ā lǐ)·艾斯特自編自導(dǎo)的《愛(ài)??丁頓》中——這部(zhè bù)融合宇宙社會(huì)學(xué)元素的西部驚悚片以(yǐ)戲謔而大膽的姿態(tài)突破類(lèi)型窠臼(kē jiù)——曾執(zhí)導(dǎo)《博很恐懼》《仲夏夜驚魂》的(de)鬼才導(dǎo)演，將藝術(shù)電影??界奉為圭臬的自由派(zì yóu pài)敘事法則徹底拋諸九霄云外。
The film is set in the desert city of Eddington, New Mexico, during the COVID summer of 2020, and the first indication that it’s going to offer a major tweak of conventional wisdom is that the protagonist, Joe Cross (Joaquin Phoenix), who’s the city sheriff, is just about the only person in town who refuses to wear a face mask. He’s an asthmatic, but he’s also got a brazen contempt for the COVID stats about transmission, and for the general notion of lockdown. Is his stance speaking for the movie’s? That’s tougher to pin down, since Joe, on the one hand, is the character we’re asked to identify with, but Phoenix plays him as a shambolic screw-up, earnest and benign but basically a walking mess.
故事背景(bèi jǐng)設(shè)定在2020年特殊時(shí)期新墨西哥州的沙漠(shā mò)之城埃丁頓，首幕便顯露出對(duì)主流敘事(xù shì)的顛覆：由華金·菲尼克斯飾演的鎮(zhèn)(zhèn)警長(zhǎng)喬·克羅斯，竟是全城唯一拒絕對(duì)(duì)面部采取防護(hù)措施之人。這位患有(huàn yǒu)呼吸系統(tǒng)頑疾的執(zhí)法者，不僅對(duì)流行病傳播(chuán bō)數(shù)據(jù)嗤之以鼻，更對(duì)當(dāng)時(shí)推行的公共(gōng gòng)管理策略報(bào)以公然蔑視。其立場(chǎng)是否代表(dài biǎo)影片價(jià)值取向？答案曖昧難測(cè)——盡管喬(qiáo)被塑造成觀眾移情對(duì)象，但菲尼克斯將(jiāng)其演繹成行事乖張的失敗者：真誠(chéng)(zhēn chéng)良善的表象下，本質(zhì)是個(gè)一團(tuán)(yī tuán)混沌的行走矛盾體。
Not long into the film, the George Floyd murder occurs, and the protests that take place in Minneapolis and other American cities trigger a small local movement in Eddington of anti-racist youth. The film is unambiguous about portraying them as a pack of deluded narcissists whose conception of themselves exemplifies the very privilege they’re out to overthrow. Aster isn’t merely mocking them; his real point is that moralistic self-righteousness has become a kind of addiction in America. Nevertheless, that he kicks off his film by skewering COVID protocols, only to lampoon the radical-chic fervor of middle-class white kids, may make you wonder, for a moment, if Ari Aster has turned into some right-wing hipster auteur tossing cherry bombs attached to Fox News talking points.
隨著劇情推進(jìn)，喬治(qiáo zhì)-弗洛伊德謀殺案的發(fā)生引發(fā)的全美社會(huì)(shè huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)波及埃丁頓，催生了當(dāng)?shù)胤捶N族主義(zhǒng zú zhǔ yì)的小規(guī)模運(yùn)動(dòng)，影片毫不含糊地將他們(tā men)描繪成一群自欺欺人的自戀狂——其身份認(rèn)知(rèn zhī)恰恰印證著他們?cè)噲D顛覆的特權(quán)(tè quán)結(jié)構(gòu)。艾斯特的批判鋒芒不僅停留(tíng liú)在揶揄層面，更直指美國(guó)社會(huì)日益嚴(yán)重(rì yì yán zhòng)的道德優(yōu)越感成癮癥。從開(kāi)篇解構(gòu)公共衛(wèi)生(gōng gòng wèi shēng)應(yīng)對(duì)機(jī)制，到嘲諷中產(chǎn)白人青年群體(qún tǐ)的先鋒時(shí)尚狂熱，這種左右開(kāi)弓的敘事(xù shì)策略，甚至令人短暫懷疑艾斯特是否(shì fǒu)化身為攜帶特定媒體立場(chǎng)的右翼標(biāo)新立異(biāo xīn lì yì)導(dǎo)演。
Actually, it’s not nearly so simple. In “Eddington,” Aster is dead serious about dramatizing what he views as the looking glass that America passed through during the pandemic era. He’s targeting that moment as The Great Crack-Up, the moment when the country lost its collective mind. But in the film there are many components to that, drawn from a wide cultural-ideological spectrum. The movie does show sympathy for the increasingly mainstream view that the sense of control that dominated the COVID years went too far. That Eddington, while larger than a small town — it’s a place of sprawling streets and buildings — appears to be all but abandoned is something that casts its own eerie spell; it stands in for a nation that’s been hollowed out, depleted, robbed of its hope for the future. When a teenage boy is chewed out by his father for having joined in a “gathering” (i.e., he met up with half a dozen of his friends in the park), we feel the creeping unreality of it.
