红字

这部由霍桑的小说改编的电影 让我第一次觉得原来电影也可以比原著好看
小说中亚瑟牧师是个懦弱的男人 不能保护自己所爱 最后死在了普林的怀中 一个悲剧收场 留下的是这样的遗憾与无奈 但是在电影中 加里奥德曼的亚瑟牧师却是一个坚贞勇敢热情无畏的男人 赋予了亚瑟又一种生命 虽然他也胆小害羞 虽然他也被封建礼教束缚 可是当自己的女人站在绞刑架上的时候 他站了出来 对人群对世俗对上帝高喊:我是孩子的父亲 在上帝眼中 我是她的丈夫 那一刻我也激动的想大喊 怎样的勇敢让他可以在背负这么多沉重之后终于面对这一切 终于喊出了几年来无法承担的责任 其实男人是要比女人苦的 女人虽然被世俗唾弃 但她是坦荡的 是高尚的 她无所畏惧 但是男人呢?无法触碰自己心爱的女人 无法拥抱刚出生的孩子 在人前仍旧做他高尚的牧师 讲他的经布他的道 谁也无法了解他内心隐忍的苦痛 而这一刻 他终于能站起来 终于能摆脱束缚 终于能拥抱爱人和孩子了 但是他却不再拥有上帝的微笑 同样面临被绞死的命运 这时候的印第安人来袭而造成的大团员结局是我觉得最无法接受的 生硬的可以 但还是希望给我一个这样的大团员结局 大概最近悲剧看多了 或者也没有那么生硬了 大家知道亚瑟有印第安人罩着 还敢把他怎样?
影片的场景服装都很好 颜色也漂亮 我截了几张图 发现任何一张拿出来都可以画一张古典主义的油画了 记得最深的就是普林偷看亚瑟洗澡那场戏 她本来是束着头发的 看到亚瑟之前放了下来 还戴上了一顶花环 让我想起夏娃和伊甸园来了 传说这一段加里有露点 但是操蛋的是我居然买了删节版...

  The film “The Scarlet Letter” tells a story of a brave woman. We call her “Hide”. She had married, but her husband was older than her and she didn't love him. One day, she came to a town of the USA and met a young priest. The priest's sermons lecture touched her heart deeply. And that, Hide's charm also moved the priest, they were fallen in love. Hide was pregnant. For this reason, she was accused of “adultery” and forced to wear clothes with “The Scarlet Letter”. But she was brave and unrepentant. She borne the baby, and lived hardened. With the help of the Indians, she got the happiness finally.

   Hide is touched my heart deeply. The woman is so brave and loyalty. She always conviction the love of the priest and full of virtue, even under the harsh realities. The letter “A” stands for shame first, but Hide makes it stand for “able”、“angle” by her brave. She strives for true love. She is a soldier who struggling with the feudal tradition!

  In the end of this film, the “Scarlet Letter” was throwing away. it is stand for the beginning of Hide's new happy live.

   May be in her heart, the “Scarlet Letter” was stand for "Amour"...

