手机

前几年过年关的时候，总是会有原来的同学三三两两聚会在一起。有一个好朋友是个男孩，读书的时候，总是称我为兄长，不过几年，就已经为人夫了，两口子都不漂亮，也不出色。


和他的妻子吃饭的时候是坐在一起，说起外遇的话题，她和我的观点不谋而和，我们都认为如果要是碰到自己的老公有了什么，只要大家还过得去，就睁一只眼闭一只眼，因为我们都觉得，人生的路很长，我们都不能保证我们自己的思想会不会出轨。说道这个话题最后，我们还笑，只要他不是太过份，只要我们彼此都还有颜面。





事情过去了几年，我开始没往结婚上想，也有几年，电影电视里不断在讨论外遇，不过都与我无关了。如果有一样东西，你从来不会失去，大概就是因为你从来没有得到过。


今年新年前和白羽一起去看了今年的贺岁片——《手机》，老调重弹，大概总是因为这曲子还没有过时，男人女人，就算不谈婚姻，爱情里占有和背叛也是永恒的话题。





故事的一开始是从河南某家农村里平淡地诉说了乡里第一部电话开通的时候，守一的表嫂坐着守一的自行车去打电话的情景，然后，在类似秦腔一样的哭音响起，哭得我心慌，那句歌词我依稀记得是：你的媳妇叫吕桂花，吕桂花让问问你，最近你还回来吗？


当镜头拉开，全部是矿工的人头，广播在继续找人，而这些男人，都没有表情，没有说话，我还以为是一部反应民工过年的片子，我没有想到，这个故事是在说，结婚女人对自己老公的牵挂，也没有想到，这是一个从古到今一直都有的话题。女人依靠男人，企盼稳定，而男人，也想有个家，可是他们又怕约束，还有怕“视觉疲倦”。不，我说错了，他们不是怕，这只是一个事实。虽然我们都在说，爱情消失了过后，还有感情可以维持在两个人中间。但是我们自欺欺人了，还是我们只是没有找到那一份“合适”呢？





故事里的墨非（张国立）说，如果这是在古代就好了，一个人上京赶考，要好几年才回家，你回来了，你说什么就是什么。他对着严守一（葛优）说，相处了，几十年，是真的有点视觉疲倦了……


电影里，严守一是个节目主持人，他的生活在继续，他的节目也在继续，他的节目里不断地讨论着“诚实”、“心里有病”，可是他的生活仍然不可能改变这一切，拿起手机，他张口就是谎言，那谎言被丝毫也没迟疑的说出来，说得我们大家都知道他拿起手机会说什么，我们在电影院里笑，可是她的女人却笑不出来。





故事里有三个女人。


严守一的前妻于文娟，她是在家里拖地板的时候，接过了严守一情人的电话，然后在发现严守一外遇的时候，断然离婚，而在离婚后生了孩子才让严守一知道，他们离婚的时候，她怀孕了。


严守一的老师沈雪（徐帆），这是个很独立的新时代的女性，她是个认真的人，所以她有几出戏，一个是他们第一次见面的时候，她不能容忍严守一漠视她的教学，把严的手机扔进了垃圾桶。也是她的认真吧，她在下学夜不睡觉还要抓夜归的学生，也还有她为严守一代酒，这些是快乐的，后来，他们住在一起了，沈雪的地位就显得夹生了，他们不是夫妻，严的过去有一个老婆，而且是一个生了孩子的老婆，严的外面，还有一个女人，一个很漂亮很年青的女人。最后沈雪在烛台前一根根地划着了火柴，此时，她在想什么呢？是在想，男人的心理总是如此，看穿看悟了？还是在感叹其实多一事不如少一事，不需要搜他的包，不需要知道太多的秘密呢？


严守一的情人武月（范冰冰），这里忍不住要称赞她几句，虽然我觉得她演这个角色，应该有更多人不喜欢她，但她确实演得很有神采，漂亮，青春，还有疯狂。





故事的报幕很有新意，导演编辑，作词作曲，每个人都是存在《手机》电话号码薄的一个名字。是的，我们的生活在改变，男人过去出去工作，女人不会知道他身边发生的世界，广播找人，现在，通讯如此发达，你的手边有一部手机，所以她找得到你，她也不放心，她找不到你，她也不放心。


