过境

《过境》展示了一种精准的艺术。每个镜头的机位、运动、时长，镜头间的剪辑点，演员表演的强度都恰到好处地组构为一个坚实的整体（一个自足的影像世界）。恰到好处，不可更改，不接受任何怀疑。

将二战的故事置入现代都市，讲述当下的难民问题，自然是高级伎俩。但也无非是雕虫小技，只要能想到，便能得以实现。相较于此，摄影机所模拟、投射的目光更显高级。克制而隐忍，高级影像的来源。

这是一道处于界限之域的目光，它与众不同的地方在于放弃了外视与内视的简单二分，跨步在两者的临界点，从而将影像表达导向一种既客观又主观的实在，而这正是小说“自由间接话语”的独特价值所在。

克里斯蒂安·佩措尔德的摄影机投射出客观的目光，同时又引出角色的主观状态：这是通过在目光中加入导演的主观姿态（观点通过镜头的设计）实现的。电影成了创作者和角色内心镜像交织的呈现工具。

一个证据在于电影中的画外音并非彻底是全知视角（类似于小说的作者），反而时常被角色自己的声音所打扰。于是，我们徘徊在到底是作者（故事的知情者）还是角色（比如他在回忆）的两难叙述之间。

克里斯蒂安·佩措尔德创造了小说影像化的新典范：不再是用影像复述故事，而是用摄影机的目光模拟腔调。高级感来源：小说的真正价值是这股神秘的腔调（声音），同样电影的真正奥秘就在于这道目光。

故事如何不必多所顾及，关键是故事怎么被转述。客观呈现过于老套了，如今是在意识的零界点上进行转录，于是取得神奇的体验效果。导演以隐身的方式显露了自己，他既在又不在电影中，这实在高明。

05/17/2020. Timelessness. The presence and absence of the time. 在时间之外、在虚无里逡巡；也如同行在日光之下尘世之上的无间道。

Almost otherworldly. Strikingly intimate, immersive, and mesmerizing. Spontaneous and grounded in every aspect.

Pure embodiment of the characters. His rootlessness and her restlessness. (Does love ground you and bring you back to the “living”? Does it give you a path to take?) Franz自身独特的质地带给了角色微妙的温度、流动性、与隐秘感。Paula Beer也十分鲜活、复杂、迷人，如活在你漫长的错觉里。Both of them are beautifully present, true, and nuanced. Loved the breath-giving, open giving-receiving between them.

作者与作品之间的疏离感。作者性的纯粹，作者却隐而不现。

The final chapter of Christian Petzold’s “Love in Times of Oppressive Systems” trilogy, after BARBARA (2012) and PHOENIX (2014), both scripted by Petzold and the late German filmmaker/critic Harun Farocki (1944-2014), TRANSIT is an adaptation of Anna Seghers’ Nazi-escaping novel and has a daring conceit that challenges the status quo of cinematic transposition.

On the face of it, the befogging disjunction between its narrative and temporality (an unspecified contemporary context) persists throughout the whole story, our protagonist is Georg (Rogowski), a young German refugee in France, who flees from Paris to Marseille, assumes the identity of a deceased writer of certain cachet, whose recent suicide hasn’t yet been circulated, to secure a ticket to embark on an ocean-liner, destination Mexico. But in Marseille, he meets the dead writer’s wife Marie (Beer), who relentlessly looks for her husband. Georg falls for her and also manages to get her a ticket without revealing his ulterior scheme, but their quirk of fate is far crueler than the truth itself.

Right out the box, audience will be fully aware that the story is not set in WWII but current times, Georg is obviously not running away from Nazis (reckoning that he gets the wind of Germans are coming), and a double take suggests he ought to be an illegal immigrant who tries to lay low and pulls out all stops to leave the Continent. However, curiously and diligently Petzold effaces any trace of modern-day trappings (no cellphone, television, or computer, signs of today’s technology), what we are granted to see in lieu are manuscripts, trains, a flashlight, footballs, a broken radio, nondescript hotel rooms, ocean liners, taxis, embassies, etc., all have been well existed in the WWII period, as if he conspiratorially intimates that what we see is actually what happened during that time, only, in the film, those things are presented in an unmistakable milieu of our reality. Which makes one wonder, is this a new approach of re-imagination? Faithfully complying with the source material’s time-line and story, then put it under the life as we know it without upgrading all its paraphernalia, only subtracting any anachronistic items, therefore, the plot doubly serves as a paralleled allegory, past horror is not so far from being repeated, time and again.