        Retelling a novel in a film adaption can be challenging. One needs to consider casting, as well as the context and setting of the story and more. Most important, the main theme should be faithfully represented. Nathaniel Hawthorne’s novel The scarlet letter (1850) and Roland Joffe’s film (1995) of the same title have certain things in common: both feature the hardened life of Hester Prynne, who commits adultery in Puritan Boston in the mid-seventeenth century. However, the differences between the novel and the film are so prominent that the film can be a problematic retelling. The novel reveals the tragic lives of the characters – Hester and Pearl Prynne, Arthur Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth – as the inevitable result of the narrow and relentless Puritan society in the mid-seventeenth century. The film, in contrast, gives its leading roles unrestricted liberty, both physically and spiritually, rather than being subjected to the Puritan morality in the original story. This mismatch between the traits of main characters and their setting in the Puritan town compromises the integrity of the story.
        Joffe presents The Scarlet Letter as an overtly sensual retelling of the novel. The alterations he made in both the plot of the story and the nature of its leading characters are a total distortion of the novel. The film portrays Hester Prynne, starred by Demi Moore, who leaves her husband in Europe and comes to live in puritan Boston in the mid-seventeenth century. Her unconventional behavior and opinions draw attention from the repressed Puritans in town. She then meets the passionate young minister Arthur Dimmesdale, starred by Gary Oldman, whose sermons deeply touch her. The minister is also attracted by her charm and they soon secretly fall in love. After receiving the news that Virginian Indians have killed Hester’s husband, she gets pregnant, bearing the minister’s child. She is nonetheless accused of adultery even if it is not known whether her husband is alive then. In order to protect the respectable minister, she refuses to tell the name of the father and is condemned to wear the scarlet letter A as a badge of ignominy. She is not repentant and continues to challenge the principles of the Puritan society openly. Meanwhile, Dimmesdale also suffers great pain from his secrete guilt. Hester’s husband then appears in town and becomes a killer to take vicious revenge on Dimmesdale. With the help of Indians, Hester and Dimmesdale leave the town finally and enjoy a happy ending.
        Hawthorne’s novel, The Scarlet Letter, allows Hester Prynne to have a freedom of mind, undisciplined by the prejudice and principle of the society. “The world’s law was no law for her mind”. However, she keeps her “freedom of speculation” all within herself. She does not want to irritate the authorities and lose the right to raise her Pearl. Conversely, Joffé apparently attempts to give Demi Moore complete freedom of mind and speech that seem totally unrealistic for a woman in the given setting and time. He glorifies the character of Hester Prynne by making her unbelievably strong, out-spoken and full of righteous justice. He portrays her as a rather wealthy heroine who buys indentured labor to farm the land instead of doing needlework. He even allegorizes Hester as a feminist by making her to confront the male dominated authorities several times in the film. When Demi Moore is accused of heresy because of disregarding “the law of men,” she questions the magistrates that “If the discourse of woman is ‘untutored chattering,’ then why does the Bible tell us that women shall be the teachers of women?” It seems rather bizarre her argument is beyond the magistrates’s power of refutation. More peculiar, Joffe describes her as a true friend to Mistress Hibbins, standing up for her when she is suspected to be a witch at the judicial hearing. Hester says bravely that “Mistress Hibbins is no witch. And she committed no crime beyond speaking her mind.” This overt battle with the public contradicts entirely with the image of Hester in the book as she “interferes neither with public nor individual interests and convenience” (209). Instead of showing Hester as a female character in a setting parallel to Hawthornes’s depiction of Puritan town in 1642, Joffe makes her too avant-garde and aggressive for her period of time.
