红字1995

《红字》，是美国小说家霍桑最著名的作品之一。这里要和小说进行比较的，是1995年黛米摩尔主演的电影版本。
    
    同样是《红字》，故事框架似乎差不多，但是就像我以前提到的《活着》的电影和小说一样，《红字》的电影表现的是现代得多的东西。不仅如此，为了影片的票房考虑，电影中还增加了许多商业元素。借用我同学的话来说，就是以为买错碟了；简直面目全非……小说原著的文笔流畅，但是由于作者的时代局限性，也就是其个人对于未来发展的迷茫，所以看起来十分压抑。电影就要酣畅许多。明显的一点就是，影片中的牧师，比我想象中要狂野许多，看开头的时候，我还以为这是一个“红字”和“皮袜子”的混合体呢。


    从表现出来的思想上看，原著主要讨论的是人的罪，即人皆有罪。而通过赎罪和将罪行袒露出来，可以使灵魂得到升华。这和作者本身是清教徒身份以及对家族以前犯下的罪过产生的宿命感分不开的。而且，作者虽然觉得当时对人思想的禁锢是不对的，但是，他对变革也抱有怀疑态度。但是电影就不一样了。时代向前推进了不是一点半点，现在思想解放已被公认，所以在影片中，海斯特的言行就更加坚定。霍桑只是向未来窥探，而导演却是回望，自然占了很大便宜。因此，再在电影中单纯的表现人皆有罪的思想便会显得不合时宜甚至怪异晦涩了。是以海斯特的丈夫的戏份被明显减少了。那么用什么来填补思想的空白呢？电影中表现海斯特和牧师间的爱情的戏份增加了，印第安人的戏份也明显增加了。特别是后者，甚至带来了影片结尾的大规模战斗场面，也许导演想为沉闷的全局制造一个高潮吧。恐怕用心白费了，因为后来强安上去的大团圆结尾实在突兀。


    小说中海斯特是迷茫的，她为了爱人而拒绝说出情夫的名字，又因为愧疚和恐惧发誓不向他人透露自己丈夫的身份。电影中海斯特是坚定的，从不认为自己有罪，也完全站在爱人的一边。在影片中她去警告了牧师约瑟，而影片刚开始海斯特乘马车去找房子的时候，镇上的人都在看她，说明到镇上的人不多，每个新人都很受关注，约瑟不可能不知道海斯特的丈夫的身份。事实上，从后面的情节中可以知道，他知道的。海斯特的不同表现表明，霍桑对爱情和教义本身就存在迷茫，他既肯定两人之间的爱是伟大的，是上天的赐予，又认定通奸是罪。电影导演明显是将“爱情”这种人性需求放至第一位。他在为两个人的行为辩护。


    电影对“女巫案”的映射部分还是保留的很好，也算是忠于原著了。但是小说中描写红字被海斯特装饰的异常美丽在电影中几乎没表现出来，更别提原著结尾海斯特是又回到这里，自愿带上红字，度过余生；而海斯特因为善良能干逐渐被众人接受也丝毫没有提及，这恐怕是因为要为引出影片结尾的战斗而不得不舍弃了吧。基于以上两点，我认为，电影在表现海斯特的坚韧善良方面比原著差远了。商业和思想似乎从来都是跷跷板的两端，我个人认为本片在这两端的平衡上处理的不好。


    影片中还有一个意象分担了红字的重量，那就是一只红色的小鸟。红色的小鸟出现过两次，后来在女奴的描述中又出现过一次。都是在影片的前半部分。第一次是在海斯特劳作时，小红鸟引她看到了牧师裸泳的情景。这无疑是给海斯特心湖投下了一块巨石。按现在的话说，大概是：哎呀妈呀，太震撼了！第二次则是海斯特终于和牧师在一起的时候，小红鸟飞进了海斯特的房子里，女奴看着红鸟忘情地沐浴。第一次海斯特想捕捉红鸟却终没有抓到，第二次红鸟自动飞到她的房间里但最终又飞走。红鸟可以说既是海斯特的媒人又是她和牧师间幸福爱情本身的象征。又因为它是鸟，也象征着海斯特甚至可以说众多妇女的精神解放。说道它的人性解放含义，它在影片中还间接地出现了一次，即海斯特的女奴被骗去审问时，女奴表达出来的。对于这个我将其理解为，人性一旦尝到了解放的滋味，就会给人深刻的影响，再想将其束缚起来，是很难的。个人不太赞成小红鸟的出现，首先，它抢了红字“A”的戏；其次，它的出现有始无终，在影片大团圆结局中也没露个脸，反倒使人觉得它指代不明。
http://xmxxm.blogcn.com/index.shtml

