手机2003

        Cell Phone (2003) marks the culmination of the popular cultural preoccupation with infidelity. A famous TV talk show host Yan Shouyi, tries without success to maintain the delicate network of lies and concealments that allow him to have two different mistresses in addition to his estranged wife.
        The story starts in a small town where the town’s first telephone, which signifies the modernization in China, has just been installed. In a small village nearby, a young man Yan Shouyi takes a peasant woman to the town to make a phone call to her husband. About twenty years later, the middle-aged Yan Shouyi has already become a popular TV talk show host in a big city, owning a wife, a nice job, a BMW, and a mistress. His life and work would not have taken this path if he had not been equipped with a cell phone, the latest wireless communication technology. But the Cell Phone also causes the end of his marriage: his wife accidentally answers a phone call from his mistress complaining about his absence from a date.
        After getting a divorce, Yan starts a new relationship with a college teacher, Shen Xue, while still occasionally dating his old mistress, Wu Yue. On the several occasions when his double life is about to be discovered by Shen, Yan deftly covers the truth with lies. His close friend Fei Muo, a university professor and producer for his television show, is also involved in a similar love affair with a graduate student, which is soon discovered by his wife. Eventually, Yan’s infidelity is discovered by Shen who sees a digital picture of Yan and Wu making love, a picture taken by the digital camera built into Wu’s new cell phone. Not only is Yan’s relationship destroyed, his career also ends as Wu threatens to expose their relationship and takes over his position as the talk show host. At the end of the film, throwing his cell phone into fire, Yan swears that he will never again own one. Then after a dip-to-black, the film welcomes a second ending, Yan’s niece, who is also from the same village, becomes a cell phone saleswoman and comes to demonstrate the latest product to his uncle Yan. (Zhang, 135)
        Given the obvious Marxist bent of Cell Phone’s rhetoric and its fable-like narrative of the dangers of commodity fetishism, one might easily conclude the film as criticism of the effects of rapid economic transformation in urban China, and denial of male dominance. However, underneath this reading which is merely based on the resolution provided by the film, we can find both the cultural underpinning and ideological impacts of the film, whether they are conscious directorial decisions or not, are the other way around.
        The film is based on patriarchal and post-socialist assumptions in the first place. The leading character, wealthy, successful TV host Yan Shouyi, is representing the controlling patriarchal order and the ruling class. The young and charming mistress Wu Yue, on the other hand, is a sexual object and an oppressed worker reinforcing and perpetuating an exploitative capitalistic scheme. Yu Wenjuan, the pregnant wife and later the mother of Yan’s only child, is a cheap labor whose family value in undertaking housework and fostering children is totally underestimated and neglected by both the character Yan and the filmmaker Feng. Shen Xue, the successor of Yu and Wu, is a wonderful replacement of the two women, since she functions as both mistress and wife and has the highest total value. Therefore, marriage and divorce follow the rules of product exchange. The values of women as sexual commodities are estimated by their male owner, based on evaluation and grading of their sexual attractiveness and productivity among others.
        In the second place, the narration neglects and degrades women’s family values.
While there are scenes of Yan Shouyi working at the TV station and attending meeting with his colleagues, which confirms his value in production, there is hardly any scene of the women working. In addition, among the values of women, the four structures proposed by Mitchell, sexuality is emphasized against reproduction, and socialization. While there are a lot of scenes of Yan Shouyi flirting and having fun with her young and passionate mistress Wu Yue, there is hardly any scene of him and the older and less attractive wife spending time together. The cinematic representation of the reproduction process of Yan’s first wife is almost absent in the film. Having been pregnant for months, Yu Wenjuan did not inform her husband at all, and Yan is only informed several months after divorce by his ex-brother-in-law that his first wife had already given birth to their baby and needs money from him.
        Hiding behind socialization of children and the new motherhood are deeper oppressions of women. Spending a lot of time and energy nurturing the kid, the woman Yu did not get the compensation in improving her own social status; instead she lost her job in the big city after she went back to her hometown. As the value of socialization of children is often neglected by the society, this part of the plot is also omitted in the film, and is only told through Yan’s narration, serving as an obstacle that hinders and adds drama to Yan’s women pursuing career. As her value looks invisible, Yan replaces his first wife not with his mistress whose value only lies in sexuality, but with a beautiful college professor Shen Xue who seems to be a more serious and proper wife candidate, but also has the sexual disposition of a mistress.
