電影《抱歉我們錯過你了》影評：【譯】肯·洛奇談
抱歉我們錯過你了影評Be Angry: Ken Loach on Sorry We Missed You
March 10, 2020
來源：https://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/be-angry-ken-loach-on-sorry-we-missed-you
【本文首發於《虹膜》公眾號】
譯者：覃天
校對：易二三
來源：rogerebert.com（2020年3月10日）
A mainstay of British social realism, directorKen Loachhas been telling humanistic stories of class and inequality for over five decades, adapting his defining cinematic interests to modern-day concerns. With 2016’s 「I, Daniel Blake」 and now 「Sorry We Missed You,」 two thematically-related films about people on the fringes abused by bureaucracy and economic injustice, the 84-year-old master continues to prove he might never run out of things to say, given the worsening state of the world from both social and political standpoints. Joining me on the phone recently, 「It was much easier back in the '60s. We're lucky because we’ve been doing it for so long,」 reflects Loach, within regards to creating his kind of cinema, making his brand of films that follow and honor the struggles of working men and women. 「What gave us the chance was the BBC. But the BBC is doing different things now and [filmmakers like me] aren't getting the chance. I hear stories of people with good projects all the time. But they don't get the chance because nobody will invest in it.」
作為英國社會現實主義導演的中流砥柱，導演肯·洛奇50多年來執著於講述階級和不平等的人性故事，並且根據當下社會現實問題來調整他的電影興趣。2016年的《我是布萊克》和新作《抱歉我們錯過你了》是兩部主題聯繫緊密的電影，講述了被官僚作風和經濟不公凌辱的邊緣人群，這位84歲的大師繼續證明了，從社會和政治角度來看，世界狀況不斷惡化，這讓他永遠都會有想要表達的故事。肯·洛奇最近和我通了電話，在創造他的電影風格，拍攝那些關注並尊敬工薪階層奮鬥的影片時，他回憶道：「在1960年代，這要容易得多。我們很幸運，因為我們已經拍了這麼長時間電影了。」「給我們機會的是BBC。但BBC現在做的事情不同了，像我這樣的導演也失去了機會。我總是聽說很多電影人手裡都有好的項目。但他們沒有機會拍，因為沒有人會投資它。
Teaming up with his long-time screenwriterPaul Lavertyfor 「Sorry We Missed You,」 Loach tackles the so-called gig economy this time; the false 「be your own boss」 promise that robs people of the basics: a dignified quality of life, time with family, the permission to pause during paid vacations, sick leaves or even to eat or go to the bathroom. We follow the delivery driver Ricky (Kris Hitchen) and his home-attendant wife Abby (Debbie Honeywood)—two recent victims of this financial structure, who have been hit by the aftermath of the 2008 crash but found hope in the misleading promise of their gigs. Financing Ricky’s job-mandated van by selling the family car, the couple face the unexpected inhumanity of their demanding, around-the-clock schedules while also trying to maintain a family life and provide proper parenting to their teenaged son and daughter.
「I am very pleased to ring theRoger Ebertcompanies,」 Loach says before we delve into our conversation on his latest. 「Great man.」
肯·洛奇與他長期合作的編劇保羅·拉弗蒂合作完成了《抱歉我們錯過你了》，這部電影探討了所謂的「零工經濟」；虛假的「做你自己的老闆」的承諾剝奪了屬於人的基本條件：有尊嚴的生活質量，陪伴家人的時間，在帶薪休假期間暫停工作的許可，病假，甚至是吃飯或上廁所的時間。我們追蹤了送貨司機瑞奇（克里斯·希欽飾）和他做家庭健康服務工作的妻子艾比（黛比·哈尼伍德飾）——他們都是最近這種「零工經濟」的受害者，他們在2008年金融危機的餘波中受到了打擊，卻在誤導他們的承諾中找到了希望。這對夫婦通過出售家庭用車來資助購買瑞奇的工作用車，他們面臨著運輸公司出人意料的不人道之處，不僅要面對滿滿當當的日程安排，還要努力維持家庭生活，撫養他們正處於青春期的兒女。在我和肯·洛奇開始談論他最新的作品之前，洛奇說：「我很高興能接受羅傑·伊伯特的公司的記者聯絡，伊伯特是一個偉大的人。」
You have been telling stories of social injustice for decades, often refashioning them with the most contemporary struggles. Here, you tap into something that's so present, the so-called "gig economy." The 「you are your own boss」 kind of exploitation. What was your journey like, noticing this shift in society and deciding to make a film about it?
