当我们仰望天空时看见什么？

因为看的是平遥首映场，所以能够看到导演录下的映前视频。 视频里，一张看起来柔软舒适的扶手沙发，一个洁白的看起来很先进的电暖气，一个男人带着口音的英语声音。 情节和环境都有了，只是没有人物。 “你知道的，我们每个人都有隐形的时候，只不过你们刚好遇到了我隐形的时候。”导演的声音回旋在小城之春的影厅里，我在黑暗中听到了观众们的轻笑。 也是第一次在导演的视频里见不到导演呢。 真是个有趣的人。 说回电影吧。 黑色幽默伴着离奇的故事延展，节奏缓慢，但从不缺惊喜的设定与细节的安排。 比如狗狗瓦迪和他朋友们的故事，童话式地在库塔伊西镇这片真实的土地上用狗狗的小脑瓜思考哪里是看球的最佳去处。 而最令我动容的，是瓦迪宁愿没有朋友陪着也要去剧院后面看球，因为这是传统。狗狗都有一个信守的念想，可往往活着的恶人们却都没有。 也许是我的幻觉，我总觉得整个故事的风格与叙述方式非常的法式，我甚至在观影过程中脑子里闪过了《天使爱美丽》的画面。 对我而言，这部电影最大的亮点必然是音乐，没有之一。音乐像是这部影片的船锚，音乐起了，影片的情绪与色彩也就跟着飘起来了。 竖琴的弹拨让灵动奇幻的氛围感包裹着屏幕，随后又注入双簧管作为铺陈，现实的故事就这样在格鲁吉亚缓缓启幕。 最后的最后，旁白说，这就是个离奇的故事，它其实有很多不合理的地方，它离奇它对社会毫无作用，但是在世界上，这样离奇的事情就是每时每刻都在发生。

所以我想，仰望天空时我们到底能看见什么呢，也许就只是天空吧。

看到天空，还不够吗?

本文首发于《电影书写札记》，图文版

作者/ David Ehrlich

翻译/ 鞘翅目

电影真的可以是任何东西，亚历山大·科贝里泽（Alexandre Koberidze）的这部抒情且不可言喻的浪漫之作——《当我们仰望天空时看见什么？》，在其150分钟片长的迤逦中，几乎无时不刻提醒着我们这一点。

开头的一个关键场景因其体现出了这种魔力而引人注目。一个叫乔治（Giorgi Ambroladze）的足球运动员和一个叫丽莎（Ani Karseladze）的知识渊博的年轻药剂师刚刚在格鲁吉亚古城库塔伊西 (Kutaisi) 的里奥尼 (Rioni) 河畔享受了一次极为兰斯莫斯式邂逅（Lanthimos-esque meet-cute）。我们只看到了他们膝盖以下的互动，或在从很远处拍摄的夜间长镜头下，这些人物看起来像黑暗中的光点。但影片中毫无感情的叙述者（由科贝里泽本人配音）向我们确保了他们的共同情感，虽然他们都将得到诅咒，只因真爱永远不会轻易寻得。

监控摄像头、雨水沟和风都发出声音来警告丽莎，第二天早晨她将以不同的身躯醒来，然而，过往汽车的喧嚣马达声使她没有听到最重要的细节：同样的邪恶之眼也将目光投向了乔治，这意味着他也将变成另一个人。这两个可爱的年轻人将如何在他们预定的第二天晚上的约会中认出彼此？他们怎么会知道自己是否坐在未来此生最大的幸福对面，还是会在走过某座连接城市的木板桥时与幸福擦肩？多么可怕的命运啊——它揭示了醒着的生活是一个了无生趣的童话。

当然，第二天早上醒来时的乔治和丽莎由不同的演员扮演（分别是Giorgi Bochorishvili 和Oliko Barbakadze ，都是天生银幕脸，或许好看的邪恶之眼看起来会比其他人更善良），但交换本身并不重要，重要的是《当我们仰望天空时看见什么？》如何为我们呈现这一变换。当老丽莎躺在床上时，科贝里泽的声音指示我们闭上眼睛，直到我们听到睁开眼睛的信号——屏幕上甚至还有一个可爱的小倒计时。

