猜你喜歡
劇照
更新時(shí)間：2023-08-11 01:37
詳細(xì)劇情
哈德維希是一名見(jiàn)習(xí)修女，她的宗教信仰狂熱而且盲目，這使她即便在修道院也顯得格格不入，最終她被逐出修道院，只能重回原來(lái)的世俗生活，她又回到了過(guò)去的身份——一個(gè)外交官的女人，一位優(yōu)雅時(shí)尚的巴黎少女，但是她對(duì)上帝的狂熱依然沒(méi)有消褪，信仰與世俗間的種種沖突使她日益走入絕路
長(zhǎng)篇影評(píng)
1 ) 生硬的美感
杜蒙導(dǎo)演在片中拍攝一種敬畏感，一種人類逐漸失去了的東西，同時(shí)也在探討著“神”的“顯性”與“隱性”。喜歡杜蒙導(dǎo)演冷靜、堅(jiān)硬的語(yǔ)言，有著一種生硬的美感，不需要那些多余的溫軟的照顧，用直接的方式闡釋意義。由此聯(lián)想到了章明導(dǎo)演，同樣喜歡，他是國(guó)內(nèi)少有的具備這種思維以及表達(dá)能力的人。
2 ) Raven in the Rain: A Conversation with Bruno Dumont
In Bruno Dumont's Hadewijch, Céline (Julie Sokolowski, in a compelling first turn) has taken on the name of Hadewijch, the patron saint of the convent where she has been received as novice. At the convent her self-mortification in the name of Christ is disruptive to the rules of the nunnery; her behavior perceived as evidence of vanity. As penance, she is sent back into the world of her former life in hopes that she will gain a clearer understanding of how her spiritual calling might apply to the real world. Reluctant to re-enter the bourgeois world of her Parisian diplomat father, Céline struggles with finding a way to reconcile her passion for God with her social world. She befriends two Muslim brothers Yassine and Nassir who introduce her to the dangers of religious extremism and force her to make a life-determining choice.
Bruno Dumont's Hadewijch boasted its world premiere in the Special Presentations Program at this year's Toronto International, where it was awarded the FIPRESCI Prize. Here at The Auteurs Daily, David Hudson has gathered reviews from the film's screenings at both Toronto and the NYFF.
My thanks to Stephen Lan for facilitating this interview and to Robert Gray for his interpretive assistance.
MICHAEL GUILLéN: Are you, by nature, a religious man? Or more a philosophic one?
BRUNO DUMONT: These days I am very interested in mysticism because it goes way beyond philosophy. Mysticism takes us to areas that are beyond questions of reason, beyond speech, and beyond our comprehension of the world. It takes us to an area that is very close to cinema, and I think that cinema is capable of exploring that area and expressing it. That's why, necessarily, I am attracted to mysticism. At the same time, it's a complex area. I'm not myself religious—I'm not a believer—but, I do believe in grace and the holy and the sacred. I'm interested in them as human values. I place The Bible alongside Shakespeare, for example; not as a religious work, but as a work of art. The Bible has the definite values of a work of art.
GUILLéN: Hadewijch stages a failing of protagonist Céline's father to provide her spiritual solace. It becomes necessary for her to seek it elsewhere. After being sent back to the world by the nuns at the convent, she comes under the influence of Nassir, a devout Muslim who becomes something of a spiritual father to her.
DUMONT: Céline's father is a politician. He's unable to follow her. But I see Nassir as being more Céline's brother in spirit than a spiritual father.
GUILLéN: In the scene where Nassir is counseling Céline, she asks him about innocence and he responds, "Can anyone be innocent in a world where people vote?" I'd never thought of democracy's culpability in quite that way before. I'd never wondered if democracy could afford innocence? Can you speak more to what you mean by Nassir's statement?
DUMONT: I believe in that statement. I agree with it completely. We are all responsible for everything that happens in the world. In our Western democracies, we appear to be responsible, we vote, and we completely don't care. We brush that off. Céline, however, is not like that; she's responsible. Today, our democratic societies are devoid of a sense of responsibility and that's something that has to be developed. That's why—when she goes to the Middle East with Nassir—Céline acknowledges and recognizes her responsibility and guilt.
GUILLéN: She weeps.
DUMONT: [Nods his head yes.]
