The Triumph of Death (Pieter Bruegel the Elder)

The Triumph of Death is an oil on panel, painted c. 1562 by Pieter Bruegel the Elder. It currently hangs in the Museo del Prado, Madrid.

The painting is a panoramic landscape of death: the sky in the distance is blackened by smoke from burning cities and the sea is littered with shipwrecks. Armies of skeletons advance on the hapless living, who either flee in terror or try vainly to fight back. Skeletons kill people in a variety of ways - slitting throats, hanging, drowning, and even hunting with skeletal dogs. In the foreground, skeletons haul a wagon full of skulls, and ring the bell that signifies the death knell of the world. A fool plays the lute while a skeleton behind him plays along; a starving dog nibbles at the face of a child; a cross sits lonely and impotent in the center of the painting. People flee into a tunnel decorated with crosses while a skeleton on horseback slaughters people with a scythe. The painting clearly depicts people of different social backgrounds - from peasants and soldiers to nobles and even a king and a cardinal - being taken by death indiscriminately.

The painting serves a useful historical purpose in that it shows aspects of everyday European life in the mid-sixteenth century. Clothes are clearly depicted, as are pastimes such as playing cards. Uniquely, the painting shows a common method of execution for sixteenth-century criminals: being lashed to a cartwheel mounted on a vertical pole. Objects such as musical instruments and an early mechanical clock, and scenes including a funeral service provide historians with a deeper understanding of the lifestyle of the 1560s.

Some argue that unlike his predecessor, Hieronymus Bosch, the artist who painted the Hellscape called The Garden of Earthly Delights, Bruegel's hordes, composed of skeletons, not demons, suggest a distinctly atheistic pessimism, and one untempered by any belief in Heaven. However, it is more likely that Bruegel was simply familiar with the then-popular Danse Macabre motif, which liberally features animate skeletons leading various people to their doom.

It has been suggested that the painting was inspired by the worsening political climate before the Eighty Years' War (started in 1568), although the painting itself predates this war. Another interpretation is that the painting is an allegorical depiction of the horrors of war, much like his Mad Meg (Dulle Griet in Dutch), also painted around 1562.

Triptych of Garden of Earthly Delights (Bosch)

Bosch produced several triptychs. Among his most famous is The Garden of Earthly Delights. This painting depicts paradise with Adam and Eve and many wondrous animals on the left panel, the earthly delights with numerous nude figures and tremendous fruit and birds on the middle panel, and hell with depictions of fantastic punishments of the various types of sinners on the right panel. When the exterior panels are closed the viewer can see, painted in grisaille, God creating the Earth. These paintings have a rough surface from the application of paint; this contrasts with the traditional Flemish style of paintings, where the smooth surface attempts to hide the fact that the painting is man-made.

Bosch never dated his paintings and may have signed only some of them (other signatures are certainly not his). Fewer than 25 paintings remain today that can be attributed to him. Philip II of Spain acquired many of Bosch's paintings after the painter's death; as a result, the Prado Museum in Madrid now owns several of his works, including The Garden of Earthly Delights.

This painting is one of the most enigmatic pictures ever made, it has captivated and puzzled audiences since its inception. It is a large triptych, yet it was never destined for a religious setting. It is a conversation piece that is it is a picture intended to be closely viewed and its meaning discussed among friends or visitors. It can be read on many levels, from the literal to the allegorical.

The closed position depicts the Earth on the third day of Creation. The muted grey-green of the exterior contrasts vividly with the vibrant colours of the three interior panels. Reading from left to right, the interior begins with paradise. As Christ prepares to wed Adam and Eve, he direct his glance and blessing to the viewer. Bosch's Garden of Eden is filled with real and fantastic creatures, verdant meadows, anthropomorphic rocks and bizarre hillocks, part pod and part crystal. Above Christ is a fountain of life.

The landscape and perspective schemes of the left and central scenes are identical. The garden is filled with young men and women of many races. There are no children and no older adults. Adam and Eve's progeny frolic unselfconsciously. Some kiss or engage in more amorous activities, others converse or eat strawberries and various fruits. A cavalcade of male riders encircles a group of bathing women in the middle third of the picture. The lack of a clear focal point or linear narrative makes the central panel the hardest to understand.

By contrast, the right wing is hell, and it finds its counterparts in other Bosch pictures. Divided into three tiers, hell includes a blasted landscape exploding in flames and smoke. A windmill is powered by sails of infernal light.. Great crowds march endlessly. In the middle, some figures skate on thin ice. A bizarre tree-man dominates. His shell-like torso forms a tavern, while couples, each comprised of one human and one demon, dance on his head to a bagpipe's melody. He looks furtively rather than directly at the viewer. The foreground is cluttered with punishments for the seven deadly sins. The prideful woman will spend eternity staring at her reflection mirrored in the backside of a devil, whose hand-like roots fondle her body. Gluttons are consumed, while a miser excretes gold coins into a cesspool. The hunters are now hunted, as indicated by the rabbit with his quarry, in this world upside down. An amorous sow, wearing the headdress of a Dominican nun, attempts to seduce the man at the lower right into signing the legal document.

---

i was suprised to know that the album cover of Dead Can Dance 'Aion' originated from this famous painting.

Aion is the fifth studio album by Dead Can Dance. The first album Lisa Gerrard and Brendan Perry wrote after the end of their amorous relationship, it was recorded at Perry's new estate, Quivvy Church in Ireland.

The male soprano David Navarro Sust contributes vocals to the first track.

The album cover shows a detail from the Dutch painter Hieronymus Bosch's triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights (specifically, its central "Earth" panel).

Triptych of Haywain (central panel)

Hieronymus Bosch (2 October 1453 – August 9, 1516) was an Early Netherlandish painter of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The artist's work is well-known for the use of fantastic imagery to illustrate moral and religious concepts and narratives.

Like the Tabletop of the Seven Deadly Sins, the Haywain shows mankind given over to sin, completely unmindful of God's law and oblivious to the fate which he has prepared for them. In this image, however, Bosch focuses on one of the Deadly Sins: the desire for worldly gain, or Avarice, whose sub-categories are elaborated in the adjacent figure groups very much as they are in the old handbooks on the Virtues and Vices. Avarice leads to discord, violence and even murder, all of which are graphically depicted in the open space before the cart. If the princes and prelates complacently jog along behind the cart, holding themselves aloof from this struggle, it is because the haystack is, so to speak, already in their possession; they are guilty of the sin of Pride. Avarice also leads men to cheat and deceive; the man wearing a tall hat and accompanied by a child at lower left is most likely a false beggar. The quack physician in the centre has set up his table with charts and jars designed to impress his victim; the purse at his side stuffed with hay alludes to his ill-gotten gains. Several nuns at lower right push hay into a large bag, supervised by a seated monk whose gluttonous tendencies are revealed by his ample waist.

 

The meaning of some of the other groups remains unclear, and we may also wonder at the presence of the lovers on top of the haystack. That they illustrate the sin of Lust we know from the appearance of similar figures in the Prado Tabletop, but it might be argued that the pursuit of the pleasures of the flesh involves the expenditure rather than the accumulation of earthly goods. A class distinction may perhaps be observed between the rustic couple kissing in the bushes and the more elegantly dressed group making music. Their music is certainly that of the flesh, for the devil near by, piping some lascivious tune through his nose, has already lured their attention from the angel praying at the left.

Triptych of Temptation of St Anthony (Bosch)

The Temptation (or Temptations) of St. Anthony is an often-repeated subject in history of art and literature, concerning the supernatural temptation reportedly faced by Saint Anthony the Great during his sojourn in the Egyptian desert. Anthony's temptation is first discussed by Athanasius of Alexandria, Anthony's contemporary, and from then became a popular theme in Western culture.

 

The earliest paintings to employ the scene were Italian frescos of the 10th century. The the later European Middle Ages one saw accumulation of the theme in book illumination and later in German woodcuts. About 1500 originated the famous paintings of Martin Schöngauer (ca. 1490), Hieronymus Bosch (ca. 1505) and Mathias Grünewald (ca. 1510). In the modern era the theme has been treated by the Spanish painter Salvador Dalí and the French author Gustave Flaubert, who considered his 1874 book The Temptation of Saint Anthony to be his master work.

 

Bosch's spiritual heroes were the saints who endured both physical and mental torment, yet remained steadfast. Among the saints, Bosch's favourite was Saint Anthony, the subject of his triptych The Temptation of Saint Anthony.

 

St Anthony (Anthony the Great, or Anthony the Abbot, 251-356) was a Christian saint and hermit, born in Upper Egypt. On the death of his parents he distributed his property among the poor and retired into the Egyptian desert where he remained in solitude for many years. He is generally regarded as the founder of monasticism. During an epidemic, said to be erysipelas, in Europe in the 11th century many cures were claimed in his name and the disease became known as St Anthony's fire. Anthony, like some other hermits, was subject to vivid hallucinations resulting from his ascetic life in the desert. These 'temptations' assume two forms in art, assault by demons and erotic visions.

 

The triptych features physical punishment on the left wing, a Black Mass in the centre, and the blandishments of food and sex on the right wing. St Anthony's triumph over such trials is mirrored by those of other hermit saints and by the Passion of Christ, whose arrest and carrying of the cross adorn the exterior of the Lisbon altarpiece.

Landscape with Charon Crossing the Styx

Joachim Patinir, also called de Patiner (c. 1480 – October 5, 1524), was a Flemish Northern Renaissance history and landscape painter from the area of modern Wallonia.  His follower in establishing a distinct style of panoramic northern Renaissance landscapes.

 

Joachim Patinir's painting Landscape with Charon Crossing the Styx depicts the classical subject related by Virgil in his Aeneid (book 6, line 369) and Dante in the Inferno (book 3, line 78) at the center of the picture within the Christian traditions of the Last Judgment and the Ars moriendi.

 

The larger figure in the boat is Charon, who "ferries the souls of the dead to the gates of Hades" (Smith 320). The passenger in the boat, too minute to distinguish his expressions, is a human soul deciding between Heaven, to his right (the viewer's left), or Hell, to his left. The river Styx divides the painting down the center. It is one of the four rivers of the underworld that passes through the deepest part of hell.

 

On the painting's left side is the fountain of Paradise, the spring from which the river Lethe flows through Heaven: "the water of Lethe has the power to make one forget the past and to grant eternal youth" (Battistini 210).

 

On the right side of the composition is Patinir's vision of Hell, drawing largely on Boschian influences. He adapts a description of Hades, in which, "according to the Greek writer Pausanias, one of the gates was located at the southern end of the Peloponnesus, in an inlet still visible on the Cape Matapan" (Battistini 213).

 

In front of the gates is Cerberus, a three-headed dog, who guards the entrance of the gate and frightens all the potential souls who enter into Hades. The soul in the boat ultimately chooses his destiny by looking toward Hell and ignoring the angel on the river-bank in Paradise that beckons him to the more difficult path to Heaven (Devisscher).

Triptych with the Birth, the Adoration of the Magi, and the Presentation in the Temple

Hans Memling (Memlinc) (c. 1430 – 11 August 1494) was an Early Netherlandish painter, born in Germany, who was the last major fifteenth century artist in the Low Countries, the successor to Jan van Eyck and Rogier van der Weyden.

 

This work is linked to Luke 2:27~

 

26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.

 

27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,

 

28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,

 

29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:

 

30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,

descent from the cross (rogier van der weyden)

Rogier van der Weyden (1399/1400 – June 18, 1464) is, with Jan van Eyck, considered one of the greatest exponents of the school of Early Netherlandish painting.

 

The Deposition, sometimes called by the usual variant names for the Deposition of Christ (Descent of Christ from the Cross, Descent from the Cross etc) is a panel painting by the Flemish artist Rogier van der Weyden (1399/1400–1464) created c.1435-38, and now in the Prado, Madrid.

 

The Deposition shows the crucified Christ being lowered from the cross, his lifeless body held by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. However, what makes this work particularly unique for the period is the swoon of Mary, collapsing in a pose that mirrors that of her son, right down to the two figures that also hold her as she falls. This pose was entirely new for Early Netherlandish art and was the product of van der Weyden's inventive mind.The sentiment, however, is a direct reflection of the mystical devotion expressed by Thomas à Kempis' popular treatise Imitatio Christi, first published in 1418. The text, just as the image here, invites the reader or viewer to personally identify with the suffering of Christ and Mary.

 

Since its creation, this work has been often copied and was extremely influential; within van der Weyden's own lifetime it was considered an important and unique work of art.

 

The tiny crossbows in the side spandrels of the picture also reflect the original patronage. It was acquired by Mary of Austria (1505–1558), sister of Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V, for whom she governed the Habsburg Netherlands, and then passed to the Spanish Royal Collection. It was transferred from the Escorial to the Prado in 1939.

Saturn Devouring His Son (Goya)

Perhaps the best known of the Black Paintings is Saturn Devouring His Son. The frightening image portrays the Roman god Saturn eating one of his children. (The Greek counterpart to Saturn is Cronus, father of Zeus.) Fearing a prophecy that one of his children would overthrow him, Saturn ate each of his children upon their birth. Goya depicts this act of cannibalism with startling savagery. The background is black, while the limbs and head of Saturn seem to pop out of the shadows. Saturn's eyes are huge and bulging as if he is mad. His fingers dig into the back of his son, whose head and right arm are already consumed. Saturn is about to take another bite of his child's left arm. The only use of color besides flesh-tones is the splash of red blood covering the mutilated outline of the upper part of the partially-eaten, motionless body, which is chillingly depicted in deathly white.

It depicts the Greek myth of Cronus (in the title Romanised to Saturn), who, fearing that his children would supplant him, ate each one upon their birth. It is one of the series of Black Paintings that Goya painted directly onto the walls of his house sometime between 1819 and 1823.

After Goya's death the work was transferred to canvas, and now resides in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.

Goya depicts Saturn feasting upon one of his sons. His child's head and part of the left arm has already been consumed. The right arm has probably been eaten too, though it could be folded in front of the body and held in place by Saturn's crushing grip. The god is on the point of taking another bite from the left arm; as he looms from the darkness, his mouth gapes and his eyes bulge white with the appearance of madness. The only other brightness in the picture comes from the white flesh and red blood of the corpse and the white knuckles of Saturn as he digs his fingers into the back of the body. There is evidence that the picture may have originally portrayed the titan with a partially erect penis, but, if ever present, this disturbing addition was lost due to the deterioration of the mural over time or during the transfer to canvas; in the picture today the area around his groin is indistinct.

Various interpretations of the meaning of the picture have been offered: the conflict between youth and old age, time as the devourer of all things, the wrath of God and an allegory of the situation in Spain, where the fatherland consumed its own children in wars and revolution. There have been explanations rooted in Goya's relationships with his own son, Xavier, the only of his six children to survive to adulthood, or with his live-in housekeeper and possible mistress, Leocadia Weiss; the sex of the body being consumed can not be determined with certainty. If Goya made any notes on the picture, they have not survived; as he never intended the picture for public exhibition, he probably had little interest in explaining its significance. It has been said that the painting is "essential to our understanding of the human condition in modern times, just as Michelangelo's Sistine ceiling is essential to understanding the tenor of the 16th century".

Goya may have been inspired by Peter Paul Rubens' 1636 picture of the same name. Rubens' painting, also held at the Museo del Prado, is a brighter, more conventional treatment of the myth: his Saturn exhibits none of the cannibalistic ferocity portrayed in Goya's rendition. However, some critics have suggested that Rubens' portrayal is the more horrific: the god is portrayed as a calculating remorseless killer, who – fearing for his own position of power – murders his innocent child. Goya's vision, on the other hand, shows a man driven mad by the act of killing his own son. In addition, the body of the son in Goya's picture is that of an adult, not the helpless baby depicted by Rubens. Goya had produced a chalk drawing of the same subject in 1796-7 that was closer in tone to Rubens' work: it showed a Saturn similar in appearance to that of Rubens', daintily biting on the leg of one of his sons while he holds another like a leg of chicken, with none of the gore or madness of the later work.

The Great He-Goat or Witches' Sabbath (El aquelarre) by Goya

Another Goya's dark paletted works from the Black Paintings collection is titled The Great He-Goat or Witches' Sabbath (El aquelarre). Earlier, Goya created a version of this work in a more cheerful and optimistic way; however, this image is ominous and gloomy. This earth-toned illustration shows Goya's demonstration of the ancient belief that the Sabbath was a meeting of witches supervised by the devil, who took the form of a goat. The goat is painted completely black and appears as a silhouette in front of a crowd of witches and warlocks. These "sub-humans" have sunken eyes and near horrifying features. The figures huddle together, leaning towards the devil. Only one girl seems resistant to the crowd, and she sits at the far right, dressed in black holding a muff. Though she does not appear involved in the ritual, she does seem to be captivated by the group's relationship to the devil.