这一镜中没有发生任何实质性的变化，丽莎没有动，但这并不重要。没有突然出现的CG特效或任何形式的低保真处理、冈瑞式的身体互换 (Gondry-esque body swap) 。相反，这10到15秒的时间突然产生了一种独特的电影潜力，它只可感知而不可肉眼所见，正如科贝里泽教会我们如何观看他的阳光诗电影，关于世界的真正魔力如何总是不可见的。

"当我们仰望天空时，我们看见了什么？"听起来像是那种只有评论家才会喜欢的难以捉摸的艺术电影，也可能是评论家拒绝的那种，在特殊节点和影展桂冠的外衣下包裹着廉价多愁善感的娇贵引进片。但事实是，科贝里泽这部俏皮的第二部长片作品不属于上述中的任何一种。主要是因为他对这两种类型都不关心（他的处女作，篇幅更长、形式更不稳定的《夏日不再重来》，更倾向于前一种类型）。它不紧不慢但引人入胜——激动人心又简单直白，并且总是像流经它的河流一样容易跟随。

"当我们仰望天空时，我们看见了什么？”永远不会忘记丽莎和乔治（两人都因为诅咒而被迫离开他们的本职工作，并在市中心找到了离对方更近的低薪工作），但它几乎完全避免了与他们古怪的浪漫喜剧困境相关联的典型起伏。取而代之的是，科贝里泽将他们的处境作为观察库塔伊西 (Kutaisi) 全貌的透镜，从当地的恶作剧者到痴迷足球的本地小孩，甚至该地区被忽视的流浪狗——都有他们自己喜欢的球队。前一分钟，我们关注着丽莎受雇开关冰淇淋机的体育酒吧里的无能老板，他买了一台投影仪来放映世界杯，但不知道如何把它放在远离眩光的地方；下一分钟，我们看着一个打错的球顺着河水漂流而下，科贝里泽的旁白叙述反映了现代世界的外围恐怖，以及在这个充满悲剧的时代，制作这种充满活力的艺术的所谓不负责任。

"当我们仰望天空时，我们看见了什么？”除了时间和城市的隐秘节奏外，它什么也不遵循，而是用它的每一根纤维来倾听。人们走来走去，法拉兹·费沙拉基 (Faraz Fesharaki) 用天鹅绒般柔软的16毫米摄影机镜头放大了一切美妙的事物，当午后的阳光在树木之间划出小宇宙时，电影本身也变得像它的观众一样敏锐有活力。两位纪录片制作人（由导演本人的父母扮演）在为他们关于现代爱情的电影寻找50对不同夫妇进行采访时进进出出，即使他们只计划用其中的6对。

有一次，一个过于急切的选角助理让陌生人假扮情侣，以达到她的选角配额，却没有意识到在镜头前奉献一段假的恋情可能足以让它成为现实。随着时间的推移，我们意识到科贝里泽散漫音调的诗歌围绕着乔治和丽莎，只因为他们的寓言式的错失联系如此完美地体现了我们每天都能在周遭看见，却又花费一生的时间去找寻的那种奇迹。

由于太过分散而无法成为一个爱情故事，由于太过内敛而无法成为一部城市交响乐，由于不够说教而感觉像一部论文电影，《当我们仰望天空时看见什么？》逐渐融合成一种抽象的田园浪漫——它发现了我们周围一切事物边缘的浪漫，并以电影中不能承受的轻盈感将其捕捉下来，我们知道我们永远无法用肉眼看到它。在其他情况下，乔治和丽莎只是两个被迫在他们永远无法离开的城市里做着烂工作的人，但在这里，我们以一种神秘的敬畏感看待他们，而这光凭我们自己是创造不出来的。

科贝里泽能够让你进入一种接受的状态，因为他没有试图教给我们任何我们不知道的东西，也没有用任何可以在灯光亮起时带走的东西来提振我们的心；他兄弟的圣丹斯音乐随意地响起，仿佛不知道该在哪里锦上添花。这也是这部电影轻松魅力的一部分。"当我们仰望天空时，我们看见了什么？”可能需要很大程度的耐心，因为它从不打算以任何形式的震撼回馈观众，但科贝里泽知道它的咒语——同样施于乔治和丽莎的咒语——只会持续同电影一样长，因此它也让我们安心地度过这段甜蜜时光。