        From Yan’s perspective, all the three women can be valued on a materialistic basis. Women become commodities, and their sexual attractiveness, job, education status are all counted in their exchange value while man is the buyer who has the right of choice because of his economic power and dominance in a patriarchal society.
        Extramarital relationship is a fatal violation of Chinese social norms and a tradition that often punishes the woman for such “immoral transgression” (Cui 181). In Cell Phone, the mistress Wu Yue, became the conflict's cause and the incarnation of immorality instead of the Male character Yan Shouyi. As an advanced prostitute, she would love to sell her body in exchange for money and power. And, ultimately, she threatens to replace Yan Shouyi as a television talk show host by using the photo she took in her cell phone. Thus, Yan Shouyi becomes the victimized character pitied by the audiences instead of the evil woman.
        The resolution of the film, Yan Shouyi’s abandoning of the cell phone, which may seem like a self-criticism, is actually a displacement and denial of the guilt and regret by reprimanding the modern technology and communication device. Cell phone becomes the scapegoat for Yan Shouyi, the hypocritical and immoral character, and therefore the patriarchal and capitalist order behind the story, which was supposedly to be criticized, is actually being extended sympathy.
        Depicted as the direct cause of all the conflicts between the protagonist and the three female characters, cell phone, the symbol of post-socialist modernity seems to be criticized. Rui concludes that Cell Phone addresses the subject through the director’s satirical take on consumerism and his exposure of the moral crises and ethical issues brought by expansion of high technology into our everyday lives (Zhang, 136). However, in the first 90 minutes of the film, a fantasy of the patriarchal and post-socialist (capitalist) utopia was already created for the male audiences: mistress as a symbol and accessory of urban success. Female audiences were also given a utilitarian fantasy integrated with the narcissistic and masochistic visual pleasure: being someone’s mistress is the shortcut to wealth and success. Thus, the film belittles the value of women, and denies women's independent existential meaning.
        In addition to the narrative constructed to propagate the attractive image of the “successful personage” that has represented the “new ideology” of contemporary China, an image that endorses a reality of growing class differences and income disparities, Feng Xiaogang adopts a lot of meta-cinematic elements in Cell Phone to offset the seriousness of his own criticism, a technique abundantly used in his early films. There are ample shots within the TV station, such as the staff operating camera, and outtakes of the TV host Yan who says his lines wrong, that remind the audiences to question the authenticity of their own movie watching experience. There is also a lot of inserting advertisements for cell phones that deconstructs the movie’s final critical stance towards post-socialist modernity. As the audiences identify and follow the male protagonist throughout the film, they highly enjoy and celebrate his material wealth and “romantic affairs” brought about by his professional success in the patriarchal and post-socialist order. In the meantime, they also accept a message that all women, whether they are educated or not, college professor or press editor, wife or mistress, are all annexed to the life of men.
        As McGrath noticed, the basic narrative structure of Cell Phone already had become so common by the end of the 1990s as to constitute a cinematic genre in itself, a genre that offers fable-like narratives of the moral dilemmas confronted by protagonists facing dramatic changes in personal economics as well as libidinal possibilities in the reform era. In such films, a man takes on one or more extramarital lovers after achieving some sort of economic success and social elevation (McGrath, 98). In many cases, a man’s ability to defy his wife is supported by both his male role and some sort of economic success. Even though these films reveal the social issues of the oppression of women, they neither provide a solution nor hold a feministic point of view that attempt to liberate women. Instead, they stand in line with the successful male protagonists, and celebrate the current patriarchal and post-socialist status quo. In a word, these films are women-concerned, but not at all feminist films.
        Supposedly a subgenre of family melodrama that aims to criticize the social immorality and educate the audiences, the actual impact of the “cinema of infidelity” is rather doubtful. An example is the sex diary scandal of Han Feng, the former senior tobacco official, which culminates the “mistress fashion” in 2010. Even more dramatic than Feng’s films, the purported diary, written in graphic detail, includes boasts that Han was enjoying sex romps with many different women while taking bribes and attending banquets. Populated by Internet users, Han’s case is just one in a million of the government officials and the privileged stratum in Mainland China.