The Nude and Clothed Maja by Goya

Two of Goya's best known paintings are The Nude Maja (La maja desnuda) and The Clothed Maja (La maja vestida). They depict the same woman in the same pose, naked and clothed, respectively. He painted La maja vestida after outrage in Spanish society over the previous Desnuda. Without a pretense to allegorical or mythological meaning, the painting was "the first totally profane life-size female nude in Western art". He refused to paint clothes on her, and instead created a new painting.

The identity of the Majas is uncertain. The most popularly cited subjects are the Duchess of Alba, with whom Goya is thought to have had an affair, and the mistress of Manuel de Godoy, who subsequently owned the paintings. Neither theory has been verified, and it remains as likely that the paintings represent an idealized composite. In 1808 all Godoy's property was seized by Ferdinand VII after his fall from power and exile, and in 1813 the Inquisition confiscated both works as 'obscene', returning them in 1836.

Spring (The Flower Girls) by Francisco Goya

 

Still Life with Salmon,Lemon and three Vessels,1772

Museo del Prado Madrid

the immaculate conception by murillo

MURILLO, Bartolomé Esteban (b. 1617, Sevilla, d. 1682, Sevilla)

The "Soult" Immaculate Conception c. 1678

Museo del Prado, Madrid

 

His culminating version of the Virgin Immaculate, in which the last of the traditional attributes is eliminated except for the crescent moon, and the putti, some painted so thinly that they seem to dissolve into the fluffy clouds. In 1813 in return for sparing the life of two monks condemned to death, the painting was taken to France by Marshal Soult. It was returned to the Prado in 1941.

 

Bartolomé Esteban Murillo was born in Seville, Spain in 1617, where he lived until his death. He was a pupil of Velasquez

 

Murillo founded a prestigious painting academy in 1660 which he presided over with great ability. His vast production of paintings, for the most part, are of a religious nature and theme.

 

Murillo's influence in Spanish painting, even more in Sevillian painting, was perpetuated until the 19th century.

 

Murillo is often accused of being too idealistic, too anodyne. His style, 'estilo vaporoso' (vaporous style) shows idealized figures, soft, melting forms, delicate colouring, and sweetness of expression and mood. In religious painting, his favourite theme was the Immaculate Conception. Murillo's appealing vision of the Immaculate Conception became canonical.

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 1)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 2)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 3)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 4)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 5)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 6)

Joy Division Documentary (Part 7)

oy Division: The Documentary (Part 10)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 8)

Joy Division: The Documentary (Part 9)

Control（Ian Curtis & Joy Division）

取名自Joy Division名曲She's Lost Control，《控制》（Control）不是一齣內容陳腐的搖滾樂海浮沈錄。

相反地，它讓我們看見一名凡人的掙扎，那是夢想的起飛與破滅，面對愛情時抵禦不了的誘惑，以及不完美的軀體帶來的折磨。籌拍《控制》之前，荷蘭籍導演Anton Corbijn不僅是世界知名的搖滾攝影師與音樂錄影帶導演（作品包括了U2、Depeche Mode），更是長期死忠的Joy Division樂迷。1979年，為了貼近心中偶像，他從家鄉移居英國，並於該年十一月拍下了第一張Joy Division現場照片。想當然耳，那是一張黑白圖像，也是《控制》所採的基調。

攝於黑白底片，電影呈現的完滿灰階，較飽足光鮮的原色系更貼近七零年代的英格蘭，那抑鬱滄茫的時代之氣。而幾乎不透光的影像風格，除了隱隱昭示了暗藏於人物表象底下的死亡意念，更呼應了後龐克樂派那款抑制壓縮的聲響。

影片自1973年開場，當時Ian Curtis只是關在房間聽著David Bowie、Lou Reed黑膠，有樣學樣畫上眼線的少年。家鄉Macclesfield彷彿一座沈寂的死牢，唯有正在倫敦燃燒的華麗搖滾才是放縱的解藥。而1976年一場舉行於曼城的Sex Pistols演唱會，卻從此翻轉了他的命運曲線。Ian Curtis雖不會彈吉他，一襲高挑身形卻是搖滾主唱的最佳人選。他在會場結識了苦尋主唱不得的Bernard Sumner、Peter Hook與Stephen Morris三人，便決定放手一試。

起先，樂隊喚為Warsaw，隨後改名為Joy Division。有著得力經紀人Rob Gretton奔走（此君也替影片提供了最多笑料），加上可謂是樂隊恩人的Tony Wilson不但歃血為盟，將之納入自身廠牌Factory Records旗下，更讓Joy Division在電視節目So It Goes露臉，自此打響了名號。隨著樂隊漸入佳境，Ian Curtis得同時兼顧工作與排演，像極了一根兩頭點燃的蠟燭。由於過於早婚，他在巡迴時邂逅的比利時情人Annik Honore與妻子Deborah Curtis之間，也成了一名拿不定主意的背叛者。

像一顆不定時炸彈的癲癇症只讓情況更加惡化。終於，身心俱疲而萬念俱灰，Ian Curtis在Joy Division好不容易得來的美國巡迴前夕自縊身亡。伴隨他二十三歲死亡片刻的歌，是Iggy Pop的The Idiot。

傳記電影之所以佳片難求，在於史實呈現之困難。除非像《超脫末日》（Last Days）那般完全逆向思考，揚棄了情節鋪陳、人物考據的反傳統作品，一般的傳記片最為人詬病的莫過於編導喜於加油添醋，看似助長了戲劇效果，卻犧牲了原真性。《控制》之所以讓人信服，除了編劇Matt Greenhalgh訪遍了所有與電影相關的人物（包括從不受訪的Annik Honore），Ian Curtis遺孀Deborah Curtis更親自擔當製片，而她那本回憶錄Touching from a Distance: Ian Curtis and Joy Divison，自然成了電影最重要的參考文獻。

除了Deborah Curtis（她至今仍居住於Macclesfield），Tony Wilson也掛名製片。若說《24小時狂歡派對》（24 Hour Party People）刻意將他渲染為一名活力十足，有時卻不免過分滑稽的喜劇角色，《控制》裡的Tony Wilson無疑更有血有肉。不再是那名不正經的老小子，而是關心之情溢於言表，行事踏實且充滿理想的音樂人。找來關鍵人物壓陣，自然提供了電影的權威性；然而，卻是一票璞玉般的演員，用他們懾人的演技回答了所有疑問。

飾演Ian Curtis的Sam Riley，雖曾於《24小時狂歡派對》露臉（當時扮演The Fall主唱Mark E Smith），《控制》卻是他首度挑上大樑。雖然現實生活中，Sam Riley本是一名獨立樂隊主唱，為求精確，他仍觀看了大量的Joy Division現場影像，學習Ian Curtis獨特的機器人舞姿，甚至下足了功夫研究癲癇症患者的病徵。Ian Curtis的挫折、沮喪與無助，佈滿了Sam Riley的年輕臉龐，也像一只浸了毒的銀針，狠狠扎入觀者之心。其餘三名Joy Division成員，扮相也惟妙惟肖，甚收畫龍點睛之效。

配樂使用了Roxy Music、The Buzzcocks甚至是Velvet Underground，讓電影更趨近當時的環境氛圍。而Ian與Deborah兩人在街頭分手時，一前一後地漠然行走宛如死寂的送葬行列，背景響起的正是Love Will Tear Us Apart。那幕，音樂與影像的連結是如此綿密深邃，多少人在戲院裡紅了眼眶。那幕，註定成為經典。

在當下時點觀看《控制》，的確教人唏噓。Tony Wilson甫過世不久，踩踏著Joy Division灰燼重生的New Order，也在奮鬥近三十年後逐漸走向尾聲。雖已預知結局，《控制》緩緩開展的劇情，不論Ian Curtis脆弱的生命，或Joy Division多舛的生涯，依舊將觀者的情緒能量牢牢向黑洞深處吸去。

隨著Atmosphere奏起，讓我們再送Ian Curtis一程，向我們抹上了慘白塗妝的青春期再道一次再見。

王丹吾爾開希

監修按語：

「我自橫刀向天笑，去留肝膽兩崑崙！」這是一百一十一年前，「戊戌六君子」之一譚嗣同在獄中牆上寫下的絕命詩。其後前仆後繼的仁人義士，包括王丹與吾爾開希，都有類似的拋頭灑血救國志。

由於譚嗣同早於一八九八年九月二十八日在北京宣武門外菜市口刑場「死得其所」，以至死無對證，其中「兩崑崙」其後更成了儒門懸案，有人解作康有為與大刀王五，有人解作大刀王五與拳士胡七，有人解作譚嗣同自言生也崑崙死也崑崙，有人乾脆認為不可解（至於「橫刀」，稍為有文化〔即是副學士程度或以上〕的新一代，興許都會解作「奪愛」吧）！

「戊戌政變」九十一周年，提起「兩崑崙」，相信許多人很容易就可以對號入座，說什麼就是王丹與吾爾開希啊！

一九八九年的夏天，二人是全球焦點，煞似崑崙雙峰，卻又像浮過赤道的冰山一樣，忽然在六四消溶。然後，一個愴然離去，一個惶然留下。如今千里雖迢迢，肝膽依然兩相照。

「六四事件」二十周年，提到王丹與吾爾開希，四十好幾的人都會記得穿佐丹奴Ｔ恤任他們「上身」的日與夜，三十好幾的人仍會記得當年跟着梅艷芳一起唱過《血染的風采》，二十好幾的人卻恐怕只會覺得，眼前這兩個中年男人，一個肥，另一個更肥！這是歷史的悲，還是時代的喜？

只知，二人是追風箏的孩子。他們所追的風箏，一隻藍，另一隻更藍！

那年夏天，我你開始有希望了！

王丹去年在哈佛戴上歷史博士四方帽時，落腳於台灣的吾爾開希，在星月下向他發了一封祝賀電郵，裏面提到一起走過的腳步，一起走過的西單大街，一起走過的五十天，和分別走過的二十年（見另文）。

那夜，美國與台灣的星空異常清朗，寧靜月夜卻頃刻被二十載春秋盟友至情至性的流水行文劃破。王丹與吾爾開希兩顆二十歲的心泛起陣陣激動，四十歲的腦同時呈現八九年他們在北京天安門廣場並肩奮戰的畫面。

那年，春夏之交，北京很熱，熱出海市蜃樓，換了人間，換了人臉，有些人恍如侏儒，有些人變身巨人。

來自北京師範大學的維吾爾人吾爾開希二十一歲，比北京大學的王丹大一歲，舉手投足魅力非凡，一頭微曲棕髮、少數民族獨有的深切輪廓、憂鬱眼神……令其領袖光環閃閃生輝。他的名字更引來天安門廣場女生仰慕詮釋：「吾代表我、爾就是你，我和你，開始有希望了！」

吾爾開希也令香港人着迷，當時的佐丹奴大老闆黎智英印製學運領袖Ｔ恤，印有吾爾開希肖像的那一款最好賣。事隔二十年，吾爾開希依然記得那一幕：「當年我在廣場的其中一個任務，是替香港人的Ｔ恤簽名。」

比起吾爾開希，架着塑膠厚眼鏡的王丹，就顯得過份沉實。吾爾開希記得，首次在天安門見到王丹時，第一印象是他開口講話時那排參差不齊的蛀牙，心想：「怎麼這個年青人沒有好好保護牙齒？」而王丹見到吾爾開希非凡的說話魅力，心知：「這個人和我很不同，他善於表達，我卻是內斂型。」

王丹：我就只去那間星巴克

王丹性格內向、沉靜、深思熟慮。九八年流亡美國，十年來在哈佛的生活十年如一日：早上七時起牀後，到宿舍附近那間星巴克邊喝 Latte 邊讀報，中午上堂下課到圖書館，坐在那個差不多已成為「王丹專用」的座位讀書至黃昏。斜陽伴晚煙，便到唐餐館吃晚飯，然後像隻倦鳥一樣回家上網、上床。

「十年來，我就只去那間星巴克、喝那杯 Latte。」王丹說，不只星巴克，他習慣光顧一個油站，以後就只會去那個油站。「我就是這樣 persistent 的人。」Persistent，可解作堅持不懈，也可譯成固執。

六四之後，民運人士四處逃生，王丹沒有像吾爾開希等逃到國外。共產黨視他為頭號通緝犯，這個「阿頭」果然厲害，跑遍大江南北，就是不離開中國國境。「那時年紀輕，還想留下來看中國的變化。」

數月後，王丹被中共抓到。回憶身陷囹圄的歲月，他說得淡然：「我是個很懶的人，坐着就不想動，所以坐牢對我來說沒大問題。」獄中的日子，他天天看書寫文章，餓了吃、睏了睡。聽他描述哈佛天之驕子的時光，跟訴說階下囚的生活，似乎沒有什麼大分別。

人到中年，王丹變得更內斂，提起年邁雙親已能平靜地道：「年紀大了，明白到，路，還是要一個人走的。」他說，對父母的想念已積存內心深處，不再像年輕時會想家想到痛哭。今年九月，王丹將到台灣政治大學出任助理教授，以為他會激動說赴台可跟父母見面，誰知還是淡淡一句：「父母還未知什麼時候來。」

王丹對新北京更感空洞。「我的記憶，仍停留在老北京，八九年那個北京。」他說，自己完全不認識新北京，那個因經濟起飛而改頭換面的新北京。鳥巢、水立方、中關村、七九八……，統統沒有感覺。

北京這個老家，八九年後離他愈來愈遠，不及美國熟悉。他放假便獨個兒穿州過省，跟老外喝啤酒不着邊際聊聊又一天。王丹不怕悶，只要給他書本，一個人的日子不淒涼。「流美」的一人生活就如流水般自由愜意，融入不了白人圈子也無所謂。

當年走上學運台前的都是知識份子，這些年，如王丹般堅走學術路的不多。提到「知識份子」，王丹才稍為激動：「我一直學習的原因，是希望做個負責任的反對派，唯有堅持不斷思考來鞏固個人修養。」他沒有像吾爾開希走入商界，深信當知識份子有責任將「不可能的理念變成可能」。

「沒有八九民運，我一樣會走到前線參與公民運動。六四對我的影響，其實不算什麼。」唯有真正的過來人，才能說得輕鬆。

吾爾開希：我不反對兒子打架

與王丹不同，當年讀教育的吾爾開希，沒有走上教育路，也沒有坐過牢。六四後即逃到國外、現居台灣的吾爾開希，是台北一家美資金融機構的合夥人，在台中也有生意，專營環保工程。「在中國，為着安身立命而讀教育；出國後，因着環境轉變想法不同，發現商界較適合自己。」

吾爾開希說，他不像王丹、不是個 persistent 的人，「我比較 open minded。」王丹日日去同一間星巴克飲 Latte，吾爾開希笑說自己做不到。「我不喜歡星巴克，我寧選不同特色的小咖啡館，每次找家新的來光顧。」

他又用烹飪來比喻個性：「我喜歡煮老家新疆羊肉，有時會加入意大利醬料烹調。」上碟就成了吾爾開希獨門炮製的「意大利新疆菜」。另一個例子，是其「開明教子秘方」：「我不反對兒子打架，但我會叫他說出打架的原因，我希望兒子勇敢面對問題。」

「開明」的吾爾開希，時常跟「執着」的王丹開玩笑道：「我不像你會自稱為『詩人』，但，不代表我寫詩會輸給你。」王丹會向別人稱「我是個詩人」，吾爾開希卻認為：「詩人是很浪漫崇高的，我不敢以此自居。」

一路走來，吾爾開希樂於為現實生活在商場打滾，肩負一家之主的責任。他的大兒子十四歲、幼子十歲，近日開始問爸爸二十年前發生在天安門廣場的事。回想那個最耀目的夏天，吾爾開希說起來仍滔滔不絕：「我是一個有煽動力的人，可以鼓動別人志氣，有很多主意。」廣場上的一點一滴，吾爾開希說得起勁，不像內向沉潛的王丹，「我和王丹的性格，真的很不同。」

六四後官方發出的通緝名單，光芒四射的吾爾開希竟意外地排在王丹之後，這個「阿二」分析：「因中共視王丹為『預謀份子』，他早在北大辦民主沙龍。」吾爾開希是平地一聲雷，王丹是暗地十分力。

在我打斷李鵬講話之前……

兩個性格迥異的人，被八九民運這條大纜扯在一起，成就了舉世觸目的民主運動，憑的是大原則的一致，以及一致的堅持。

吾爾開希最為人津津樂道的一幕，是八九年五月十八日在人民大會堂跟當時的總理李鵬會面時，為打斷他的講話而說：「時間很緊，我們在這裏坐得舒服，但外邊的同學在挨餓，所以我很抱歉打斷你的話。」電視機旁數十億人，無不驚嘆這個身穿藍白間條醫院病服（經常被誤以為是睡衣）的小伙子之膽識。

吾爾開希當日出言打斷李鵬前，其實做了一個不為人知的小動作──望望身旁的王丹。「當我跟王丹眼神相碰的一刻，王丹就跟我點頭，然後我才出聲。」王丹就在吾爾開希望向自己時，知道盟友內心所想。台前，功勞歸吾爾開希；幕後，力量來自王丹。

八九年五月，命運安排性格凹凸的兩個新青年在紅旗下相遇，互補對方當領袖的不足，並留下苦樂參半、終身難忘的印記。此後二十年，他們在歷史的長河上，各自游到自己所屬的浮台為生活打拼。

 

後記： 公共知識份子不談私事

王丹與吾爾開希，兩種人，各有死穴：

王丹：私人感情。「作為一個公共知識份子，這樣私人的事，我不會公開談。」有沒有伴侶？什麼時候成家？一概不透露，語氣強硬。

吾爾開希：體重。「你問我增磅幾多？這個問題太私人了，我不是娛樂明星，我和媒體之間不存在利益關係，不要炒作……」語氣不滿。

四個月後，王丹與吾爾開希，將於台灣重遇。兩個性格本就不同的中年男人，二十年間各有經歷、各有原則底線。重遇，也許是友誼的另一個開始。

Control (2007)

Control is a 2007 black-and-white biopic film about Ian Curtis (1956–1980), lead singer of post-punk band Joy Division. The screenplay written by Matt Greenhalgh is based on the book Touching from a Distance, by Curtis's widow, Deborah, who is also a co-producer of the film. The film was directed by Dutch director Anton Corbijn. In the film, Ian Curtis is played by previously little-known actor Sam Riley. Samantha Morton plays Deborah, while Alexandra Maria Lara plays Annik, the woman with whom Curtis had an extramarital affair.