手机做得越来越好，可以录音了，可以发彩信了，可以拍摄了，是我们的生活空间受到了挤压，还是我们阴暗的心里没处可躲呢？


其实我无意讨论什么道德问题。这方面我有些冷漠。这本来就是个对错无法分得太清的世界。





只是觉得很有趣，还有几个有趣的片断。


墨非和严守一说，女人和女人站在了一起，最怕就是“结盟”呀。


但其实，男人互相为彼此掩饰，女人则互相妒忌。


里面李燕在知道自己老公有外遇后，和深雪一起去电信局查手机的通话记录，李燕没有劝慰，对话里多少有些兴灾乐祸，还有一点挑拨离间。





在这个故事里严守一的外甥女来京考试，主考官要她表演一段小品是她爸回来后干的第一件事情，结果外甥女冲门而出，再没有进来，原来她爸回来第一件事是串门。沈雪问她，你就不会编一编，他就不兴和你妈说说话？小姑娘硬着脖子说，“他们没话说。”


这个实在的小姑娘当然不会选上。


所以我们知道生活本来就改变了我们，我们已经习惯了谎言，也许也在不停地说谎。


女人是不是你不敢承受，有一天你的婚姻也是走到无话可说的地步呢？





但是我们还是在等，还是在问。


于是那首歌仍然在响起。


“你的媳妇叫吕桂花，吕桂花让问问你，最近你还回来吗？”


……


……


……

这是一部反映真情的电影，它的角度很特别，说的故事也十分贴近生活。

一开篇，是一段矿工的戏，吕桂花问丈夫何时会回家，在通讯不便的情况下，她跑老远的路，到镇里通过电话给丈夫带了一个话，丈夫能否听到，妻子都是不确定的，她的问候，丈夫更无法回答。而她也只是想跟丈夫说，自己想他了。当这一个妻子的问候，通过矿上的广播在全矿区的上空飘荡时，矿上所有的男人都笑了，这是多大的安慰啊，最辛苦的时候能想到自己的家人，有什么能够比这更让人感到幸福的呢？

之后的情节种种，感情一直是一个主线，不管是夫妻间，情人间，还是奶奶和孙子，喜欢要钱的兄弟，或者是帮忙做活的乡亲。一丝浓重的感情线，一直贯穿着始终。

而另一方面，这又是一部反映现实的影片。现实，作为一条更浓重，甚至近乎到强硬的线索，不断压迫着影片里的角色，压迫着人与人之间的'真情'。从最初的通信不便，到后来的有车，有房，有手机，有钱。人与人之间的距离'近'了，但反而 '近的喘不过气来了'。手机可以说是一个关键点，而它实际上更是一个象征，象征着现代生活中，人们所承受的各个方面的压力。现代的人，在生活中，工作中，不断被各种各样的事情纠缠，打磨，更像是在縫隙中，维持着心中的感情。痛苦，折磨，对抗和逃避，人被压得喘不过气来。这也是为何很多人，觉得这部影片'恐怖'。

写到这里，话算是说了一半，根据每个人生活经历的不同，这部片子自然会反映出不同的东西，而因它的诙谐幽默，让此片也具备娱乐片的效果，所以在我看来，是难得一遇的佳作。

建议看看'手机'的小说，文字的东西，体会起来，会更透彻

    普希金说：“一切过去的，都将成为美好的回忆。”中国人的崇古思想尤为严重，若对现实失望，便会幽幽地叹上一句“人心不古”。例如感情这回事，在社会普遍缺乏忠贞感的年代，人们把希冀的目光投回古代，古典式爱情成了现代人最后一根救命稻草。

    果真如此吗？对于这个问题，《手机》里的费老是这么说的：“古时候好啊，上京赶考，几年不回，回来的时候，你说什么都是成立的。”艳羡之情，溢于言表。当然，费老所憧憬的并非古典忠贞的爱情，而是由于交通和通讯不便所造成的偷情契机。