GUILLéN: One of my favorite characters of Christian literature is Mary Magdalen, whose love for Jesus—and, later, the risen Christ—I've long read as the love of the Soul for Spirit, and the desire of the Soul to be wed to Spirit. Her story exemplifies for me the longing of the mystics to be—almost physically—connected with Spirit. That longing, that desire, that dalliance runs through all of your films to one degree or another; but, never as consciously as we find it here in Hadewijch. The corporeality of your films, the bodies of your actors, have inferred the incorporeal and the spiritual; but, in Hadewijch they are directly referenced.
DUMONT: What you speak of is present in so much of the writings of the mystics—the physical experience of the presence of God. It's what you find in so many accounts of the visions of mystics, this direct contact with God. Hadewijch in her writings also speaks of direct contact with the body of Christ and the pleasure she takes in his body. Mystics are able to experience the sense of infinity through their bodies. They refuse themselves food. They don't allow themselves to sleep. It's through their bodies that they're able to experience the sacred.
GUILLéN: The pleasures of renunciation and abstinence are multifold.
DUMONT: Oui! Abstinence, chastity, yes, very much.
GUILLéN: Why—at this juncture as a filmmaker—have you become specifically intrigued by the mystics? Though, admittedly, even your early films exhibit "the upward glance." At some point your characters always seem to look towards the sky for guidance or solace.
DUMONT: It's something I find enormously interesting. They're visionaries. They have access to the invisible through their gaze on externals—perhaps the sight of a pasture, a winding path, a small river—but, they access the invisible through the visible world. They know how to see. Because they know how to see, they can see what to others is invisible and interior.
GUILLéN: So when they look upwards, they see into the invisible world through the visible world?
DUMONT: Voila! Through their gaze, because of their gaze, because they know how to see, the visible becomes an evocation of the invisible. They are like spectators at movies.
GUILLéN: From a very early age I've felt that the word "through" is one of the
most beautiful words in the human language. How one sees through physical or visible objects into the invisible fascinates me. Scrying. In my training as a Mayanist, I was fond of the Mayan term il bal, which basically means "seeing instrument", an appellation that could be applied to various objects—a rock crystal, water coursing in a stream, a leaf falling from a tree, a cloud, a book, a Mayan stelae—any number of things that can help you see into the invisible world. In your case, I would say your camera lens and the physically-projected films themselves are il bals.
What distinguishes Hadewijch from your earlier films, however, is—as I mentioned earlier—Céline 's consciousness. Though in your earlier films your characters may be visionaries who glimpse into the invisible, they don't seem as conscious; their longing is not as articulated. Would you agree?
DUMONT: Yes, you're absolutely right. In this film the protagonist is conscious for the first time. There is an element of light and clarity that's not in my previous films. Hadewijch/Céline is a lighter person—"light" in the sense of illumination—and her clear gaze is able to transform the world.
GUILLéN: I hope to understand your film on its own terms and not read more into it than you would perhaps want me to; but, I wonder about Céline's statement that "the sweetest thing about love is its violence"? Is that a statement specifically taken from a spiritual text? What were you trying to say by that?
DUMONT: That's a literal quote from Hadewijch's writings.
GUILLéN: It sets up a dissonant tension between love and violence, just as there is a tension between Céline's spiritual quest and her involvement with religious fanaticism. By contrast to the politicized martyrdom of Islamic fanatics, Céline's spiritual quest seems almost anachronistic and out of touch with contemporary events, or at least hazardously susceptible to them. I could fully understand why Yassine said to her—"You're nuts."
DUMONT: I needed Yassine because he's so real. He's the only character who's in touch with reality. I needed him as someone spectators could identify with and also because—through his gaze, through what he says—he puts Céline in a certain position. He sets her up in a certain way and I needed the audience to relate to Céline in a certain way. Yassine is the only person who's "normal" in the film. Everyone else is absolutely crazy.
GUILLéN: [Laughs.] The character of Yassine—as well as the film itself—exhibits more humor than I've seen in your previous work. Yassine was clever. I laughed outloud when Céline clutched him and he said, "You're needing love or something?"
DUMONT: He is very funny.
GUILLéN: Another distinction from your previous work is Hadewijch's aspect ratio. You've set 'Scope aside to create a more contained, intimate frame?