 

The film details the life of the troubled young musician, who forged a new kind of music out of the punk rock scene of the United Kingdom in the 1970s, and the band Joy Division, which he headed from 1977 to 1980. It also deals with his rocky marriage and extramarital affairs, as well as his increasingly frequent seizures, which were thought to contribute to the circumstances leading to his suicide on the eve of Joy Division's first U.S. tour. The title is a reference to the Joy Division song, "She's Lost Control"—believed to be a reference to an epileptic client befriended by Curtis while employed at a Job Centre in Macclesfield, who later died during a seizure. The film covers some of the same time as the 2002 film 24 Hour Party People, which is a biopic about Tony Wilson, the founder of the band's record label, Factory Records.

 

The film was winner of the Director's Fortnight, the CICAE Art & Essai prize for best film, the Regards Jeunes Prize for best first/second directed feature film and the Europa Cinemas Label prize for best European film in the sidebar. It won five awards in the British Independent Film Awards, including "Best British Independent Film", "Best Director of a British Independent Film" for Corbijn, "Most Promising Newcomer" for Riley and "Best Supporting Actor" for Toby Kebbell. It also won Best Film award in the Evening Standard British Film Awards for 2007. In 2008, writer Matt Greenhalgh won BAFTA's "Carl Foreman award for special achievement by a British director, writer or producer in their first feature film".

 

Plot

 

In 1973, Ian Curtis, at age seventeen, is living with his parents, Kevin and Doreen, and his sister, Carole. In a chemistry class, he daydreams, possibly displaying a symptom of petit mal, a minor form of the epilepsy which was to develop later in his life. It is during this period of his life that he first meets Debbie Woodruff, who is dating his best friend Nick. After bonding over a love of music and Ian's penchant for poetry, they attend a David Bowie concert together, realizing their mutual attraction. Ian proposes and Debbie accepts, and though extremely young, they marry and move in together. His interest in married life fading soon after, however, Ian retreats to the solitude of his room, where he writes poetry, as Debbie decorates the house.

 

In 1976, after attending a Sex Pistols gig, Ian and Debbie meet Bernard Sumner, Peter Hook, and Terry Mason, the members of a band who disliked their lead singer. Ian approaches the trio at the end of the gig, suggesting that he become their vocalist instead, which leads to the formation of Warsaw. With Stephen Morris recruited as the drummer, and Mason taking over managerial duties, the band anxiously play their first gig.

 

At this time Ian is working as a civil servant in Macclesfield and is given the opportunity to record a demo of the band to perform. This results in Ian and Debbie paying £400 to have the demo recorded but now under the new name Joy Division. The demo EP, An Ideal for Living, was recorded and sent to local music mogul Tony Wilson. The band watch Tony give a less-than-impressive mention of the EP on his television show, leaving them upset. Joy Division then attend a battle of the bands event at a bar where they impress everyone including Wilson and DJ Rob Gretton, who offers to manage the band and has a propensity of spewing profanity.

 

Tony Wilson then agrees to let the band perform on their TV show. The band perform "Transmission" with Ian's family watching at home. This performance then leads to Tony signing the contract with the band in his own blood.

 

The band then starts to tour with Ian starting to neglect his now-pregnant wife. Ian also keeps his job as a civil servant at the Employment Exchange. As he interviews a job seeker, she has an epileptic fit that leads him to write the lyrics for "She's Lost Control". The film's title, Control, derived from this song. Shortly after this, Ian suffers a similar fit while traveling from a gig and in the hospital, it is revealed that he has epilepsy. Ian tried to get in contact with the epileptic girl, but discovers she has died. Treatment for epilepsy at this time relied on trial and error with medications; those that Ian takes leave him drowsy and moody. The doctor recommends to Ian that he gets plenty of early nights and abstains from alcohol (both of which Ian ignores). Due to the medication and the late nights, Ian is becoming extremely tired at work. After a chat with his supervisor, Ian decides to resign from his role to pursue his musical career despite the more unsteady income. At this time, Debbie gives birth to a baby girl, Natalie, and is forced to take up work to make up the wages Ian has lost with his resignation.

 

Joy Division then travels to London for a gig where the band meets Annik Honoré, who wishes to interview the band for a Belgian music fanzine. After the rest of the band fall asleep Ian and Annik talk and Ian admits that he has been trying to leave his home town for a while and that his marriage was a mistake. The band then travel to France to do a tour where Ian and Annik start an affair. Debbie is initially unaware of the affair, but becomes suspicious when Ian admits he's unsure if he loves Debbie anymore. Whilst Ian is shooting the video for "Love Will Tear Us Apart" Debbie searches through the house for clues as to whether Ian is having an affair. She finds Annik's telephone number and calls her. Debbie confronts Ian who vows to break up the affair, which he doesn't do (despite calling her to say that he has). It is at this point that Rob informs the band that they will be touring America.

 

During a gig Ian has another epileptic fit. He is carried off stage and is comforted by Annik. With the pressure of his family, his affair, the band, and his epilepsy, Ian takes an overdose and collapses in his house. Before his collapse he writes a letter to Debbie saying that he loves Annik. Ian is then rushed to hospital and released a few days later. Joy Division are then due to perform a concert at Bury's "Derby Hall" where Ian is clearly unwell and walks off stage. Rob Gretton asks the lead of the support group, Alan Hempsall of Crispy Ambulance, to cover. Hempsall agrees, but this leads to a riot on stage. After the riot, Ian says to Tony that he feels everyone hates him and it's all his own fault.

 

Having left the marital home, Ian is forced to stay at various people's homes. Initially he stays at Rob's (with Annik in tow). Rob informs Debbie of Ian's whereabouts and Debbie tells Rob to let Ian know she wants a divorce. He then stays at Bernard's who tries hypnotherapy on Ian to see if this helps his thinking. Eventually he returns to his parents home and agrees to stay there until the American tour.

 

Two nights before the tour he decides to return home to talk to Debbie. He arrives home and watches Stroszek on television before Debbie arrives home. He begs Debbie to take him back and argues that his affair with Annik is an unrelated matter. Debbie brushes it off and then Ian orders her out of the house until the following day when he will "be gone". Alone in the house, Ian drinks large glasses of whiskey and plays Iggy Pop's The Idiot whilst writing a letter to Debbie. As he places it on the mantelpiece he has another seizure and collapses, unconscious. He regains consciousness early the following morning but is extremely weepy. He then walks into the kitchen where he sees a clothesline. Feeling depressed, lonely and possibly still drunk, he decides to end it all and hangs himself.

 

Later that day Debbie returns home and walks into the house. She then discovers Ian's body hanged in the kitchen (the actual scene of Curtis' body hanging is not shown) and runs out of the house in hysteria, holding Natalie as she cries "can someone help me". As Joy Division's "Atmosphere" plays, we see Rob Gretton, the remaining members of Joy Division and Stephen's girlfriend Gillian Gilbert (the remaining members of Joy Division and Gillian would eventually form the alternative rock band New Order) in a pub staring silently and Tony Wilson and his wife Lindsay picking up, and consoling Annik at a train station. Church bells ring with very black smoke rising to the air from a crematorium. The message "Ian Curtis died May 18, 1980. He was 23 years old." appears on the screen. The screen then fades to black with "Atmosphere" still playing.

 

Production

 

Corbijn had been a devout Joy Division fan since the band's early days in the late 1970s. After moving to England, he met the band and shot several pictures for NME, which boosted his career as a photographer. Some of his pictures taken are featured in the movie. He also directed the music video for the 1988 rerelease of "Atmosphere". He said that the film overlapped with his own life in some ways. "I had moved to England to be close to that music at the time, and I was very into Joy Division. I worked with them, took pictures of them that became synonymous with their music, and I was forever linked. Then eight years after [Ian Curtis'] death, I did the video for "Atmosphere." So in other people's eyes I was always connected with them."

 

Control marks Corbijn's debut as a movie director, and he paid half of the �4.5 million budget out of his own pocket.  The film was shot on colour stock and printed to black and white to "reflect the atmosphere of Joy Division and the mood of the era". Todd Eckert and Orian Williams are the producers. Deborah Curtis, Ian Curtis' widow, is a co-producer, along with music mogul Tony Wilson, who died months before the film's release. It had been Wilson who had given Joy Division their TV break on the local magazine programme Granada Reports, and he also founded Factory Records, which released most of Joy Division's work.

 

Ian Curtis' daughter, Natalie, was in the crowd as an extra for the Derby Hall gig.

 

 

Reaction from band members

 

Peter Hook and Stephen Morris, two of the founding members of Joy Division, generally praised the film. However, Morris has disputed its factual accuracy, saying "None of it's true really," but also acknowledging the need for bending facts because "the truth is too boring". Hook criticized the Preview audience's reaction, saying how at the end of the film "it really hurt and everybody started clapping. It would've been nice to have a dignified silence".

 

Hook also remarked that "Control is a hell of a lot more factual than 24 Hour Party People. You can tell that Anton knew us, and he knew us well, and he took the original script, which was very English, and quite subtly he made it deeper and have a broader appeal, so that it would not just make sense to an English audience, but to an international audience."

 

After viewing the film at Cannes, Hook said he "knew it was a great film and that it would be very well received because, even though it's two hours long, only two people went to the toilet the whole time. In fact, one of them was Bernard. The other one was a 70-year-old woman."'Bernard' refers to the other founding member of Joy Division, Bernard Sumner.

 

The Killers cover the 1979 Joy Division song "Shadowplay" on the soundtrack.[26] However, all live Joy Division performances in the film are performed by the actors. The actors contribute a cover of an original Joy Division song ("Transmission") to the soundtrack. Incidental tracks by 1970s artists like David Bowie and the Buzzcocks are the original recordings. New Order provided the original incidental music for the soundtrack. The Sex Pistols' track was omitted from the US version.

Music to Brood by, Desolate and Stark

THE mystique surrounding Joy Division has always been way out of proportion to its record sales. Far bigger bands, like the Clash and Pink Floyd, are still waiting for their biopics, but this post-punk cult band from Manchester, England, has two to its name. The first, the bright, hyper-active "24 Hour Party People," from 2002, couldn't be further in mood from the lustrous monochrome and stillness of the new film, "Control."

"Party People" wasn't entirely devoted to Joy Division. (The lead character was Tony Wilson, Factory Records' co-founder and a patron and champion of the band.) But it's hard to imagine that movie getting made without the aura and international name recognition supplied by the band and its doomed frontman, Ian Curtis.

The Joy Division legend is based partly on the enigma of Mr. Curtis and his dramatic exit in 1980, a suicide that terminated the band's life, too. (Its members had vowed to drop the name if any member quit.) But it's also founded on the power and originality of Joy Division's music. Listening to the band's two studio albums, "Unknown Pleasures" (1979) and "Closer" (1980), which will be reissued on Oct. 30 by Rhino, what's most striking is how harsh the music is. This is a sound with the mettle to match the unflinching view of the human condition presented by Mr. Curtis's lyrics.

Bernard Sumner's guitar sounds as if it has been chipped out of granite; Peter Hook's bass playing is fluent but unyielding, like steel cable. In performance, as documented on the live recordings packaged with these reissues, Joy Division's dense assault approaches heavy metal. But its studio music was stark and desolate, permeated with a cavernous spatiality courtesy of the brilliantly inventive producer Martin Hannett.

Joy Division's unsettling combination of the visceral and the ethereal has hooked generation after generation of listeners. New Order, the more commercially palatable and dance-oriented (yet still angst-tinged) outfit that the band became after Mr. Curtis's death, has helped maintain Joy Division's profile. As with the Velvet Underground, Joy Division's name has been kept alive by the vastly more successful groups it influenced, like U2 and the Cure, which have paid it public tribute.

Joy Division helped spawn the Goth movement (countless sepulchral singers have copied Mr. Curtis's doomy baritone drone), and you can spot its stray chromosomes popping up everywhere from emo to the more melancholy strains of metal. Most recently, Joy Division-indebted outfits like Interpol, Bloc Party and Editors have refocused attention on post-punk, that late 1970s, early '80s era of musical experimentalism and lyrical innovation in which Joy Division assumed a central role.

Crucial to Joy Division's allure is Mr. Curtis's bleak glamour. There were a relatively small number of photographs taken of him (many by Anton Corbijn, the director of "Control"), keeping his charisma — the faraway eyes, the Eastern bloc image of long gray raincoat and short hair — ageless in black and white. And his lyrics boasted an unusual combination of unflowery directness and mysterious poetic depths: "A cry for help, a hint of anesthesia/The sound from broken homes" (from "Colony"). Mr. Curtis's despair has a perennial appeal to sensitive teenagers confronting for the first time the possibility that life is meaningless. At some point between "Unknown Pleasures" and "Closer," fans and critics began to treat Mr. Curtis like a seer: a New Wave equivalent to Jim Morrison, but with the balance shifted from Eros to Thanatos. (The Joy Division songbook is remarkably devoid of sex, not to mention humor.)

Then Mr. Curtis's suicide transformed him into something like a martyr. This notion of singer as fallen savior was played up in Mr. Corbijn's 1988 video for the re-released single "Atmosphere," in which a procession of cowled monks carry a gigantic photograph of Mr. Curtis.

"Control" resembles an expanded remix of that black and white, Bergmanesque clip. But a full-length movie can't rely on the power of pure imagery the way a video can. Mr. Corbijn obviously needed to somehow "explain" Joy Division. One approach he might have taken would be to situate the band's music as the product of a time and place: late-'70s Manchester, a declining industrial city in the rainy, grey-skied northwest of England, its landscape blighted with derelict factories and cleared lots.

But "Control," for all its unstinting attention to period detail, barely mentions the group's sociopolitical context. Instead Mr. Corbijn opts for biography, presenting Mr. Curtis's increasingly out-of-control life — his disintegrating marriage and a guilt-racked affair, the conflicting pressures of impending fame and a rapidly deteriorating epileptic condition — as the truth behind Joy Division's songs.

All this makes for a compelling story, but it has distinct limits as a prism for understanding Joy Division's music. Mr. Curtis's songs are existential rather than autobiographical. Rarely straightforwardly drawn from his life, his lyrics strip away the everyday details that observational songwriters use to impart a sense of lived reality. In his songs, ordinary life achieves an epic grandeur (hence their perennial fit with the wounded narcissism of adolescence). But there's no bombast or emotional theatrics; instead there's a modernist starkness as pared down as a Samuel Beckett play.

These lyrics are all the more effective framed by music that has the hard-rocking power of the Stooges but is too repressed to actually rock out. Another problem with tying Joy Division's impact to the specifics of Mr. Curtis's life is that during the group's lifetime, hardly any of it was public knowledge. Few outside the Factory Records milieu were aware of his marital problems. It's only since the publication of "Touching From a Distance," the 1995 memoir by his widow, Deborah Curtis, on which "Control" is largely based, that his personal trials have become widely known. The foundations of the group's enduring cult were laid during a 15-year period in which Mr. Curtis really was an enigma.

Yet there's one crucial factor mentioned in "Touching From a Distance" that "Control" strangely ignores: Mr. Curtis's romantic fascination with rock stars who died young. In the book Ms. Curtis writes that her husband told her he had "no intention of living beyond his early 20s." This apparent death wish suggests that amid the depression and confusion, there was an aesthetic component to his fatal decision. From his teenage infatuation with glam rock to the attention he paid to record design, Mr. Curtis appreciated the power of gesture. Because his suicide preceded the release of "Closer," it determined the album's immediate reception and its long-term resonance. (In "The Eternal," the narrator watches a funeral procession — his own?) It could be that Mr. Curtis planned it that way. He played a major role in choosing the album's cover, a photograph of a sculpture tableau in a cemetery of the dead Christ surrounded by mourners.