原文链接：‘What Do We See When We Look at the Sky?’ Review: A Lyrical Fairy Tale Reminds Us Films Can Be Anything

说实在的 我需要一部这样的作品

假设每一部电影都是有性格的 那对于近期很浮躁的我来说 这部电影就是适合的 是作为平息浮躁的媒介出现的 于我而言 它是那种讲了什么故事不重要 但是安安静静沉浸其中 平和地看完就好的电影

重要的是"感觉" 你在看的过程中感受到了什么

比如我不会去探究瓦尔迪和默茨卡拉两只狗狗相约去看世界杯开幕式这件事情 导演想表达什么 探究现实与奇幻在影片中的关系等等 这些我都不会去做 看到这类情节我丝毫不会怀疑和试图去做出解释 而是认为在导演塑造的影片世界里 在格鲁吉亚的库塔伊西 这件事情就是不突兀的

比如有路人来借鱼线还是什么线 他们玩着线笑的很开心 这份开心感染了男女主 当下的我看到那几张笑脸 即使在屏幕之外也被感染了

比如店老板和男主一起去搬东西的时候对于是否把蓝色的一面放到下面而有了不同的意见 但是彼此平和地沟通 "我会重视你的意见 也许是我错了 但也许是你错了 我们可以一起在看看" 如果世界上的每份沟通都能像这样该多好呢

还有一个情节是 有几个人来买冰淇淋 但是要等上一个小时 但是他们愿意等 当下的我想到的是 我也会愿意等 不仅仅是一句空话 而是在无数次的选择里被证实了的我的选择 在那一刻也意识到了 我想要找的同行的人 也是会选择"愿意等"的那个人 这个决定背后蕴涵了数不清的生活态度和选择 你很难通过众多线索去辨别 但只要把ta置身于这种情形下 ta的选择便会告诉你所有的一切 即使不延伸那么多 为了美食我总是愿意等的 这个美食不仅仅指好吃的食物 还有生活里许许多多美好的得到了/做到了就会让我快乐让我感到值得的事物 因为这一份情绪对于我很重要 不是别的随随便便的替代品可以打发的

中字翻译见推送链接：

//mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vNTgn1hkangju5cgFrpZ0w

【1】

In PingYao International Film Festival, the introduction of your film and some of the behaviors in the film are very interesting. You are always an «absent presence» to remind the audience that although you did not appear, you emphasize it is absolutely your own artistic work. Is this interesting interaction a little joke you made to the audience? Or do you want to remind the audience of some other meanings ?

Now I’m working on a film with an invisible character, a man with no body but with a voice and I try to understand how I shall film him. I intend to film this character exactly the way I film the other ‘visible’ ones but I still don’t know how it will work and if it’s possible so every time I have a possibility to try things out I try to do it. Also I had a feeling not being visible in front of the camera.

【2】

Actually, for the audience, if you don’t know enough about the global history, intellectual history, civilization history, football history, and the common sense of the 20th century, it’s difficult to fully understand some of your ideas in the film. Then after watching the film, we have to go to make up the lesson in order to better understand your meaning. Do you think the audience will have some kind of loss or other feelings because they don’t understand your film?

Myself I’m definitely not an intellectual, I consider most of the people smarter and better educated than I am so I don’t think anyone will have a problem to understand the film I made. Filmmakers thinking they are smarter than the people who will watch their film make mostly terrible films.

There are films made in Hollywood for example, you watch them and you feel insulted because you feel people behind this film consider you as dumb and silly person but in the end it’s always other way around.

【3】

What emotion do you most want to express to the audience? My understanding is the importance of “love”. And you are a great director, even if these details are not familiar to the public , we can still feel your charm as an auteur-director.