DUMONT: The 1-66 projection ratio is best suited to the subject. When I'm determining a film's technical aspects—when I'm choosing film stock, what microphone I'm going to use, what camera, what camera lenses—it's always in terms of what I'm trying to convey. Here, I was trying to use something as humble and as close to the character as possible. This almost square frame is simple and humble. Cinemascope is far more spectacular and conveys a force that I didn't need in trying to come close to Céline. I chose something much simpler which worked better for the film, I think.
That was the same reason, for example, that I chose to mix the film in mono-sound and not use stereo because the sound stays right in the picture; it doesn't go outside the frame.
GUILLéN: the accordion band, the church ensemble, the sung Muslim prayer, and the use of Bach's "Passion of St. Matthew" as coda. Were you trying to show through such diverse music how it expresses the different voices of Spirit?
DUMONT: Yes. Mystics have always used music—Bach's cappella, for example—to express faith. Through music, one can obtain a glimpse of the hidden side of the soul that otherwise is difficult to express.
* * *
[The following is not for the spoiler-wary!!] I ran out of time before I could ask Dumont the burning question I was hesitant to ask, what actually happened at film's end? Was that scene after the explosion in the Paris subway? Was it a flashback before Céline was sent away from the convent? Was it some kind of dream? Is that withholding of information purposeful? This elision proves provocative and frustrating. At indieWIRE, Michael Koresky writes that "at film's end there remains a baffling opaqueness, both in terms of the director's and the characters' motivations." At Variety, Justin Chang concurs that the Parisian act of terrorism is "quickly called into question by a rain-soaked coda." At Not Coming To A Theatre Near You, Mike D'Angelo muses, "I've read at least three different interpretations of the film's perplexing coda, which makes no logical sense unless you conclude either (a) that it precedes certain other events chronologically (my initial assumption), or (b) that certain other events weren't real."
I have vacillated between these various possibilities and imagine I will do so for some time; but, today—conjuring the image of a raven hunched in the rain—I have decided it is a portent, an omen and that the scene is a flashback. What do you think? ■
Bruno Dumont's Hadewijch boasted its world premiere in the Special Presentations Program at this year's Toronto International, where it was awarded the FIPRESCI Prize. Here at The Auteurs Daily, David Hudson has gathered reviews from the film's screenings at both Toronto and the NYFF.
My thanks to Stephen Lan for facilitating this interview and to Robert Gray for his interpretive assistance.
MICHAEL GUILLéN: Are you, by nature, a religious man? Or more a philosophic one?
BRUNO DUMONT: These days I am very interested in mysticism because it goes way beyond philosophy. Mysticism takes us to areas that are beyond questions of reason, beyond speech, and beyond our comprehension of the world. It takes us to an area that is very close to cinema, and I think that cinema is capable of exploring that area and expressing it. That's why, necessarily, I am attracted to mysticism. At the same time, it's a complex area. I'm not myself religious—I'm not a believer—but, I do believe in grace and the holy and the sacred. I'm interested in them as human values. I place The Bible alongside Shakespeare, for example; not as a religious work, but as a work of art. The Bible has the definite values of a work of art.
GUILLéN: Hadewijch stages a failing of protagonist Céline's father to provide her spiritual solace. It becomes necessary for her to seek it elsewhere. After being sent back to the world by the nuns at the convent, she comes under the influence of Nassir, a devout Muslim who becomes something of a spiritual father to her.
DUMONT: Céline's father is a politician. He's unable to follow her. But I see Nassir as being more Céline's brother in spirit than a spiritual father.
GUILLéN: In the scene where Nassir is counseling Céline, she asks him about innocence and he responds, "Can anyone be innocent in a world where people vote?" I'd never thought of democracy's culpability in quite that way before. I'd never wondered if democracy could afford innocence? Can you speak more to what you mean by Nassir's statement?
DUMONT: I believe in that statement. I agree with it completely. We are all responsible for everything that happens in the world. In our Western democracies, we appear to be responsible, we vote, and we completely don't care. We brush that off. Céline, however, is not like that; she's responsible. Today, our democratic societies are devoid of a sense of responsibility and that's something that has to be developed. That's why—when she goes to the Middle East with Nassir—Céline acknowledges and recognizes her responsibility and guilt.