記者：幾十年來，你一直致力於拍攝關於社會不公的電影，並且經常用社會當下最尖銳的矛盾來重塑這一主題。在《抱歉我們錯過你了》中，你探討了非常當下的一個話題，即所謂的「零工經濟」。關於「你是你自己的老闆」這一口號背後的經濟剝削，你是如何注意到了社會上的這種變化，並決定拍攝一部關於這一變化的電影？
I've worked with [screenwriter] Paul Laverty for 26-27 years now. I’m very lucky to work with Paul. We just talk endlessly about everything. And one of the ideas that's been in mind [for us], over many years, is the idea of how work is changing—a former secure job, where people [could] go on holiday and not lose pay [is fading]. You [could] be sick and you wouldn't lose pay, and you couldn't be sacked overnight. All those gains are disappearing and now [there is] this new form of exploitation, the so-called gig economy, [with] the pretense that you are self-employed. Whereas in fact, you are just a driver and you are working for a company that made it appear that you're self employed.
肯·洛奇：到現在，我已經和保羅·拉弗蒂合作了26-27年，我很幸運能和他一起工作。我們之間有著說不完的話題。多年來，我們一直在考慮的一個想法是，「工作」是如何變化的——在過去，當一個人有一份有保障的工作，他可以去度假，或是生病了，也不會失去工資，也不可能一夜之間被解雇。而這樣的工作關係正在變化，所有這些收入正在消失，現在出現了這種新的剝削形式，即所謂的「零工經濟」，它的藉口是「你可以做自己的雇主」，而事實上，你只是一名司機，你為一家公司工作，而這家公司讓你看起來像是個雇主。
So the employer has no responsibility. If anything goes wrong, the worker pays. And that's for the drivers and for people who are doing care work, which is done by private companies. Private companies make their money again out of exploitation so that they can just tell the worker when they're working the night before and they just have to do it or they can be sacked at any point and they don't get paid several times. So they may only get paid 20 minutes in an hour, even though the rest of the time is [also] work time because they're [traveling] to the next patient.
所以公司的雇主沒有責任。如果出了什麼差錯，由勞動者負責賠償。這一制度針對的是司機和從事護理工作的人，而這些工作又大多由私人公司提供。私人公司通過剝削他們來賺錢，他們可以在前一天晚上告訴勞動者，他們第二天什麼時候工作，他們必須這麼做，否則他們可能隨時被解雇，並且好幾次都不會得到工資。因此，可能每小時的工時中，勞動者只能得到其中20分鐘的報酬，儘管剩下的時間也是工作時間，因為他們要去照料下一個客戶。
So with all these changes are happening, [Paul and I] thought, we have to try and tell this story. And Paul made a very good point, which is that when you're at work, you put on a smile. You know, you keep up a pretense, people don't know your circumstances. But when you get home and if you've got a family, that's when the pressure emerges because you're tired, you haven't eaten, the alarms going off in seven hours time, and you've got no patience. You can't deal with things that the father or mother ought to deal with. So that's why we thought we should tell a family story.
因此，隨著所有這些變化的發生，保羅和我認為，我們必須努力把這個故事講述出來。保羅提出了一個非常好的觀點，那就是當你在工作的時候，你會帶著微笑。不過你知道，你只是一直在偽裝，人們不知道你的處境。但是如果你有家人，回到家時，壓力就會浮現出來，因為你累了，你還沒有吃東西，鬧鐘在七個小時後就會響，你會變得沒有耐心。你不能處理作為父親或母親應該處理的事情。這就是為什麼我們認為應該講一個家庭故事。
The impact the parents’ jobs has on the family is heartbreaking. There is this once sequence in the film where you see all four of them operate as a unit to help the mom solve a work dilemma. That’s when you can actually see what they can be like as a real family.