事實(shí)上，事情并沒(méi)有這么簡(jiǎn)單。在(zài)《愛(ài)??丁頓》中，阿斯特非常認(rèn)真地描繪了(le)他眼中，在特殊時(shí)期美國(guó)經(jīng)歷的(de)集體精神裂變。導(dǎo)演將彼時(shí)定義為(wèi)"大崩裂"時(shí)刻——整個(gè)國(guó)家陷入群體性認(rèn)知失調(diào)(rèn zhī shī tiáo)。影片通過(guò)多元文化光譜的拼貼達(dá)成(dá chéng)這種解構(gòu)：既流露出對(duì)"管控尺度是否(shì fǒu)越界"這一主流質(zhì)疑的共情（埃丁頓這座(zhè zuò)街道縱橫卻宛若空城的沙漠都市(dū shì)，恰似被掏空內(nèi)核、耗盡元?dú)狻适磥?lái)(wèi lái)期許的國(guó)家隱喻），又以超現(xiàn)實(shí)筆觸(bǐ chù)描繪日?；恼Q。當(dāng)一個(gè)十幾歲的男孩??因?yàn)?yīn wèi)參加了一次 “聚會(huì)”（即在公園里(lǐ)與他的六七個(gè)朋友聚會(huì)）而被(bèi)他的父親訓(xùn)斥時(shí)，我們感受到(dào)了令人毛骨悚然的不真實(shí)感。
But COVID is just the trigger. “Eddington,” while not a comedy, showcases an angry, sinister, and maybe crazy new America that it views with a deadpan tone of trepidatious glee. And the movie presents us with a fully scaled vision of that transformed society. As Aster presents it, what happened to America is about COVID and everything the relentless rules of the pandemic did to us. It’s about the rise of the new scolding moral absolutism. It’s about how conspiracy theory, which used to be the province of the liberal-left, became the new crackpot paradigm of Middle America, to the point that attacking the government for lies and coverups (like, you know, the plandemic) went from being a rebel stance to a kind of authoritarian reflex.
特殊時(shí)期(shí qī)不過(guò)是導(dǎo)火索?！稅?ài)??丁頓》以非喜劇的冷面(lěng miàn)幽默，解剖著一個(gè)躁動(dòng)、詭譎、幾近癲狂(diān kuáng)的新美國(guó)圖景。影片構(gòu)建出社會(huì)(shè huì)轉(zhuǎn)型期的完整病理切片：在艾斯特的(de)鏡頭下，美國(guó)這個(gè)國(guó)家承受的不僅(bù jǐn)是特殊時(shí)期本身，更是防控機(jī)制帶來(lái)(dài lái)的深層異化。這里見(jiàn)證著訓(xùn)誡式(shì)道德絕對(duì)主義的崛起，目睹陰謀論從(cóng)自由派陣營(yíng)的專(zhuān)利異化為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)美國(guó)(měi guó)人的新瘋狂范式——當(dāng)質(zhì)疑政府(zhèng fǔ)信息透明度從反抗姿態(tài)蛻變?yōu)槟撤N(mǒu zhǒng)威權(quán)條件反射（譬如特定流行病起源論），荒誕(huāng dàn)便完成了它的辯證法。
It’s also about the creeping paranoia of gun culture, and about the paranoia that has gathered around the all-too-real issue of pedophilia (a trend that actually started with the day-care abuse trials and missing-children milk cartons of the 1980s, then picked up contemporary steam with QAnon and Pizzagate). It’s about how social media became the dark hall of mirrors that magnified all these toxic forces, to the point that the distorting of reality almost seemed to be the buried reason for it all. And it’s about the ominous rise of big tech (embodied here by a massive proposed data center from a corporation called solidgoldmagikarp), which is both the orchestrator and beneficiary of that hall of mirrors.