At some gut level, Mr. Curtis understood that rock is all about myth. From the start, he was driven by a fierce ambition to become precisely the kind of edge-walking rock shaman that he ended his life as. The manner of that ending sealed the deal, giving Joy Division's music an appalling gravity and — for better or worse — an undeniable authenticity.

Joy Division assimilated the desolation of its environment and the dislocation of its era and gave it a somber glamour. The barren beauty of that landscape of sound captured how lots of people felt at that late-'70s moment: the dawn of the Thatcher-Reagan era, a freshly frigid cold war with renewed anxiety about Armageddon. But tension and dread are far more the norm than the exception, which perhaps explains the time-defying and endlessly renewing appeal of Joy Division.

Control (2007)

Haunting Songs of Heartbreak, Done by a Man With Experience

 

In 1973, when we first encounter him, Ian Curtis (Sam Riley) is a lanky schoolboy in Macclesfield, a red-brick English town outside of Manchester, with intense but not unusual interests. Apart from cigarettes and his best friend's girlfriend (whom he will shortly marry), these are mainly musical and literary. In his debut film, "Control," about the last seven years of Mr. Curtis's life, Anton Corbijn notes some of the figures in the young man's personal canon — the expected proto-punk culture heroes (David Bowie, Lou Reed, J. G. Ballard), yes, but also William Wordsworth, whose "Ode: Intimations of Immortality" Mr. Curtis quotes from memory.

Of course, from its very first frame, "Control" is shadowed by intimations of its main character's imminent mortality. Mr. Curtis, the lead singer in Joy Division, the great post-punk Manchester quartet, committed suicide in 1980, just before the band was to embark on its first American tour. He was 23, and in the years since his death he has become a canonical figure in his own right. Even as Joy Division's austere, brooding songs — "Love Will Tear Us Apart," "Isolation," "She's Lost Control" — have continued to influence musicians from all corners of the musical cosmos, they have lost very little of their glum, haunting power.

The challenge facing Matt Greenhalgh, the screenwriter, and Mr. Corbijn, a celebrity photographer who took pictures of the real Joy Division a few months before Mr. Curtis died, is how to tell this story of great promise and early death without turning it into yet another exercise in pop martyrology. How, in other words, to take account of Mr. Curtis's artistic life and its premature end without treating them as simple cause and effect. The worst and most common failing in movies of this kind — biographies of artists, musicians in particular — is that they turn creativity into a symptom and fate into pathology. One of the great virtues of "Control" is that it does not fall into this trap. Where it might have been literal-minded and sentimental, it is instead enigmatic and moving, much in the manner of Joy Division's best songs.

You hear a lot of these on the soundtrack, flawlessly performed by Mr. Riley and the other members of the cast (Joe Anderson on bass, James Anthony Pearson on guitar and Harry Treadaway as the wisecracking drummer) who turned themselves into an uncannily persuasive tribute band. (Just how good they are may not become fully apparent until you hear the real Joy Division's version of "Atmosphere" over the end credits.)

Joy Division's two albums were artifacts of their time that became permanent fixtures in the pop universe, available to any listener with a good reason to want a few minutes of voluptuous bad feeling. In tracing them back to their origins, Mr. Corbijn resists the temptation to pile on the evocative period details or to wallow in nostalgia for the early days of the Manchester scene. Shot in a pale, Nouvelle Vague black-and-white palette, "Control" manages to be both stylized and straightforward, avoiding overstatement even as it generates considerable intensity.

Mr. Riley, hollow-eyed and gentle-looking, is crucial to the film's effectiveness. Since Mr. Curtis is known more by his deep, plangent voice than by his face or his physical presence, Mr. Riley does not labor under the burden of mimicry, like the recent portrayers of more famous singers like Ray Charles or Johnny Cash. His performance is quiet, charismatic and a little opaque, in keeping with the movie's careful, detached approach to its subject.

Samantha Morton, playing Mr. Curtis's wife, Deborah (on whose 1995 memoir, "Touching From a Distance," the film is based), provides a necessary measure of hurt and warmth, reminding the audience that Ian Curtis's great subject as a writer was heartbreak.

But Mr. Corbijn and Mr. Greenhalgh, to their credit, do not presume to probe the depths of Mr. Curtis's psychology, or to find the hidden emotional sources of his songs. Instead their film shows, plainly and sufficiently, how those songs were made. They were written down in a notebook, practiced with the rest of the band and then performed in front of ever larger and more ecstatic audiences.

But the group's progress — it wins the favor of the Manchester music guru Tony Wilson (Craig Parkinson) and acquires an aggressive manager in the person of Rob Gretton (Toby Kebbell) — is accompanied by increasing complication and strain in Mr. Curtis's personal life. While still a teenager, he marries Deborah and becomes a father just as Joy Division is recording its first album. He begins to suffer from epileptic seizures and to worry that the medicine he takes to treat the condition will affect his moods and his mind. He also falls for a Belgian journalist named Annik Honoré (Alexandra Maria Lara), and love tears him apart, again.

"Control" tells a sad story that is also a chronicle of success, and it declines to find an easy moral either in Joy Division's rapid rise or in its lead singer's early death. These are things that happened, both on the intimate stage of individual life and in the larger arena of popular culture. Mr. Corbijn, no doubt aware of what this movie will mean to devotees of post-punk melancholy, sticks to the human dimensions of the narrative rather than turning out yet another show business fable. You don't have to know anything about Joy Division to grasp the mysterious sorrow at its heart.

COCO BEFORE CHANEL

《天使愛美麗》（ Amelie）柯德莉塔圖（ Audrey Tautou）近年主演的電影，多譯作《天使×××》或是《××愛美麗》，幸而由她主演的法國時裝名牌 CHANEL創辦人嘉比香奈兒（ Gabrielle Chanel）傳記片《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》，香港譯名叫《少女香奈兒》，為演活一代時裝傳奇 icon，柯德莉已擺脫了「愛美麗」的形象，影片不是愛美麗式的陽光故事，也不是關於一個品牌王國的輝煌事迹，相反，卻是一個可憐貧窮的交際花絕境求生的故事。
撰文：張一明、賴俊德

由法國女導演安妮芳婷（ Anne Fontaine）執導的《少女香奈兒》，正如英文片名，就是關於 CHANEL創辦人嘉比香奈兒發迹前的事迹，可可（ CoCo）便是她小時候爸爸叫她的乳名。影片並不是一般看得人熱血沸騰又振奮的勵志電影，只見一位孤兒如何混入上流社會，甘願成為一朵交際花，當別人不見得光的情婦，做另一個男人暫借的情人，並如何努力去改變自己一生命運。

柯德莉不再愛美麗

片中的柯德莉（左圖）跟可可（右圖）本人一樣，經常煙不離手。

《少女香奈兒》以可可與姊姊小時候度過的孤兒院作為開場背景，開場講她被送到孤兒院的情節，那時可可常對修女及同學說父親會現身探望她，但一直以來沒有親人見她，令可可的童年很不快樂。影片描寫童年的情節不多，鏡頭一轉已是 15年後在酒館與姊姊當歌女的可可。
扮演年輕版可可的柯德莉塔圖，比起她在近年其他電影的任何角色，面容都要瘦削和憔悴，也鮮有甜美燦爛的笑容，在鏡頭前煙不離手。片中的她原本與姊姊是兩個低俗的歌女，兩人都渴望成名，都渴望有男人包養，也喜歡讀愛情小說，但可可跟姊姊不同的是，她不相信可以找到白馬王子的完美愛情結局。
其實《少》片的篇幅與重點，主要落在描寫可可與姊姊被酒館炒掉後，她周旋在生命中兩個重要男人之間的生活，影片的格局很似一部歐洲的愛情片，但絕對不是荷李活式的 happy ending。
可可遇到的兩個男人均談不上好情人，她與二人的交往也涉及今天我們所說的援交成份。第一個男人是法國貴族 Balsan，他原是可可在酒館工作時認識的中坑常客，早已看中了可可，但可可並沒有對他一見鍾情，因為沒有工作，才主動走向 Balsan獻身。有說 Balsan是第一位帶可可走進上流社會，擴闊她眼界的男人，為香奈兒日後的出現奠下基礎，其實 Balsan原本沒有這種意圖，他反而當可可是收在閣樓房間中的玩偶，甚至對可可說過：「日本藝伎會為男人脫衣，我希望你像她們一樣。」

錯失真愛埋首事業

1883-1971
可可香奈兒事業上的成功得來不易，儘管有才華，但也需要機緣的配合。

Balsan在家中舉行派對時也希望把可可收起，不願她被賓客看見，甚至有幾次 Balsan因玩厭了可可，要將她送走，只是厚顏的可可死留不走。
可可另一個生命中最重要的男人，是由美國演員艾歷山度利孚拿（ Alessandro Nivola）扮演的英國人 Arthur"Boy" Capel。他是 Balsan的生意夥伴，年輕、英俊、有智慧又有品味，也使可可露出了真正的笑容。
可是， Boy跟可可一樣有不光彩的背景，即使他願打本讓可可發展自己的事業，卻為了自己的生意與未來而決定與富家女結婚，結果可可只能當 Boy的情婦。
然而電影終歸是電影，難免會有美化成份，即使現實生活中，可可在這個兩男人之後還有其他情人，故事卻將 Boy描寫成可可愛得最深、傷得最痛、甚至是寧願埋首事業而終身不嫁的一生摯愛，以凸顯二人濃烈的感情。

香港上映日期： 6月 11日

石榴裙網盡富豪權紳

在《少女香奈兒》中出現的兩位情人 Balsan與 Boy，無疑令可可脫胎換骨，但她成為時裝界女王後的情史更精采，全因身邊的狂蜂浪蝶不少是全歐洲最富有、最具權力、又或者是最有才華的男人。
Boy 車禍死後可可傷心欲絕，遂進入藝術界尋找靈感與慰藉，不少才子精英對她神魂顛倒，其中一位是俄羅斯著名音樂家 Igor Stravinsky，已婚的他據說愛可可愛得無法自拔， 1920年時天天以教音樂的藉口跟她見面，但這段深刻的戀情短暫得很。其後可可看中了大畫家畢卡索，但他當時剛結婚，可可便向他的摯友、詩人 Pierre Reverdy埋手，並很快便熱戀起來。

西敏公爵妙計送鑽

未幾可可戀上俄國貴族 Dimitri Pavlovich，並在他身上感染到俄國及東方的藝術文化，其著名的 No.5香水，也是 Dimitri介紹下由一位俄國皇室香水師配製。不過論身家豐厚，可可的情人中沒人及得上英國的西敏公爵，身為當時英國首富的他向可可展開銀彈攻勢，最為人津津樂道是有次西敏派人將一籃新鮮蔬菜從英國送到法國給可可，籃內竟然藏有一顆綠寶石。
跟多位富商貴族分手後，可可計劃將他們所送的珠寶拆下來重新設計，因此認識到珠寶設計師 Paul Iribez，曾效力 Cartier的他是少數可可曾考慮談婚論嫁的對象，二人並合作推出了珠寶，可惜戀情最後無疾而終。

包養納粹晚節不保

可可最後一段廣為人知的戀情，是於二戰時期年近 60歲時，包養了比她年輕 13年的納粹軍官 Hans Gunther von Dincklage，也因而賠上名譽︰戰後可可以間諜罪被捕，但透過好友、英國當時首相邱吉爾的幫助下逃過牢獄之災，最後流亡到瑞士達 9年之久，後來可可憶述︰「到我這個年紀，當有男人說要跟你睡，你總不會叫他拿護照給你看吧？」

情人車輪轉

可可的情史精采富戲劇性，身邊的狂蜂浪蝶有不少均是富商權貴。

《戲內》
情人： Balsan
身份：貴族馬主
關係：當可可為藝伎般為男人脫衣的女人

《戲內》
情人： Boy
身份：英國商人　
關係：為自己未來與富家女結婚而只將可可當情婦

《現實》
情人： Pavlovich
身份：俄國貴族
關係：開拓可可對東方藝術文化的認識

《現實》
情人：西敏公爵
身份：英國首富　
關係：以銀彈攻勢追求可可

話你知：倡簡約衣飾　打破女性枷鎖

戲中柯德莉（中）的簡約衣着明顯與當時上流社會婦女不同。

《少女香奈兒》雖然也不是一部 CHANEL品牌服飾史，但故事中有不少生活細節表現出可可在縫紉及設計的才華，以及獨特創新的 fashion sense。可可當時不斷指出法國上流社會女性衣着打扮錯誤，認為女性穿衣應要舒服、活動自如為首要條件，打破當時傳統女性的枷鎖，在時裝風格上為女性帶來前所未有的解放。
影片壓軸的一場大型時裝表演，除了有 CHANEL總公司借出歷年服裝與珠寶首飾外，鏡頭與剪接也總結了一位貧窮孤兒闖出名堂的對比轉變，她從以前只能在別人豪宅一角偷看上流社會的花花世界，終於可以成為受到注目與重視的時裝大師。

話你知：百年 CHANEL　電影 5連環

今年是 CHANEL創立 100周年，影圈爭相開拍香奈兒的傳奇而鬧出 5胞胎。除了《少女香奈兒》及早前由莎莉麥蓮（ Shirley Maclaine）主演的美國電視電影《 Coco Chanel》外，由法國女星 Anna Mouglalis擔正的《 Coco Chanel& Igor Stravinsky》早前就為康城影展閉幕電影。據悉還有兩齣有關香奈兒的電影在籌備中，其中一齣由狄美摩亞（ Demi Moore）主演。

莎莉麥蓮
電視電影《 Coco Chanel》

Anna Mouglalis
康城閉幕電影
《 Coco Chanel& Igor Stravinsky》

Coco Chanel

Chanel創辦人 Coco Chanel位於巴黎 Rue Cambon31號 Chanel故居內的水晶燈，隱藏着「 G」、「 5」及「 W」 3個神秘符號， G代表她本名， 5是她的幸運數字， W是她一生最愛西敏公爵。一直以來世人對 Coco Chanel的感情生活都充滿好奇，愛上她的全是達官權貴，並非她美貌絕倫，而是她的自信、獨立最引人。 1939年第 2次世界大戰後 Chanel要結業，她與納粹黨軍官 Hans Gunther Von Dincklage戀上，被法國人大罵，但其後重開生意都有增冇減，產品的優質說明一切。

設計出第 1條 Little Black Dress、第 1個設計師用真人模特兒示範新裝、第 1個提倡男服女穿，'06美國權威雜誌《 Time》選出 60位當代英雄，跟德蘭修女、王妃戴安娜一同獲選，成為極少數的時裝界女英雄。
6 月 11日，講述 Coco Chanel的法國電影《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》終在港上映（法國率先 4月 22日上映，只 4星期但票房已有 7百多萬歐羅，約 8千萬港元！），由法國人視為影壇國寶的 Andrey Tautou主演。今日找來星級化妝師 Zing、 Angelababy、 Joyce Fashion Styling Manager Gavin及賣 Chanel味黑白服而大賺的時裝店老闆 Humphrey，大談愛上 Chanel之謎，最後更有獨家優惠買 Chanel，低至幾折？謎底在本文尾頁！

硬朗自信有型就是 Coco Chanel，擅長男服女造，大圖的 Andrey Tautou劇照和 Coco Chanel真人舊照同樣有不少吸煙動作。

Tweed coat珠鏈全為 Chanel簽名式，圖中旋轉樓梯正是參照 Coco Chanel巴黎故居。

《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》 611上映

講足超過 1年，《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》終於鐵定於 6月 11日在港上映。在 40多種 Coco Chanel傳記中，導演 Anne Fontaine揀取艾蒙杜查禮斯魯撰寫的作藍本。 Garbrielle Chanel被喚作 Coco，是她在窮困時到酒廊唱歌，一把雞仔聲而被人起的花名。出身清貧、冇人事關係、讀書不多，但運用她出色的裁縫天賦，改變命運。要知道 Chanel服裝由最著名的 Lesage廠造，當年飾物工場 Gripoix廠更只幫 Chanel一個品牌製造，工匠全人手鑲嵌每 1件飾物。
電影服裝設計大部分由'04法國凱撒大獎服裝設計獎得主 Catherine Leterrier負責，其餘部分由 Chanel贊助， Catherine更為電影起了間製衣工場，造 Chanel早年的設計成品，帽子也製作了近 800頂，可見導演刻意突出 Chanel最馳名的手工，戲內就不乏主角 Audrey Tautou在工廠內縫紉的片段。
導演 Anne Fontaine在試鏡時已覺得曾演《天使愛美麗》的 Audrey Tautou有 Coco Chanel倔強但自信的眼神，於是拍板由她飾演走出孤兒院、在巴黎遊蕩、在酒廊賣唱、直至遇上生命中兩位十分重要的男人而扭轉一生的故事。

 