說穿了，馮小剛執導的《手機》不過是一部有關外遇和謊言的電影。


筆者本來設想這是一部批判新世代通訊科技－手機的故事，但只要剝下表層的營銷包裝和認清於電影裡刻意營造的有關手機的片面判詞，我們不難發覺本片就探討手機之害這一預設母題完全不夠深度而單純是一個晃子。


本片的主戲在於電視節目名嘴嚴守一如何糾纏於有了自己孩子的前妻文娟、激情外遇武月和理想妻子沈雪三個女人之間的故事。


上面的澄清旨在讓觀眾莫要錯誤對號，而並非把電影判成掛羊頭賣狗肉之流。整個故事其實都繫於手機之上，只是手機的角色並非主題卻是促進劇情的工具。電影的每個轉折，比如是嚴守一與前妻離婚、他與沈雪的最後分別以至奶奶最後過身的姍姍來遲，均得算到手機的頭上；甚至談及電影的另一原素－謊言也是緊密的連袂到手機之上，事關嚴守一於電影裡撒的每一個謊言均是有關手機的，故此，就編劇的完整統一性而言，本片確是一絕。


從上面可見，本片的故事絕不新穎甚至說成過份簡單也未嘗不可，但只要小心留意細部劇情，筆者又發現當中不乏佳句。


比如是嚴守一作為電視節目名嘴本身就是個絕妙設置，隨著劇情的發展，嚴守一主持的節目【有一說一】便正好有對應的清談主題。說謊、心裡有病這兩場便恰到好處地對嚴守一當下的處境作了輕鬆幽默的自嘲。這種以對白闡明母題的手法本來流於單純直接屬低手之作，唯配合起主角職業的預設，又反過來為這種淺白的手法提供了非常合理的解釋，故這種借力打力的編劇技巧就確是值得一讚的地方了。


其他有關嚴守一如何「處心積慮」撒謊的設計也同時是表現馮小剛幽默本色的佳句。另外相加起筆者最欣賞的中國演員－葛優精湛的演出，《手機》絕對是一部國內罕有的具通俗娛樂性的佳作。

圣诞夜，我看了电影《手机》。这是2003年度最佳惊竦片，看完以后教人混身冰凉。以前小刚拍的东西，目的在于娱民。娱民这东西就不能太往深里走，即使不得不太深，也得表现出荒谬和黑色来。小刚潜水一年，最新奉献出来的东西不深不浅，基本上是写实主义，让人看了毛骨悚然。

《手机》这个片子，从头到尾都给人一种相当疲惫的感觉。我唯一能看出来的故事大纲就是一个中年男人怎么样让生活给活活逼崩溃了，这比恐怖片还恐怖，比记录片还真实。在真实生活中，过着和严守一一样生活的人不是太少，而是太多了。这就造成本片不再是搞笑，而是批判现实主义。

批判现实主义具体什么意思我不清楚，今天也是第一次用。在我理解里，那就是讲述一个大家日常生活里都能见到的故事，然后用极其悲惨的命运惩罚主人公，以达到教育人民的目的，类似地狱写真。我不当人民好多年，也不喜欢被教育。

