發(fā)展中國家的工人假如都像歐美那樣注重生活質(zhì)量注重親情友情，那么勞動力成本一定會猛漲，像巴西南非一樣陷入中等收入陷阱?？墒沁@些發(fā)展中國家的人就活該被犧牲嗎？媽的，除此還真是別無他法。要么犧牲幾代人走向發(fā)達國家，要么困在中等收入之中社會逐漸混亂。

從來都沒有人人平等。人和動物沒什么區(qū)別，社會其實就是金字塔，一切社會革命有哪個真正實現(xiàn)了理想的內(nèi)容？沒有的。因為這些都違反了自然定律。那到底該怎樣活？參考動物世界吧。

｜｜

對話摘錄 “我沒辦法把它組裝好”“我今晚沒空”“我希望兒子明天醒來就能看到它”“...”“和博”“我在工作，我沒空??！”“為什么美國的爸爸就有空？？？”“為什么？因為他們的工作成效爛透了”妻子摔東西。丈夫“巴嘎”和博：“日本工人加班不是為了工資，是為了公司”日本人看到美國老婆對丈夫瞪眼看呆了哈哈哈哈

這部電影拍攝于1986年，距今已有27年歷史。之所以能大浪淘沙般把這部電影挖出來，是因為紐約時報上的一篇文章。文章在講述“雙匯收購史密斯菲爾德”時，擴展到當前中國赴美投資熱，又回憶起80年代的日本赴美投資潮，而Gung Ho這部電影就是當年好萊塢記錄那個年代的代表作之一。 其實，Gung Ho這個英文詞來源于漢語，是“干活”的音譯。清末中國窮苦勞工在美國內(nèi)戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后被擄至美國修筑鐵路，這些勞工的吃苦耐勞精神讓美國人印象深刻，而勞工們經(jīng)常說的“干活”（Gung Ho）一詞就被老美用來形容做事積極高效，后來發(fā)展出引申義狂熱。 不過，Gung Ho這個明顯具有舶來色彩的英文詞顯然與做事積極高效的內(nèi)涵不完全一致，這個詞還包含了個人服從集體，做事整齊劃一的意思。 這部電影取名為Gung Ho，也確實很好地描繪了什么是具有中國特色，特別是日本特色的干活?，F(xiàn)在看來，拍攝質(zhì)量平庸，許多空洞無謂的鏡頭；文化印象刻板，日本人一絲不茍到像機器人一般的工作精神，一起下河洗澡反映出的集體主義；橋段設(shè)計生硬，老婆生孩子也要在工廠加班的夸張情節(jié)。盡管如此，我相信當年美國人就是這么看待一個崛起的日本經(jīng)濟，現(xiàn)在的美國人也許依然這么看待正在崛起的中國經(jīng)濟。 電影中有一段在酒吧的情節(jié)，上班時壓抑的日本人到酒吧就完全變了另一個人，酗酒、喧嘩、狂舞，而老美在酒吧仍局限于休閑社交，狂歡僅限私人家中的派對，而不在公共場合。更有趣的是，日本經(jīng)理酒后吐真言說：“我麻煩大了，生產(chǎn)任務(wù)完不成，我的事業(yè)要毀了?！彼拿绹聦侔参克f：“我的麻煩才大，我跟工人們說產(chǎn)量只要提高就可以加薪，即便完不成預(yù)定的更高目標?！比毡窘?jīng)理聽后狂笑說：“你說得沒錯?。　泵绹?jīng)理一聽樂了，以為日本經(jīng)理同意產(chǎn)量提高就可以加薪，結(jié)果日本經(jīng)理接著幽幽來了一句：“你的麻煩確實比我大，呵呵！”

我小時候在正大綜藝一類的節(jié)目里看到這種日本的膠囊旅館時，就渴望居住其中。

我特別喜歡緊湊、高效的空間。

現(xiàn)在我對膠囊旅館沒有向往了。

畢竟，小時候是不懂 sex 的需求的。

而且，我因為某個經(jīng)歷，還生出了一點幽閉空間恐懼的毛病。

★

《工合》是一部技術(shù)沒有任何毛病的電影。

對了，片名 Gung Ho，是「工合」，不是「干活」。

維基百科上有詞源解釋： //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gung-ho

一部講美日文化沖突的電影，片名用了一個來自中文的詞，隱患就已經(jīng)埋下了。

★

但技術(shù)上真沒毛病。很多細節(jié)甚至是教科書式的。

比如這樣的臺詞：

「喂，是我呀，漢特 · 斯蒂文森……不，是『斯蒂文森』?！憧隙ㄕJ識我啦?！前?，我們一起上過幼兒園的?！皇?，不是我跟你。我是跟你表弟一起上過幼兒園，他睡午覺的時候老是提起你。……沒錯。沒錯。聽我說，我給你打電話的原因是……」……「我可以來找你啊，我現(xiàn)在開車過來的話，只要二十九個小時就可以到你那兒了?！?