1921年創立 Chanel之前， Coco Chanel於 1910年開設女裝帽子店，一手一腳造帽，戲內亦有此幕。

飾演這兩男角分別是圖中曾演《侏羅紀公園 3》的 Alessandro Nivola及《黑幫大佬中頭獎》的 Benoit Poelvoorde。

Zing最愛 Coco Chanel名句"A woman who doesn't wear perfume has no future"

喜愛時裝的，都必留意到 Zing總愛在 tee及牛仔褲上披着 Chanel tweed jacket。問 Zing， Chanel在他心目中排第幾，「除了化妝是我的最愛，其餘的一切都只是甜品，辛苦工作後獎給自己的玩具， Chanel也不例外。」獎給自己的 Chanel tweed jacket，是近 50件，以新貨入場費每件約$50,000起計，再不計他走遍法、英、日古董店找來的 60年代 Haute Couture（高級訂造服，只此一件）……
80年代還在老家新加坡已愛 Chanel，「小時候已迷上被人稱為 the face of Coco的 Ines de la Fressange、法國影星 Carole Bouquet，及 Richard Avedon、 Ridley Scott、 Jean Paul Goude等名導演拍的 Chanel香水廣告。」
Chanel帶給我們整體的氣氛， lifestyle的幻想。「在 Chanel，你會發現山茶花飾物，也可是釘在手袋上。菱格皮用在皮袋 2.55，更可以在皮褸上。 Tweed料的梳化， boucle面的化妝品等，運用得融會貫通。」最後是實力：「試過拿 1件外套找專家拆開研究，得知 Chanel的剪裁及手工的確一流。 Coco Chanel最重視外套的膊頭位（袖頭），臨出騷發現不合身都一定要改。」大圖 Zing穿的 Chanel tweed suit，更是膊位沒有車線，郁動方便內外俱備。
人人話 Coco Chanel高貴典雅， Zing卻形容她：「其實很 punk！」 Coco Chanel曾經說過珍珠和真鑽石要當它們垃圾般戴。 Zing亦將上季 1件本身設計破爛的 cashmere tweed jacket用刀多幾下！ Zing愛 Coco Chanel就連其行都欣賞，已不用再告訴你他鏡頭後對 Chanel歷史一切有多熟悉了。

拿了近 20張《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》劇照給 Zing過目，他最喜歡這張，「她對 tweed coat的袖位最着緊，相中的 Audrey很有她的神髓。」

由 2.55爆成的皮褸

真正令 Zing迷上 Chanel的是'91秋冬的 1輯相片，以 Marlon Brando及 Hip-Hop jewelry作靈感，「這輯相令我瘋癲！當年被評為 the 2.55 bag exploded on the body and became a jacket。」即是 2.55菱格皮用上皮褸。「有幸找得番 4件。」

 

 

另 1件'91秋冬戰利品， Lagerfeld將當時的 rap jewelry化成腰鏈。

Haute Couture軍 tweed

60年代 Coco Chanel年代本人的 Haute Couture。菱形 tag說明一切。 Zing熟悉 Chanel之程度就是一望鈕扣設計就認得出是何年何季。

Face of Coco

Zing最愛藍血貴族名模 Ines de la Fressange，訪問期間忍不住要親開 80年代她行騷的 video給筆者看。

沒出產 show piece

「這件是 prototype，只在騷上出現過，之後沒有被製成商品，所以只得 1件。在 flea market找到，很平！」 Tag上白布條寫有編號，方便 model能極速辨認然後出場。

 

Baby︰我碰上了 Karl Largerfeld！

對於 Zing， Chanel是 punk，對於大部分人來說，則是高貴。一眾模中， Baby、 Janice Man及 Chrissie都是 Chanel迷，但那個最有氣質、與 Chanel最匹配的，我們選了 Baby。我們《 FACE》影足她 4年，由未紅箍住牙，到現在更給日本 Avex簽下，形象百變，每次擺 pose近乎 100（個）！但口裏仍常掛住感謝前感謝後，不多言又乖巧，雖同 Coco Chanel的自信硬朗南轅北轍，但高貴氣質倒是天生，就連上海母親都是 Chanel迷，早就一袋兩份用。 Baby買的都是最襟興的黑白款 2.55、 Classic Bag，「過兩萬的 seasonal款，留給媽咪買吧，嘻！」 Baby愛 Chanel因媽咪，認識 Chanel就靠經理人 Kim，「 Kim講得最多的是 Coco Chanel自強不息的毅力，很值得世人學習。最記得 Kim講過當時的 Coco Chanel已認為男女應平等，女性不應再為討好男人，而日日戴令人喘不過氣的腰封，而設計一系列鬆身套裝。」
已不能一睹 Coco Chanel的風采，但 Baby早前到巴黎工作時竟有幸遇見現任主帥 Karl Lagerfeld，「嘩，去到 Chanel店門口，見到架好靚的房車泊了在門口，然後有兩個十分帥的男仔落車，在後面的就是 Karl Lagerfeld，連保鑣都咁高水準，哈哈！」但因怕醜沒要求合照，是次潮拜亦沒有斬獲，因法國總店的貨不多，貫徹知慳識儉本色。

至於電影《 COCO BEFORE CHANEL》，「我早就在 iPhone下載了 Chanel的 application，隨時睇到最新資訊。」 Baby還說到上映時定會打扮成 Coco Chanel style捧場！唔知會唔會帶埋圖中私伙 Chanel羊皮 2.55呢？港店現售$23,300， Baby在英國買下，只需$17,000咋！

除了圖這個 Chanel， Baby也用過媽咪全新未剪牌的 Balenciaga，媽咪近日心頭好是 Jimmy Choo。 Like mother, like daughter囉！圖則為她自付的 Classic Bag。$23,300（ Chanel）

原來多得經理人 Kim傳授香奈兒歷史，難怪與 Baby屬同一 Style模特兒公司的汪圓圓、熊黛林也個個 Chanel。

橙紅 Chanel Bubble因用上尼龍夾棉，故比牛、羊皮袋平一半，是 Chanel'09最平入手貨色，難怪水行齊斷。$11,650

Chanel新貨不少，但潮友多揀孖 C logo的 Classic Bag及 2.55，最新除了鮮黃，就有此紅色羊皮。$22,500（ Both from Chanel）

全港率先引入日本 Chanel味黑白服

耀華街龍頭大哥 Pink Martini老闆 Humphrey，'05開始在此開店，初時只賣歐洲 vintage服，「到咗 07年，發現好多買唔起 Chanel的日本女仔，周圍搵似 Chanel的服飾，再自己 mix& match，加上《 Vivi》、《 JJ》都常介紹，覺得香港追日本風都會 buy這一套，所以引入 Duras Ambient及 Delyle等日牌。」店鋪 1間變 2間，開到去中環，靠此發達？ Humphrey謙稱：「唔好咁講，但這兩個品牌的 4袋 tweed coat、菱格 chain bag、珍珠山茶花飾物真的佔超過一半生意額。」
驚喜是幫襯的，除一班熟客及哈日、學㗎妹玩黑白 look的女生外，還有富貴的徐子淇， Angelababy都話每次到日本必潮拜，原來不只買不起 Chanel，連擁有 Chanel的也追捧，證明 88年歷史的 Chanel，奠下的黑白潮流是如此永恆襟興。

Humphrey亦是 Chanel迷，身上除了有在日本新發現玩 Chanel風的男裝美牌 Hollywood tee，頸上的是 Chanel No?香水頸鏈，還有 Chanel J12鑽表，夠他買下全店 Chanel風產品了。

就是這個 Delyle chain bag令 Angelababy同港日少女搶購，明明是人造皮，但車成菱格後反變得堅挺貴氣非常， Coco Chanel十足 Steven Jobs，總比對手行快很多。黑白兩色各$1,180

Humphrey Pink Martini老闆

 

Hollywood No? tee代訂價$980

在日本小店購入的山茶花×珍珠 tee代訂價$890

Duras Ambient 4袋徽章 tweed coat$1,980（ All from Pink Martini）

Chanel男裝要訂

Chanel 女裝是從男裝中構思出來，早於'54 Coco Chanel有見腰封束縛十分辛苦，把男裝呢絨外套改成女服，不修腰、直筒剪裁兼 size由 34-42都有，所以 Zing也可從古董找到心頭好，但 Chanel從沒刻意建立男裝系列，要到'05秋 Karl Lagerfeld才首次在 Chanel騷（圖）帶來男裝（早期只有 55年的男裝香氛 Pour Monsieur），自此每季都有男模現身天橋，但專門店仍只有少量（ Tee都有，李克勤都買過。），須向專門店訂購。

古董

Gavin'96 加入 Joyce由 Visual Merchandiser做起，至今第 13個年頭，成為 Fashion Styling Manager，負責管理店鋪形象甚至店員培訓。自上季起到巴黎、倫敦及紐約引入古董首飾，有 Chanel、 Givenchy及 YSL等牌，入 60多件，在 Joyce 1星期賣光，今季更花足 5日搜羅 52件，當中 19件是 Chanel，已賣出 6成，「劉嘉玲都買咗 10幾萬。」耳環乃最平入手（$9,900），只剩 3款，過多個星期又售罄㗎喇！
說實在，標價比專門店的貴，為何要買？「幾十年前出產的全是 1間叫 Gripoix的廠，專門幫 Chanel造，家間廠已不在，所以十分有紀念價值！」
買古董最怕買錯假嘢， Gavin十分肯定的答：「我哋很多貨都購自法國，很多時裝雜誌如《 Vogue》都有報道過，絕對信得過！另外 Joyce巴黎辦公室的同事好厲害，識好多窿路搵收藏家，全是有聲譽的，所以絕對信

Gavin So Joyce Boutique Fashion Styling Manager
90年代初 Chanel銀色大 chain鏈，亦可拆成 2條手鏈，男仔都啱。$13,900

80年代 Chanel logo通花粗鈪$32,000

On Pedder去年首引入，定價$7,000起，可能上回太好賣，上季 Joyce都引入，標價最低變近萬， Joyce貝殼 display較 On Pedder更有心思，畀（錢）都畀得甘心啲。

90年代 Chanel銀色錢幣腰鏈，吊牌有齊 Coco Chanel icon同 logo。$18,900

80年代 Chanel花形耳環，由多隻蜜蜂組成。$9,900/對

80年代 Chanel珍珠海星耳環$9,900/對

 

70年代 Chanel水滴形吊耳環$9,900/對（ All from Joyce）

經典

180步驟 2.55
1955 年 2月推出 2.55而命名，當時 Coco Chanel有覺女性地位日漸提高，需要 1個襟用的手袋外出，還在袋的背部加有咭片位。菱格紋靈感來自賽馬騎士所穿的 jacket，每個 2.55都要經 180個步驟、由 6位工匠花 10小時完成。最初版由羊皮及金 chain包皮孭帶而成，後來逐漸有多種皮、布料加入，如牛皮、鱷魚皮、蛇皮、絨面、猄皮、漆皮都有。菱格羊皮 2.55為最經典，每季都有推出。$23,300

40分鐘造一朵山茶花
俄國情人狄米崔大公爵曾告訴出生平凡的 Coco Chanel， 19世紀的帝俄宮廷貴族參加晚宴時，總習慣扣上白色山茶花，自此山茶花被設計成心口針、髮飾、吊墜，多不勝數，更有絲緞、絲絨、羊皮等多種物料，最純熟的工匠都要花 40分鐘造出 1朵！今季新款，玩番經典黑、白，用上真絲造。約$3,000（香港暫未有貨）

手袖鑲鋼 Tweed Coat
Tweed coat即呢絨外套，質地輕軟，每隔幾 cm就要用針縫一縫以定形，就是獨門 over stitch技術，連鈕扣都以歐洲古法炮製，在樹脂原料中加入牛奶，不易甩色， 1件製作需 120小時㗎！手袖內更鑲有鋼線使其挺身。'08春夏巴黎時裝騷更以巨型 tweed coat做布景，今季新出有圖中胸前附有黑布裝飾的 tweed coat，型到爆。$55,000

索吻 No.5香水
1921 年第一支 No.5香水面世，之所以叫 No.5，有說是 Coco Chanel揀選了調香水師的第 5個試驗品，所以命名，由玫瑰、檀香及茉莉花製成，全部人手摘取，包唔會整爛花蕊，多年來已成為 Chanel其一標誌，有 No.5吊墜、匙扣等小物。去年 11月改樽身設計，保留茉莉及法國 5月玫瑰等重要成分，分別是改變了比例。最正的是曾有人問過 Coco Chanel應滴在甚麼地方，她答道：「滴在你想別人吻你的地方！」 Chanel No.5$820/100ml，新裝（右）$915/75ml

 

情人禮物珍珠鏈
初戀男友送給 CoCo Chanel的第 1份禮物就是珍珠鏈，覺得它是高貴、典型的女性象徵。最初 Chanel只有珍珠頸鏈，後逐漸加入 18K金拼珍珠及奧地利石拼珍珠等。到了現在，珍珠更混入鬆糕鞋中，今季首出眼鏡掛鏈，靚到暈！更同平日單買珠鏈的價錢差不多！$18,500（ All from Chanel）

林 Angel Customers and Demon Customers

行止

「顧客永遠是對的」，是商業社會人人知曉的「硬道理」，然而，信貸市場的顧客卻不能一視同仁。這即是說，他們是否「最佳顧客」，有此一時也彼一時也的分別。這種情況，以信用卡公司和客戶的關係最明顯。

「欠債還錢」亦是商業社會的「硬道理」，傳統智慧是如期償還本息的債務人便是上等人─好顧客，可是，對信用卡公司來說，這種「硬道理」並不能帶來厚利，「逾期還錢」最好是長期拖欠的才是最佳客戶，因為這類客戶要支付欠款利息─以美國為例，逾期二天的利率可能高達年率百分之二十八─同時還要交逾期付款的手續費，這些收益才是信用卡公司的重要入息來源。

「逾期還錢」的信用卡持有者，業內稱為「周轉者」（revolver），意謂他們財政支絀借信用卡度青黃不接期，這類人便是筆者常說先花未來沒有的錢的人；他們的欠款，在信用卡發行公司看來，是「永恒的賺錢資產」（a perpetual earning asset），拖欠的代價是付高息，令信用卡公司合法地做「大耳窿」（放高利貸者），信用卡公司因此不鼓勵客戶即期付清欠款，而是希望客戶永遠有「未清的尾數」。由於信用卡公司定下一定期限內必須歸還的款項可能低至總欠款的百分之二，客戶的欠款便大部分成為須付高息的貸款，發行公司坐收厚利，不在話下。至於那類即期還清欠款的，業內稱為「佔便宜者」（freeloader），有此帶貶義的別名，顯示信用卡公司認為他們貪圖方便（比支付現金方便）才使用信用卡，即佔提供方便的信用卡公司的便宜。這種說法其實並不公允，因為信用卡公司亦可從「即期付款」上獲得一定利潤─接受信用卡的公司須支付百分之零點八至百分之三的「交換費」，這約佔信用卡公司三成毛利（一般而言，其他三成來自收費、四成是利率差），當然，信用卡公司的支出不少，主要是郵寄信用卡及每月賬單、使用信用卡的優惠和向持卡者提供諮詢服務。從其所佔收入的比例看，「佔便宜」的還是信用卡公司。

可是，消費超出本身財力被迫付高息的「最佳顧客」，在經濟不景氣的現在，卻突然變成「最劣客戶」，這是因為面臨公司倒閉、收緊規模、撙節開支聲中，他們很易失業、減薪，而一旦陷入這種困境，在平均零儲蓄的社會，無能力償還欠款─信用卡或其他按揭及分期付款─現象便極普遍，這些本來是信用卡公司主要收入來源的客戶，遂成為其最大負累（美國銀行今年二月信用卡逾期三十天未還款比率達百分之七點八，今年第一季的信用卡壞賬高達十八億美元）。為防範拖欠情況惡化，信用卡公司近月紛紛採取行動令他們「退卡」，而誘使「最劣顧客」這樣做，以美國運通對美國本土客戶為例，是提供「現金優惠」，只要清還欠款，公司即奉送三百美元現金，條件是客戶必須註銷信用卡。換句話說，信用卡公司用「現金補貼」的方式「趕客」，這與它們在○八年六月前仍費盡九牛二虎之力爭取顧客的情況（○七年美國信用卡公司一共發出五十一億份招徠生意的宣傳單張），形成強烈對比。

商業顧問施爾登和《財富》無任所編輯高爾雲不久前出版《天使和惡棍顧客》一書（L. Selden 和 G. Colvin:《Angel Customers and Demon Customers》, 03），「天使」指的是如期付清欠款的顧客，「惡棍」當然是拖欠期還款者，一如上述分析，後者才是盈利之源，在經濟好景時，信用卡公司設法「培植惡棍顧客」，種種刺激、引誘他們先使未來沒有的錢的措施由是而生，結果正是這類客戶在經濟不景時連累公司出現巨額虧損！作者們在本書提出了一系列方法，指導信用卡公司如何分辨客戶的良窳，這些方法商學院大概都有傳授，問題是在劇烈競爭下，什麼原則、規章早因不計後果追求業務增長的拓展活動而被拋諸腦後。

信用卡公司「趕客」─引誘那些被它們核定為可能破產客戶「退卡」，同時限制其他客戶的消費額，是信用卡公司自保求存的必要、正確措施，然而，在市場層次，這樣做等同收縮信貸（deleveraging）。債務人減少負債，不再隨便隨意消費，當然可使財政狀況慢慢健康起來，而高危貸款減少令債權人承擔的風險下降，亦是令業務正常發展之正道。這些做法因此值得鼓勵，問題是，當「減債」是集體行動時，等於注入經濟體系（消費市場）的資金突然大幅萎縮，其對經濟增長產生的負面影響，便和成功勸服人民提高儲蓄比率一樣，會對經濟帶來重大衝擊！

先使未來特別是未來沒有的錢，令經濟「過熱」、危機隱伏，在這種情形下，消費者一遇逆境（失業、減薪）便面臨破產威脅；然而，這種情況亦有積極的一面，在紙幣購買力持續消蝕的現在，負債對債務人大為有利，亦是令他們可以像企業從舉債中獲益受惠的辦法。換句話說，信用卡公司收緊信用，等於削弱信用卡持有者這種「權益」，可說是無意間製造了另一種不公平─企業尤其是大企業通過發債，可從貨幣購買力下降（不一定是通脹）中獲得利益，小市民因信用卡公司突然設限無法變相負債先使未來沒有的錢，因此討不了便宜！

The Dead Christ Supported by an Angel by CANO, Alonso

museum prado, madrid.