    中国最忠贞的爱情故事据说来自古时的牛郎和织女。一条大河波浪宽，没有稻花香两岸，牛郎的爱情始于大河，困于大河，也算是因果循环。

    不过上世纪70生人普遍受周星驰解构、颠覆思想的影响，传说里痴情专一的牛郎在他们看来并不是个绝种好男人。首先，牛郎是以一个偷窥者的身份出现，体现了其低劣的道德水准；其次，趁织女洗澡时偷其衣物，这是恋物癖的典型症状；第三，在织女一丝不挂时进行谈判，胁迫织女嫁给自己。这样的行为放到现代就是一个不折不扣的流氓罪，可挪到古代却变成了值得歌颂的爱情故事。所以现代人的爱情观念不一定就是那么低俗和赤裸裸，把一切罪过归结于时代是站不住脚的。

    上世纪70年代生人是目前中国社会的主体，可偏偏处在一个夹缝中的尴尬境地。美国人爱把他们的人群按年龄划分成“迷惘一代”、“垮掉一代”、“嬉皮一代”。在中国，如果说生于60年代是“过于责任”的一代，生于80年代是“物质的一代”——把握物质，并被物质把握。那么处于夹心饼干中间的70年代人则是“孤独自我”的一代，他们处于保守和反叛的交汇处，骨子里的保守和现代反叛的教育糅合形成了独特、矛盾的价值观和爱情观。他们不相信天荒地老，没想过从一而终，却也不怎么游戏爱情，本质上还是渴望传统的情感与生活方式。

    就像夹心饼干最精华的部分在中间一样，或许70年代人对待感情的态度更为理性和客观。格非在小说《初恋》的结尾这样写：“我们信誓旦旦，永不分离；我们未雨绸缪，时刻准备，各奔东西。”细致入微地描绘出70年代人的爱情观。