I can’t say I know from the beginning exact emotions or ideas I want to share with the film. Of course there are some, but as I have experienced it, sometimes you think that you feel and think one thing but actually it’s completely different – and when you make a film that’s what you learn, you may think you want to make a comedy with fun and happiness but it’s full of sadness or the other way around – so it’s about trust, you have to trust the work you do.

【4】

About cinematography: you use a lot of close shot and close-up in the film, although it looks like a zoom-in to some extent, but it actually gives people a feeling of paying attention to the portrait itself, very close to the person. But the perspective has always been polite and objective. Is this the attitude you maintain in filming? An attitude of keeping a proper distance from the subject.

I think the distance is one of the most important tools while making a film. Let`s say physical distance - however do you go to the object or person you are filming physically is a decision which defines the character of the film, no_t_ only this of course but it makes big difference.

When you show a close up or detail - you go with the camera and near or do you use a lens which allows you to stay bit away, this kind of decision is not only about how sharp or not sharp the background than appears and not only the feeling of being in the scene or being a spectator of the scene — it‘s also always a statement from the filmmakers — and there is no right or wrong, you just have to find your own distance.

【5】

About the experience of watching the film: does the cue tone “close your eyes-3, 2, 1-open your eyes” put the audience into the dream of the movie or in reality?

I have not thought about it this way — but I like it. You close your eyes here and open them somewhere else. Here Leo Messi still has only World Cup Silver — there it‘s Gold, here it’s hard to get your photo developed in Kutaisi — there we have a laboratory to develop 16mm film in the same town..

I have to think more about the concept you propose. For me it was a game, a way to start a game with the audience, to go back to the time when cinema was related to magic and all the spectators felt like children.

【6】-【未回答】

About the symbol of “football”: For Chinese audiences, they do not know much about the history of Georgia and its neighboring countries, but they do know a little about football. In the film, you treat football and football match as a big environment and event concerned by the collective, while emphasizing more on emotions between individuals. Does the «football» in the film have more symbols of the times and group significance?

【7】

In this film, I can find some echoes of familiar texts. For example, the scene where an actor and an actress meet at a crossroads reminds me of poet Wislawa Szymborska’s poems like Love at First sight. A famous Chinese painter once drew a cartoon entitled Walk Left, Walk Right based on this poem.

The whole shot is so beautiful and poetic. In addition, the use of anthropomorphic objects in the film also enriched the color of some «surrealist» style. But it’s worth noting that the film’s tone is both realistic and fantastic. Do you find it’s contradictory? Or are you waiting for the audience to discover your design？

It is interesting that you mention Wislawa Szymborska. In Kutaisi, in the city where we made the film, on Galaktion Tabidze street you will find her poem written on the wall. That’s how I discovered her months before we started to shoot and I think it was important for the film.

Now as you mention her name I understand how things invade you, become part of your life and even part of things you do without you consciously planning it. Where can I find the painting - Walk Left, Walk Right?

My Idea while making the film was to give a space to things happenings, occasions which are considered unusual or impossible nowadays. All the things which seem to be magical are meant to be real – I don’t ask a tree to speak in my film because I want it to be a symbol for something else – it-’s- speaks in the film only because it can speak in our world to – I have never heard it but means nothing.

【8】

Could you explain the meaning of the film’s title? My personal understanding is: the sky is something shared by all mankind, just as «love» is an emotion felt by people all over the world?

Always when Leo Messi scores a goal he looks to the sky, I was always impressed by this gesture and his connection to the world above us. He has his own reasons to look up and so does everyone. It is a universal gesture with very private experience.

For ages people were looking to the sky and seeing different things – now we are given in the school very precise answers about what is up there but my feeling is it will change again.

【9】-（未回答 其实也不用答 完美忽略我的废话问题 默契）

Do you know much about the young directors in China? Which Chinese director’s works do you like best?

【10】

Is there any sequential connection between your new work and your previous works? We are really looking forward to seeing the previous works.

While doing this film I tried to make a distance to the previous one, there is always a danger that you will find a comfortable way of working and start to repeat yourself but I also did not wanted to forbid myself something so I just decided to follow the wishes I had and now I see that there are more similarities between two films than I had planned but I also have no Problem with it – the film is very personal and apparently that is the way I feel in the very moment, I could make it differently but this is more sincere – sincere towards myself.