 

An Andalusian by birth and training, Alonso Cano, a painter, sculptor and architect, did most of his painting between 1638 and 1652, in Madrid, and later in Granada. This part of his career was divided between the execution of altarpieces and the portrayal of religious scenes revealing the highest qualities of an artist in love with beauty. In his conception of painting, Cano, a great creator of types, stands somewhere between Zurbarán and Murillo. His frequently rounded forms are softened by lively and harmonious, but never strident colors. Strong lighting and vigorous composition give his figures, almost always religious, their distinctive plasticity.

The most noteworthy of Cano's altarpieces are those in the church at Getafe (near Madrid), dating from 1645. From that time on, Cano's technique became increasingly pictorial, that is to say, increasingly Baroque, acquiring some of the subtleties he had previously ignored. Perhaps his most important painting is the Descent into Limbo (in the County Museum, Los Angeles), a strange, rather illustrative composition, anecdotal in the movement imparted to the figures, but including one of the rare, and one of the most beautiful, female nudes in Spanish art.

His sense of drama finds its most intense expression in his Dead Christ Supported by an Angel, in the Prado. Cano's gifts as a landscape painter are apparent in a number of pictures with Biblical themes, for example in his Christ and the Woman of Samaria, in which the lights and darks have a strongly naturalistic effect.

During his later years in Granada, Cano painted a number of other important works, like the Seven Mysteries of the Virgin, brilliantly colored canvases of monumental proportions painted between 1652 and 1664 for the main chapel of the Cathedral. Cano's foremost achievement is undoubtedly the series of Immaculate Conceptions painted at various times in his career, including a particularly fine one in the Provincial Museum at Vitoria, and another in the oratory of Granada cathedral. Fate has not been kind to Cano's paintings: several of the best have been destroyed in revolutions and wars.

天使與魔鬼

丹‧布朗的《天使與魔鬼》（Angels and Demons），《達文西密碼》的姊妹篇，由此暢銷小說所改編的電影將會在5月中旬全球公映，宗教界人士彷彿如臨大敵。

誠然，若說《天使與魔鬼》是「敵基督」，倒不如說她是「反教庭」！但並非「反對教庭」，甚至乎「反擊教庭」，而是從另一角度「反思教庭」，反思教庭過去的黑暗時代，反思宗教與科學的互動關係，反思天使與魔鬼是否真的同出一體？

眾所周知，丹‧布朗是一名基督徒，母親更是教會內的全職樂師，丹‧布朗從小就參與了教會的合唱團，進入艾摩斯特大學後也是合唱團的一分子，在1986年以西班牙語和英語雙學位畢業後，他以音樂人的身份出道，推出個人的音樂專輯，其後在1991年搬到荷里活，進入國家作曲學院（National Academy of Songwriters），為了追求創作歌手和鋼琴家的夢想，卻邂逅了比他年長十二歲的藝術創作系主任，也是他未來的妻子布萊絲．紐頓（Blythe Newlon）。

1993年，布萊絲隨丹．布朗返回他的老家新罕布夏州，丹．布朗一邊在高中任教英語，一邊繼續搞音樂；1994年，丹．布朗就發行一張名為《天使與魔鬼》（Angels & Demons）的音樂專輯，美術設計就是後來為其同名小說設計「雙元圖標」（Ambigram）封面的約翰．蘭登（John Langdon），《天使與魔鬼》主角羅伯‧蘭登教授就是向這位設計師致敬。

1996 年，丹．布朗辭去教職專心寫作。1997年跟布萊絲結成夫妻，1998年出版《數字城堡》（Digital Fortress），2000年出版《天使與魔鬼》（Angels and Demons）， 2001年出版《大騙局》（Deception Point），首三部小說成績平平，每部小說的初版大約只有一萬本，但在2003年出版第四部小說《達文西密碼》（The Da Vinci Code），竟一躍而成為暢銷作家！

縱觀丹．布朗的四部作品，表面上都是以密碼學結合科技、宗教、藝術的驚悚懸疑小說，實際上卻是探討政府或教會的陰謀。有說丹．布朗的成功，不在於小說如同肥皂劇般的情節，反而在於充滿綽頭的「反基督」主題（尤其是《達文西密碼》），但他一直以基督徒自居，更在訪問中表示：隨著小說流行而帶動的討論風氣是一個好現象，最後反而能證明真理的不可動搖。

借通俗娛樂來探討宗教，也許是一個不錯的機遇，但必須知道這是一柄兩刃的利劍，偶一不慎，只會帶來兩面不討好，甚至是兩敗俱傷的結果。

《天使與魔鬼》講述教宗突然逝世後，教庭權力真空時，四位候選教宗竟被消失多年的「光照會」綁架，「光照會」更潛入歐洲粒子研究中心偷走了極不穩定的「反物質」，企圖在主教閉門選出新任教宗期間，每小時在一處教堂內殺死一名候選教宗，最後以「反物質」來摧毀梵蒂岡！羅伯‧蘭頓﹝湯漢斯飾﹞臨危受命，在美麗的意大利女科學家維特多莉亞•維特勒﹝伊莉素娜飾﹞，以及教庭內務總管柏德烈﹝伊雲麥葵格飾﹞協助下，追尋已有四百年歷史的四大古老符號——土、氣、火、水，從種種蛛絲馬跡中解開「光照會」的陰謀……

持平而論，《天使與魔鬼》的小說劇情實在過於牽強，解謎過程也流於穿鑿附會，蘭頓教授以「503」來開始推測第一個祭壇，就顯得太一廂情願；再者，按照他的推論，幾乎每一位中古時期的藝術家都可以是「光照會」的成員啊！難怪引來教會牧者的批評，只因為曾曇花一現的「光照會」早在十八世紀前已瓦解了。

《天使與魔鬼》電影為小說去蕪存菁，加插了不少幽默節情，鏡頭和音樂的運用得宜，雖則是以速度戰勝觀眾的理智，卻拍攝出緊張的氣氛，極具視聽之娛，其中尤以最「反物質」爆炸的一幕，就令人眼前一亮，嘆為觀止！

《天使與魔鬼》以曾經存在的「光明會」為賣點，爭議性當然不及以仍然存在的「共濟會」為焦點的《達文西密碼》，但對於信徒們的啟發性，卻是不容忽視。

《天使與魔鬼》內所提到「光明會」，究竟跟歷史上的同名組織有幾多相近之處，並非筆者的興趣所在，加上故事內的宗教狂熱幕後黑手只是借「光明會」之名來行事，相信也不會為觀眾帶來太大的疑問，但我們不可否定的是，在中古歐洲的黑暗時期，教庭對科學家的逼迫卻是鐵一般的事實，而在一系列的「獵巫行動」中，不少異教的女性也被貼上了「女巫」的標籤而受害，也不禁令人婉惜；然而，就像新任教庭內務總管所說：錯不在宗教，錯的只是人！就讓我們反省有否只著眼於宗教的大義，而疏忽了基督的大愛？

宗教與科學當然並非勢不兩立，但我們必須小心「科學」是否已成為了新時代的「神」？我們更需要謹慎「自由」和「轉變」等潮流觀念，是否已成為了新生代的祟拜對象？

最後，更值得我們反思的是，蘭頓教授雖然是一個無神論者，卻是由他來守護了教庭，我們所面對的反對聲音，會否就是神透過異教徒來對我們作出天使般的提醒呢？……

Angels & Demons (2009)

A 2009 American film adaptation of Dan Brown's eponymous novel. It is the sequel to The Da Vinci Code, another Brown film adaptation, even though the novel Angels & Demons was published first and takes place before the novel The Da Vinci Code. Filming took place in Rome and the Sony Pictures Studios in Los Angeles. Tom Hanks reprises the lead role of Robert Langdon, while director Ron Howard, producer Brian Grazer and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman also returned.

 

 

天使與魔鬼

Lydia

這本書早已看過了，Discovery Channel已拍攝了幾輯關於這本書背後的種種，此書糅合了不少不同學派的歷史學者的解說。故事性高和混合了梵蒂岡的古老傳說。

今回湯漢斯瘦身和改變了髮型，他為了演出游泳一場，要減肥和做運動收肚腩，果然比上一集的形象改善了，換了漂亮的女拍檔（今次的女科學家也是可有可無），所以沒影響之至，一點也沒有損失。

當然去過羅馬和參觀過梵蒂岡的朋友說，就是湯漢斯快快快的由一個景點趕去另外一個景點，書中的枝節和理論都刪除了。

最好笑的地方，是湯漢斯在追追趕趕，走入秘道時，還要講一大堆對白，解釋光明會的來源，教會和科學家的鬥爭，看來有點滑稽，我心想為何不打字幕來交代呢？

究竟劇情怎樣當然不會在此說，免得大家沒興趣去看。

當然單是看風景和建築物也是有苗頭的，為何不輕輕鬆鬆的去看這套戲呢？

正因為這套戲的來頭勁，是必看的一套戲，否則你會沒有話題跟朋友說了。

把歷史和幻想混成一談，讓觀眾把一些熟悉的事件串連一起，加上幻想力，然後構造一個人物，博學多才，廣閱經典，由他口中說出來就是說服力多了，這一位人物就活像「發現頻道」裏被訪問的大學教授，講歷史滔滔不絕，令到觀眾如癡如醉，看這套戲也是一大享受。

不信請先看一看原著那本書，你會一路追看下去的。

RocknRolla (2008)

A British crime film written and directed by Guy Ritchie, and starring Gerard Butler, Thandie Newton, and Tom Wilkinson.

 

Plot

Lenny Cole (Wilkinson) is a crime boss who calls the shots in London's underworld and real estate market. We learn all about Lenny from Archy (Strong)—his second in command—who serves as the film's narrator. When a wealthy Russian property dealer by the name of Uri Omovich (Roden) looks to Lenny for help on a major new deal, Lenny is eager to assist (for a very large fee, of course). Uri agrees to pay, and as a show of faith, he insists that Lenny borrow his "lucky" painting. Uri then asks his accountant, Stella (Newton), to transfer the money to Lenny, but things quickly go awry when a band of thieves known as the The Wild Bunch consisting of One Two (Butler) and Mumbles (Elba)—intercept the money before it reaches him (at the behest of Stella). To make matters worse, the lucky painting has mysteriously been stolen, and the number one suspect is Lenny's estranged stepson, crack-addicted rock star Johnny Quid, who is presumed dead. As Lenny desperately tries to locate the painting, Uri calls in sadistic henchmen to recover his money.

In an attempt to find Johnny, Lenny and Archy enlist his former record producers Mickey (Ludacris) and Roman (Piven) to track him down or else their concerts and clubs will be shut down. Meanwhile, Handsome Bob (Hardy) is distraught on the night before his court case, he's scheduled to do a five year prison stretch. One Two organizes a party for Bob. On the way to the party, One Two tries to cheer Bob up to no avail. Bob then comes out to One Two, admitting to having a crush on One Two. One Two is disgusted, but thinking that it's Bob's last night as a free man, asks him what exactly he'd like to do. The next day, One Two refuses to attend Bob's court hearing to the surprise of Mumble. One Two uncomfortably tries to explain that something happened between him and Bob the previous night, when Mumbles tells him that everyone knows that Bob is gay.

When One Two, Mumbles, and Bob try to steal the second load of Uri's money they are wounded and chased by Uri's persistent hired mercenaries who engage them in a shootout and a lengthy foot chase. They nevertheless deliver the money to Stella as they did before. By this time Uri has grown impatient and has Lenny viciously beaten, demanding that the painting be returned and the money delivered. Two item peddling junkies manage to steal the painting from Johnny and sell it to the Wild Bunch, which is given to One Two who gifts it to Stella after they have sex. Mickey and Roman find Johnny and call Archy to have him delivered. After capturing the three, Archy and Lenny's men go to apprehend One Two who is already in the hands of Uri's vengeful mercenaries. Archy and his men kill the mercenaries and kidnap One Two as well as Mumbles and Handsome Bob who arrived to deliver the name of the talked about police informant inside the London underworld.

Uri arrives at Stella's house to seal their arrangements while also asking her to marry him, as he has been smitten with her for a long time. Immediately after, Uri spots his lucky painting in Stella's living room. After being asked how long she's had it, Stella says she's had it for years, not knowing it's actually Uri's. Feeling betrayed and enraged, Uri orders his associate inside to kill Stella.

Meanwhile, Archy brings Johnny, the Wild Bunch, Mickey, and Roman to Lenny's warehouse where Johnny begins to verbally provoke Lenny. Lenny then shoots Johnny in the stomach before he finishes telling Archy that Lenny is the rat. Lenny then orders Johnny, Roman, and Mickey escorted downstairs while demanding that the Wild Bunch to tell him where the money is. Handsome Bob offers Archy the documents in his jacket pocket which reveals the informant, code named "Sidney Shaw," to be Lenny. Lenny had arranged with the police to give up many of his associates for prison at any given time in exchange for his freedom. One Two, Mumbles, and Archy himself are among the people Lenny has ratted out over the years. With this new information brought to light, Archy frees the Wild Bunch and kills Lenny.

In the meantime, Johnny informs Mickey and Roman how they will be executed prompting Lenny's men to act prematurely. Mickey and Roman intervene and kill the men and Johnny kills two more guards waiting outside the lift. The Wild Bunch save them from the last remaining henchman (One-Two knocks him out from behind) and they all escape.

Some time later, Archy picks up a rehabilitated but still eccentric Johnny Quid from the hospital. Archy offers Uri's lucky painting to Johnny as a peace offering and "welcome home present," which Johnny accepts. Archy reveals to Johnny that obtaining the painting "cost a very wealthy Russian an arm and a leg." The film closes with Johnny proclaiming that with his new freedom, he will do what he couldn't do before: "become a real RocknRolla". The end credits reveal that there will be a sequel titled "The Real RocknRolla". During the end credits, it is revealed that One Two and Bob had danced together on the night before Bob's court hearing.