（仔細一品，「只要二十九個小時就可以到你那兒了」宜改為「明天下午就能到你那兒了」?！付判r」用的是「細節(jié)數(shù)字」的公式，但細琢磨會顯得假了，因為這個時間的計算是復雜的，且包含途中休息等不確定因素。如果說「明天下午」，路程之遠一樣彰顯，但真實感強了很多。）

★

時過境遷，今天再看這部電影，我們可以很輕松地把中國人代入片中的日本人角色。

畢竟，美國人的工作效率，跟東亞哪一國都沒法比。

片中對日本文化的描寫還是浮于表面的，所以抓不住美日文化沖突的靈魂。

這當然就導致了編劇寫到結(jié)局時的困境。

這樣營造的矛盾沖突，如何靠主角解決？

最后，在一百零七分鐘的正常鋪墊之后，編劇只能讓日本大老板毫無征兆地轉(zhuǎn)變，才能解決問題。

所以毫無力量。

★

其實片中有力量的片段很多。

邁克爾 · 基頓的幾次演講，都是教科書式的臺詞撰寫。起承轉(zhuǎn)合，推進有度。有時欲擒故縱，有時樹上開花，有時順水推舟……不是故作高深的「高智商」戲，不是軟綿綿湊字數(shù)的口水文，不是強行喊口號的打雞血。就是實打?qū)嵉纳钪腔邸?/p>