GUILLéN: She weeps.
DUMONT: [Nods his head yes.]
GUILLéN: One of my favorite characters of Christian literature is Mary Magdalen, whose love for Jesus—and, later, the risen Christ—I've long read as the love of the Soul for Spirit, and the desire of the Soul to be wed to Spirit. Her story exemplifies for me the longing of the mystics to be—almost physically—connected with Spirit. That longing, that desire, that dalliance runs through all of your films to one degree or another; but, never as consciously as we find it here in Hadewijch. The corporeality of your films, the bodies of your actors, have inferred the incorporeal and the spiritual; but, in Hadewijch they are directly referenced.
DUMONT: What you speak of is present in so much of the writings of the mystics—the physical experience of the presence of God. It's what you find in so many accounts of the visions of mystics, this direct contact with God. Hadewijch in her writings also speaks of direct contact with the body of Christ and the pleasure she takes in his body. Mystics are able to experience the sense of infinity through their bodies. They refuse themselves food. They don't allow themselves to sleep. It's through their bodies that they're able to experience the sacred.
GUILLéN: The pleasures of renunciation and abstinence are multifold.
DUMONT: Oui! Abstinence, chastity, yes, very much.
GUILLéN: Why—at this juncture as a filmmaker—have you become specifically intrigued by the mystics? Though, admittedly, even your early films exhibit "the upward glance." At some point your characters always seem to look towards the sky for guidance or solace.
DUMONT: It's something I find enormously interesting. They're visionaries. They have access to the invisible through their gaze on externals—perhaps the sight of a pasture, a winding path, a small river—but, they access the invisible through the visible world. They know how to see. Because they know how to see, they can see what to others is invisible and interior.
GUILLéN: So when they look upwards, they see into the invisible world through the visible world?
DUMONT: Voila! Through their gaze, because of their gaze, because they know how to see, the visible becomes an evocation of the invisible. They are like spectators at movies.
GUILLéN: From a very early age I've felt that the word "through" is one of the
most beautiful words in the human language. How one sees through physical or visible objects into the invisible fascinates me. Scrying. In my training as a Mayanist, I was fond of the Mayan term il bal, which basically means "seeing instrument", an appellation that could be applied to various objects—a rock crystal, water coursing in a stream, a leaf falling from a tree, a cloud, a book, a Mayan stelae—any number of things that can help you see into the invisible world. In your case, I would say your camera lens and the physically-projected films themselves are il bals.
What distinguishes Hadewijch from your earlier films, however, is—as I mentioned earlier—Céline 's consciousness. Though in your earlier films your characters may be visionaries who glimpse into the invisible, they don't seem as conscious; their longing is not as articulated. Would you agree?
DUMONT: Yes, you're absolutely right. In this film the protagonist is conscious for the first time. There is an element of light and clarity that's not in my previous films. Hadewijch/Céline is a lighter person—"light" in the sense of illumination—and her clear gaze is able to transform the world.
GUILLéN: I hope to understand your film on its own terms and not read more into it than you would perhaps want me to; but, I wonder about Céline's statement that "the sweetest thing about love is its violence"? Is that a statement specifically taken from a spiritual text? What were you trying to say by that?
DUMONT: That's a literal quote from Hadewijch's writings.
GUILLéN: It sets up a dissonant tension between love and violence, just as there is a tension between Céline's spiritual quest and her involvement with religious fanaticism. By contrast to the politicized martyrdom of Islamic fanatics, Céline's spiritual quest seems almost anachronistic and out of touch with contemporary events, or at least hazardously susceptible to them. I could fully understand why Yassine said to her—"You're nuts."
DUMONT: I needed Yassine because he's so real. He's the only character who's in touch with reality. I needed him as someone spectators could identify with and also because—through his gaze, through what he says—he puts Céline in a certain position. He sets her up in a certain way and I needed the audience to relate to Céline in a certain way. Yassine is the only person who's "normal" in the film. Everyone else is absolutely crazy.
GUILLéN: [Laughs.] The character of Yassine—as well as the film itself—exhibits more humor than I've seen in your previous work. Yassine was clever. I laughed outloud when Céline clutched him and he said, "You're needing love or something?"
DUMONT: He is very funny.