南京！南京！

黃國兆

陸川這個名字，我很早便記住了。好幾年前，我在威尼斯看了他的處男作《尋槍》，因為不太喜歡，所以見了面也沒有詳談。後來看到他執導的第二齣電影《可可西里》，覺得他進步神速，影片先後獲得台灣金馬獎和中國金雞獎的最佳影片。他的名字總讓我想起「登陸仁川」，我總覺得他是會拍戰爭片的。

無可否認，《南京！南京！》是大陸眾多以「南京大屠殺」為題材的影片中最好的一部，也是大陸所有抗日戰爭片之中，甚至所有現代戰事片之中最出色的一部。對香港觀眾而言，它比馮小剛的《集結號》更寫實，更洋溢人道主義的精神和反戰的思維。我雖然沒有考證過，但總認為《集結號》裏面共產黨軍隊打巷戰時，相互交換的眼神和手勢，是美國大兵才用的暗號，某程度上是可笑的。

中國觀點 國際視野

三十八歲的陸川拍攝本片野心非同小可，他是想用電影來「書寫」歷史，不僅從中國人觀點出發，也要具備國際視野。我覺得陸川這部電影最令人讚賞的是尊重歷史，盡量還原重大歷史事件的一部分真相。我覺得近代的中、日兩國人民，中、日兩國政府，都要從新學習尊重歷史，尊重和確認真正發生過的事情，學習從歷史汲取教訓。近年大陸民間和某些官員以至許多媒體，都逐漸公開承認蔣介石和國民黨軍隊抵抗日本侵略的功績和不可抹殺的貢獻。

陸川拍攝本片時，比過往大陸導演拍攝的歷史戰爭片都更為尊重史實。熟悉這段慘痛歷史的觀眾都知道，南京的失陷，當時負責守衞京師的司令長官唐生智可以說是歷史罪人。皆因唐生智自動請纓，要與南京共存亡，蔣委員長才委以守城重任。但唐生智後來卻下令棄城撤軍，撤退過程又毫無組織，十六萬國軍精銳損失過半，更釀成屠城慘劇。《南京！南京！》有提及唐生智棄城撤走，但沒有交代前因後果，只描述了當時宋希濂部第二十八軍拒絕撤出，要跟日軍周旋到底。片中陸劍雄（劉燁飾）這個角色，便是宋希濂部一名下級軍官。影片描述的國軍潰逃情景，也是忠於史實，並沒有加油添醋，惡意詆毀。反而宋希濂部許多國民黨士兵拚死抵抗，被描寫成真正英雄。

本片無可否認是受到《舒特拉的名單》、《雷霆救兵》以至《鋼琴戰曲》等非常出色的人道主義情懷戰爭片的影響。就像《舒特拉的名單》一樣，陸川以黑白攝影呈現一段並未塵封的歷史，一方面賦予影片沉重的紀錄片風格，另一方面亦淡化了許多血腥暴力的場面。陸川刻意追求歷史的真實感覺，用意非常明顯。本片中一個引起中、日兩國觀眾爭論的角色，是年輕的日本士兵角川（中泉英雄飾）。許多中國網民認為角川這個角色美化了屠城的日軍，而不少日本人認為中泉英雄飾演這個溫情主義的士兵，是對大和魂的污辱。這些現象恰好說明了陸川試圖以國際視野去呈現重大的歷史事件，而凡事都有其兩面性或多面性。嚴格來說，陸川幾乎是通過角川的日本人視點，去述說這段歷史。雖然角川的視點不是全知觀點，但影片以他置身南京城外準備攻堅開始，而幾乎是以他吞槍自殺作結（最後的鏡頭是角川死前蓄意放走的小豆子和順子逃出生天的狂喜）；而以戲份而言，主角無疑是日本士兵角川。片末日本皇軍的一場祭禮，正是凸顯日本軍國主義近乎宗教狂熱的瘋癲狀態，間接諷刺了靖國神社。下令屠城的日本華中派遣軍司令長官松井石根，於日本戰敗後被列為甲級戰犯，一九四八年由遠東國際軍事法庭判處絞刑，其神位不也供奉於靖國神社嗎？因此這一場看不到松井石根的祭禮儀式，絕不應解讀為歌頌日本大和魂。

放下歷史的包袱

《南京！南京！》中德國納粹商人拉貝（John Rabe）這個角色，最近已由同樣年輕的德國導演戈倫貝格（Florian Gallenberger）拍成史詩式電影《約翰．拉貝》，並且還獲得德國電影大賞的最佳男主角和傑出劇情片等多個獎項。最諷刺的是，當年日本發動妄想征服全球的侵略戰爭的「盟國」、曾經殺害數以百萬計猶太人的德國人，現在竟然嚴厲批評日本皇軍在南京的暴行。為什麼德國人可以站在道德高地上，去批判日本人所犯的滔天罪行呢？原因很簡單，因為德國政府和人民都認了錯（少數納粹狂熱分子除外），而且是言行一致的誠心認錯；反之，日本政府從來沒有認錯，只在迫不得已的情況下假情假義地道歉了事。認了錯的新一代德國人，完全沒有歷史包袱；德國和法國的關係，可說情同手足。日本政府死不認錯，而且篡改歷史，中、日兩國人民的友誼只是表面的客套，大家都互相敷衍。因此，認錯是和解的第一步。沒有經過認錯的和解，只是表面的和解，不可能是真正的和解，雙方也不可能發展新的友誼。

日本政府不肯承認的而且確曾經發生過的歷史事件，企圖向國民隱瞞真相，不尊重歷史，不尊重中、日雙方的死難者、受害者，行為卑下，態度惡劣。但中國政府迄今仍不肯為「六四事件」平反，不承認軍方鎮壓和平示威的學生工人群眾是不必要的、甚至是一次錯誤的決定。而在官方的刻意淡化和粉飾下，「六四事件」不也遲早面目全非、真相難尋嗎？我們一天不去平反六四，不去認真地對待歷史真相，我們有資格去批評日本人不尊重歷史嗎？

DEPECHE MODE

DEPECHE MODE
宇宙新秩序
Text：袁智聰
Date: 2009-04-26

打從英倫電子班霸樂團Depeche Mode自1997年的《Ultra》專輯改組成三人陣營起，Dave Gahan、Martin Gore和Andrew Fletcher三子便非常準時地每四年便走在一起出版全新專輯。

我們彷彿看到樂隊經歷過漫長的《Devotion Tour》所引發的混亂麻煩時期(Alan Wilder離隊、Dave沉溺毒品險些送命、Andrew精神崩潰)之後，DM乃得以重新找到他們的新秩序。

2009年發表的第十二張專輯《Sounds Of The Universe》同樣地是DM四年來的新作，這樣的出版專輯密度已維持了十多年，然而何以今次似乎特別叫人引頸以待呢？

當然，其一原因是2003年的前作《Playing The Angel》叫大家聽得喜出望外，所以固然對其後繼之作深表期待；其次，是《Sounds Of The Universe》發表的同時，亦同步出版了一個極度吸引、包裝精美且質量十足的昂貴豪華Box Set版，擺明用作討喜誓死追隨DM之老樂迷，令到這張新作不禁有一種非同凡響而來之感，兼且聽起來份外有雅興。

去年，我問德國電子先鋒Kraftwerk的靈魂人物Ralf Hütter時問到他現在喜歡聽甚麼類型的音樂，他虛無地回答：「我們聽噪音，以及來自宇宙的各種環境聲音。」("We listen to noise, and all kind of environmental sounds from the universe.")

現在DM把這張新專輯喚作《Sounds Of The Universe》，是英雄所見略同，抑或Martin Gore看過我篇訪問呢？

愛不釋手：盒子裡的小宇宙
如果你是義無反顧地追隨Depeche Mode多年的樂迷，當你捧著這盒《Sounds Of The Universe》的豪華Box Set版時，絕對可有如小朋友拿著一盒大大的玩具時那種足以樂上半天的莫大滿足感。

傳奇性音樂單位的新作另行推出貴價豪華Box Set版，是近年的一個趨勢。目標是一眾矢志不渝的忠實樂迷，明知他們有較高音樂消費能力，貴貴也會購買，所以設計包裝印刷亦不惜工本，愈出愈豪華。

《Sounds Of The Universe》這盒禮盒式Box Set有幾豪華、內容有幾豐富：三張CD，包括CD 1的《Sounds Of The Universe》專輯，CD 2的Bonus Tracks & Remixes，CD 3的Demos；DVD則內含四十五分鐘的紀錄片《Making The Universe》、專輯簡介短片《Sounds Of The Universe》、單曲〈Wrong〉的MV、四首歌曲的錄音室Live Session影片、整張專輯的5.1環迴版等；兩本大小不同的八十四頁厚的硬皮書冊，大的刊有Anton Corbijn拍攝的照片及歌詞，小的是錄音實況寫真集；還有兩個扣章，一張小海報，五張一套的Artcard(那是十四位設計師操刀設計的明信片之其中五款——即是若然你想集齊全套，那便至少要買三盒Box Set了)，以及印有獨立編號的證書(我的是43354)，蓋著是一個質量十足的硬盒。整盒Box Set重量超過2KG。

最重要是，這不是甚麼Anthology式精選回顧Box Set，而只是源自一張DM的新專輯而已。單憑一張專輯的素材，已可以出版到這麼內容豐富大大盒的Box Set，相信DM已締造了一個「創舉」，不得不向這個Box Set的企劃人寫個服字。

當然，別理會甚麼金融海嘯，DM與Mute廠牌毅然出版這套《Sounds Of The Universe》的高價Box Set，因為他們看準了我們這群對DM抱有深厚情感的精忠樂迷。

.....and more
http://mcb.com.hk/online2/article/article.php?did=2&aid=584

三人時代的兩個階段
《Violator》標誌著DM走上登峰造極，《Songs Of Faith And Devotion》把他們推至高處不勝寒狀態，然後失去了Alan Wilder，而DM也再沒有另貿覓新團員以填補其空缺，實行把樂團精簡化地變作三人組。

從1997年第一張以三人組姿態發表的《Ultra》至今已有十二年，期間共出版過四張官方專輯，我們亦不難把三人時代的DM劃分成兩個階段。

當年Alan Wilder的重要角色，是承擔了絕大部分歌曲的製作工序。從《Ultra》到2001年的《Exciter》，我們看到DM一心以三人組的陣營重新振作而來，但同時卻放不下對第四成員崗位的癥結，所以無論是前者裡找來Bomb The Bass 的Tim Simenon抑或後者裡找來LFO的Mark Bell操刀監製，二人本身都是獨當一面的電音藝人，故基本上他們已儼如該專輯裡的第四成員，亦反映到當時Martin等人在某程度上的信心不足，在陣中仍彷彿存有一個缺口，需要一位音樂製作人來填補。

直至《Playing The Angel》在2005年的出現，情況也不一樣了，這張分別在美國紐約州聖大巴巴拉及英國倫敦灌錄的專輯，擔綱唱片監製是曾為Blur、Elbow、Doves、Clinic、Tom McRae跨刀的Ben Hillier，以往的合作明單上清一色是結他音樂單位，他也並非甚麼電子樂手，然而他卻因此而跟DM擦出不一樣的火花——Ben並沒有令到DM再度搖滾化起來，反之卻更凸顯電聲的空間感建築，電氣橫流，加上又是破天荒地首次有Dave筆下的歌曲收錄在DM唱片內(在2003年出版過首張個人專輯《Paper Monsters》的他揚言如果Martin不讓他在DM下張專輯參與創作的話他便會離隊去)，打破了自1986年專輯《Black Celebration》以降由Martin獨攬創作大權的局面。

三人時代的DM終於修成正果，《Playing The Angel》是樂迷心目中他們在過去十年間最優秀的一張專輯。

Ben Hillier再監製
跟《Playing The Angel》相隔四載，《Sounds Of The Universe》再次交由Ben Hillier操刀監製，原因就是大家覺得上次出來的效果很棒很稱心滿意所以再找他合作，食過翻尋味嘛，就是那麼簡單了。看到是DM有意與Ben再下一城。

論質素，《Sounds Of The Universe》無疑《Playing The Angel》的延續，音樂製作之精細，可謂彼此不相伯仲，好比兩張姊妹作。加上Martin Gore近年在eBay購買了不少Vintage Synths，所以新歌當中很著重別出心裁的Analog電聲運用，層次感甚高，有很多細緻位，比如開場曲〈In Chains〉的一輪電聲引子已交代了他這次對聲響之實驗。況且操刀混音的是Tony Hoffer(Air / Beck)，他一向甚擅長處理Analog聲，最終出來亦效果奇佳。

當然，在《Sounds Of The Universe》裡仍有一名Programmer(Luke Smith)協力，這是自《Ultra》起在每張DM專輯裡必備的崗位(也許Martin並非電腦軟件高手吧)，但已把客席樂手人數減至最低。彷彿要日漸回到四人時代DM那種在音樂製作上不假外求的作風。

宇宙之聲
先行單曲〈Wrong〉已是一個好開始：撲朔迷離、深潛神秘的未來派電子曲式，勾起出一片淒迷浪漫低調氣息，加上Dave喋喋不休地唱出那咄咄逼人的質問式曲子，這首相當扣人心弦而戲劇性的作品絕對有先聲奪人之效。在紀錄片《Making The Universe》當中便鉅細無遺地看到此曲的製作過程。

音樂主腦Martin Gore繼續要彰顯他的藍調結他彈奏功架，〈In Chains〉之未來派Electro Blues-Soul已不在話下，而Dave Gahan跟其音樂夥伴Christian Eigner及Andrew Phillpott創作的〈Hole To Feed〉和〈Miles Away / The Truth Is〉等亦是其電氣藍調歌曲。難得是Dave與Martin筆下的作品皆有這一致的取向。

〈Fragile Tension〉和〈In Sympathy〉都是DM那類情感幽美的中板電子曲目，喜歡〈It's No Good〉、〈Only When I Lose Myself〉的都會喜歡這兩曲。有著偉大Chorus的下一張單曲〈Peace〉，那流麗簡潔的歐陸電子樂韻已甚討喜。〈Perfect〉的Electro-Pop復刻電聲也不言而喻，單是那清脆俐落的鼓機聲已叫人聽得媚飛色舞。另一出自Dave等人手筆的〈Come Back〉，其金屬敲擊聲響儼如回到《Some Great Reward》和《Black Celebration》的80年代中期DM之音。而純音樂〈Spacewalker〉太空電子Space-Age得來，又宛如Y.M.O.的唯美樂章。

我個人至愛有兩曲。〈Little Soul〉泛著是幽悒而淒美的歌德式電影感，意境茫然迷濛、哀怨鬼魅，Dave與Martin的一唱一和二重唱又是那麼無懈可擊。而專輯裡唯一由Martin唱出的〈Jezebel〉，絕對是一首縈繞心頭的憂傷動人Ballad歌曲，美不勝收，他那令人心碎的歌聲脆弱得一彈即破。
.....and more
http://mcb.com.hk/online2/article/article.php?did=2&aid=584

Kryptos

美國中央情報局（ CIA）座落在維珍尼亞州總部的內園內，自 1990年開始擺放了一座 3米（ 10呎）高的雕塑，叫 Kryptos，意思是「隱藏」。 Kryptos上面盡是英文字母，如 EMUFPHZLRFAZYUSDJKZLDKRNSHGNFIVJ，你知道這堆字母的意思嗎？但這些看似胡亂放在一起的字母，其實隱藏了四段密碼，但《達文西密碼》作者丹布朗（ Dan Brown）盛傳將在 9月出版的新作《 The Lost Symbol》加以破解。

解密專家束手無策

Kryptos是雕塑家桑伯恩（ Jim Sanborn）的傑作，他說整個創作意念是「神秘力量」。 CIA為幫助他創作，曾派出局內退休解密專家舒爾德（ Ed Scheidt）在神秘地點，教他二戰前歐洲間諜的密碼。教曉徒弟沒師傅，桑伯恩雕塑上的密碼謎底，最後連舒爾德也不知道。

CIA的解密專家都想破解 Kryptos的密碼。像史泰恩（ David Stein），他花了 400小時私人時間，破解了第一段密碼。至今共三段密碼被破解，至於第四段，任由 CIA最高手解密專家也解不開。難度那麼高，全因桑伯恩在密碼中再加謎語，而謎語中又有謎語。

丹布朗（ Dan Brown）是密碼迷，對於 CIA這座被喻為解密界珠穆朗瑪峯的雕塑，他同樣着迷。他出版《達文西密碼》時聲稱雕塑上寫着「只有 WW知道」，只要倒轉來看， WW變成 MM，正是指小說中為耶穌留下血脈的抹大拉的馬利亞。盛傳他 9月出版的《 The Lost Symbol》就是要為 Kryptos解密。

桑伯恩對丹布朗拿 Kryptos寫小說老大不高興。他幾年前已拆破「只有 WW知道」語句跟抹大拉馬利亞無關， WW其實指 Kryptos1990年完成時的 CIA局長韋伯斯特（ William Webster），他給了 WW一信封寫下密碼的答案。「我不想我的作品原意被改變。」他希望 Kryptos的密碼永遠不會破解，那麼這雕塑永遠有着神秘魅力。

南京！南京

中國導演馮小剛來香港，大罵港人不看大陸華語片，《集結號》不賣座，《非誠勿擾》只收兩百萬，說香港人不識貨。然而以戰爭片而論，中國電影出過幾部能與史匹堡爭雄的鉅作？
最近，新進中國導演陸川的《南京！南京！》，反而在戰爭場面交了一張不錯的考卷。首先，導演不貪大。一般人都以為，看足南京大屠殺全卷，但陸川控制住野心，只拍日軍殺進城後的一個橫切面。陸川很聰明，大陸導演在政治外交之間走鋼線，把日本人拍得太兇狠，有損「日中友好關係」，拍日軍拍得太慈眉善貌，就會激怒滿嘴巴愛國情緒的憤青。據說本來有二十分鐘屠殺的暴力戲，因為大陸沒有電影分級制，只有剪掉。剪了，反而更「客觀中立」了，因為日本至今只承認，在南京殺了兩三萬戰俘，沒有大舉殺平民。

