The history of Danish country church architecture is told by showing scenes of how the church was used by the congregation, beginning with the celebration of mass in a small and simple wooden church 800 years ago, and ending with the congregation singing in a village church of to-day. The development and the growth of the pattern of church architecture is shown.
Dreyer in this film shows a series of churches from different periods with churchgoers in period clothing. Each period is separated by a shot of a church bell double-exposed on the sky. Although the film has a vibrant and instructive way of communicating the different epochs and styles to students, it does not exhibit the artistic quality that usually distinguishes a Dreyer film, except perhaps in some of the costumes, which were originally made for Day of Wrath.
The board of Dansk Kulturfilm in autumn 1945 decided that their planned church film would exclusively be about village churches. Dreyer would rework the script that was written by editor and folk high-school principal Bernhard Jensen, aided by a committee of experts consisting of architect H. Lønborg-Jensen and Victor Hermansen, curator at the National Museum of Denmark. Dreyer had a first draft ready in mid-March, entitled Kirken er et gammelt Hus ("The Church Is an Old House"), which was distributed to the members of the committee for their comments.
In the last half of July, Dreyer and Victor Hermansen travelled the country to look at suitable churches. They researched the details and at Dreyer’s request a number of technical changes were made to the churches, including the removal of porcelain holders for electrical wiring in Tveje Merløse Church.
On 4 July, Dreyer went in advance to Ringkøbing. Shooting was set to start a few days later with the arrival of the director of photography, Preben Frank, who had fallen off a ladder and broken his leg, Fortunately, he was ready to cautiously start working again within a few days, with his leg in a cast.
Otherwise, the production went without a glitch. Everywhere, Dreyer said, they were well received at the vicarages and they had no problem getting enough extras. On 1 august, they returned to Copenhagen with almost all their footage in the can. They only needed to film the church in Skelby, where the weather had been against them, plus a Swedish wooden church in Hedared. The economy was distressed so soon after the war, especially when it came to foreign currency, but there were no real wooden churches left in Denmark and building an interior set in the studio would be too expensive.