GUILLéN: Another distinction from your previous work is Hadewijch's aspect ratio. You've set 'Scope aside to create a more contained, intimate frame?
DUMONT: The 1-66 projection ratio is best suited to the subject. When I'm determining a film's technical aspects—when I'm choosing film stock, what microphone I'm going to use, what camera, what camera lenses—it's always in terms of what I'm trying to convey. Here, I was trying to use something as humble and as close to the character as possible. This almost square frame is simple and humble. Cinemascope is far more spectacular and conveys a force that I didn't need in trying to come close to Céline. I chose something much simpler which worked better for the film, I think.
That was the same reason, for example, that I chose to mix the film in mono-sound and not use stereo because the sound stays right in the picture; it doesn't go outside the frame.
GUILLéN: the accordion band, the church ensemble, the sung Muslim prayer, and the use of Bach's "Passion of St. Matthew" as coda. Were you trying to show through such diverse music how it expresses the different voices of Spirit?
DUMONT: Yes. Mystics have always used music—Bach's cappella, for example—to express faith. Through music, one can obtain a glimpse of the hidden side of the soul that otherwise is difficult to express.
* * *
[The following is not for the spoiler-wary!!] I ran out of time before I could ask Dumont the burning question I was hesitant to ask, what actually happened at film's end? Was that scene after the explosion in the Paris subway? Was it a flashback before Céline was sent away from the convent? Was it some kind of dream? Is that withholding of information purposeful? This elision proves provocative and frustrating. At indieWIRE, Michael Koresky writes that "at film's end there remains a baffling opaqueness, both in terms of the director's and the characters' motivations." At Variety, Justin Chang concurs that the Parisian act of terrorism