我曾经类似道德偏执狂一般挑剔周围的世界，但是现在我充分理解人性的种种。人类的精神力量在大多数时候都屈从于肉体的需要，并且因此而造成精神上的痛苦。我曾经以为那是个例，现在我才知道这是通解。如果世间真的存在所谓忠贞不渝，那么最合适执行的对象是和尚，而众所周知和尚是不结婚的。即使肉体能保证绝对的循规蹈矩，但是在精神的辅道上永远都塞满了车。

一个所谓幸福的婚姻，我想更多的是习惯。因为这么过和每天系脸刷牙是一样的，也就如此过下去了。另外我推测另外一个很重要的因素是专注之力。把注意力集中在一点上，其余的欲望才会纷纷坠落，而不是纷纷扬起。这又说回去了，最幸福的婚姻需要和尚来完成。

我是被这片子吓到了，不是因为结果，而是因为作用选择都处于两难境地，且无法改变。这片子让人感觉到，生活没有最糟，只有更糟。看完以后，它能使郁闷者更加郁闷，绝望者更加绝望。

这片子一点都不好笑。

为毛要为这一般般的片子写评论呢，因为看了半天影评，发现基本分为两种意见-------男人精神紧张感觉揭了自己的短，说危险；女人面对汹涌现实，要妥协。

对，没错儿，人性是喜新厌旧。人道主义起见，我们表压抑人性，男人要出去找人就去吧，女人要宽容，只要不怕坏家庭安定团结你就去吧。

不知道这些人为毛要结婚。可能很多人只想要个室友，如果室友离开，再找室友麻烦，一样的程序再来一次，累，那干脆就这么将就着吧。所以啊，就有了什么灰色的蓝色的红色的知己之类。

生活能不能简单点儿呢？有病就是把原本简单的弄复杂了。

爱就好好爱，不爱就死开。

看完电影《手机》，突然之间对手机铃声有一种心理障碍。不是自己，因为自己已经几乎二十四小时关机，而是坐车回去的时候每听到别人的手机铃声响起，心里便浮起那句话“做人要厚道”。实在无奈。看着前面旁边的乘客若无其事地打手机或者发短信，心里便想，每一个人的手机里面，有多少多少的秘密？

剧情不想多叙述。网上一找便铺天盖地的是。在网站看到有一句话：“敢带老婆看手机吗”。看到就笑起来。这是什么问题？婚外恋的情节总是引起人们无尽的探索兴趣和闲聊话题。人总是喜新厌旧。用电影里张国立那句标准的四川话来说：“二十多年睡在一张床上，确实有点儿审美疲劳”，最贴切不过。

而片子里张国立和葛优两人各自在对方与情人通话、见面后看似告诫的两句“做人要厚道”恰恰是全剧最大的亮点也是最意味深长的台词。看到冯小刚黑色幽默的精髓。

婚姻就由手机的来电和短信而破裂。看的时候心里在想，做不慎密就不要引火自焚。笑。男人总是不满足。看电影前与鹤鹤聊天时他也说，其实每个男人都会认为一辈子只有一个女人的人生是不完整的，只是现实和想法未必会相同而已。我表示赞同。这也是题外话了。

分析一下三个主要的女人吧。

于文娟。严守一的妻子。她是倔强的，坚强而亦脆弱的。不肯认输亦干脆认输。感觉她傻就傻在看到了武月（范冰冰）发来的消息让严守一晚上睡觉别脱内衣以后依然要亲眼所见那一排齿痕。其实消息本身已经说明问题。她心里也是清楚的。何苦非要看一看炽烈的哪一个印记再把伤口彻底撕裂？但接下来离婚，独自剩下孩子并抚养他的过程印证了她的坚强和倔强。让我欣赏。

沈雪。三个女人里最傻最笨的一个。疑神疑鬼，小心眼儿，不讲理。怎么看也有上海女人的“作”劲，但是傻多了。男人的包要每天翻，手机要查，还要到电信局去检查通话记录。这样的女人，用上海话说就是“拎不清”。任谁都讨厌这种间谍似的人，没事儿都被她折腾出事儿来了。要背着你外头找人，就被你这么整天查的，还能管得住？最后分手是必然的。