The finished film was shown for the first time on 24 September 1947 to a small, closed circle, which included the Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs. In December 1947, as was Dansk Kulturfilm’s standard practice, the film was presented to the press, politicians and others on a programme with four other short films.
看到陈赫很恶心，好在戏份少，能看到含男量这么低的电影还是蛮爽的。
但总有个感觉，就是还不够，无论是微妙的氛围，还是情欲，暧昧，偶然，巧合所带来的微妙的心理感受，都差了一些。尽管我还不能说清楚到底差在哪。
第二段居然还有比较
没想到这么好看，幸好收到了票。第一个故事很有趣但算是常见的套路，第二个故事电影里不常见但像是短篇里读到过，第三个故事大惊喜！！！触发了隐藏彩蛋！不枉我下雨天大晚上的跑去新彩云。恳请四十岁左右的女本子们都给我去看！！！就第二次扮演重逢的时候默默流了一个泪…
对《夜以继日》毫无感觉的我，这回终于 get 到了滨口龙介。全靠对白推动，但是剧本非常非常出色，100%按照剧本拍摄毫无即兴成分，却有完全不露痕迹的轻盈灵动，表演又是那么自然流畅。每个故事都很「小」，就像村上所写的「是人生中稍微繞點路的插曲。即使沒有發生那種事，我的人生想必也和此時此刻沒太大差別」的故事。而在这三个小小故事里，对人与人之间关系和情感的描绘异常细腻丰富，洞察力惊人，驾驭节奏行云流水，真是厉害。是那种看起来没费什么力气也没花多少钱好像很容易就能拍出来，但事实上你就是拍不出来的作品。映后看导演访谈，滨口龙介看起来就像个宅男，说话语调平得就像个 AI，简直無法想像他怎么能写出如此女性视角的故事，这大概就是所谓的天赋异禀吧，真让人生气！！！（其实是嫉妒）
冲着和大鹏的《吉祥如意》对比去看的，果然比较下来，贾玲的纯粹和真诚更打动我。
二刷感受到了更多人物丰富性，细节的雕琢还有整个片子中，虽然基本均由对话撑起，一贯的高水平调度与剪辑保证的流畅。
一种短片集的典范，有坚固的理念贯穿在三个故事中。除了延续一贯的对情感关系的去道德化，在形式上更设置了三个功能各异的zoom in，相较洪片里变焦的泛滥，滨口用之以转换时空、强调信息、或是切换情境，重新发掘出这种古老技艺的潜力。同时，为了强调这三个叙事重音，并不用繁复的室内调度，多通过密集的对话做文本翻转和跃迁，演员直视镜头的正反打简直勾魂摄魄。想想滨口在15、16年已经分别捧出两部代表作（《欢乐时光》《天国还很遥远》），分别标志他在长短片领域的两个巅峰，此番出手更是举重若轻，彻底展现出游刃有余的创作活力。43岁的他已经迎来了超新星爆发期。#40th Istanbul Film Festival#
搞事情中：
第一篇那个洪尚秀的影像瞬间，第二篇在教授起身开始自我表达，第三篇里回旋扶梯的来去和类似剧场式的演绎，在人物性格与逻辑的断面，滨口在想象与现实的边界模糊与交互的可能尝试上做层层递进。但非常难得的是，滨口延续从欢乐时光到夜以继日的女性主体的视角，即便这种主体性是歇斯底里的破坏力量，但他的态度始终是一种暧昧的鼓励。丨犹爱第一个，举重若轻，也确实看笑了。“我们在对话中抚慰彼此。”
1.极有韵味的剧作，围绕着种种偶遇、多重的扮演和身份的误识与轮转。2.一如故事一女主所言，他们通过谈话触到了彼此内心的深处，而身体的接触与交合却从未达成，全片亦缺失了造爱场景，甚或连对象都可以是假扮虚设的，通过朗读与录音亦可达到自慰式的高潮。这恰符合拉康的理论：欲望的游移漂浮正因为其追求的是永远失去的目标，而幻想的功能是维持永不能满足的欲望。换句话说，经由缺席，方能抵达更加迷人的、真正的在场。3.三个故事中，女性都是幻想、选择与行动的主体，男性或无踪或成为猎取与戏弄的对象。4.但唯有故事二的法语教授（涩川清彦）极富人格魅力，让办公室大门永远敞开，正直，坦诚，寡欲，有礼有节。5.故事二：在半公共空间朗读情色片段，反引诱；故事一：无缝想象后开启重复叙事；故事三：自动扶梯的上下追赶，将错就错。（9.0/10）
发现了三章都有"名字"引发的"偶然". 果然女性的感情特别细絮.
7/10。滨口龙介构建的现实本身是一个充满欺骗、遗憾的不稳定空间，他将深藏的情愫、古怪的诱惑和不伦的越界，安插于细碎流淌的日常，形成了人物带有内心私密、幽暗的微妙张力，例如《魔法》的芽衣子以假阳具来类比前男友、激怒对方拍碎了身旁的气球，最终在咖啡店经历了修罗场的一次幻想后选择逃离，《开着的门》运用教授办公室开着的门和女学生朗读淫秽书籍的声音，不断将这对师生在道德的界线和欲望的呼唤之间拉扯，欲望泄密多年后重逢的公交车上奈绪对佐佐木的一吻，则呼应了《再来一次》天桥上夏子与绫的拥抱，每一次选择、交谈都以意想不到的转折抵达了情感的起始状态。尽管有不少洪尚秀的视觉要素（原地打转般的场景安排、凝视感的长镜头和推镜头对面部表情的捕捉），还是太依赖狗血情节来吸引观众，没有真正把梦与现实、欲望边界虚化的作者趣味。
女【戏精，阴阳怪气，讽刺性假笑，嘴硬｛我不爱！，袒露占有欲（转移到情敌）｝，试图激怒，我爱你｛吵得像曾经，伤你伤己｝，选！，咱们残缺】
说实话如果没有贾玲对母亲的怀念这块，我会更加讨厌这部强行煽情又无法共情的“电影”。
釜山电影节看的。三个小故事。最喜欢第一个，最不喜欢第三个。
特别喜欢从反转开始到贾玲最后任性的大哭。其实是很私人的电影，贾玲就是任性的想拍一部片子来怀念母亲。没有太多感同身受，但确实为她高兴。
巧遇，巧合与巧思，真是绝妙的故事。一部三幕话剧，最后一幕真是太妙了，虽然结尾走向了鸡汤，但错认与扮演的想法真是天成。每一个故事的结尾都有“是否要追上去”的抉择，有的人追上去了，而有的选择留在原地。很难说哪样做更好或者更对，无非都是偶然。
妈妈不会后悔成为妈妈，不会后悔生了孩子。妈妈不求回报，只求健康快乐就好。
日本洪尚秀，但演员不受限制，篇幅更为短小，也不限于男女之爱，日本的爱情结局也没有那么多撕心裂肺，所以过程就可以很舒适的进行。总之比洪的更透气些、明亮些。
Copyright © 2015-2023 All Rights Reserved
