奧斯卡金像獎(jiǎng) 何為最佳影片？
本帖最后由 gangangwen 于 2014-3-7 03:11 編輯 點(diǎn)擊查看原文Books, arts and culture
書籍，藝術(shù)和文化The Oscars
奧斯卡金像獎(jiǎng)What makes a best picture?
何為最佳影片？Feb 26th 2014, 12:08 by F.S. 1 AT THE first ever Academy Awards ceremony in 1929, there were two prizes up for grabs that equated to "Best Picture". The "Outstanding Picture" award went to "Wings", a first-world-war potboiler and box-office smash, and the award for "Unique and Artistic Production" was won by "Sunrise: a Song of Two Humans", a silent-era melodrama that, though it made far less money than its blockbuster counterpart, was hailed almost instantly as a masterpiece and is considered so to this day.
1929年第一屆奧斯卡金像獎(jiǎng)?lì)C獎(jiǎng)典禮上，有兩座金像獎(jiǎng)都相當(dāng)于現(xiàn)在的“最佳影片獎(jiǎng)。“優(yōu)秀影片獎(jiǎng)”花落一戰(zhàn)體裁影片“翼”（Wings），該片在今天看來(lái)似有些粗糙，卻在當(dāng)時(shí)票房大賣?！蔼?dú)特藝術(shù)獎(jiǎng)”由一部無(wú)聲情節(jié)劇“日出：兩個(gè)人的歌”奪得。這部電影的票房雖然與同期獲獎(jiǎng)大片“翼”相差甚遠(yuǎn)，卻是一部在當(dāng)時(shí)迅速獲得認(rèn)可的大作，至今仍有很高的評(píng)價(jià)。
2 The split was a tacit acknowledgment that it can be difficult, if not impossible, for voters to judge certain genres of film against one another. And yet the very next year the Academy dropped the second category. These days, when the Oscars ceremony broadcasts a montage of "Best Picture" clips, "Sunrise" is controversially excluded.
人們心照不宣地承認(rèn)，如此區(qū)分是因?yàn)橐捌u(píng)委們?cè)u(píng)判出哪些體裁的影片比其他體裁的更好雖然并非不可能，卻還是頗有難度。然而第二年的金像獎(jiǎng)卻不再頒發(fā)“獨(dú)特藝術(shù)獎(jiǎng)”。在現(xiàn)在的奧斯卡頒獎(jiǎng)典禮“最佳影片”剪輯的播放中，“日出”已在爭(zhēng)議聲中被拿掉。
3 The debate persists as to what the Academy should be celebrating. What should a "Best Picture" winner be? Should it be a
low-key film with heart and artistic ambition, or should it a slick, populist crowd-pleaser with big names and an even bigger budget? The choice, of course, is rarely quite so simplistic, but there are undoubtedly genres that dominate (dramas), and others (comedies, science fiction) that have very little chance of winning, however much of a shoo-in they are for a nomination.
這樣的爭(zhēng)議一直持續(xù)著，爭(zhēng)論奧斯卡金像獎(jiǎng)究竟應(yīng)該頒給什么電影?！白罴延捌睉?yīng)該是什么樣的影片？是意在營(yíng)造動(dòng)人藝術(shù)感的深調(diào)影片，還是通俗易懂，滿足大眾口味，大牌云集甚至大筆預(yù)算的電影？要做出選擇自然從非易事，但無(wú)疑有些體裁的影片是獲獎(jiǎng)主力（比如戲?。?，而其他一些體裁（戲劇，科幻小說(shuō)）無(wú)論在提名的時(shí)候呼聲多高，脫穎而出的機(jī)會(huì)都微乎其微。
4 This year's extraordinary line-up of "Best Picture" nominees provides the best example yet of just how difficult it can be to compare films. Not only is the shortlist widely regarded as one of the best in recent history (many critics consider all nine films to be better than last year's winner, "Argo") but each one is representative of a very different genre.