is "quickly called into question by a rain-soaked coda." At Not Coming To A Theatre Near You, Mike D'Angelo muses, "I've read at least three different interpretations of the film's perplexing coda, which makes no logical sense unless you conclude either (a) that it precedes certain other events chronologically (my initial assumption), or (b) that certain other events weren't real."
I have vacillated between these various possibilities and imagine I will do so for some time; but, today—conjuring the image of a raven hunched in the rain—I have decided it is a portent, an omen and that the scene is a flashback. What do you think? ■
3 ) i am not a believer, i am a dis-believer.
i am not a believer, i am a dis-believer.
這部電影不是一部宗教情懷的電影，其實(shí)電影里面充滿了對(duì)宗教的懷疑。如果有人看完電影，被女主角的虔誠(chéng)所感動(dòng)，這里就可以借用一句“少年派”里的他爸爸的臺(tái)詞：“兒子，你從老虎眼睛里看到的人性,不過(guò)是反射出的你的影子”。人們眼里的宗教，有時(shí)候是一種自我投射：仁慈、善良、暴力、血腥。
其實(shí)，亞辛這個(gè)角色才是影片里最正常的一個(gè)人，他保持著現(xiàn)實(shí)世界的氣息，雖然有時(shí)顯得很暴躁，但他哥哥和女主角都走向了一種極端。
影片里的很多元素還是體現(xiàn)了導(dǎo)演的一些常用意象，比如：山丘樹(shù)林的取景、騎摩托飆車的少年、蒼白而不處不在的肉體沖動(dòng)。
一直想知道像杜蒙這樣的導(dǎo)演，拍那么多電影會(huì)不會(huì)感到厭倦，或是越拍越上癮？
這部電影不是一部宗教情懷的電影，其實(shí)電影里面充滿了對(duì)宗教的懷疑。如果有人看完電影，被女主角的虔誠(chéng)所感動(dòng)，這里就可以借用一句“少年派”里的他爸爸的臺(tái)詞：“兒子，你從老虎眼睛里看到的人性,不過(guò)是反射出的你的影子”。人們眼里的宗教，有時(shí)候是一種自我投射：仁慈、善良、暴力、血腥。
其實(shí)，亞辛這個(gè)角色才是影片里最正常的一個(gè)人，他保持著現(xiàn)實(shí)世界的氣息，雖然有時(shí)顯得很暴躁，但他哥哥和女主角都走向了一種極端。
影片里的很多元素還是體現(xiàn)了導(dǎo)演的一些常用意象，比如：山丘樹(shù)林的取景、騎摩托飆車的少年、蒼白而不處不在的肉體沖動(dòng)。
一直想知道像杜蒙這樣的導(dǎo)演，拍那么多電影會(huì)不會(huì)感到厭倦，或是越拍越上癮？
4 ) 53
發(fā)生在巴黎的恐怖襲擊不是已經(jīng)由《哈德維希》預(yù)示出來(lái)了嗎？一個(gè)信仰基督的少女被伊斯蘭教洗腦，然后在一輛地鐵上引爆自殺性爆炸。危害難道僅僅是那些涌入歐洲的難民？或已在歐洲大陸扎根的移民？《哈德維?！氛故玖肆硪环N更加恐怖的潛在危險(xiǎn)——土生土長(zhǎng)的歐洲人。
雖然布魯諾?杜蒙此片的用意是探討信仰的現(xiàn)代形態(tài)，這是男孩的形象展示出來(lái)的：泥瓦匠，救其自溺卻蒙入獄，儼然是基督的現(xiàn)代化身。然而，試圖從中引申出對(duì)宗教恐怖主義的探討不是沒(méi)有意義的。
一方面是發(fā)生在這片大陸上的信仰缺失，使得人的行為帶上了更大的冒險(xiǎn)性。片中的女孩因?yàn)樵诨浇绦叛鲋袑ふ也坏浇K極的意義（那是已經(jīng)變質(zhì)的替代品），從而被男孩蠱惑入伊斯蘭的信仰團(tuán)伙（作為一種更為激進(jìn)的信仰形態(tài)），走上了恐怖主義行徑。