【11】

It can be inferred from your work that you are familiar with film language, and you have a solid foundation of film history. When I watched it, I felt that you were trying to subvert the entirety of the form and take the film language as the representative of the language system. Can we understand it this way?

I have always loved watching films but I am not a cinephile, I have seen some films but there are films someone who makes films has to have seen and I have not made it yet - I know many people around me who have seen and watch now more than me.

For me filmmaking has become the way of living, that‘s what I do — I make films and I try to understand how it works, I have some tools and some knowledge, some experience but not much of any of it yet - so I make films and through doing it I try to understand it what it really means.

【12】

The film is filled with many local compositions, and a large number of close-up shots and Close shots, which reflects a seemingly dynamic but static beauty. It feels like a return to the montage trend of early film history, and I personally use a word to describe it — 「photo montage」.

This is meant to emphasize the sense of photography, stillness, and immersion of a single frame/single shot, which together coherently make up countless paragraphs of the film. Together with the sound, the unique appearance form of this film is achieved, which will give people a real and cordial feeling of watching the film. Do you intend to return the freedom and randomness of film creation?

I have a feeling that in first few years, when people started to make films in the beginning of the past century everything what can be done with a film was done. The thing is sometimes it‘s hidden, sometimes it’s just a second. It is so concentrated if you don‘t look very very closely it’s impossible to see.

So they did everything - it‘s like they (the early filmmakers) planted a tree and this tree started to grow and it could have had many, hundreds of branches but the Industry started to follow only one branch saying this is cinema and everything else is everything what you want but not cinema, they call it experimental cinema, art house, autore cinema - and by doing it they exclude all the forms which don’t suit the hipe out of the daily life everything what does not have the usual length and does not tell a well understandable story is considerd to be less cinema, to be something strange, some kind of a monster - but we know this kind of mainstream cine is only one small branch of a huge tree, it is not even a big branch and it‘s important to climb all over this tree go also to the top of the tree that’s where you can see from that there are other trees too.

【13】

Would you like to share with the audience some things that impressed you during the filming of this film?

I was doing my previous film almost alone, this one we did in a bigger group and the difference is huge. I love both but before starting this one I had some concerns - regarding the possibility of making something personal while not being alone - apparently it‘s possible.

Not just possible but it can be very beautiful when few people work together, everyone puts his or her personal and private things in the film and in the end it all can be one thing - one film.

【14】

Do you think our way of «close reading» runs counter to your original intention of making this film?

I was touched by the way you thought about the film and I think I have learned some new things about it so - thank you.

翻译、整理于2021/11/22

首发于 奇遇电影 图文版

如果不看导演科贝里泽的前作，或许能够把握住影片的手法，但一定理解不到影片的主题。这部电影非常之“可爱”，一方面是影片的剧情就像是一个古老的童话故事，讲的是一对刚刚一见钟情的恋人因为被恶魔之眼诅咒而被改变了外貌，无法认出彼此并因此饱受磨难的故事，有很多可爱的（童话式的）奇幻元素，导演甚至还有动用了无所不知、自我反射甚至打破第四堵墙的（童话故事式的）旁白叙事人（特别是开场警告女主角诅咒即将发生的段落，以及狗狗们看球的叙事段落）；另一方面则是导演延续了前作中的“有声默片”手法，不少完全是使用默片技巧的段落（大都加上了默片风格的配乐），以及经常通过旁白而不是台词来讲述故事（作用类似默片中的字幕卡）。一方面利用身体局部特写的手法让我明确了他的参考系之一是布列松，另一方面整部影片的气质又很接近奥塔·伊奥塞利阿尼（或许还有一点米哈伊尔·寇巴希泽）的小曲子风格，有很多令人舒适的闲笔。