今年史無(wú)前例的的“最佳影片”提名恰恰證明了要評(píng)出獲獎(jiǎng)電影有多難。不僅獲得提名的電影被公認(rèn)為近年來(lái)最優(yōu)秀的影片（很多評(píng)論家都認(rèn)為今年的9部提名影片都比去年的“最佳影片獎(jiǎng)”獲獎(jiǎng)影片“逃離德黑蘭”（Argo）要好），每部影片都是迥異體裁風(fēng)格的代表作。
5 Take the three films leading the race, for instance: "12 Years a Slave", Steve McQueen's deeply moving and at times almost unwatchably brutal depiction of slavery in the South; "Gravity", Alfonso Cuarón's lost-in-space epic, featuring mesmerising cinematography and groundbreaking 3D; and "American Hustle", David O. Russell's comic contender. All three are paragons of their genre.
比如領(lǐng)先的三部電影，“12年為奴”（12 Years a Slave），片中Steve McQueen對(duì)美國(guó)南部殘酷奴隸制度的描述感人至深，有時(shí)幾乎令人不忍直視；Alfonso Cuarón'的“地心引力”（Gravity）運(yùn)用了美輪美奐的攝影技術(shù)以及震撼人心的3D技術(shù)，講述了迷失太空中時(shí)發(fā)生的史詩(shī)般的故事；以及“美國(guó)騙局”（American Hustle）， David O. Russell的喜劇影片競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手。每部都是各自體裁領(lǐng)域的典范之作。
6 So, which should be rewarded? As the first film to focus so fully and unflinchingly on the realities of slavery, "12 Years a Slave" feels too historically significant not to win. Aside from its extraordinary performances, this is landmark cinema,
a fictional reminder of a history that the film world has often ignored.
如此一來(lái)，哪部影片應(yīng)該獲獎(jiǎng)呢？“十二年為奴”如此全面且毫不畏懼的聚焦奴隸制度，從歷史意義上來(lái)講沒(méi)有理由不獲獎(jiǎng)。除了演員精湛的演技外，這也是一部里程碑式的電影，以故事的形式追溯了這段在電影界中常常被忽視的歷史。
7 Dramas dominate the "Best Picture" competition, accounting for more than half of all winners, and it seems almost certain that Mr McQueen's film will win. Certainly the bookmakers think so. But Academy voters will probably feel the need to acknowledge the technological innovation of "Gravity", so Mr Cuarón looks likely to get "Best Director"—a decent consolation prize. Something similar happened last year when Ang Lee won the "Best Director" award for "Life of Pi": the message here is that while the Academy enjoys its luscious visual fantasies, it's the morality tales that get the biggest prize.
戲劇主導(dǎo)著“最佳影片”的角逐，占了所有獲獎(jiǎng)影片的一多半，而且McQueen先生的電影會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)幾乎板上釘釘。出版商們自然也如此認(rèn)為。但評(píng)委們也許會(huì)覺(jué)得有必要承認(rèn)“地心引力”在科技方面的創(chuàng)新，那么如此看來(lái)Cuarón就有可能摘得“最佳導(dǎo)演獎(jiǎng)”—一個(gè)體面的安慰獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)。去年便發(fā)生了類似的事情，李安因“少年派”（Life of Pi）獲得了“最佳導(dǎo)演獎(jiǎng)”：由此可見，盡管評(píng)委會(huì)欣賞這場(chǎng)華麗的視覺(jué)盛宴，贏得大獎(jiǎng)的卻還是有道德意義的故事。
8 So, where does this leave "American Hustle", rich with eccentricity, belly-aching laughter and much-loved performers, but low on edification? Mr Russell's film won "Best Comedy" at the Golden Globes (which still splits its "Best Picture" prizes into "Drama" and "Musical/Comedy") but the odds for it winning the Oscar are poor. Nor are they good for Martin Scorsese's brash, brilliant comedy, "The Wolf of Wall Street".
