宪法对我的意义

“及时”这个词在过去的几年里得到了大量的使用。这就是生活在一个刀锋交错的历史时刻的结果。我们平衡,摇摇欲坠,在一个稳定的薄滑,钻石的锐利和钻石的珍贵。在这种时候,故事不得不产生新的共鸣。然而,在这个时刻,几乎所有事情都突然让人感到与之相关,而海蒂·施莱克(Heidi Schreck)的《宪法对我意味着什么》(What the Constitution Means To Me)在这几个星期里出现在亚马逊Prime上,则是另一个层面。这是一项卓越的成就,一项具有毁灭性清晰度的工作。它也很有趣、富有同情心、令人惊讶,而且不知怎么地,不管发生了什么,它都闪耀着乐观的光芒。观看它既痛苦又至关重要,就像在肋骨断了的情况下深呼吸一样。它会伤害。痛苦是值得的回报。

在其2019年百老汇演出的最后几周,由马里埃尔·埃莱尔“体质”是在表面上显着地简单。(虽然海勒寄望执导本片,舞台制作是由戏剧导演奥利弗·巴特勒等于宽限期,技能和洞察力执导。)Schreck的扮演她自己,讲述她是如何走遍全国为15岁的故事,竞在美国退伍军人协会大厅宪法的辩论赢得奖学金的钱上大学。当打了她年轻的自我,她穿上黄色上衣,每天调用它;她告诉她的听众,她要求作为老白人男子,她会在这些事件中对谁说话,这组是从她的记忆唤出,但可惜她的记忆忘了包括门。这是友好的,随意的,与其说是打破第四墙为不打扰把一上来摆在首位,而缺乏技巧下划线的是平易近人的基调一样,海勒的背后的摄像头坦率又轻柔的手法。我们只是在谈论,施雷克似乎每个选择的说;我们只是在这里聊天,没什么大不了的

但这是一件大事,而Schreck选择放弃更具戏剧性的选择,给《宪法》注入了直接、脆弱和诚实。主要居住在第九和第十四修正案,Schreck挖掘美,矛盾,特别是美国宪法的失败看着它通过几个镜头:她的15岁,20岁,作为一个年轻的女人,一个成年女人,作为女儿和孙女和曾孙女。(正如她在该剧最精彩的一个笑话中提到的,她还是男人的超级粉丝;“我是a的女儿父亲”她面无表情,手放在心脏),这是关于她的家庭历史,美国历史。它是关于由前导什么排斥意味着为她的生活,这是什么意思为女性,有色人种,LGBTQIA +和非二进制的人 - 尤其是对跨妇女和彩色每一天的妇女。

不可避免的是,该工作“宪法”的海勒的电影将得到频繁相比,最有可能是托马斯·卡尔《华尔街日报》(the wall of the wall)的原班人马。汉密尔顿“上映,题材的-proximity,当然格式的所有邀请的比较。(Lin-Manuel米兰达安吉莉卡·斯凯勒想要的托马斯·杰斐逊为了“在续集中加入女性角色”,Schreck的剧本提出了一个问题:是要重写原剧,还是要取消整部剧,改用新的演员和剧本重新启动。)但在手法上,它更像是纪录片詹妮弗·福克斯“2018叙事功能“这个故事“,其中记载了福克斯的儿童性虐待通过检查自己的观点,并采用虚构的工具来添加和删除个人距离。过去的已经过去,现在是现在,无一不是在不断发生一次。

多说施雷克的无可挑剔结构,显着周到的文本是减少看着它展开的经验,但也有少数元素的需求提到,其中一个比它在​​剧院做甚至可能更好地发挥在胶片上。While the above paragraphs may suggest that Schreck’s play is a one-woman operation, she’s not alone on stage for long, as actor Mike Iveson enters, playing both himself now (as Schreck does) and a legionnaire there to make sure that Heidi and her unseen fellow debaters follow the rules to the letter. His is a largely silent, unsmiling presence, watchful and remote, there to enforce rules that he or men like him wrote. More importantly, though, he’s there simply to be there, a man watching and listening as Schreck peels back layer after layer, addressing abortion, consent, domestic violence, and the many ways in which the document her 15-year-old self so loved has failed her and countless other women for generations. Yet the relationship is not a static one, and Heller captures Iveson’s steady presence and Schreck’s keen awareness of it with sharp-edged subtlety. It’s all in the framing—a statement which, come to think of it, also applies to certain interpretations of constitutional law.

但是Iveson不Schreck的唯一舞台上的伴侣。In the film’s final moments, Schreck is joined onstage by Rosdely Ciprian, a New York high schooler and debater who squares off against Schreck in an unscripted but staggeringly well-prepared debate on the question of whether or not the constitution of the United States should be abolished. Schreck’s play is astonishing, her performance unforgettable, but it’s in these closing moments that “What The Constitution Means To Me” achieves its final form: proof, visceral and thrilling, that our future can be a remarkable one if we fight to jam the door open just a little bit wider. The pandemic halted the national tour of “Constitution,” as it did virtually all live theatre, and no film, however remarkable, can replicate the experience of seeing it live. But Heller’s film comes damn close, particularly when her camera captures Schreck and Iveson’s faces, alight with pride and joy and something like optimism, as Ciprian brings down the house. The future is uncertain, and pain is inevitable. And yet when Ciprian says “We the people,” “Constitution” doesn’t feel “timely.” It feels like a promise—albeit one we have to earn.

现在可以在亚马逊

Allison鞋匠

佳佳鞋匠是总部设在芝加哥的自由电影和电视评论家。

现在玩

雪谷之狼
战前
Kajillionaire
黄玫瑰
的转向

电影作品

什么是宪法对我意味着电影海报

宪法对我的意义(2020年)

额定NR

最新博客文章

评论

评论的Disqus