影片更(gèng)觸及槍支文化中的妄想癥，以及圍繞(wéi rào)未成年人權(quán)益保護(hù)議題衍生的社會(huì)性偏執(zhí)(piān zhí)（這種集體心理可追溯至上世紀(jì)八十年代托兒所(tuō ér suǒ)訴訟案與失蹤兒童牛??奶盒尋人啟事，在(zài)當(dāng)代網(wǎng)絡(luò)陰謀論助推下演變?yōu)樾?xīn)的道德恐慌）。社交媒體在此被(bèi)呈現(xiàn)為暗黑鏡廳——所有毒性力量在(zài)此折射放大，直至現(xiàn)實(shí)扭曲本身成為(chéng wéi)終極目的。而科技巨頭的陰影（以(yǐ)虛擬企業(yè)"金鯉魚(yú)??"籌建巨型數(shù)據(jù)中心為隱喻(yǐn yù)）既是這場(chǎng)鏡廳詭局的操盤(pán)手，亦(yì)是最終獲利者。
That sounds like a lot for a movie to chew on, but “Eddington,” for all its heady themes, is a far more nimble and relatable entertainment than Aster’s last film, the masochistic surrealist art nightmare “Beau Is Afraid.” The new movie is two-and-a-half-hours long, and it ultimately does take a turn into something ominously out there. But for most of it Aster lures us in by telling a grounded and weirdly arresting story, which the age-of-the-pandemic themes sort of flow through.
盡管承載著如此(rú cǐ)龐雜的思辨負(fù)荷，《埃丁頓》卻展現(xiàn)出比艾(bǐ ài)斯特前作《博很恐懼》——那部充滿(mǎn)(chōng mǎn)自虐傾向的超現(xiàn)實(shí)主義噩夢(mèng)——更為靈動(dòng)輕盈(qīng yíng)的娛樂(lè)性。這部?jī)蓚€(gè)半小時(shí)的作品雖(suī)最終滑向形而上的詭譎之境，但主體(zhǔ tǐ)敘事始終扎根于怪誕卻迷人的(de)現(xiàn)實(shí)主義土壤。導(dǎo)演通過(guò)扎實(shí)的類(lèi)型敘事(xù shì)引力場(chǎng)，讓特殊時(shí)期的時(shí)代癥候如(rú)暗河般在故事裂隙中自然流淌(liú tǎng)。
It all begins with Phoenix’s desperate, lackadaisical, borderline incompetent sheriff coming under fire for his anti-mask stance, then making the decision to challenge the city’s mayor, Ted Garcia (Pedro Pascal), with his posh backers and facile grin. Joe decides to run for mayor himself, but these two men have an enmity that reaches back to a buried personal scandal: Twenty years before, Garcia slept with Louise (Emma Stone) when she was 16 and got her pregnant. She had an abortion and went on to marry Joe. Joe and her are still together, living in an isolated ranch house atop a small mesa (along with Louise’s blustery mom, played by Deirdre O’Connell; she moved in during COVID). But Louise has a history of mental illness, and Emma Stone plays her as the image of frail, washed-out vulnerability.
故事始于菲尼克斯飾演的警長(zhǎng)喬：這個(gè)(zhè ge)因拒執(zhí)防護(hù)令陷入輿論漩渦的(de)失意者，以近乎自毀的姿態(tài)向佩德羅(pèi dé luó)·帕斯卡飾演的市長(zhǎng)泰德·加西亞發(fā)起挑戰(zhàn)(tiǎo zhàn)——后者帶著精英支持者的倨傲假面(jiǎ miàn)，游走于權(quán)力場(chǎng)。當(dāng)喬決意參選市長(zhǎng)(shì zhǎng)，塵封二十載的丑聞漸浮水面：加西亞曾(céng)與時(shí)年處于青少年期的露易絲(lù yì sī)（艾瑪·斯通飾）發(fā)生關(guān)系致其懷孕，她流產(chǎn)(liú chǎn)后嫁給了喬。如今這對(duì)夫妻(fū qī)住在一個(gè)與世隔絕的小山丘上(shàng)的牧場(chǎng)房子里（伴隨特殊時(shí)期遷入(qiān rù)的暴躁岳母，由迪爾德麗·奧康奈爾(ěr)飾演），而斯通詮釋的露易絲始終籠罩在(zài)蒼白易碎的精神創(chuàng)傷陰云之下。
The marriage is hanging by a thread, and the thread gets cut when Austin Butler, acting with the smoothness of the young Johnny Depp, shows up as Vernon, who’s part of what appears to be a cult devoted to victims of child sexual abuse. Vernon sits in the Crosses’ kitchen and tells his story, a piece of retrieved memory that replaced his other memories, and it’s so garishly far out that we think: Is he about saving people or implanting them with new identities? More to the point: Is this what “salvation” is becoming in America? Louise, in thrall to Vernon’s therapeutic snake oil, has soon abandoned Joe, and this leaves him devastated.
