奧斯卡金像獎 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(shū)籍，藝術(shù)和文化The Oscars
奧斯卡金像獎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頒獎典禮上，有兩座金像獎都相當于現在的“最佳影片獎?！皟?yōu)秀影片獎”花落一戰體裁影片“翼”（Wings），該片在今天看來(lái)似有些粗糙，卻在當時(shí)票房大賣(mài)?！蔼毺厮囆g(shù)獎”由一部無(wú)聲情節劇“日出：兩個(gè)人的歌”奪得。這部電影的票房雖然與同期獲獎大片“翼”相差甚遠，卻是一部在當時(shí)迅速獲得認可的大作，至今仍有很高的評價(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，如此區分是因為要影片評委們評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卻不再頒發(fā)“獨特藝術(shù)獎”。在現在的奧斯卡頒獎典禮“最佳影片”剪輯的播放中，“日出”已在爭議聲中被拿掉。
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.
這樣的爭議一直持續著(zhù)，爭論奧斯卡金像獎究竟應該頒給什么電影?！白罴延捌睉撌鞘裁礃拥挠捌?？是意在營(yíng)造動(dòng)人藝術(shù)感的深調影片，還是通俗易懂，滿(mǎn)足大眾口味，大牌云集甚至大筆預算的電影？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出獲獎電影有多難。不僅獲得提名的電影被公認為近年來(lái)最優(yōu)秀的影片（很多評論家都認為今年的9部提名影片都比去年的“最佳影片獎”獲獎?dòng)捌疤与x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對美國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“美國騙局”（American Hustle）， David O. Russell的喜劇影片競爭對手。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)，哪部影片應該獲獎呢？“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。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.
戲劇主導著(zhù)“最佳影片”的角逐，占了所有獲獎?dòng)捌囊欢喟?，而且McQueen先生的電影會(huì )獲獎幾乎板上釘釘。出版商們自然也如此認為。但評委們也許會(huì )覺(jué)得有必要承認“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“最佳導演獎”—一個(gè)體面的安慰獎項。去年便發(fā)生了類(lèi)似的事情，李安因“少年派”（Life of Pi）獲得了“最佳導演獎”：由此可見(jiàn)，盡管評委會(huì )欣賞這場(chǎng)華麗的視覺(jué)盛宴，贏(yíng)得大獎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“美國騙局”置于何地呢？怪人頻出，笑點(diǎn)令人捧腹，演員受到觀(guān)眾喜愛(ài)，卻不夠有意義？Russell先生的影片在金球獎（仍將“最佳影片獎”分“戲劇”和“音樂(lè )/戲劇”體裁頒發(fā)）角逐中獲得“最佳喜劇獎”，但其獲得奧斯卡獎的幾率卻不大，Martin Scorsese高調出彩的喜劇“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(lèi)影片的評審如動(dòng)畫(huà)片一樣分立出來(lái)，因為極少有喜劇能夠獲獎。但在近期這似乎不可能實(shí)現，部分原因是由于5年前，金像獎評委會(huì )剛剛將“最佳影片獎”的提名影片由5部增加到10部，以拓寬對不同體裁影片的認可度。還有人認為設立一個(gè)新的類(lèi)別—如喜劇—會(huì )降低該類(lèi)電影獲得主要獎項的可能性?？纯赐庹Z(yǔ)片的情況就知道了：除了其本類(lèi)獎項，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。對一些觀(guān)眾而言，無(wú)論是Alexander Payne苦樂(lè )參半愛(ài)意融融的家庭片“內布拉斯加”（Nebrask），還是 Spike Jonze在“她”（Her）中講述的在不遠的未來(lái)，人類(lèi)與操作系統約會(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），“達拉斯買(mǎi)家俱樂(lè )部”（Dallas Buyers Club）以及“菲利普船長(cháng)”（Captain Phillips）也都是頂級的電影作品。
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.
就像冬季奧運會(huì )一樣，在奧斯卡金像獎的角逐中，最優(yōu)秀的競爭者有時(shí)也會(huì )馬失前蹄，錯失小金人，這或許并不公平。但有如此之多提名影片的好處就是頒獎典禮開(kāi)場(chǎng)的節慶氛圍更加濃烈。對于觀(guān)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屆奧斯卡頒獎典禮將于3月2日開(kāi)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.
影評界其實(shí)有這樣一個(gè)默認的共識：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。
