论文部分内容阅读
近年來，美国迪士尼出现了一批用真人电影翻拍原来的动画经典电影的趋势，借助高超精湛的CG技术，让以往只能在动画中呈现的神奇魔幻想像，在真人世界中活灵活现、栩栩如生。真实与虚幻的界限几被模糊。《奇幻森林》票房大卖，《美女与野兽》正在热映。自杭州动漫节连续举办形成相当影响力以来，走在中国动画前列的浙江动画是否可以从以上现象中得到有益的启示？
在动画电影的早期竞争时代，迪士尼与其他动画人截然相反，不是让动画人物来到真实世界搞笑逗乐，而是让真人走进虚幻的动画世界。这一策略不是迪士尼的刻意求新，正相反，它是迪士尼怀着一颗永不泯灭的童心，对于虚幻动画世界的笃信。这让迪士尼很快超越了其他动画影人，雄踞动画王国的第一宝座——相信自己才能成就自身。
1991年出品的迪士尼动画电影《美女与野兽》，在当年就勇夺金球奖最佳音乐喜剧片，并成为奥斯卡历史上唯一一部被提名为最佳影片的动画电影。这个运用现代主义、女性主义对原版民间童话进行颠覆式改写的动画电影，无疑已经成为“美女与野兽”主题的定型言说，也成为迪士尼动画电影二次辉煌以来的巅峰之作。
苦于原创童话的匮乏，或曰想象力的枯竭，近年来迪士尼以真人电影的方式，大规模翻拍自己的动画经典，既有《沉睡魔咒》的大幅度改编，也有忠实于原作的《灰姑娘》《奇幻森林》，于今，更以超豪华的演员阵容，翻拍动画史上的经典之作《美女与野兽》。风头正劲的大牌明星，曾饰演《哈利·波特》系列中赫敏的爱玛·沃森出演Beauty，《唐顿庄园》中的“大表哥”丹·史蒂文斯出演Beast，还有卢克·埃文斯饰演反派加斯顿，伊万·麦格雷戈配音烛台卢米埃尔，伊恩·麦克莱恩配音时钟科格斯沃思、艾玛·汤普森是茶壶太太……光凭这演员表就已吸引足够多的粉丝了，更何况原版动画电影本身就有一批数量惊人的“死忠粉”。
但讨好“原著党”“死忠粉”绝非易事。以水灵灵、活泼泼，然终有瑕疵的真人翻拍一部动画经典的理由何在？留存在动画迷想象中的“人设”岂非更具千人千面的美好？豪掷1.6亿美元巨额投资的真人版《美女与野兽》精心制作，人物形象、服装、化妆、道具都在忠于原作的基础上，进行了大幅的提升。制片人大卫·霍伯曼坦言：“最难的地方在于既还原动画，又能有一定的创新性。有很多东西你在动画中或许省略，但在电影中不能。”这大概是现有技术条件下，以好莱坞工业模式，对真实与虚幻边界的极限探索了吧。当平面二维动画，以真人3D的形式栩栩如生地呈现在全画幅屏幕上，那几乎触手可折的玫瑰花、魔云笼罩下的黑色城堡、幽暗深远的森林小道、簌簌飘落的雪花，与出没其间的群狼，具有极佳的3D景深和立体层次。高超的CG特效，使剧中烛台、座钟、衣柜、茶壶茶杯母子，还有新加入的钢琴角色，拥有精致奢华的家具外表，又以生动的表情、动作展现出情态各异的鲜明性格。Be Our Guest承袭了原版动画中的经典场景，歌舞动作的形式感都一模一样，却比原版场景更为眩目夺人，营造了梦幻一般的效果，达到了视觉想象的极致。结尾时正邪双方的城堡大战，更充满了迪士尼式的卡通幽默。这些比真人主演更出彩的CG角色，模糊了真人电影与动画电影的界限，是否更为符合迪士尼当初的心中壮志：把虚幻的动画世界变成活生生的真实？
对动画原版亦步亦趋，仅在技术与细节上打造恢宏壮丽、浪漫诗意的场景，而在故事内容上，真人版《美女与野兽》未敢大动干戈，仅仅是补充了贝儿母亲的故事，为父女相依的生活提供情感背景；配角跟班乐福对加斯顿的仰慕与依恋也被制片方拿来做宣传的噱头，实际观影中极易被忽略。类似这些对故事细节的补充、丰富，只是辅线成分，远不足以颠覆原著。这是否出于讨好“原著党”，还是受已经高度固化、保守而缺乏创新的好莱坞电影工业所制？但无论如何，片中盛大而炫丽的视觉盛宴还是值得去感受的，至少，我们可忘记真实与虚幻的界限，重新陶醉于这个流传至今的古老童话中。
（本文照片由达飞欴提供）
Fusion of the Real and the Unreal
By Wang Shu
In the early years of Disney， its animated films tell stories about humans， their romance and adventures. It wasn’t a strategy for innovation. It reflected a belief in retelling human stories and making them into fantasies. This strategy boosted Disney to the best maker of animated films.