我們是否需要去考察伊斯蘭極端信仰在歐洲大陸上的蔓延。此次巴黎的恐怖襲擊已經(jīng)證明了恐怖主義扎根于歐洲土壤的現(xiàn)狀。據(jù)調(diào)查結(jié)果顯示，實(shí)施爆炸行為的數(shù)名恐怖分子系巴黎土生土長(zhǎng)的移民后代，而不是據(jù)很多人推測(cè)的隨著敘利亞難民而涌入歐洲的極端分子。說(shuō)明恐怖主義已經(jīng)內(nèi)化，而緊接著的下一步便是對(duì)歐洲人的馴化。
我們?nèi)绾畏乐闺娪爸锌植佬袕降陌l(fā)生？布魯諾?杜蒙沒(méi)有給我們答案，這是歐洲人自己，以及作為命運(yùn)共同體的我們需要思考的。
雖然布魯諾?杜蒙此片的用意是探討信仰的現(xiàn)代形態(tài)，這是男孩的形象展示出來(lái)的：泥瓦匠，救其自溺卻蒙入獄，儼然是基督的現(xiàn)代化身。然而，試圖從中引申出對(duì)宗教恐怖主義的探討不是沒(méi)有意義的。
一方面是發(fā)生在這片大陸上的信仰缺失，使得人的行為帶上了更大的冒險(xiǎn)性。片中的女孩因?yàn)樵诨浇绦叛鲋袑ふ也坏浇K極的意義（那是已經(jīng)變質(zhì)的替代品），從而被男孩蠱惑入伊斯蘭的信仰團(tuán)伙（作為一種更為激進(jìn)的信仰形態(tài)），走上了恐怖主義行徑。
我們是否需要去考察伊斯蘭極端信仰在歐洲大陸上的蔓延。此次巴黎的恐怖襲擊已經(jīng)證明了恐怖主義扎根于歐洲土壤的現(xiàn)狀。據(jù)調(diào)查結(jié)果顯示，實(shí)施爆炸行為的數(shù)名恐怖分子系巴黎土生土長(zhǎng)的移民后代，而不是據(jù)很多人推測(cè)的隨著敘利亞難民而涌入歐洲的極端分子。說(shuō)明恐怖主義已經(jīng)內(nèi)化，而緊接著的下一步便是對(duì)歐洲人的馴化。
我們?nèi)绾畏乐闺娪爸锌植佬袕降陌l(fā)生？布魯諾?杜蒙沒(méi)有給我們答案，這是歐洲人自己，以及作為命運(yùn)共同體的我們需要思考的。
5 ) 《哈德維?！?/h4>Céline就是一塊信仰的試金石，對(duì)于宗教人士和普通民眾她都是格格不入的。
布魯諾·杜蒙 Bruno Dumont希望用一個(gè)極端特例去探討宗教與信仰的關(guān)系。
那個(gè)瘦骨嶙峋的男性角色的設(shè)置非常有意思，長(zhǎng)相與身材都與世人所奉耶穌形象接近，而且他被設(shè)置成一名貌似被誣陷的罪犯。
6 ) 懷念上帝
主人公深深懷念她遠(yuǎn)去的愛(ài)人耶穌，絕望中甚至追隨極端分子的腳步，這并非出于政治理念或宗教信仰，而是一個(gè)絕望女人對(duì)愛(ài)情最后一次無(wú)奈的挽回，她孤注一擲，可愛(ài)人仍漸行漸遠(yuǎn)。她獻(xiàn)出生命，上帝卻在意外中降臨——在片尾男子的眼睛里。
布魯諾·杜蒙 Bruno Dumont希望用一個(gè)極端特例去探討宗教與信仰的關(guān)系。
那個(gè)瘦骨嶙峋的男性角色的設(shè)置非常有意思，長(zhǎng)相與身材都與世人所奉耶穌形象接近，而且他被設(shè)置成一名貌似被誣陷的罪犯。
宗教題材，明顯各種沒(méi)有處理好，女主的情緒經(jīng)常寫的讓我無(wú)法理解。很多地方都過(guò)于假了，就像結(jié)尾的那一坨爆炸假煙。最后那段念的過(guò)了吧，哭這么傷心，但演技真的讓人捉急。整部片不成立的地方太多。Hadewijch d'Anvers的故事還有詩(shī)歌我都不熟，2者連接部分無(wú)法多言。
看這種深?yuàn)W且宗教的片子，簡(jiǎn)直在折磨自己，還是過(guò)兩年再看。
早知道又是這樣一個(gè)人的糾結(jié)就表看了
女主太有意大利文藝復(fù)興時(shí)期油畫人物的范兒啦~~~圓潤(rùn)還是圓潤(rùn)，沒(méi)戴發(fā)帶的時(shí)候很美很美~~~寄托懵懂的世界觀于對(duì)宗教的狂熱與執(zhí)念，如果夠聰明，本身就是危險(xiǎn)的選擇。這對(duì)平庸的人是慰藉，隨遇而安，隨心所愿，隨隨便便~~~~一輩子就那么過(guò)了。
第72分鐘，云層褪去，光灑下來(lái)照到Hadewijch與穆斯林的臉上，隨后她便皈依到伊斯蘭教。如此的“見(jiàn)光”時(shí)刻在此前所有Dumont電影里都存在，成為全片為數(shù)不多的情節(jié)，然而攝影機(jī)又必然繼續(xù)捕捉到云層聚集、光再度消失，見(jiàn)光不過(guò)是一場(chǎng)幻覺(jué)。
如同王宮般的家，誓愿侍奉耶穌的少女，阿拉伯裔的少年、伊斯蘭信仰及其斗爭(zhēng)。信仰（宗教）、族裔、暴力-死亡-愛(ài)。尋找逝去神之愛(ài)的女孩。