        Cell Phone (2003) marks the culmination of the popular cultural preoccupation with infidelity. A famous TV talk show host Yan Shouyi, tries without success to maintain the delicate network of lies and concealments that allow him to have two different mistresses in addition to his estranged wife.
        The story starts in a small town where the town’s first telephone, which signifies the modernization in China, has just been installed. In a small village nearby, a young man Yan Shouyi takes a peasant woman to the town to make a phone call to her husband. About twenty years later, the middle-aged Yan Shouyi has already become a popular TV talk show host in a big city, owning a wife, a nice job, a BMW, and a mistress. His life and work would not have taken this path if he had not been equipped with a cell phone, the latest wireless communication technology. But the Cell Phone also causes the end of his marriage: his wife accidentally answers a phone call from his mistress complaining about his absence from a date.
        After getting a divorce, Yan starts a new relationship with a college teacher, Shen Xue, while still occasionally dating his old mistress, Wu Yue. On the several occasions when his double life is about to be discovered by Shen, Yan deftly covers the truth with lies. His close friend Fei Muo, a university professor and producer for his television show, is also involved in a similar love affair with a graduate student, which is soon discovered by his wife. Eventually, Yan’s infidelity is discovered by Shen who sees a digital picture of Yan and Wu making love, a picture taken by the digital camera built into Wu’s new cell phone. Not only is Yan’s relationship destroyed, his career also ends as Wu threatens to expose their relationship and takes over his position as the talk show host. At the end of the film, throwing his cell phone into fire, Yan swears that he will never again own one. Then after a dip-to-black, the film welcomes a second ending, Yan’s niece, who is also from the same village, becomes a cell phone saleswoman and comes to demonstrate the latest product to his uncle Yan. (Zhang, 135)
        Given the obvious Marxist bent of Cell Phone’s rhetoric and its fable-like narrative of the dangers of commodity fetishism, one might easily conclude the film as criticism of the effects of rapid economic transformation in urban China, and denial of male dominance. However, underneath this reading which is merely based on the resolution provided by the film, we can find both the cultural underpinning and ideological impacts of the film, whether they are conscious directorial decisions or not, are the other way around.
        The film is based on patriarchal and post-socialist assumptions in the first place. The leading character, wealthy, successful TV host Yan Shouyi, is representing the controlling patriarchal order and the ruling class. The young and charming mistress Wu Yue, on the other hand, is a sexual object and an oppressed worker reinforcing and perpetuating an exploitative capitalistic scheme. Yu Wenjuan, the pregnant wife and later the mother of Yan’s only child, is a cheap labor whose family value in undertaking housework and fostering children is totally underestimated and neglected by both the character Yan and the filmmaker Feng. Shen Xue, the successor of Yu and Wu, is a wonderful replacement of the two women, since she functions as both mistress and wife and has the highest total value. Therefore, marriage and divorce follow the rules of product exchange. The values of women as sexual commodities are estimated by their male owner, based on evaluation and grading of their sexual attractiveness and productivity among others.
        In the second place, the narration neglects and degrades women’s family values.
While there are scenes of Yan Shouyi working at the TV station and attending meeting with his colleagues, which confirms his value in production, there is hardly any scene of the women working. In addition, among the values of women, the four structures proposed by Mitchell, sexuality is emphasized against reproduction, and socialization. While there are a lot of scenes of Yan Shouyi flirting and having fun with her young and passionate mistress Wu Yue, there is hardly any scene of him and the older and less attractive wife spending time together. The cinematic representation of the reproduction process of Yan’s first wife is almost absent in the film. Having been pregnant for months, Yu Wenjuan did not inform her husband at all, and Yan is only informed several months after divorce by his ex-brother-in-law that his first wife had already given birth to their baby and needs money from him.
        Hiding behind socialization of children and the new motherhood are deeper oppressions of women. Spending a lot of time and energy nurturing the kid, the woman Yu did not get the compensation in improving her own social status; instead she lost her job in the big city after she went back to her hometown. As the value of socialization of children is often neglected by the society, this part of the plot is also omitted in the film, and is only told through Yan’s narration, serving as an obstacle that hinders and adds drama to Yan’s women pursuing career. As her value looks invisible, Yan replaces his first wife not with his mistress whose value only lies in sexuality, but with a beautiful college professor Shen Xue who seems to be a more serious and proper wife candidate, but also has the sexual disposition of a mistress.
        From Yan’s perspective, all the three women can be valued on a materialistic basis. Women become commodities, and their sexual attractiveness, job, education status are all counted in their exchange value while man is the buyer who has the right of choice because of his economic power and dominance in a patriarchal society.
        Extramarital relationship is a fatal violation of Chinese social norms and a tradition that often punishes the woman for such “immoral transgression” (Cui 181). In Cell Phone, the mistress Wu Yue, became the conflict's cause and the incarnation of immorality instead of the Male character Yan Shouyi. As an advanced prostitute, she would love to sell her body in exchange for money and power. And, ultimately, she threatens to replace Yan Shouyi as a television talk show host by using the photo she took in her cell phone. Thus, Yan Shouyi becomes the victimized character pitied by the audiences instead of the evil woman.
        The resolution of the film, Yan Shouyi’s abandoning of the cell phone, which may seem like a self-criticism, is actually a displacement and denial of the guilt and regret by reprimanding the modern technology and communication device. Cell phone becomes the scapegoat for Yan Shouyi, the hypocritical and immoral character, and therefore the patriarchal and capitalist order behind the story, which was supposedly to be criticized, is actually being extended sympathy.
        Depicted as the direct cause of all the conflicts between the protagonist and the three female characters, cell phone, the symbol of post-socialist modernity seems to be criticized. Rui concludes that Cell Phone addresses the subject through the director’s satirical take on consumerism and his exposure of the moral crises and ethical issues brought by expansion of high technology into our everyday lives (Zhang, 136). However, in the first 90 minutes of the film, a fantasy of the patriarchal and post-socialist (capitalist) utopia was already created for the male audiences: mistress as a symbol and accessory of urban success. Female audiences were also given a utilitarian fantasy integrated with the narcissistic and masochistic visual pleasure: being someone’s mistress is the shortcut to wealth and success. Thus, the film belittles the value of women, and denies women's independent existential meaning.
        In addition to the narrative constructed to propagate the attractive image of the “successful personage” that has represented the “new ideology” of contemporary China, an image that endorses a reality of growing class differences and income disparities, Feng Xiaogang adopts a lot of meta-cinematic elements in Cell Phone to offset the seriousness of his own criticism, a technique abundantly used in his early films. There are ample shots within the TV station, such as the staff operating camera, and outtakes of the TV host Yan who says his lines wrong, that remind the audiences to question the authenticity of their own movie watching experience. There is also a lot of inserting advertisements for cell phones that deconstructs the movie’s final critical stance towards post-socialist modernity. As the audiences identify and follow the male protagonist throughout the film, they highly enjoy and celebrate his material wealth and “romantic affairs” brought about by his professional success in the patriarchal and post-socialist order. In the meantime, they also accept a message that all women, whether they are educated or not, college professor or press editor, wife or mistress, are all annexed to the life of men.
        As McGrath noticed, the basic narrative structure of Cell Phone already had become so common by the end of the 1990s as to constitute a cinematic genre in itself, a genre that offers fable-like narratives of the moral dilemmas confronted by protagonists facing dramatic changes in personal economics as well as libidinal possibilities in the reform era. In such films, a man takes on one or more extramarital lovers after achieving some sort of economic success and social elevation (McGrath, 98). In many cases, a man’s ability to defy his wife is supported by both his male role and some sort of economic success. Even though these films reveal the social issues of the oppression of women, they neither provide a solution nor hold a feministic point of view that attempt to liberate women. Instead, they stand in line with the successful male protagonists, and celebrate the current patriarchal and post-socialist status quo. In a word, these films are women-concerned, but not at all feminist films.
        Supposedly a subgenre of family melodrama that aims to criticize the social immorality and educate the audiences, the actual impact of the “cinema of infidelity” is rather doubtful. An example is the sex diary scandal of Han Feng, the former senior tobacco official, which culminates the “mistress fashion” in 2010. Even more dramatic than Feng’s films, the purported diary, written in graphic detail, includes boasts that Han was enjoying sex romps with many different women while taking bribes and attending banquets. Populated by Internet users, Han’s case is just one in a million of the government officials and the privileged stratum in Mainland China.