那么這又將“美國(guó)騙局”置于何地呢？怪人頻出，笑點(diǎn)令人捧腹，演員受到觀眾喜愛，卻不夠有意義？Russell先生的影片在金球獎(jiǎng)（仍將“最佳影片獎(jiǎng)”分“戲劇”和“音樂(lè)/戲劇”體裁頒發(fā)）角逐中獲得“最佳喜劇獎(jiǎng)”，但其獲得奧斯卡獎(jiǎng)的幾率卻不大，Martin Scorsese高調(diào)出彩的喜劇“華爾街之狼”（The Wolf of Wall Street）也不例外。
9 There have been calls in the past to introduce a separate comedy category, similar to the one for animations, because so few comedies have ever won. But this seems unlikely to happen anytime soon, in part because the Academy increased the number of possible "Best Picture" nominees from five to ten just five years ago precisely in order to widen the recognition of different genres. Also some argue that creating a new category—comedy for example—would decrease the likelihood of films in that category winning the main award. Look at what happens to foreign-language films: beyond their own category they win almost nothing.
過(guò)去曾有人提議將喜劇類影片的評(píng)審如動(dòng)畫片一樣分立出來(lái)，因?yàn)闃O少有喜劇能夠獲獎(jiǎng)。但在近期這似乎不可能實(shí)現(xiàn)，部分原因是由于5年前，金像獎(jiǎng)評(píng)委會(huì)剛剛將“最佳影片獎(jiǎng)”的提名影片由5部增加到10部，以拓寬對(duì)不同體裁影片的認(rèn)可度。還有人認(rèn)為設(shè)立一個(gè)新的類別—如喜劇—會(huì)降低該類電影獲得主要獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)的可能性。看看外語(yǔ)片的情況就知道了：除了其本類獎(jiǎng)項(xiàng)，它們幾乎一無(wú)所獲。
10 Plenty more could be said about this year's other nominees, too. For some viewers the bittersweet family love in Alexander Payne's "Nebraska" or the strangely wonderful near-future where humans date operating systems in Spike Jonze's "Her" should be hard to beat. And the three other nominees, "Philomena", "Dallas Buyers Club" and "Captain Phillips", all feature towering performances.
今年其他提名影片的可圈可點(diǎn)之處也有很多。對(duì)一些觀眾而言，無(wú)論是Alexander Payne苦樂(lè)參半愛意融融的家庭片“內(nèi)布拉斯加”（Nebrask），還是 Spike Jonze在“她”（Her）中講述的在不遠(yuǎn)的未來(lái)，人類與操作系統(tǒng)約會(huì)的奇異美好的故事，都是難以匹敵的好作品。其他三部提名影片，“菲洛梅娜”（Philomena），“達(dá)拉斯買家俱樂(lè)部”（Dallas Buyers Club）以及“菲利普船長(zhǎng)”（Captain Phillips）也都是頂級(jí)的電影作品。
11 Like the Winter Olympics, the Oscars is a competition where the best contestants sometimes stumble and miss out, perhaps unfairly, on gold. But the beauty of having so many nominees is that the preamble offers more scope for celebration. And for the viewer, a race where every single contender is so wonderfully distinctive becomes far more exciting to watch.
就像冬季奧運(yùn)會(huì)一樣，在奧斯卡金像獎(jiǎng)的角逐中，最優(yōu)秀的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者有時(shí)也會(huì)馬失前蹄，錯(cuò)失小金人，這或許并不公平。但有如此之多提名影片的好處就是頒獎(jiǎng)典禮開場(chǎng)的節(jié)慶氛圍更加濃烈。對(duì)于觀眾而言，一場(chǎng)每個(gè)參賽者都如此出色的比賽看起來(lái)也更加激動(dòng)人心。
The 86th Academy Awards take place on March 2nd.第86屆奧斯卡頒獎(jiǎng)典禮將于3月2日開幕。
作者: 鄰家王子
時(shí)間: 2014-3-6 19:09
作者: wjl55dl
時(shí)間: 2014-3-8 09:46
學(xué)習(xí)了！！謝謝！??！
作者: renjie
時(shí)間: 2014-3-9 21:03
The split was a tacit acknowledgment that it can be difficult, if not impossible, for voters to judge certain genres of film against one another.
影評(píng)界其實(shí)有這樣一個(gè)默認(rèn)的共識(shí)：將體裁不同的電影放在一起一決高下，這么做雖然可行，但也頗具難度。