武月。青春美貌、前卫风情。三个女人里最聪明的一个。虽然一直不喜欢范冰冰。懂得吸引男人，也懂得抓住自己的利益。她应该是爱过严守一的。在青海看严的节目会暗自流泪。那个镜头拍得很好。但是最终失望心冷。三年多的青春代价，她聪明地找到方式问严守一要回。够绝够狠。让我赞叹。

回到最终，有点女人=恶魔的感觉。但难道“审美疲劳”就真的无法忍受？无法忍受为何结婚？结婚的时候懂得家庭和责任么？不是任何事情都由得人去后悔的。

这一句“做人要厚道”，引申直观开来就联系到“责任”和“良心”。虽然这个社会已经越来越多的人忘记这两个词。

女：“开会呢吧 ？”
男：“对。”
女：“说话不方便吧 ”
男：“啊。”
女：“那我说你听。”
男：“行。”
女：“我想你了。”
男：“噢。”
女：“你想我吗？”
男：“嗯。”
女：“你昨天真坏。”
男：“嗨。”
女：“你亲我一下 ”
男：“嗯，啧。”
女：“那我亲你一下，‘啵’，听见了吗？”
……

http://www.blogcn.com/user5/vivianisvivian/blog/894177.html

    普希金说：“一切过去的，都将成为美好的回忆。”中国人的崇古思想尤为严重，若对现实失望，便会幽幽地叹上一句“人心不古”。例如感情这回事，在社会普遍缺乏忠贞感的年代，人们把希冀的目光投回古代，古典式爱情成了现代人最后一根救命稻草。

    果真如此吗？对于这个问题，《手机》里的费老是这么说的：“古时候好啊，上京赶考，几年不回，回来的时候，你说什么都是成立的。”艳羡之情，溢于言表。当然，费老所憧憬的并非古典忠贞的爱情，而是由于交通和通讯不便所造成的偷情契机。

    中国最忠贞的爱情故事据说来自古时的牛郎和织女。一条大河波浪宽，没有稻花香两岸，牛郎的爱情始于大河，困于大河，也算是因果循环。

    不过上世纪70生人普遍受周星驰解构、颠覆思想的影响，传说里痴情专一的牛郎在他们看来并不是个绝种好男人。首先，牛郎是以一个偷窥者的身份出现，体现了其低劣的道德水准；其次，趁织女洗澡时偷其衣物，这是恋物癖的典型症状；第三，在织女一丝不挂时进行谈判，胁迫织女嫁给自己。这样的行为放到现代就是一个不折不扣的流氓罪，可挪到古代却变成了值得歌颂的爱情故事。所以现代人的爱情观念不一定就是那么低俗和赤裸裸，把一切罪过归结于时代是站不住脚的。

    上世纪70年代生人是目前中国社会的主体，可偏偏处在一个夹缝中的尴尬境地。美国人爱把他们的人群按年龄划分成“迷惘一代”、“垮掉一代”、“嬉皮一代”。在中国，如果说生于60年代是“过于责任”的一代，生于80年代是“物质的一代”——把握物质，并被物质把握。那么处于夹心饼干中间的70年代人则是“孤独自我”的一代，他们处于保守和反叛的交汇处，骨子里的保守和现代反叛的教育糅合形成了独特、矛盾的价值观和爱情观。他们不相信天荒地老，没想过从一而终，却也不怎么游戏爱情，本质上还是渴望传统的情感与生活方式。

    就像夹心饼干最精华的部分在中间一样，或许70年代人对待感情的态度更为理性和客观。格非在小说《初恋》的结尾这样写：“我们信誓旦旦，永不分离；我们未雨绸缪，时刻准备，各奔东西。”细致入微地描绘出70年代人的爱情观。