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

话说自由是魔鬼，因而新教徒们肆意地在新大陆踩场，天真的Hester踏足饥饿的陷阱；在这里，Arthur的赤裸会被溪流拥抱；赤鸟在林木中享受无忌的诱惑。因为自由是魔鬼，所以天空与大地做起了爱，所以偷情可以不戴套，鬼祟可以不关门，就连浴室也可以开小洞。不好意思，这里是美洲大陆——自由与梦想的国度。就像Harrier阿姨的大剧透：美女和帅哥就该在一起。

那些怀抱可爱情怀的童鞋们，The Scarlet Letter里头有伟大的爱吧，也有撼人的信念吧，不过在我看来，爱情只是网名，真相却是自由。从开场，Hester就在奋力挣脱律法的约束，试图自个儿开展一番生活，同时也在挣脱邻舍们的目光闲言，挣脱乡俗礼节的规范，似乎凡尘的一切皆成束缚。Hester就不该属于此地，但她是天使还是魔鬼？也许她是魔鬼，因为自由在这里就是魔鬼，那么她的心头镌刻着自由，说不准是从火星跑来的魔鬼。这或许就是为什么作为天使的Arthur终遭迷惑。不过看来，就连Arthur也在追逐自由。即使最后把真相大告天下，难道不是在以死亡作为自由从而逃脱心灵深重的焦灼么？电影里，女人对自由的感知是基于无知，而那男人的自由便是基于畏惧。当忠贞比纵欲更难面对，Hester从容地选择妥协；当负罪变得比自缚更让人悲痛，Arthur的抉择无疑是死亡。这分明不是什么女权主义下的坚韧，也不是责任当前的大无畏精神，只是自由赋予了自由的牢笼，而两名臆想的灵魂在自我设定的阴霾里逃窜罢了。

在基督的历史里，女性头顶丑陋的帽子被指作罪恶的源头。伊甸园里有禁果孕育的自由，但这自由里的魔鬼并非单纯地等同于罪恶。上帝仅告诉了他们自由化身为一道门，然而是哪一道终究还是Hester与Arthur的选择。

很难判定改编的结尾不会涉及到90年代中期好莱坞电影总体偏向的小温情格调。各位耳熟能详的不是Forrest Gump （《阿甘正传》）、The Shawshank Redemption（《肖申克的救赎》）就是Léon（《这个杀手不太冷》），残忍里不乏温存。然而，到底是什么时候有情人终成眷属就意味着一定是大团圆结局？看不到即使是Titanic里爱得生生死死轰轰烈烈的Jack 和Rose到头来也抵不住现实中Revolutionary Road的百般无奈么？相遇后的Hester和Arthur就好似找到了生存与奋斗的理由，然而结局一旦获得了这以爱情代言的自由，谁又能保准偏左的Hester和靠右的Arthur不会出现信仰分歧？有的恋人适合谈情，而有的则该经营家庭。有时候在人怀念过往的同时，表明他并不满足于现状，电影里头Pearl的旁白，我读出了一点这样的意味……由谁来判定究竟是原著还是电影要更悲剧些？谁要来定义罪恶？谁又要来定义自由？

一不小心，我这样的延伸似乎给纯粹的爱情片加上了突兀的讽刺色彩。本片的改编带有矛盾，电影The Scarlet Letter究竟是反宗教或是颂扬宗教，Roland Joffé的作品大概偏向于前者。但毕竟，还是有人会看到看不见的事物。撇去怀疑主义，我还是老实看电影的好……

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

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

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

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

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