這篇影評(píng)可能有劇透

原文作者Ebert團(tuán)隊(duì)中的Sheila O'Malley。

Any detective interviewing a crowd of witnesses knows that every individual will have a different story about what they saw. Can there even be such a thing as "the truth" when it comes to complicated human interactions? This is the concept of "The Argument," directed by Robert Schwartzman, with screenplay by Zac Stanford. What would happen if a group of people attempted a re-enactment of something they all experienced together? Who said what when? Whose memory is the correct one? There are some very funny bits here, but unfortunately the concept takes too long getting off the ground, leaving the first three-quarters of the movie floating in limbo, waiting for it to all make sense.

【任何偵探如果盤問(wèn)一組目擊者，可能都會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)每個(gè)人都會(huì)講一個(gè)不同的故事出來(lái)。當(dāng)涉及到復(fù)雜的人際互動(dòng)時(shí)，“真相”到底是否存在？這就是“The Argument”這部電影的基本概念，由羅伯特-史沃茲曼導(dǎo)演，Zac Stanford編劇。如果一群人試圖重建他們的共同經(jīng)歷，會(huì)發(fā)生什么？誰(shuí)在什么時(shí)候說(shuō)了什么？誰(shuí)的記憶是準(zhǔn)確的？電影中有一些非常有趣的片段，但鋪墊概念用了太長(zhǎng)時(shí)間，使電影前3/4的意義不明，等到最后才會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)其中的道理。】

Jack (Dan Fogler) is a struggling screenwriter, with just one credit to his name, a "cerebral" zombie movie called "The Dead Doth Trod the Hills at Night." He has a love-hate relationship with his girlfriend Lisa's burgeoning acting career. Lisa (Emma Bell) just got the role of Mozart's wife Constance in a production called "Wolfgang" and Jack is proud of her success, but jealous of her flirty connection with her co-star Paul (Tyler James Williams). Jack invites his literary agent Brett (Danny Pudi) and Brett's humorless wife Sarah (Maggie Q) over to celebrate the opening of "Wolfgang." It's already awkward because both Maggie and Brett obviously did not care for the show. What's even more awkward is Lisa, unbeknownst to Jack, invited Paul. Paul surprises Lisa by bringing along his giddily ditzy girlfriend Trina (Cleopatra Coleman). Lisa and Paul are hyped up on their success. Jack seethes. Maggie is bored. Brett is irritated. Trina gets wasted. Jack and Lisa are both so upset over how the night went, they invite everyone back the next night, to re-create things and see where it all went wrong.

【杰克是在職業(yè)生涯中掙扎的一名編劇，目前為止只有一部名為“The Dead Doth Trod the Hills at Night”的大腦僵尸電影；杰克與女友麗莎有著愛(ài)恨交織的一種關(guān)系；麗莎的演藝生涯剛剛起步，剛剛接下了名為“沃爾夫?qū)钡奈枧_(tái)劇中莫扎特妻子Constance這一角色；杰克為麗莎驕傲，但對(duì)她和莫扎特男主演保羅之間的輕浮關(guān)系非常不滿。”沃爾夫?qū)笆籽莸倪@晚，杰克請(qǐng)自己的文學(xué)經(jīng)紀(jì)人Brett和他毫無(wú)幽默感沒(méi)有耐心的女友薩拉（Maggie Q）來(lái)家里為麗莎慶祝。尷尬的是，Brett和薩拉對(duì)”沃爾夫?qū)巴耆珱](méi)興趣。更尷尬的是，麗莎背著杰克偷偷請(qǐng)來(lái)了保羅和他的只會(huì)咯咯傻笑腦子不太夠用的女友Trina。麗莎和保羅飄飄然于演出的成功。兩人公開(kāi)調(diào)情，杰克氣炸了，Maggie Q被無(wú)聊到了，而Brett屢屢被激怒，Trina喝醉。杰克和麗莎對(duì)這一晚都極為不滿意，第二天兩人把各自的好友叫了回來(lái)，試圖重新過(guò)一遍當(dāng)日?qǐng)鼍埃纯吹降啄睦锍隽隋e(cuò)。】

Night after night, the group attempts to re-create the original party. The conceit wears itself out almost instantly, since none of the characters seem particularly alive, nor is it clear why any of them are friends. Nothing important is at stake. The concept of "The Argument" doesn't kick in until the film is almost over, when Jack hires actors to come and "play" all of them in a script he has crafted based on the original night. All of the actors think this is a legitimate audition for a real project. They all take it very seriously. During the first read-through, they take on independent lives of their own, bringing eccentric interpretations to all we have just seen. This section is very clever and legitimately funny (I laughed out loud a couple of times). As the hired actors (Karan Brar, Charlotte McKinney, Nathan Stewart-Jarrett, Marielle Scott and Mark Ryder) read the script, the originals sit there and watch, arguing loudly with Jack's interpretation, or mocking Jack for his clearly biased spin. (Jack casts a hunk to play himself, for example.) This section sparks with controlled chaos. The movie goes off the rails, in the best sense. At one point, the actor playing Jack stops the scene and asks the real Jack, "I'm a little unclear. Is my character an idiot?" When Jack makes the fictional Paul declare, "What I care about most in my life are my abs and my glutes," the real Paul flips out at this mischaracterization.