        Joffe misinterprets Hester’s morality under the Puritan setting by making noticeable change to her sense of sin in the film version. In the novel, Hester firmly believes she has sinned by the liaison with the minister though she never regrets their sincere love. She, therefore, throughout the book, does penance by living an ascetic life in an abandoned cottage at the outskirt of Boston. She is totally deprived of social interactions, with no friends and seeking none; she makes a living doing needlework and raises Pearl alone; she even gives out charity to the even more miserable beings. By doing so, she hopes that atonement can be made for “a union that is unrecognized on earth”. Hawthorne portrays her anguished by the public bitterness and conscious of the shame brought by the scarlet letter, but remains uncomplaining. In the film, however, Hester has no contrition or guilt nor does she think she has sinned at all. Right after Demi Moore is imprisoned because of adultery, she questions Dimmesdale that “Do you believe we’ve sinned? What happened between us has a consecration of its own!” Later in the scaffold scene, she challenges the Governor again on her understanding of sin: “I believe I have sinned in your eyes, but who is to know that God shares your views.” Whereas Hawthorne portrays Hester as a victim of Puritanism principles by presenting her sufferings and defenselessness to the notion of sin, Joffe makes her more like a victor over the “law of men.” Due to the absent conscious of sin in Demi Moore, Joffe is unable to bring to light the transfiguring and ascendant effects taken place in Hester in the novel, which is driven by her sense of sin. Therefore, he fails to underscore her transformation as Hawthorne does, which results from the inhuman nature of Puritan society – the main issue that Hawthorne criticizes.
        As Hester’s guilt-wracked lover, Arthur Dimmesdale, is not only too powerful a character in the film, but he has too much flexibility in expressing his love. In the movie, he does not reveal bravely to be the child’s father only because Hester pleads with him. However, “everything in [his] nature cries out for it.” Joffe’s Dimmesdale no longer has the nature of cowardice and hypocrisy, but is almost as brave and honest as Hester is. He even defends her innocence as he accuses her confinement as “an abomination.” Joffe manages to set up excessive interviews between Dimmesdale and Hester, only to demonstrate that he has true love for her and desperately wants to help her out by risking himself. Even more at the end of the movie, when Hester is about to be executed for witchcraft, Dimmesdale confesses his love and secret to the public: “I love this woman. I am the father of her child. And in God’s eyes, I am her husband.” He then puts the string on his own neck, wiling to die for Hester. By openly challenging the rules of the town, Joffe’s Dimmesdale seems to have a negative view on Puritanism as well. Joffe reverses the role of Dimmesdale to an emotive and courageous man who has a voice for his love and a respect for human nature. This revision is problematic because such qualities are deprived in this repressed “Puritan divine” as decribed in the novel, whose puritanical morality is so deep-rooted.
        Joffe overly emphasizes the emotional appeals to the audience by producing a Hollywoodized happy-ending. In the novel, Hawthorne creates a single powerful climax: all the other human voices and music subdue, left with only the majestic voice of Dimmesdale’s confession and the revelation of the scarlet letter on his breast. At this point, Hawthorne pushes all the tension and suppressed emotions – anguish, sin and repentance – to an extreme that they can bear no more but to be released into the final lyric paragraphs. The peaceful dialogue between Hester and Dimmesdale before his death serves as a powerful form of salvation for the previous vehement narrative as well as the burdened tragic lives of Hester and Dimmesdale. Joffe, however, creates different tension points in his ending. He depicts Hester, as a champion of justice, asks to be hanged together with Mistress Hibbins; then Dimmisdale heroically declares his love for Hester and is willing to dye for her; finally and most absurd, a rebellion by the Indians saves them all, turning the film into an action movie. Joffe introduces digression to release the main tension in the story. Though the ending that Hester and Dimmesdale live happily afterwards might be more comfortable for the audience, it is much less powerful than the one in the novel.
        Joffe portrays both Hester and Dimmesdale as the brave and passionate warriors against the Puritan society’s inhumanity, rather than being victims. Of course, it is good that Joffe believes that Hester and Dimmesdale eventually triumph over the repressed Puritan doctrines, but by giving them much more undisciplined freedom in their nature than Hawthorne does, he seems to deny the fact that they are ever repressed or affected by Puritanism. Assuming that both Hester and Dimmesdale have emancipated spirits almost equivalent to modern-day people, Joffe manages to cross out the imprint left on them by Puritanism in the mid-seventeenth century in Puritan Boston. By depriving those characters of the tragic consequences from the Puritan principles, he undermines the intention of Hawthorne in reforming Puritanism in the novel.