 《南京！南京！》的戰爭場面，很明顯受了波蘭斯基的《鋼琴戰曲》的影響，跟着搭了一條瓦礫破敗的廢墟街。
日軍攻打南京，守南京的司令唐生智急急跑了，遺下一批戰俘。片中一片廢墟的南京街景，只有由飛機一通轟炸過之下，才會如此破爛。街道兩旁剩下的房子，都炸飛了屋頂，只剩下一排殘黑剝落的磚牆。在南京攻防戰中，沒經過空襲，這堂背景，不論用真搭還是電腦特技，都與史實不符。
拍電影是不是一定要忠於史實？是一個有趣的問題。但大陸觀眾看《赤壁》，不是左一句原著如何、右一句史實怎樣嗎？
不知道陸川先生是什麼用意，全片由頭到尾，強調日軍只殺戰俘，把婦孺平民和軍人分開。活埋了一批，婦女用來當慰安婦，反倒成為戲中的主菜。哪有大規模的屠殺。開頭這一場，日軍闖進教堂，其中避難的幾百中國平民通通舉手，主角日軍角川向一道木門緊鎖的密室放了幾槍，他以為國軍跑不掉的窩藏在那裡。門打開之後才發現殺錯良民。角川非常懊悔，哭叫：「我不是有意的。」
把俘虜的國軍趕到長江邊，架起機關槍集體槍斃，忠於史實。然而，堆積如山的屍體，當年在中華門外，日軍淋上汽油一把火燒掉。結果是一條長江染得血紅，上空黑煙翻騰，天地為之變色。電影《南京！南京！》裡，沒有放火燒屍這一段，會不會有意淡化日軍的罪行？還是電影製作成本所限，刪掉這一場？我心地好，從來不用陰謀論看人，我相信原因是後者。
最忌未學懂走路，先學奔跑，中國導演拍戰爭片，必取千軍萬馬的宏大場面，以為兩陣對圓，一通廝殺，導演坐在吊臂起重機上，手拿擴音器，呼風喚雨，指揮這方，號令那邊，確實有化身為上帝的快感。

然而，沒有吳宇森的功力，不要捨近圖遠，棄小爭大。戰爭也可以拍小場面的。《鋼琴戰曲》沒有千軍萬馬，只有一輛德國的坦克車，追着猶太人鋼琴師的男主角，他在殘垣破頂上沒命奔逃，大砲在後追轟，像追打一隻飛蚊。強權的殘暴，人命的渺小，這一樣是令人難忘的戰爭場面。
中國人流行的通病，是像孫中山說的，個個從小立志要做大事、做大官。一「大」之成就，要有無數「小」的基礎堆成。建築一座大廈，對混凝土和鋼筋的細節沒有要求，大廈必定傾塌。特區十年，就像拍中國式的戰爭片，高科技港、中醫中藥中心、環保國際城市，口號一砲接一砲，全是放煙花的大場面。但實踐這些口號的人物和細節呢？只有中環飯局精英、論壇吹水人才，委任一組副局長和政治助理，半年表現，觀之令人頹喪，這就是一味只識圖大，沒有心機把小事做好的民族病。
金庸的武俠小說，大製作比小品好。《書劍恩仇錄》、《天龍八部》都是群戲。《笑傲江湖》和《鹿鼎記》更把一個亂世的中國代入縮影。小品如《白馬嘯西風》和《俠客行》反而相對沒有那麼多影視改編。為什麼？因為假大空的自我虛妄症。

 

台灣的李安作風就踏實了。他不拍大製作，連《臥虎藏龍》也只是背景大，但人物小。一部《色•戒》，看出李安穩健的文學、美術、音樂的基礎通識——戲中有一場講大學生演完了戲之後，在榕樹的窄巷邊消夜慶祝。這場戲幾句廣東話對白，李安聘請老牌李我，指導演員怎麼說三十年代的廣東話。李我是三十年代廣州西關大少，其粵腔有古音，李安是台灣人，但他知道中國方言隨着時代的變遷，說話的腔調和用詞必有變異，所以他不放過細節，叫老人家來教口音，這就是從美國荷李活學來的專業精神。
相比之下，《南京！南京！》就顯得粗疏了。有一場戲，女主角高圓圓向一批婦女演講，宣稱皇軍要她們其中一百人，自願做慰安婦。高圓圓的對白有一句：「這就意味着你們是為了大家犧牲。」什麼叫「這就意味着」？這是當前大陸流行的惡性西化詞彙，由 Which Means、 This Means的英文硬譯過來。三十年代的中華民國，中國人無論有沒有教養，是不會說出這種三流四不像的下等中文的。
這就是細節。一齣戲，有時 A級與 B級之差，不在於擲多少資本，也不在於比賽宣傳愛國，在於細節。如果中國觀眾要求低，中國電影明明 B-的，就可以吹捧成 A+了。這是情緒化的另一回事。然而，在國際層面，中國電影要趕上荷李活，五十年內不可能。

Pineapple Express (2008)

An American comedy film directed by David Gordon Green, written by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg and starring Seth Rogen and James Franco with cameo appearances by Ed Begley, Jr. and James Remar. Producer Judd Apatow, who previously worked with Rogen and Goldberg on Knocked Up and Superbad, assisted in developing the story, which was partially inspired by the buddy comedy subgenre.

being comfortable with uncertainty

佛學家 Pema Chodron 教導「隨遇而安」（being comfortable with uncertainty），凡事都當作是一個新的開始，不要浪費時間空想現實會改變，接受現實隨機應對，而且毋須預知未來會發生什麼事情。最重要是不要執着，因為固執己見只會令你對新事物一無所知，不如解放思想迎接不可預測的將來。

Burton的意思與佛教的「破執」大同小異。Burton 忠告要忍受由不肯定造成的不舒服感覺，應以科學方法去計算事物發生的或然率，每項投資都同時存在風險與回報，衡量各種客觀條件得出的結果即使與自己原先想法南轅北轍，亦要面對現實，我們沒有必要也不能承受因為「肯定」（certainty）心態導致的災難性後果。

格蘭瑟姆就大市是熊是牛設計了兩套推算方案【表】，讀者可作為參考，也可以在機會率方面換入自己估計的數字。

林 錢世

行止

一、

去年十二月九日，筆者在本欄提及富格遜的新書（Niall Ferguson:《The Ascent of Money - A Financial History of the World》，企鵝○八年），直譯為《世界金融史─金錢的崛興》，及後一想，覺得譯名雖然可「信」，然而平鋪直敍，「信」「達」合格卻失之「雅」，和內子談起，她衝口而出：《錢世》，揣摩本書內容，說的正是錢的「身世」，它細膩地介紹了金錢在文明世界崛興的過程，即其在世界經濟、政治發展中的作用，此譯符「信雅達」要求且易記易上口；可是，《錢勢》又如何？《金錢進化論》亦不錯，這些俱足以展示金錢與時並進（其實是帶領世界進步）的勢頭，因此均稱恰可。至此，筆者躊躇莫決，對當年嚴復為一譯名而「旬月躊躇」的心情，完全了解。

遲遲未評介這本書，一來是「事忙」，二來則在等待欣賞其ＤＶＤ後才作「定論」。這本書是作者應ＢＢＣ之請而寫的電視紀錄片「劇本」（ＤＶＤ二片共六集），成書當然作過大量加工及潤飾，惟其淺白通俗的特色不變；不過，由於每一集都有主題，遂令本書讀起來如雜誌文章的結集，並無一氣呵成的氣勢。有一小事似可一提，筆者購ＤＶＤ時「㩒錯掣」，結果又買了一本英國版的書─和美國版不同的是英國版有多幅精美彩圖。

二、

富格遜今年四十五歲（一九六四年於蘇格蘭格拉斯哥出生），畢業於英國劍橋現在大西洋彼岸另一劍橋的哈佛任教，被譽為「當代最有成就」、「英國最著名歷史學家」的學者；他不僅對近代史見人所未見（如認為第一次世界大戰因英國─並非已有定論的德國─把發生於巴爾幹半島的悲劇「提升」至國際衝突；此說在史學界並無共識），且其文風明快文筆流暢可讀，因此大受讀者和傳媒歡迎。不過，筆者以為本為電視片集而寫的書，把金錢進化過程寫得條理清晰，加上他的「賣相」不錯，ＤＶＤ應更可觀，然而不然，他說起話來面部表情太太太太多，幾乎每句話都要又揚又攢那兩道濃黑的長眉，配合大動作的手勢還有聳肩縮肩，「氣勢逼人」，極盡吸引觀眾注意之能事，筆者卻有點「頂唔順」、吃不消，遂有看ＤＶＤ不如讀其書之感。

能文善道的學者較易成名，有實學者因此成為象牙塔內外人所尊崇的名人，這類學者，經濟學界亦有不少。一九七七年四月（剛好三十二年前！）筆者在《信報月刊》發表短文〈拍成電視紀錄片集的經濟史〉，介紹 J. K. 葛爾布萊斯應ＢＢＣ之邀把其新作《變幻的時代》（The Age of Uncertainty）拍成一套十三輯的紀錄片。葛爾布萊斯身高六呎七吋，風度翩翩，以高超的寫作技巧聞名（《經濟學人》則評之為「太花巧」），加上腔調柔和、口才便給，是少有的能寫善言的大家；筆者的讀後及觀後感是他對古典經濟學家如阿當．史密斯、馬爾塞斯、李嘉圖、熊彼德和凱恩斯等人的理論，如數家珍，輕鬆寫出、娓娓道來，令人增益不淺，亦明白經濟學對人類經濟發展產生深遠影響……。筆者當時寫道：「正如凱恩斯所說：『那些自以為完全不受知識分子影響的人，通常是一些已故經濟學家的奴隸……』。」這句話筆者後來多次引用，如今中國刺激經濟增長的「方略」，雖說具中國特色，一樣無法擺脫凱恩斯的陰影。

三年後的一九八○年，佛利民根據他於一九六二年出版的論文結集《資本主義與自由》，與夫人露絲合作，改寫為十章本的《自由選擇》，並於同年應美國公共電視之請，拍成一套十輯的電視片集，令其「天下沒有免費午餐」學說深入民間。佛利民滔滔雄辯、機鋒畢露，令這套紀錄片集暢銷二十年而不衰，受其影響者不知凡幾。金融海嘯令佛利民鼓吹賦予企業家無限自由的哲學，成為導致金融災難的「幕後黑手」，他的學說「退隱」自不可免，但若干年後勢必「復出」……。有趣的是，八、九十年代保守學派當道時，自由學派的葛爾布萊斯在政壇和學術界的影響力日漸消褪，但去年年中以來，又見不少詮釋、鼓吹其學說以及為他「平反」的文章，那與佛利民及其信徒的處境剛相反。經濟學亦墜入風水輪流轉的循環？

此後二十年，似乎未見類似的紀錄片面世，直至二○○二年，在耶魯和劍橋受教育的經濟研究者丹尼爾．耶津（D. Yergin, 1947-），應美國公共電視之邀，把其於一九九八年（與友人合作）的著作《制高點─政府與市場之爭重塑現代世界》（The Commanding Heights: The Battle Between Government and the Marketplace That Is Remaking the Modern World）製成三輯紀錄片（片名簡化了；本港明珠台及台灣公共頻道均曾播出），聲容並茂地縷述了自由市場在二十世紀崛興以至貿易環球化的經過，是了解自由經濟如何「打敗」計劃經濟成為世界經濟主流體系的最佳紀錄片；耶津通過和若干領袖人物（依出現次序）如切尼（布殊的副總統）、克林頓、Newt Gingrich（克林頓時期曾任國會少數派〔共和黨〕領袖，是主張銀行可自由經營不應受任何規管的健者）、魯賓（克林頓的財長）以及葛爾布萊斯、佛利民與 J. Sachs 等的對談，為這部紀錄片平添生趣。

精簡的解說配合「活動的插圖」，這類紀錄片，筆者認為是弘揚經濟學的最佳媒介，亦是了解經濟學與文明社會關係的捷徑（看這類紀錄片雖然亦得聚精滙神，總比讀書輕鬆）；《信報》現在正朝多元化發展，也許應該考慮說服張五常教授「現身說經濟」，在《經濟解釋》基礎上，加上街邊玉器交易的機靈和年宵市場賣橘的熱鬧，拍成紀錄片，以張教授一頭愛因斯坦髮型（格力威和最近來港的祈幸〔E. Kissin〕亦如是）、多才多藝及前無古人後無來者的氣勢，內容不愁不豐富，大收旺場，可以預卜！

富格遜以歷史學家（現為哈佛歷史及商業行政學講座教授）替金融發展史作傳，雖然提及的史實和資料不少已是眾所周知，惟他大都找到一點前人未及的趣聞逸事，且均能從新角度切入，並無老生常談之感，而他的詮釋時有新銳之見，少有陳腔濫調之詞。筆者將分數天細說之……。和上面提及諸書不同，富格遜這本書是為紀錄片而寫，因此可讀性甚高，讀者不必因其厚達四百餘頁而生畏，更不可因為看了紀錄片而棄讀。 細說《錢世》．之一

Changeling (2008)

A 2008 American drama film directed by Clint Eastwood and written by J. Michael Straczynski. Based on real life events in 1928 Los Angeles, the film stars Angelina Jolie as a woman who is reunited with her missing son—only to realize he is an impostor. After she confronts the city authorities they vilify her as an unfit mother and brand her delusional. The dramatized incident was connected to the "Wineville Chicken Coop" kidnapping and murder case. Changeling explores female disempowerment, political corruption, child endangerment and the repercussions of violence. Ron Howard intended to direct, but scheduling conflicts led to his replacement by Eastwood.

After hearing about the case from a contact at Los Angeles City Hall, Straczynski spent a year researching the historical record, which he said shaped 95% of the script. The shooting script was Straczynski's first draft and his first produced film screenplay. Several actors campaigned for the lead; Eastwood cast Jolie partly because he felt her face fit the period setting. Jeffrey Donovan, Jason Butler Harner, John Malkovich, Michael Kelly, and Amy Ryan also feature. Most of the characters were based on real life people, while some were composites.

Historical context

Wineville Chicken Coop Murders

In 1926, Gordon Stewart Northcott took his 14-year-old nephew, Sanford Clark, from the boy's home in Saskatchewan, Canada, to Northcott's ranch in Wineville. Northcott beat and sexually abused Clark, and in September 1928, the police took Clark into custody after a family member informed them of the situation. Clark revealed that Northcott had kidnapped, molested and killed several young boys with the help of Northcott's mother—Sarah Louise Northcott—and the forced participation of Clark himself. The police found no bodies at the ranch—Clark said they were dumped in the desert—but discovered body parts, blood-stained axes, and personal effects belonging to missing children. Northcott and his mother fled to Canada, but they were arrested and extradited to the United States. Sarah Louise initially confessed to the murders, including that of Walter Collins. She later retracted her statement, as did Northcott, who had confessed to killing five boys.

After Christine Collins was released from Los Angeles County Hospital, she sued the police department and won the second of two lawsuits. Although Captain Jones was ordered to pay Collins $10,800, he never did. A city council welfare hearing recommended that Jones and Chief of Police James E. Davis leave their posts, but both were eventually reinstated. The California State Legislature later made it illegal for the police to commit someone to a psychiatric facility without a warrant. Northcott was convicted of the murders of Lewis and Nelson Winslow (12 and 10 respectively), and an unidentified Mexican boy, though the authorities believed he may have committed as many as 20 murders. Northcott was executed by hanging in 1930. Sarah Louise was convicted of Walter Collins' murder and served almost 12 years in prison before being paroled. After Northcott's execution, a boy believed to have been killed by Northcott was found alive. In 1930, the residents of Wineville changed the town's name to Mira Loma, partly to escape the notoriety brought by the case.

The Wineville Chicken Coop Murders — also known as the Wineville Chicken Murders — was a series of kidnappings and murders of young boys occurring in Los Angeles and Riverside County, California in 1928. The case received national attention and events related to it exposed corruption in the Los Angeles Police Department. The 2008 film Changeling is based upon events related to this case.

The murders

In 1926, Saskatchewan-born ranch owner Gordon Stewart Northcott took his 14-year-old nephew, Sanford Clark, from his home in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. Before a family member told the police about the situation, Northcott had beaten and sexually abused Clark.^[5] In September 1928, the Los Angeles Police Department visited the Northcott Ranch in Wineville. Police found Clark at the ranch and took him into custody.

Clark claimed that Northcott had kidnapped, molested, beaten, and killed several young boys with the apparent help of Northcott's mother, Sarah Louise Northcott. He had also forced Clark to participate. The police found no complete bodies at the site, but they discovered body parts, the personal effects of missing children, and blood-stained axes. Clark said quicklime was used to dispose of the remains, and the bones had been dumped in the desert. The Northcotts had fled to Canada and they were arrested near Vernon, British Columbia.

Aftermath

Investigators found a blood-stained axe as well as bones, hair and fingers from three of the victims that were buried in lime near the chicken house at the Northcott ranch near Wineville - hence the name "Wineville Chicken Coop Murders." Wineville changed its name to "Mira Loma" on November 1, 1930, due in large part to the negative publicity surrounding the murders. Wineville Avenue, Wineville Road, Wineville Park and other geographic references provide reminders of the community's former name. Sanford Clark returned to Saskatoon, Saskatchewan