【夜復(fù)一夜，這一群人不斷重復(fù)那一晚的情境。虛榮心幾乎是立刻就顯露出來(lái)，每個(gè)人都不是十分敏感，也不是很清楚為什么彼此會(huì)成為朋友。沒(méi)有什么危在旦夕，感情不會(huì)破裂。”The Argument“這個(gè)詞直到電影快要結(jié)束時(shí)才出現(xiàn)，杰克自己把最初那晚的情景轉(zhuǎn)化成文本，并請(qǐng)來(lái)幾個(gè)演員分別扮演自己和這群朋友。演員們以為這是為一個(gè)真正的項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行的試演，都非常嚴(yán)肅地對(duì)待試讀，他們把各自的生命體驗(yàn)代入，對(duì)觀眾剛才所看到的一切進(jìn)行了古怪有趣的解讀。這一部分相當(dāng)聰明活潑（我自己笑了幾次）。雇來(lái)的演員們讀劇本時(shí)，原型們坐在一旁觀看，同時(shí)大聲評(píng)價(jià)杰克的解讀，嘲笑他跑偏的地方，比如請(qǐng)了個(gè)英俊的大塊頭（Mark Ryder）演他自己。這一部分火花四射，混亂又有序。劇情逐漸脫軌（往好的方面），有一次，演員杰克問(wèn)真杰克，”我有點(diǎn)不明白，我這個(gè)角色是個(gè)笨蛋嗎？“而當(dāng)真杰克讓演員保羅聲明，”我生命中唯一關(guān)心是，是我的腹肌和臀大肌“時(shí)，真保羅勃然大怒。】

The reality in the fake play is more real than the "reality" of the movie we just saw. Or something like that. Being this high-concept, this surreal, is difficult. You have to lay the ground rules early, to get the audience on the same page, to say: "This is what we will explore here." One thinks of something like "Living in Oblivion," an extended satire and lampoon of the challenges of independent filmmaking. The whole film is an exaggeration, but it's exaggeration in service of extremely targeted points and observations. This is what is not present in "The Argument." What is also not present is perhaps the most obvious: the existential or esoteric "Rashomon"-style questions about truth. "Then why? Why are we here?" says one of the "characters" in Jack's play. It's a good question, and one "The Argument" doesn't really answer. The final sequence of "The Argument" is very funny, but it's too little too late.

【劇中劇似乎比劇更加真實(shí)可信。這種高概念和這種超現(xiàn)實(shí)非常難以達(dá)成。必須在早先立下基本規(guī)則，讓觀眾們與創(chuàng)作者達(dá)成共識(shí)，然后再告訴觀眾：”我們要研究研究這里。“有點(diǎn)像1995年的喜劇電影《開(kāi)麥拉狂想曲》（Living in Oblivion），對(duì)獨(dú)立制片電影所面臨挑戰(zhàn)的深度挖苦和諷刺。整部電影都在夸張，而這種夸張服務(wù)于清楚的目標(biāo)和觀察對(duì)象。這在本片中沒(méi)有表現(xiàn)出來(lái)。另外沒(méi)有表現(xiàn)出來(lái)的還有存在主義的，或是類似羅生門的，關(guān)于真相的深?yuàn)W問(wèn)題。如同杰克的戲劇里一個(gè)演員問(wèn)道，”那么為什么？為什么我們會(huì)在這里？“這是一個(gè)非常不錯(cuò)的問(wèn)題，本片沒(méi)有回答。電影的最后這部分非常有意思，可惜來(lái)得太晚，內(nèi)容占比又太少。】

這部電影在我自己心目中是3~4分之間。

確實(shí)是有點(diǎn)蠢，但卻是蠢萌蠢萌的。其實(shí)我們自己和伴侶吵完架也經(jīng)常在腦海里復(fù)盤，絕大多數(shù)時(shí)候是不會(huì)認(rèn)識(shí)到自己的錯(cuò)誤，經(jīng)常性放大對(duì)方的缺點(diǎn)，而且不只一次會(huì)想到”這句話好為什么當(dāng)時(shí)不這么說(shuō)“，盡管那句話大概率傷害性極大。如果像電影里讓別人重復(fù)自己當(dāng)時(shí)的言行，可能就會(huì)看出自己的愚蠢和自以為是來(lái)。比如麗莎看到賣弄風(fēng)情的角色麗莎，才會(huì)意識(shí)到自己與保羅的舉止在杰克等人眼里是那樣輕浮吧。我倒是覺(jué)得麗莎和保羅之間可能真的沒(méi)什么，如果真的有事情發(fā)生過(guò)，反而會(huì)裝成若無(wú)其事的樣子。作為演員會(huì)掩飾得天衣無(wú)縫。

與上面影評(píng)里不一樣，我看這部電影時(shí)大笑了好多次，不僅僅是最后一部分演員們帶來(lái)自己的詮釋，他們自己復(fù)盤時(shí)也是差錯(cuò)百出，每個(gè)人的記憶都保留對(duì)自己有利的部分。挺諷刺的。

導(dǎo)演Rober Schwartzman的中間名更如雷貫耳一些，是《教父》三部曲導(dǎo)演科波拉的外甥。這部”The Argument“中，有他之前作品《夢(mèng)鄉(xiāng)》和《獨(dú)角獸》的海報(bào)。

虛構(gòu)的電影作品”The Dead Doth Trod the Hills at Night“也有海報(bào)。

Maggie Q的角色看上去冷冷的酷酷的，也有很多搞笑的地方，盡管她有影像記憶（photographic memory），但因?yàn)閷?duì)”沃爾夫?qū)安涣加∠笤谙龋睦镉辛顺梢?jiàn)，某些回憶就如同戴了有色眼鏡一般。對(duì)語(yǔ)言包括肢體語(yǔ)言、酒和食物等細(xì)節(jié)的精準(zhǔn)更顯諷刺。對(duì)不相關(guān)物品的在意似乎多于對(duì)人的關(guān)心。

當(dāng)尼基塔遇上Abed，居然很有喜劇效果。