In 1991， ， an animated musical romantic fantasy drama film produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation and released by Walt Disney Pictures， grabbed Academy awards. It was also the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture. The adaptation of the original fairytale is a masterpiece with touches of modernism and feminism. It received rave reviews from critics and the general public. It is undoubtedly one of the greatest animated films. And it ushered in the second glorified period of Disney films. Nowadays， however， Disney seems to be going in another direction. Some of its animated films now have action-live versions. in 2014 saw much modification. in 2015 basically did not change much from its animated version of 1950. in 2016 was a good remake of the namesake Disney animated movie of 1967. The ambition of the action-live version of the 1991 classic is understandable. The cast boasts big stars. The cast itself can attract a lot of film fans， not to mention the large following of the 1991 original film.
The 160-million-dollar film was an expensive recreation. It wasn’t meant to be an exact reproduction. Some changes had to be introduced as the 2016 version features real people in real life. It is indeed an extravagance of dream colors and objects. Watching the storyline unfolds and spectacular scenes materialize and fade away， one finds it hard to tell where the real ends and where the unreal starts. The demarcation line between the two sides of the fantasy is fuzzy and uncertain. Probably that’s exactly what Disney wanted to accomplish. For some filmgoers， it isn’t as good as the animated version made in 1991. Is it simply because the 2016 version is meant to make the film as authentic as the original one？ Or is it because Hollywood can’t make a breakthrough？ There may not be good answers. Nor is it important to ask questions and try to get answers. One can at least forget about questions and answers and allow the eyes to feast on the extravagant fantasy.
在动画电影的早期竞争时代，迪士尼与其他动画人截然相反，不是让动画人物来到真实世界搞笑逗乐，而是让真人走进虚幻的动画世界。这一策略不是迪士尼的刻意求新，正相反，它是迪士尼怀着一颗永不泯灭的童心，对于虚幻动画世界的笃信。这让迪士尼很快超越了其他动画影人，雄踞动画王国的第一宝座——相信自己才能成就自身。
1991年出品的迪士尼动画电影《美女与野兽》，在当年就勇夺金球奖最佳音乐喜剧片，并成为奥斯卡历史上唯一一部被提名为最佳影片的动画电影。这个运用现代主义、女性主义对原版民间童话进行颠覆式改写的动画电影，无疑已经成为“美女与野兽”主题的定型言说，也成为迪士尼动画电影二次辉煌以来的巅峰之作。
苦于原创童话的匮乏，或曰想象力的枯竭，近年来迪士尼以真人电影的方式，大规模翻拍自己的动画经典，既有《沉睡魔咒》的大幅度改编，也有忠实于原作的《灰姑娘》《奇幻森林》，于今，更以超豪华的演员阵容，翻拍动画史上的经典之作《美女与野兽》。风头正劲的大牌明星，曾饰演《哈利·波特》系列中赫敏的爱玛·沃森出演Beauty，《唐顿庄园》中的“大表哥”丹·史蒂文斯出演Beast，还有卢克·埃文斯饰演反派加斯顿，伊万·麦格雷戈配音烛台卢米埃尔，伊恩·麦克莱恩配音时钟科格斯沃思、艾玛·汤普森是茶壶太太……光凭这演员表就已吸引足够多的粉丝了，更何况原版动画电影本身就有一批数量惊人的“死忠粉”。
但讨好“原著党”“死忠粉”绝非易事。以水灵灵、活泼泼，然终有瑕疵的真人翻拍一部动画经典的理由何在？留存在动画迷想象中的“人设”岂非更具千人千面的美好？豪掷1.6亿美元巨额投资的真人版《美女与野兽》精心制作，人物形象、服装、化妆、道具都在忠于原作的基础上，进行了大幅的提升。制片人大卫·霍伯曼坦言：“最难的地方在于既还原动画，又能有一定的创新性。有很多东西你在动画中或许省略，但在电影中不能。”这大概是现有技术条件下，以好莱坞工业模式，对真实与虚幻边界的极限探索了吧。当平面二维动画，以真人3D的形式栩栩如生地呈现在全画幅屏幕上，那几乎触手可折的玫瑰花、魔云笼罩下的黑色城堡、幽暗深远的森林小道、簌簌飘落的雪花，与出没其间的群狼，具有极佳的3D景深和立体层次。高超的CG特效，使剧中烛台、座钟、衣柜、茶壶茶杯母子，还有新加入的钢琴角色，拥有精致奢华的家具外表，又以生动的表情、动作展现出情态各异的鲜明性格。Be Our Guest承袭了原版动画中的经典场景，歌舞动作的形式感都一模一样，却比原版场景更为眩目夺人，营造了梦幻一般的效果，达到了视觉想象的极致。结尾时正邪双方的城堡大战，更充满了迪士尼式的卡通幽默。这些比真人主演更出彩的CG角色，模糊了真人电影与动画电影的界限，是否更为符合迪士尼当初的心中壮志：把虚幻的动画世界变成活生生的真实？
