金球獎(jiǎng)大贏家《少年時(shí)代》到底是一部怎樣的影片？

Shot over 12 years, Richard Linklater’s film about growing up is a devastatingly plausible biography of a real person – and a terrifying reminder that life is short.

歷時(shí)12年的拍攝，導(dǎo)演理查德•林克萊特借這部電影真實(shí)地記述了一個(gè)人的成長歷程，卻也提醒了大家——人生苦短。

With so many movies contriving to be dumb, formulaic and yet messily over-complicated, the pure simplicity and clarity of Richard Linklater’s masterly Boyhood makes a glorious change. It is a marvel, particularly its refusal to bend itself into any traditional screenplay-seminar narrative structure. Like life, like old man river, it just keeps rolling along.

當(dāng)許多電影失去了表現(xiàn)力、結(jié)構(gòu)趨于程式化、情節(jié)過于復(fù)雜而又毫無章法，理查德•林克萊特的這部《少年時(shí)代》巧妙地讓極簡純粹之風(fēng)華麗逆襲。這是一部奇跡之作，它不拘泥于任何傳統(tǒng)劇本的敘述結(jié)構(gòu)，如同時(shí)光、如同老人河(美國密西西比河的別稱)，兀自流淌。

The central conceit was endlessly and excitedly compared by critics to lots of different things when it arrived – largely Michael Apted’s 7-Up series and François Truffaut’s Antoine Doinel movies – but the remarkable thing was that it really hadn’t been done before. The nearest attempt was probably Michael Winterbottom’s honourable attempt in his film Everyday.

《少年時(shí)代》一經(jīng)上映，其主題就曾被影評(píng)家們不斷拿來與各種影片熱火朝天地比較，對(duì)比最多的當(dāng)屬邁克爾•艾普特的《人生七年》紀(jì)錄片系列、以及弗朗索瓦•特呂弗的影片《四百擊》。而《少年時(shí)代》的出彩之處正在于它并沒有因襲舊作。相比之下，邁克爾•溫特伯頓的佳作《日復(fù)一日》也許是最為接近的作品。

Linklater took a child, Ellar Coltrane, and filmed him playing a kid called Mason in various naturalistic settings and situations for a few weeks every year for 12 years. He then stitched together the result: a devastatingly plausible biography of a real person. Before our eyes, the child became a man in a movie time lapse. The movie was loose and open-ended because that was how it had to be. The filming procedure was like life. Actually, it was life. How incredible to have a repertory cast of actors ready to commit, like family, to such a project over such a length of time.

12年間，林克萊特每年都會(huì)抽出幾周時(shí)間，記錄男孩梅森(艾拉•科爾特蘭 飾)在各種現(xiàn)實(shí)場景中的故事。當(dāng)他將這些片段剪輯在一起時(shí)，一段無比真實(shí)的個(gè)人自傳就誕生了。只是一部電影的時(shí)間，一個(gè)男孩就這樣在我們眼前成長為男人。影片結(jié)構(gòu)松散，留下了(現(xiàn)實(shí)本該有的)開放式結(jié)尾。同時(shí)，電影的推進(jìn)就如同生活本身。而它確實(shí)就是真實(shí)的生活。像這樣如同一家人一般的演員陣容每周固定出演，還能持續(xù)這么久，確實(shí)令人難以置信。

It is impossible to watch this movie and not be moved and awestruck by an obvious truth: grownups were once children. The adults and the kids we see in movies, or outside in the streets, in real life – they are not separate races or tribes. They are the same. Ethan Hawke, playing the dad – he used to be a kid. Patricia Arquette, so wonderful as the mom – she used to be a kid. And Lorelei Linklater, equally wonderful as Mason’s sister: she is, then was a kid. She, too, demonstrates a real-time growing up.

《少年時(shí)代》最令人動(dòng)容、最讓人感概之處莫過于影片將一個(gè)鮮明的事實(shí)展現(xiàn)在了我們的面前：每一個(gè)大人都曾是孩子。不論是在影片中，還是在真實(shí)的生活里，成人與孩子從來都不是身處兩個(gè)“陣營”中的獨(dú)立“物種”。他們就是彼此。影片中的父親伊桑•霍克，曾經(jīng)也是個(gè)孩子;影片中的母親帕特里夏•阿奎特也一樣;和母親一樣出色的姐姐羅蕾萊•林克萊特(也是主人公現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中的姐姐)，同樣擁有她的童年，同樣有過成長的經(jīng)歷。

And there is another simple, powerful truth that Boyhood demonstrates, one that I can’t remember seeing expressed with such force in any other film, or indeed any novel or play. And it is simply that life is terrifyingly short. It really is over in an instant. Watching this film as a parent is almost unbearably sad, especially when Patricia Arquette’s mom bids farewell to Mason as he heads off to college, cheerfully unconcerned about his parents’ empty-nest anguish.

《少年時(shí)代》所展現(xiàn)出的另一個(gè)簡單而強(qiáng)大的事實(shí)則是：人生太短暫，總是稍縱即逝。而這也是我從未在其他電影、小說或是表演中所強(qiáng)烈感受到的。為人父母，看這部電影時(shí)更能感到無法釋懷的憂傷，尤其是看到梅森的媽媽帕特里夏•阿奎特送他去上大學(xué)時(shí)告別的一幕。孩子離開時(shí)滿心歡喜，卻絲毫不知道父母心中的“空巢之痛”。

Boyhood is a film that inspires love. There can hardly be anything more worthwhile than that.

《少年時(shí)代》喚起了我們的愛——這世上最珍貴的存在。