影像似乎難以準(zhǔn)確傳達(dá)導(dǎo)演意圖及宗教情懷。但，最后時(shí)刻女主角的好戲相當(dāng)精彩。設(shè)置的倒敘有點(diǎn)考驗(yàn)觀影者的投入程度。
節(jié)制與錯(cuò)覺(jué)。隱忍內(nèi)斂的拍攝手法凸顯作者功底 處處看得出布列松的影子，然而后段刻意創(chuàng)造的錯(cuò)覺(jué)卻讓人摸不著頭腦，結(jié)尾的拯救一場(chǎng)也顯略敷衍
note：很喜歡Yassine那頭安全帽，大大圓圓的看起來(lái)特別扎眼，好像不管他做了什麼粗野的舉動(dòng)，都顯得乖順和無(wú)罪。
其實(shí)也許冥冥之中神還是存在的吧。主線之一要說(shuō)的是一種愛(ài)，但是你感受不到的時(shí)候卻又十分不確定，主線之二就是青春期萌動(dòng)少年的困惑與煩惱
和小神說(shuō)的一樣，馬馬虎虎，不看也罷
哈德維?！と論碛兄环N中世紀(jì)的圣女激情。與其說(shuō)是信仰，不如說(shuō)將耶穌變成她“愛(ài)欲”的對(duì)象，她的虔誠(chéng)是對(duì)于信仰的終極褻瀆。在《哈德維?！分?，不是信仰和極端主義，宗教和世俗，異教之間的沖突，以及歐洲的難民危機(jī)被杜蒙形而上化為幾種神學(xué)的差異：上帝來(lái)源于愛(ài)欲，世間生機(jī)的恩典，或是（極端的）行動(dòng)，最終響應(yīng)為一場(chǎng)突如其來(lái)的特效爆炸，直接炸毀了杜蒙式的空鏡頭，以及她的伊斯蘭信仰- 愛(ài)情。哈德維希/塞琳在影片中進(jìn)行著一個(gè)環(huán)形敘事，也是原罪之環(huán)。而在這個(gè)神圣的，關(guān)于悔改的祈禱鏡頭之中，一個(gè)腳手架出現(xiàn)在了右側(cè)，作為杜蒙對(duì)于信仰本身的反論：結(jié)構(gòu)/建筑的當(dāng)代性隱喻讓信仰激情不可能或無(wú)法在當(dāng)下成立。正因如此，《哈》才不是一部福音電影，而上帝的拯救不如一個(gè)裸體的怪人，而他的故事則在杜蒙接下來(lái)的影片得到延續(xù)。
到底是要宣揚(yáng)什么烏七八糟的東西？反宗教者看完表示反感，即便電影本身還不錯(cuò)。還有女主角的頭發(fā)老讓人覺(jué)得有一禮拜沒(méi)洗了。
無(wú)字幕，按照標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，我卻看懂了。三次跑入基督墓地，平靜、哭泣、嚎啕。信奉基督的女子轉(zhuǎn)而進(jìn)入了一會(huì)兒穆斯林的世界，宗教的迷茫，褻瀆的負(fù)罪感，道德的快速轉(zhuǎn)換，她無(wú)力招架。結(jié)局：入水自殺；上帝化身成男子，將她救起；她哭了。不是布列松附體，也不是冰冷的無(wú)法觀看，有些戲十分精彩。為杜蒙正名。
鏡頭好美，姑娘好白，信仰好虔誠(chéng)，溝通好障礙；大愛(ài)此片結(jié)尾，希望之光一閃而逝；小小缺憾，基督少女的心路轉(zhuǎn)變，有點(diǎn)突然。一念之差，造業(yè)無(wú)限。
冬天來(lái)了，上帝在籠子里，未知的母親，我沒(méi)有任何悲傷的理由。講了一個(gè)學(xué)神學(xué)的平胸且從不穿內(nèi)衣的青春期琺國(guó)少女和看演出時(shí)候要泡自己的阿拉伯少男由于信仰種族遭遇不同產(chǎn)生的對(duì)愛(ài)情生活和宗教的彷徨是嗎，是我就看懂了，不是我就摔了去睡覺(jué)
只有杜蒙能如此清澈地將兩個(gè)看似如此觸不可及的對(duì)立面并置在一起。
主人公深深懷念她遠(yuǎn)去的愛(ài)人耶穌，絕望中甚至追隨極端分子的腳步，這并非因?yàn)檎卫砟睿且粋€(gè)絕望女人對(duì)愛(ài)的最后一次無(wú)奈的挽回，她孤注一擲，可愛(ài)人仍漸行漸遠(yuǎn)。她獻(xiàn)出生命，上帝卻在意外中降臨——在片尾男子的眼睛里。
這是杜蒙頭一回用配樂(lè)？導(dǎo)演訪談里兩個(gè)點(diǎn)很有趣：1、“別跟我談布列松”，2、人們還在糾結(jié)911。好吧盡管結(jié)尾簡(jiǎn)直就是[穆謝特]翻版好么（再加上巴赫……）。杜蒙以前的片兒很肉，幾年不拍片忽然皈依了似得這么道學(xué)……視聽(tīng)上多用兩極鏡頭（大全景切長(zhǎng)焦近景），而且機(jī)位擺得特有個(gè)性。
f235b4547 字幕：http://shooter.cn/xml/sub/160/160122.xml 哦宗教！無(wú)共鳴...