本来冲着“红字”的标题、Gary Oldman还有海报去看的片子。。。

没想到看得不知所云！！！

136分钟的片子，看完了发现，两个多小时再也回不来了！！！

把原著改得乱七八糟，人物简直是顶着原著名号的冒充者罢了。。。

以Demi Moore的声音怎么适合演女主？？？

说着说着就像缠带卡壳了，让人听着浑身难受！！！

而且，原著中女主那隐忍、逆顺的外表哪去了？？？

被Demi演成了一个拓荒欲望极强的女权主义者！！！

更夸张的是：Demi在片子里面强壮地像个汉子！！！

有没有搞错？？？

Gary Oldman也把原著中闷骚的男主演成了明骚的愤青！！！

还有Gary湖中洗澡露PPJJ的场景太扯淡了点吧？？？

男主一个美洲殖民地拓荒期的牧师，遮还来不及，怎么可能经常跑去人家后院裸泳呢？？？

再说红鸟勾引女主、女奴偷窥女主洗澡、长发男试图强奸女主、长发男被女主老公暗杀、女主老公自杀的桥段，乱七八糟哪里来的啊？？？

这不是美剧好不好！！！

至于Pearl，和个道具差不多。。。

完全没有原著中小女孩的灵气和妖质！！！

还有片子的画外音，一直听得我蛋疼！！！

亏了我是个男生，可以很精确运用“蛋疼”这个词来形容自己当时的感受。。。

总之，不靠谱啊不靠谱！！！！！！！

“我很敬重和爱这个孩子的父亲，而我不可能也不能说出任何给他带来伤害的话。”

向这样的女人致敬。

所有的宗教禁忌都是人们凭空想象出来的，有宗教信仰不代表就有崇高信仰，有一时的信仰不代表能坚守一生。真正的崇高信仰是严于律己、宽于律人。

所有的信仰之争、主义之争都是权力之争和利益之争。只有为人类和广大人民的终极幸福而追求的才是值得称道的。

人类从最初原始社会的夭折、饥饿、寒冷、病痛、乱伦到现代社会的长寿、美食、温暖、舒适、爱情，每经历过一次王朝的更替和帝国的消逝和民众的觉醒、民主和独立，人类的文明都在螺旋式的上升。

我坚信人类会因为文明而永恒。

    这个片看第一遍的时候，我感动得一塌糊涂。今天又翻出来看了一遍，废言几句。
    一个女人得坚韧和伟大，是第一次看完以后的总结。她坐船三个月到一个陌生的地方独自开始新的生活，买地、安家、雇人、耕种，本身就不是一个平凡的女子会承担的责任。更何况还要面对新环境中人群的挑战和压力：人们异样的眼光、邪恶牧师的骚扰。
    正如邻居希莉所言,她的丈夫虽然娶了她的人但是却得不到她的心。一个年轻漂亮、聪明勇敢而又博览群书、思想独立的女人，内心很难被真正虏获。同样地对于丁亚涩，一个年轻英俊、对上帝虔诚的牧师而言，势必要把他的一生献给钟爱的事业了。可是他们偏偏相遇了。我很喜欢这一段，应该是全剧中最美好的部分。别说两个年轻漂亮强壮有力的身体对彼此的吸引（连我也被惊羡了，看来不管男女我都是很好色的），也是精神的契合让他们走到一起。他们眼神接触时留下刹那间的空白，继而又惊惶失措地逃避。Gery Oldman在Moore的纯净坦诚的笑容中不能自拔，害羞而无助，却是满眼的柔情。
    短暂的温情在那样的历史背景下显得多么无助而卑微。她丈夫的噩耗，怀孕，受审判被关押，在狱中诞下一女。坚韧的女人在里面哭泣，痛苦的男人在雨中流血以减轻内心的伤痛。社会的伤疤用一个“红字”贴在女人的身上，人心的侮辱作为惩戒－－这是最残酷的刑罚。女人丈夫的归来加重了气氛的阴险。疯狂的报复以最阴暗的方式部署，人性的脆弱在那时显露无遗。接下里就是一连串的杀戮，直到最后他们都站在绞刑台上……
    我始终看到一张坚毅而伟大的脸，正义的控诉，坚贞的情操。她从来没有卑微的时候，虽然她也感到痛苦和无奈。而相比于女人的坦荡和神圣，那个和神在一起的男人却背负着女人的保护和罪恶的圣明，痛苦地苟延，让所谓的道德扭曲善良的心灵。直到面对死亡，他才大声喊出："I love this woman. I am the father of her child. And in god sight, I am her husband！" 天啊，他终于释放了自己。看到这里会不会有人泪流满面？
    我想是不会再看第三遍了。演员表达得很到位，凄美的故事结合复杂的社会时代背景，情节布置得很从容。大概因为小说本身也不错吧。不会去看小说了。