Roger 兴发Ebert Home

三小时早午餐的朋友:Greta Gerwig的分手

"Frances Ha"

Frances,Greta Gerwig在她共同写作的电影中的二十件事上是二十多岁的Noah Baumbach.,“Frances Ha.,“离开地方有麻烦。她会肯定地告诉你,有一系列羞怯的侮辱和风骚的魅力。她滞后并花了她的时间,从未度过了空间或心灵的空间或框架,或者甚至是她的生活中的部分别人认为她应该很好地离开了她的年龄。二十七虽然老了,但她的室友Benji一点。

弗朗西斯也难以离开与索菲的友谊(Mickey Sumner)曾经是并进入目前的地方,因为索菲与男友的关系变得更加严重。A circuitous, but no less inevitable dissolution of Frances and Sophie’s relationship is captured between the thumb and forefinger of Noah Baumbach and Greta Gerwig’s perceptive screenwriting, from the last good day to a regrettable night drunk on fancy vodka, facing one’s mirror with one’s foot on the ground to stop the room from spinning. Living situations change. Hangouts are shorter. And Frances is forced to transmogrify into a third wheel, during which there is an awkward scrimmage for power.

并不是弗朗西斯没有成长的事情,对抗的一些责任。但是,“弗朗西斯哈”的敏锐性也是如此,索菲困扰着离开地方的假设,或者相反,这么擅长这样做,并假设这种计划出的生活框架不仅对每个人都有意义,而且应该是通缉被大家。男朋友,订婚,远离城市,逐渐安定下来。不是那个有什么问题。但也没有任何内容right, or at least better, about it either.

Greta Gerwig是as much a great chronicler of the friend romance as she is of the friend breakup, those tedious events that, in most film and television are depicted as cataclysmic events that result in crosstalk, split-screen, and Andy Cohen playing catty referee. (Okay, maybe I’ve been watching a lot of "Real Housewives.") But in “Frances Ha,” “Mistress America,“ 和 ”夫人鸟,“他们是,没有失去个人情感重量,这更令人不舒服的事实。

“Frances Ha”的特定形象作为一个有用的模板:在被告知她不会在假日季节的剩余时间后最终离开她的梳妆室后,她与索菲和她的男朋友补丁一起举行帕特里克·赫森)。他们的计划晚会在一起减少到“快速饮酒”,因为假期访问迎接男朋友的父母。随着两个人兴起他们的计划,他们向宠物名称和宝宝谈话,最令人厌恶的事情。弗朗西斯试图扮演。由于补丁扼杀了索菲的包装拖延,索菲转向弗朗西斯,一个吹嘘,不再寻求朋友在他们亲密的批准。Frances recognizes this as a kind of grotesque performance, her mouth hangs a little open, knowingly, yet there’s a blinkered confusion at the bizarreness of being expected to participate in this little act of coupledom which should have only been meant for Sophie and Patch in the first place. For all of her future work in her self-actualization and whatever perceived unfairness might be tingeing the relationship between her and Sophie at this time, she is at least aware of the staginess and ego of being expected to like, or even want, what Sophie has. At this point, there’s no reason to tell Sophie about how Frances is struggling, lest she be judged. It’s the first bad sign of the night. But Gerwig’s embodiment of a near out-of-body experience of personal cringe is visceral, more so than the actual verbal argument she and Sophie get into at the bar bathroom the three of them end up going to.

What stays with one after Frances and Sophie breakup is not the intensity of the bathroom argument (the roar of “Don’t treat me like a three-hour brunch friend!” is admittedly quite satisfying) but the legibly sallow look on Frances’ face as she stares at herself, spinning through the Rolodex of what went wrong that night, in her friendship, in her life. What she could have said or done or be. A silent spiral and a sinking feeling. Ultimately, anticlimactic. The recognition that you do not have what your friend has and what your friend has is being telegraphed to you as what you should have.

我最近再次看那场景,现在较少的卧室化小说,聪明的熟悉,不可思议,无意的反思,一个人在玻璃上守卫框架下方的照片。我现在的前朋友最近从她的朋友解雇了我。这是一个简短的谈话,直截了当,正式。不是特别戏剧性的。随着我小心翼翼地导航,我们的电话对话已经受到影响,以避免错误。无论我提前被指控的行为如何,我以前乐于纠正,因为我关心我的朋友的感受。她在她最管理的声音中发言。她感谢我五年的友谊(它实际上是七),在让他们打包所桌子之前,一个员工曾经担任过几年的服务,并在一天结束时离开。没有遣散费。有一个投影,显然,作为她预计我的那种人,她希望我想要她和自己想要的生活。 The same telegraphing Frances recognizes Sophie doing with each passing interaction, their expectations for themselves and for one another discordant. I admitted I was tired of walking on eggshells around her and we both seemingly threw in the towel, her beating me to some unspoken social media-unfriending race I didn’t know we were in, feeling penalized for reasons that remain opaque, yet still tethered to the idea I did something wrong and that I alone should have taken all steps to ward off against the wilting dynamic. That I should have wanted more and better, in spite of the fraught implications of wanting, desiring, less for yourself than for others.