這段(duàn)搖搖欲墜的婚姻，在奧斯汀·巴特勒飾演的(de)弗農(nóng)登場(chǎng)后徹底崩解。這位帶著(zhe)約翰尼·德普早期慵懶邪氣的神秘來(lái)客(lái kè)，似乎是一個(gè)專(zhuān)門(mén)針對(duì)兒童性虐待受害者(shòu hài zhě)的邪教組織的成員。當(dāng)他在克羅斯(kè luó sī)家廚房講述那段覆蓋原生記憶的(de)創(chuàng)傷回溯時(shí)，離奇程度令人脊背發(fā)涼(fā liáng)：他到底是在拯救人們，還是在(zài)給他們植入新的身份？更深層(shēn céng)的叩問(wèn)在于——當(dāng)下美國(guó)的"拯救"話語(yǔ)(huà yǔ)是否已然異化為這般扭曲形態(tài)？被(bèi)弗農(nóng)偽治療話術(shù)蠱惑的露易絲最終棄喬(qì qiáo)而去，留下警長(zhǎng)在精神廢墟中(zhōng)獨(dú)自沉淪。
Aster is out to capture how the dislocation of reality that’s becoming the coin of the realm isn’t just a political/media phenomenon; its tentacles reach right into the heart of intimate relationships. And we see the same sort of social-turned-emotional freakout when the Black Lives Matter movement hits Eddington. The film never doubts the validity of the protests that rose up against the murder of George Floyd. But it does satirize the performative aspects of a certain brand of middle-class radicalism, and the way that this ensares various members of the community, like Sarah (Amèlie Hoeferle), who becomes such a self-lacerating true believer that she starts to sound like a member of the Weather Underground; Brian (Cameron Mann), a local kid who starts out just wanting to flirt with Sarah, then finds his identity undergoing an extended mutation (with a real payoff at the end); and Michael (Micheal Ward), the Black cop who works for Joe and couldn’t be more of a straight-arrow, but winds up the victim of a group of terrorist extremists who are out to “save” him.
艾斯特力圖捕捉現(xiàn)實(shí)錯(cuò)位(cuò wèi)如何從媒體場(chǎng)域滲透至親密關(guān)系內(nèi)核(nèi hé)。當(dāng)平權(quán)浪潮席卷埃丁頓時(shí)，我們目睹(mù dǔ)社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)如何異化為情感層面的(de)集體癔癥。影片從未質(zhì)疑喬治-弗洛伊德謀殺案(móu shā àn)所引發(fā)抗議的正當(dāng)性，卻犀利解構(gòu)(jiě gòu)特定中產(chǎn)激進(jìn)主義的表演性姿態(tài)——這種意識(shí)形態(tài)(yì shí xíng tài)捕獸夾先后困住多位社區(qū)成員：從(cóng)自我鞭笞近乎氣象派組織成員的(de)莎拉（阿梅莉·霍弗勒飾），到始于調(diào)情終于身份(shēn fèn)畸變的本地青年布萊恩（卡梅隆·曼飾，其(qí)異化過(guò)程在結(jié)局獲得驚人閉環(huán)），再(zài)到恪盡職守卻淪為極端主義團(tuán)體"拯救"對(duì)象(duì xiàng)的黑人警探邁克爾（米歇爾·沃德飾），每個(gè)靈魂(líng hún)都成為時(shí)代精神病理學(xué)的鮮活標(biāo)本。
There’s no question that in “Eddington” Art Aster makes himself a scalding provocateur, the same way Todd Field did in “Tár” when he staged the confrontation at Juilliard between Cate Blanchett’s Lydia and the BIPOC student who questioned her devotion to dead-white-male composers. Yet as much as nailing down the precise point-of-view of “Eddington” is destined to be the subject of numerous incendiary debates, I’d argue that this is very much not a case of Aster becoming some young A24-approved version of David Mamet. What he captures in “Eddington” is an entire society — left, right, and middle — spinning out of control, as it spins away from any sense of collective values.
毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)(háo wú yí wèn)，艾斯特在《埃丁頓》中將自己鍛造成(chéng)極具爭(zhēng)議的挑釁者——正如托德·菲爾德(fēi ěr dé)在《塔爾》中安排凱特·布蘭切特飾演(shì yǎn)的指揮家與某音樂(lè)學(xué)院少數(shù)族裔學(xué)生?????(xué shēng)就"傳統(tǒng)經(jīng)典作曲家"展開(kāi)對(duì)峙。雖然影片(yǐng piàn)的終極立場(chǎng)必將引發(fā)激烈爭(zhēng)議，但(dàn)必須澄清：這絕非A24廠牌??背書(shū)??的大衛(wèi)(dà wèi)·馬梅式劇作復(fù)刻。艾斯特真正捕捉到的(de)，是整個(gè)社會(huì)系統(tǒng)（左翼、右翼與中間派(zhōng jiān pài)）在集體價(jià)值共識(shí)崩解中的失控(shī kòng)狀態(tài)——就像離心機(jī)里飛散的粒子(lì zi)，徹底脫離任何向心力的掌控。
The movie is about the center not holding, and you feel that refracted through every pleading stammer of Phoenix’s alienated, sad-sack performance. It’s not quite up there with his great ones, but it’s not one of his mumbly showboat ones either. There’s a bitter poignance to Joe, who’s in way over his mussy-haired head. When he finally takes matters into his own hands, you keep rooting for him even as he does something indefensible. For a while, the film becomes a darkly ambling thriller, one that plays Joe’s investigative team off the efforts of a local Pueblo officer, Butterly Jimenez (William Belleau), who we suspect might turn out to be our hero’s version of Inspector Javert.
影片"中心(zhōng xīn)失守"的主題在華金·菲尼克斯的表演(biǎo yǎn)裂隙中纖毫畢現(xiàn)：通過(guò)其塑造的(de)警長(zhǎng)那疏離的結(jié)巴、落魄的肢體(zhī tǐ)語(yǔ)言，每個(gè)顫音都折射著秩序崩塌(bēng tā)的微芒。雖未達(dá)其表演巔峰，卻摒棄(bǐng qì)了過(guò)往炫技式的含混演繹。當(dāng)(dāng)這個(gè)被亂發(fā)遮蔽雙眼的失敗者最終(zuì zhōng)選擇鋌而走險(xiǎn)，觀眾仍會(huì)不自主地為他(tā)的背德抉擇揪心——此刻敘事悄然蛻變(tuì biàn)為黑色游走式驚悚：警長(zhǎng)調(diào)查組與(yǔ)原住民警官巴特利·希門(mén)尼斯（威廉·貝洛飾）的博弈(bó yì)，恍若《悲慘世界??》沙威警長(zhǎng)的當(dāng)代變奏，在(zài)文明與蠻荒的接壤處投下道德(dào dé)悖論的陰影。
But just when you think you’ve got “Eddington” pinned down as a coherent and even conventional suspense tale, the movie wriggles out from under you and enters a terrain of stranger things. It doesn’t get lost in the grim funhouse of its own conceits, the way “Beau Is Afraid” did. But it does grow a little…abstract. There’s an indulgent side to Ari Aster, and though it’s more under control here, you can feel him giving him into it. Yet it’s also inseparable from what makes him, in “Eddington,” such a stimulating filmmaker. He wants to show us the really big picture, and while “Eddington” isn’t a horror movie, it puts its finger on a kind of madness you’ll recognize with a tremor.
正當(dāng)觀眾自以為把握住(bǎ wò zhù)《埃丁頓》作為傳統(tǒng)懸疑片的敘事脈絡(luò)時(shí)(shí)，影片卻如沙漠響尾蛇般滑出掌控，遁入(dùn rù)超驗(yàn)的異質(zhì)空間。它沒(méi)有像《博(bó)很恐懼》般沉溺于自我指涉的黑暗(hēi àn)迷宮，卻仍難掩某種...抽象化的(de)創(chuàng)作慣性。這是阿里·艾斯特骨子里的(de)作者印記——即便在此作中有所克制(kè zhì)，我們?nèi)阅芨Q見(jiàn)其放任藝術(shù)觸須恣意(zì yì)生長(zhǎng)的瞬間。而正是這種危險(xiǎn)的(de)詩(shī)意，成就了《埃丁頓》令人戰(zhàn)栗的當(dāng)代(dāng dài)啟示錄特質(zhì)：雖非類(lèi)型意義上的恐怖片(kǒng bù piàn)，卻精準(zhǔn)按住了時(shí)代精神病灶的脈搏(mài bó)，那震顫將長(zhǎng)久縈繞在觀者的神經(jīng)末梢(shén jīng mò shāo)。
出處：