★

電影嘛，很多時候都是這樣。

技術(shù)上成功了，電影不一定能成功。

但技術(shù)上若不成功，電影幾乎不可能成功。

《工合》至少留下了許多值得后輩研習的東西。

★

P.S. 有個角色姓 Googleman。在1986年的當時，人們對這個名字當然沒有什么特別的感覺。

If you create a user account, you can add your own review of this DVD Released 9-Sep-2003 This review is sponsored by BUY IT Details At A Glance General Extras Category Comedy None Rating Year Of Production 1986 Running Time 107:28 RSDL / Flipper No/No Cast & Crew Start Up Menu Region Coding 4 Directed By Ron Howard Studio Distributor Paramount Home Entertainment Starring Michael Keaton Gedde Watanabe George Wendt Mimi Rogers John Turturro Soh Yamamura Sab Shimono Case ? RPI $24.95 Music Thomas Newman Video Audio Pan & Scan/Full Frame None English Dolby Digital 5.1 (448Kb/s) Widescreen Aspect Ratio 2.05:1 16x9 Enhancement Video Format 576i (PAL) Original Aspect Ratio 2.35:1 Miscellaneous Jacket Pictures No Subtitles None Smoking Yes Annoying Product Placement No Action In or After Credits No NOTE: The Profanity Filter is ON. Turn it off here. Plot Synopsis This film is called Gung Ho in the US, but I guess they thought that title wouldn't be understood elsewhere, so we get it as Working Class Man (yes, the Jimmy Barnes song does appear, under the closing credits). I think that I first saw this film on video, shortly after it had played in the cinemas. The film is set in Hadleyville, which is basically Small Town, USA. The town is dying, because this is the late 1980s, when the USA is going through the most painful part of its transition from industrial to post-industrial society. Hadleyville used to have two large factories, one turning out underwear and one making cars. The underwear factory closed, leaving the town dependent on the car plant as the major employer in the town. Now the car plant has been shut down for months, and the town is fading fast. People are leaving, shops are closing. In a last-ditch effort, they send the factory foreman, Hunt Stevenson (Michael Keaton) to Japan to try and interest Assan Motors in taking over the plant. After a mildly offensive (in today's terms) trip through Japan, which includes him barging into places where he doesn't belong, Hunt returns home, convinced that he has failed. But he hasn't. Assan Motors sends a jet-full of executives, led by Kazihiro-san (Gedde Watanabe, who puts in an excellent performance) to take over the plant. This film is about culture shock, and it runs both ways. The jingoistic Americans see the Japanese as uptight, unreasonable, dictatorial, and strange. The Japanese see the Americans as lazy, egotistical, not team-players, and strange. The process is not helped by Hunt's appointment as employee liaison. Hunt lies to both sides, and does next to nothing in terms of helping them to understand one another — not because he is intending to deceive them, but because he is cowardly, afraid to tell them things they don't want to hear. As matters deteriorate, he comes up with the bright idea of setting a challenge: if the plant can turn out 15,000 cars in one month, the Japanese will raise wages and guarantee full employment (if you're young, you've probably never heard the term "full employment"). Now things get interesting. Unfortunately, Hunt lets the employees think that there's a lesser target for which they'll receive a smaller raise. Add to this a suggestion of nepotism, in that Kazihiro has a second-in-command called Saito (Sab Shimone), who is Kazihiro's boss's nephew. Saito is reporting back to Mr Sakamoto (Soh Yamamura), who is reporting back to his uncle on how things are going. This is Kazihiro's last chance: he failed in his last job, and was sent through a retraining programme for shamed executives. It's amusing to see the portrayed American attitude to a policy of zero defects — something that is now common. I found this film rather funny back in the late 1980s. Now I find it quite dated, and occasionally a bit offensive, but I think that is rampant political correctness at work. If you watch carefully, this film gives as much time to making points about small-town American mentality as to pointing out oddities in Japanese culture. It's given to George Wendt to display the worst intolerance, and it is clear that his behaviour is not approved of by the others. All in all, this is a dated comedy, but still amusing, providing you view it in the context of the culture that produced it. Don't wish to see plot synopses in the future? Change your configuration. Transfer Quality Video This transfer is presented at an aspect ratio of about 2.00:1, 16x9 enhanced. The original theatrical aspect ratio was 2.35:1, shot in Panavision. This is better than pan-and-scan 1.33:1, better than 1.78:1, but still not the original aspect ratio. Still, there are no obvious mis-framings, so it's not too bad. The image is uniformly quite soft. Shadow detail is dreadful — darker shades drop off into black far too quickly. Film grain does not appear to be a big problem, but it could be a contributor to the softness of the transfer. There is no low-level noise. Colour isn't too bad, but comes across as dull and lifeless. There are no colour-related artefacts, but there are some scenes that feature over-hot whites, particularly at the start of the film. There are plenty of small film artefacts: spots, flecks, and chips; but they are generally untroubling. There is only a little aliasing and just hints of moiré, but there are no MPEG artefacts. There are no subtitle tracks. There are some subtitles burned into the image for some of the Japanese dialogue — they are easy to read, and seem well-timed to the dialogue, but without the ability to speak Japanese I cannot assess their accuracy. The disc is single-sided and single layered. That means there is no layer change. Video Ratings Summary Sharpness Shadow Detail Colour Grain/Pixelization Film-To-Video Artefacts Film Artefacts Overall Audio The soundtrack is only provided in English. Strangely, it is Dolby Digital 5.1 at 448 kbps — strangely, because there's no use of the subwoofer (except in the 4th of July fireworks), no significant use of the surrounds, and next to no stereo image. Heck, a Dolby Digital 1.0 soundtrack would have been adequate to convey what we get here. There's a little distortion in one or two places, but it's quite minor. The dialogue is clear and easy to understand. There are no obvious audio sync problems. Thomas Newman has provided an adequate score, although more than a little of it sounds somewhat clichéd. Audio Ratings Summary Dialogue Audio Sync Clicks/Pops/Dropouts Surround Channel Use Subwoofer Overall Extras There are no extras. Not a single one. Menu The menu is static and silent, and features only Play and Scene Selection. Despite the movie being 16x9 enhanced, this menu is not, so it looks too wide on a 16x9 display. R4 vs R1 NOTE: To view non-R4 releases, your equipment needs to be multi-zone compatible and usually also NTSC compatible. The Region 1 version of this movie (released over a year ago) is reported as being 1.78:1 aspect ratio on one site (which is worse than this disc), and 2.10:1 on another (which might be what we have here) — I suspect that the latter is more accurate. The R1 disc has English and French soundtracks, and English subtitles — that's more than the R4 — but it doesn't make enough difference to make me give the win to the R1. Summary A movie that's pretty much past its use-by date, but that still offers a few laughs. The transfer is sub-standard, though. The video quality is poor. The audio quality is adequate. The extras are utterly absent. Ratings (out of 5) Video Audio Extras Plot Overall ?