Gerwig在友谊的皮肤下滑动一个手术刀,以剥离那些不断转移的动态,并且露出,并且渴望,欲望和矛盾。在“女主人美国”,这是一位大学新生/有抱负作家特雷西之间的萌芽友谊(lola kirke.)和所有 - 所有的和无所事事的布鲁克(Gerwig)。由于特雷西的短篇小说使用Brooke和他们共同渴望在城市和各地的夜间失去饮酒,并且在可能性中喝酒,特雷西的全刺蓬勃发展和凌乱的特征在于钦佩和判断。他们的亲密绽放,彼此相互镜子,尽管他们的年龄差异,这成为他们努力成为自己的理想化版本以及他们彼此想要的方式的一种方式。

Their dynamic, written on the fragile palette of assessment and in the inedible ink of yearning and even envy, contains as much pleasure as it does pain. The film opens with the first lines of Tracy’s writing: “She would say things like, ‘Isn’t every story a story of betrayal?’” The question has the grime of betrayal on it, oily and hard to wash off. So when Tracy and Brooke’s ever precarious relationship hangs off a precipice, Tracy’s short story revealing what she thinks of Brooke after all (fictional though it may be), it’s not only Brooke’s ego that gets splashed with sludge.

尽管电影的新螺旋球框架,“女主人”已经伤口了。The litigation of Tracy’s story is a set-piece, but the drama is in watching Tracy head home on the Metro-North train from Connecticut to New York, not even bothering to look out the window at the line of wet trees becoming a forest of skyscrapers. She stares at a list of questions about the incriminating short story instead, which look back at her in turn, each number a vein in a fractal of interpersonal cracks. The drama is in the burning resignation of Tracy resting her head in her mother’s lap, admitting she has gone through a breakup. (Frances also uses this phrase.) The drama is also in Tracy heading back to all the places in New York she and Brooke went to, the uncertainty of whether she really wants to find Brooke after all.

在某种程度上取得了一些反向的“Frances Ha”,Brooke是弗朗西斯被判断的混乱,但这里这是一个可取的特征,但并非从怀疑主义中脱离。她不在乎让男朋友有关稳定的工作,关于安定下来的稳定。她有人兴奋,人们希望她脱离。特雷西喜欢布鲁克,但暂停。这是暂停它的污点;如果只有特雷西摧毁了门,想要她想要的东西,因为她想要它。

我没有关于手机的看法尤其戏剧性。安迪科恩将把它留在切割室;Baumbach或Gerwig可能使其作为后续场景的连接组织。即使较小的事件超出了他们通常的手段,而且无论背叛都有人,我觉得有一个预先与社会正义的身份取决于与社会正义的身份相一致,那么事件本身并不是特别显着的。有意义的个人历史,它被背负着。(我的意思是,当你与豆爸爸竞争的时候是什么?literal起义?)所有那个,七年,没有爆炸结束,但有一个痛苦的原因?同样? - “晚上好。”


在21世纪初和海岸的另一边,希望与夫人鸟(给予名称陆基)Saoirse Ronan.)。女士鸟与以某种可预测的方式锚定的人的前景不合时宜,有自由和创造性的激情。她最好的朋友朱莉(Beanie Feldstein) likes that she wants those things, even if she herself does not necessarily want them.

But as the wanting gets bigger, the priorities shift and the relationship to those implications do too. Lady Bird is slung with the dreams of a class status greater than her own and the congealing of her own ethos, with her mother (Laurie Metcalf)和朱莉作为见证人。男朋友(卢卡斯对冲)和新的富人朋友(Odeya Rush.) become less people than the avatars she wants to impress and to be, at the expense of her relationship with Julie.


这个场景发现它作为女士鸟的补充,在与她的新时髦男朋友一起去舞会的路上(TimothéeChalamet.)和他的Coterie听戴夫马修斯”乐队的“撞到我,这车谴责lame, but which crashes into her as a memory with Julie. A song that both lovely and cheesy to them, and a moment they now can’t have together. In Gerwig’s conception, and maybe real life’s too, the smaller moments unshared are more painful than the break itself.

在我自己的友谊分手 - 通过假设推动我的前朋友想要的是我也想要的,或者更糟糕的是,应该想要的,并用种族,班级和Queerphobic underes - 不寻常的节奏是什么震撼我的东西。它扭曲了手指刺的血液测试的方式;滑倒的尖峰,它的赌注被打磨为不可避免的。无聊和乏味的事实是伤害和压力和虚伪滴落。它在大流行期间没有利益,在大流行期间没有利益,半十年后的时间或善意寻找新的基础,或对相互增长的慷慨的慷慨。(但至少有一个指责的1,200字文字消息!)

There are elements of the aforementioned three films that resemble what “happened” (my therapist had to reassure me that I was “not a white woman”), but Gerwig feels the most accurate in this moment not in the broader plot scenarios and specific friendships and their falling out (and eventual resolution), but their less conventionally interesting moments. Friendship breakups reek of an everydayness, so musty and fundamentally undramatic that, regardless of their gradations of political or social implications, they’re barely worth mentioning to anyone who isn’t privy to any of the parties involved.

电话后,我决定观看一些Gerta Gerwig电影。我想我意识到,出于不同的原因和不同的空间,我们都是,我的前朋友和我,离开了地方。我们曾经和彼此一样曾经是谁,我们的价值是什么,我们的价值观通缉为自己和彼此;葡萄藤一旦抬起同样的围栏,现在被绘制到不同的光线。或者也许这是浪漫化的,解释远离矛盾的流泡和不平衡的无可原能的变化的舒适幻觉。

But maybe that is exactly why, sans reality TV aesthetic, Gerwig is so good at examining them, dramatizing events that are not so dramatic but whose effects inconsistently weigh like one. Everyone loses in a friendship breakup, less an upended game board than the incremental loss of interest in and forfeiture of the game. The contradictions that once allowed friendships to thrive can evolve into something else. Even in her most articulate or droll executions, they rest uneasily at the intersection of mundane and catastrophic, quotidian and infuriating, dull and numb and stinging of shrapnel. Before they reconcile, Gerwig’s friendships don’t break, they rot. But sometimes you have to be your own match to your own bonfire, your own beacon of hope; even though, as Tracy may attest, it may be a lonely business. But not for long.


Latest reviews