Relative to its innovative and sagacious leitmotif, Petzold’s narratological disposition is unfortunately less impressive (abruptly killing off secondary characters for the shocking effect is blasé), dutifully crossing the t’s and dotting the i’s of the monotonous dilemma (a tentative father figure fell by the wayside in a transient sojourn, and an eleventh hour cop-out that becomes a blessing in disguise), although Franz Rogowski comports himself particularly striking with a searing dignity and a tormented reluctance written all over his face, and Paula Beer, often exudes an entrancing restraint and sophistication that is so incongruous with her tender age, comes into her own in the latter stage of the story with a difference, whose seesawing allegiance between three men, her husband, Georg and Richard (Giese), a doctor of her fallback position, keeps us dangling in a heartbeat. Even without a mind-blowing cadenza like he did in PHOENIX, to induce frisson, nonetheless, Petzold infuses TRANSIT with a melodramatic poignancy that stoutly holds its own concomitant with its allegorical connotation and metaphorical expression.

referential entries: Petzold’s BARBARA (2012, 7.0/10), PHOENIX (2014, 7.8/10).

提前声明 这篇文章不讨论电影本身，片子本身还行，但由于奇差无比的翻译，给我留下了极其糟糕的印象，这篇文章完全大晚上被气得就是来喷不负责任的字幕组。

先放两张图对比一下

正常字幕组翻译水平

我第一次看的版本

我虽然没学过德语，所以不能从专业的角度去探讨翻译的好坏，但图二的翻译水平简直连基本的语句通顺逻辑正常都做不到，只能说汉语都不过关。

然后我就用Google翻译了一下，看来还真是和机翻一个水平线上的……

诸如此类的奇葩翻译数不胜数，先挖个坑，等回头再填

我想困境是本片在极力营造的一个主题，故事发生在纳粹攻陷马赛前，首先就是把这个二战时期的故事放到现代法国街景下的演绎，这是时间上的错乱；空间上他打开了一个以墨西哥大使馆为圆心的难民视角，他们有着不能明文的生活规则，如果无法手握一张离境船票，任何人甚至不能入住旅店，而向秘密警察的告密也成了一种默认，“是羞耻让我们沉默。”，警察突袭旅店时大家互相凝望。每个人都在等待着自己的身份被盖章，他们在使馆内热切地倾诉自己的避难故事，游荡在使馆的辐射圈内，又隐匿于各个旅店之中，对彼此冷眼旁观，这样的末世感与阳光充裕的海港城市混乱地重叠在了一起。

但正是这种外部困境下，男主角的视角才显得极为无助与真诚。故事开始，带着一位已经自杀身亡的诗人的遗物，男主角和负伤的海因茨从已经沦陷的巴黎跳上了去往马赛的火车，在夜晚幽微的蓝色光线里，男主角阅读了诗人遗留的稿件与他妻子的来信，早上醒来时海因茨已经去世了。从下火车开始，他便是带着两个死亡讯息来到马赛的外来者形象，我想本片最终想讲述的就是这一层身份的困境。海因茨的妻儿藏在马赛，诗人的妻子一直在寻找丈夫，他鬼使神差进入了他们的生活，可以选择做海因茨儿子的父亲，也可以是诗人，甚至是诗人妻子的情人医生，但每一次选择便意味着对另一种身份的抛弃，隐藏在身份困惑的背后，就是人与人之间这层情感联结。“谁会先忘记，离开的人还是被抛弃的人？”。

葆拉贝尔饰演的妻子在本片再次化身了精灵般的存在，出现在了这个被麻醉的世界。压抑的社会规则之下，只有她与海因茨的儿子带给了男主角真实的、关于爱的刺痛，他最后给出了那张船票，主动将真实的自己从替身里抽离了出来，我感叹于导演佩措尔德的这分勇气，他将男主角永恒地困在了错乱的时空之中，却带来了一切的可能性，也自然是每个时代的残存的爱与希望。

电影是把二战前夕的背景搬到现代来了。犹太人，共产党人都在遭受清洗，迫害。只要没有国家给他们发签证，就等于是任人宰割的命运。一张签证就像是免死金牌，大家都在努力得到一张出逃活命。此处插播一条真人真事，意大利的何凤山广场。就是当时中国领事在积极发放签证给犹太人帮助他们逃到上海的故事。有兴趣的人可以点击链接去读一下。另附他个人wikipedia，有兴趣的可以点击读一读。

电影中很多人都在等签证，歌手，养狗的女人，georg的朋友们还有他自己，同时每人也像是在寻找一个陪伴。最后所有人的希望都落了空。歌手死了，朋友们或死或被捕，养狗的女人失去希望也死了，marie没找到丈夫，医生没有到达彼岸去开诊所，小男孩没有找到一个像父亲一样的依靠，georg也没有得到签证和爱情。电影讲的是transit，所有人的故事也都在transit结束。就像是二战时期被迫害的每个人的故事一样，被旁白一样的声音念出，萦绕在马赛港口，还有欧洲各地，都是无枝可依。电影里有很多维度的空间重合，很值得回味。

最后是开放式结局，一种解释可能是marie没有找到weidel，下船回来继续找，但是解释不通她看到georg而没认出他。个人认为是另一种解释，就是船沉了，marie的执念回来了，带着她的脚步声，georg的执念在她身上，所以看到她还在找来找去，但marie看不到他。后来大清洗开始，Georg遇害的同时，也是和marie的重逢。所以那一刻的脸上是看到marie来接他的惊喜。