对动画原版亦步亦趋，仅在技术与细节上打造恢宏壮丽、浪漫诗意的场景，而在故事内容上，真人版《美女与野兽》未敢大动干戈，仅仅是补充了贝儿母亲的故事，为父女相依的生活提供情感背景；配角跟班乐福对加斯顿的仰慕与依恋也被制片方拿来做宣传的噱头，实际观影中极易被忽略。类似这些对故事细节的补充、丰富，只是辅线成分，远不足以颠覆原著。这是否出于讨好“原著党”，还是受已经高度固化、保守而缺乏创新的好莱坞电影工业所制？但无论如何，片中盛大而炫丽的视觉盛宴还是值得去感受的，至少，我们可忘记真实与虚幻的界限，重新陶醉于这个流传至今的古老童话中。
（本文照片由达飞欴提供）
Fusion of the Real and the Unreal
By Wang Shu
In the early years of Disney， its animated films tell stories about humans， their romance and adventures. It wasn’t a strategy for innovation. It reflected a belief in retelling human stories and making them into fantasies. This strategy boosted Disney to the best maker of animated films.
In 1991， ， an animated musical romantic fantasy drama film produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation and released by Walt Disney Pictures， grabbed Academy awards. It was also the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture. The adaptation of the original fairytale is a masterpiece with touches of modernism and feminism. It received rave reviews from critics and the general public. It is undoubtedly one of the greatest animated films. And it ushered in the second glorified period of Disney films. Nowadays， however， Disney seems to be going in another direction. Some of its animated films now have action-live versions. in 2014 saw much modification. in 2015 basically did not change much from its animated version of 1950. in 2016 was a good remake of the namesake Disney animated movie of 1967. The ambition of the action-live version of the 1991 classic is understandable. The cast boasts big stars. The cast itself can attract a lot of film fans， not to mention the large following of the 1991 original film.
The 160-million-dollar film was an expensive recreation. It wasn’t meant to be an exact reproduction. Some changes had to be introduced as the 2016 version features real people in real life. It is indeed an extravagance of dream colors and objects. Watching the storyline unfolds and spectacular scenes materialize and fade away， one finds it hard to tell where the real ends and where the unreal starts. The demarcation line between the two sides of the fantasy is fuzzy and uncertain. Probably that’s exactly what Disney wanted to accomplish. For some filmgoers， it isn’t as good as the animated version made in 1991. Is it simply because the 2016 version is meant to make the film as authentic as the original one？ Or is it because Hollywood can’t make a breakthrough？ There may not be good answers. Nor is it important to ask questions and try to get answers. One can at least forget about questions and answers and allow the eyes to feast on the extravagant fantasy.