理解影片的关键，其实在于片中“PartII”的开篇旁白，这个童话故事发生在“世界杯的那个夏天”，但这次世界杯是虚构的，正如这个故事是虚构的一样——在影片中，拥有梅西的阿根廷队，在四分之一决赛踢出了5:1的大胜（这个比分在阿根廷的世界杯比赛中从未发生，是的我连这个都查了），并在决赛中3:1战胜对手，获得冠军。除去导演可能是个阿根廷球迷之外（虽说导演主要居住在德国，很可能灵感来源是2014年世界杯），世界杯所提示的，实际上是他在前作《夏天不再重来》中反复在段落开头旁白中讲述的“发生战争的那个夏天”（指的是2008年俄国入侵格鲁吉亚的南奥塞梯战争）。因此Part II的开场旁白才会讲到“这段时间会被未来的人们认为是一段最暴力的时间，而我们同他们一样，无法理解巨大暴行发生时候人们的日常生活。”对世界杯的记忆，结构性地提示的其实是对战争的记忆，而这种突如其来，没有逻辑的“诅咒”，也是“暴力发生时的日常生活”的前提。

当然，不了解这些背景知识也不妨碍享受这部影片，导演把格鲁吉亚古城库塔伊西的夏日，拍得非常美丽，而且影片还有一个特别迷人的迷影指向，最后是电影拯救了这对命途多舛，明明就在眼前却无法相认的恋人。我其实觉得影片的另一个创意来源是辛波斯卡的《一见钟情》，这个故事有时也会让我想起《向左走向右走》。

还有，闲笔好是好，不过影片还是应该再短一点……

看过《我们仰望天空时看见什么?》大抵会有答案。

电影片名就是一句不折不扣的诗，在长达150分钟的内容里用日常生活的细节来书写一个奇幻诡谲的爱情童话。这不是什么影坛前辈导演的最新力作，而是年轻导演亚历山大·科贝里泽的第二部长片作品，入围了今年柏林电影节竞赛单元，并获得影评人费比西奖。 这位格鲁吉亚导演能否成为一位电影诗人还有待观察，不过整部作品的确与传统的叙事电影有着极大的差别。一开场利用人物身体局部特写的镜头画面来描写一见钟情的男女主角，相当新颖和亮眼。其次，说书人口吻的画外音贯穿全片，承担了一部分的叙事功能，感觉像是观看黑白默片上的字幕卡似的，这种“有声字幕卡”不断提示情节接下来的走向。

▲具有时代氛围感的灯光色彩

此外，导演在色彩打光和配乐方面也下了不少工夫，极力渲染出时代氛围感，令人印象深刻。尤其是片中采用了90年世界杯的主题曲，一下子勾起了遥远的记忆，同时情节中却又不断出现阿根廷球王梅西的名字，故意虚构了一场不存在的球赛，模拟出万人空巷的情景，两个不同年代的氛围交织起来给人一种错乱的历史感。这种混淆时空的手法在德国导演佩措尔德的《过境》里令人惊艳了一把，在此无疑彰显出导演对足球和梅西的钟爱。 也许这些美学手段足以让观众沉醉于这个奇幻故事里，不过，这些手段也在不断弱化叙事，使情节变得愈加抽象化。开头抛出男女主角受诅咒而易容的悬念，这对恋人究竟能如何找到对方延续感情呢？我当时想象出很多种可能性，其戏剧化程度足以变成一部好莱坞爱情喜剧。然而意外地，剧本根本不屑于类似的戏剧化套路，而是极力淡化两人重新面对和相处的过程，画面上尽是城市街景、富有诗意的空镜头，又或者是爱看世界杯的狗狗，用诗意画面取代叙事。

▲中了魔咒的女主角

再加上导演亲身上阵的旁白声音，抹去了不少男女主角之间的对白台词，使人物塑造缺乏力度，像是轻飘飘的纸人，间接令爱情线变得单薄。于是，剧本不得已在中段加入一位导演找寻几对情侣进行创作的情节来补救，这段充满迷影意味的设计最终破除了男女主角身上的诅咒。 影片足以彰显出这位格鲁吉亚新导演鲜明的作者风格，相信也是讨好影评人欢心的原因。不过，他更在意的是足球和这座城市，甚至是电影，而爱情故事仅仅是一种点缀，在宁静的生活长河里偶尔泛起的浪花。