圣诞夜，我看了电影《手机》。这是2003年度最佳惊竦片，看完以后教人混身冰凉。以前小刚拍的东西，目的在于娱民。娱民这东西就不能太往深里走，即使不得不太深，也得表现出荒谬和黑色来。小刚潜水一年，最新奉献出来的东西不深不浅，基本上是写实主义，让人看了毛骨悚然。

《手机》这个片子，从头到尾都给人一种相当疲惫的感觉。我唯一能看出来的故事大纲就是一个中年男人怎么样让生活给活活逼崩溃了，这比恐怖片还恐怖，比记录片还真实。在真实生活中，过着和严守一一样生活的人不是太少，而是太多了。这就造成本片不再是搞笑，而是批判现实主义。

批判现实主义具体什么意思我不清楚，今天也是第一次用。在我理解里，那就是讲述一个大家日常生活里都能见到的故事，然后用极其悲惨的命运惩罚主人公，以达到教育人民的目的，类似地狱写真。我不当人民好多年，也不喜欢被教育。

我曾经类似道德偏执狂一般挑剔周围的世界，但是现在我充分理解人性的种种。人类的精神力量在大多数时候都屈从于肉体的需要，并且因此而造成精神上的痛苦。我曾经以为那是个例，现在我才知道这是通解。如果世间真的存在所谓忠贞不渝，那么最合适执行的对象是和尚，而众所周知和尚是不结婚的。即使肉体能保证绝对的循规蹈矩，但是在精神的辅道上永远都塞满了车。

一个所谓幸福的婚姻，我想更多的是习惯。因为这么过和每天系脸刷牙是一样的，也就如此过下去了。另外我推测另外一个很重要的因素是专注之力。把注意力集中在一点上，其余的欲望才会纷纷坠落，而不是纷纷扬起。这又说回去了，最幸福的婚姻需要和尚来完成。

我是被这片子吓到了，不是因为结果，而是因为作用选择都处于两难境地，且无法改变。这片子让人感觉到，生活没有最糟，只有更糟。看完以后，它能使郁闷者更加郁闷，绝望者更加绝望。

这片子一点都不好笑。