記者：影片中這對父母的工作給家庭帶來的衝擊令人心碎。在電影中有一個只出現了一次的場景：家庭中的四個人作為一個整體來幫助母親解決工作困境。那時你才能確切地看到，他們作為一個真正的家庭可以是什麼樣子。
Yes! Yes, they're just going on a trip. It's a Saturday night, they go out and put some music in the cab and sing along. Yeah, you can see the potential.
肯·洛奇：是的！是的，他們一起在星期六的晚上坐車出去，在車裡放著音樂，唱著歌。是的，你可以通過這個場景看到這個家庭的可能性。
I often feel social class is a blind spot in mainstream American movies. Though recently, I have been thinking that’s maybe changing. 「Parasite」 just won Best Picture from the American academy (AMPAS) and perhaps that’s a small sign. I’m wondering if you observe this shift in conscience, in terms of what audiences and industry are responding to.
記者：我經常覺得社會階層的話題在美國主流電影中缺席已久。不過，最近我一直在想，這種情況可能正在改變。《寄生蟲》剛剛獲得了奧斯卡最佳影片獎，或許這是一個小的信號。我想知道，從電影觀眾和行業的反應來看，你是否注意到了這種轉變？
I don't know. I mean, mainstream cinema, whether it is British or American (I don't know about other European films, maybe not quite so much), is still about film stars looking beautiful and having wealth that nobody explains. You never see where their money comes from, they just live in beautiful places and look glamorous. Even when a lot of films are now about ordinary people, they're still played by film stars. There's a gloss to them that is not realistic. Italian Neorealists were using ordinary people to be in the films sometimes. So you really felt this was a working class man or a working woman. And [in our film], I guess we've tried to do the same.
肯·洛奇：我不知道。我的意思是，不論是英國還是美國的主流電影（我不了解其他歐洲國家的主流電影，也許它們的情況還不太一樣），它們中仍然充滿了坐擁財富、面容華麗的明星。沒有人解釋這些的財富從何而來，他們住在雍容美麗的住所裡，看上去光彩照人。即使現在很多電影都是關於普通人的，但是它們依然由明星扮演，這給人一種不切實際的感覺。意大利新現實主義的電影人們有時會讓非職業演員出現在電影中，所以你真的會覺得，電影中的那個角色就是一個工薪階級的人。在《抱歉我們錯過你了》這部影片中，我想我們也嘗試過同樣的做法。
The second biggest issue for a director after the script (which is the most important thing) is [casting]. Who is going to bring [the story] to life? And if you can't make that decision as a director because the film star is attached to the project, it's difficult to see how you can really make the film you need to make. Because the casting is the second most important decision you've got to make, and if it's already [made for you], how can you work?
對於導演來說，僅次於劇本（這是最重要的事情）的第二大問題是選角。誰來把這個故事演繹出來呢？如果因為電影明星參與了這個項目，而你作為一名導演，不能做出這個決定，那麼很難看出你如何才能真正拍出你想要拍的電影。因為選角是你必須做出的第二個最重要的決定，而如果這些角色就在那裡，你還需要選擇嗎？
And you do something very unique with your cast. You shoot your films in chronological order without revealing everything all at once. What was that process like for this particular film and cast?
記者：你用你的演員做了一些非常獨特的事情。你按時間順序拍攝你的電影，而不是一下子把所有的東西都展示出來。對於《抱歉我們錯過你了》這部電影和它的演員來說，這個過程是什麼樣的？
It’s just a way of working. I mean, the people in it knew everything about the family, who they are and why they [do what they do] when they're doing it. So there are no secrets to make it difficult. But sometimes, when there's a surprise, you want to shoot the surprise because that's the hardest thing to act. [For example], when the little girl sees her father hit the son—he sort of hits him across the head—when we shot the film, the sequence, she came in and stood in that bedroom and we kind of reenacted it for her. So it had an effect on her really. And when, she'd stolen the keys, we filmed her doing it even though we wouldn't put it in the film so that she felt she had really done it and then she kept it a secret until she told them where they were. I think [with this method], you get a more authentic response really. It means they don't have to think for six weeks, 「Oh my God, am I going to cry at this point?」 Whatever they do, if they're [really] in the moment, it's okay.
肯·洛奇：這只是一種工作方式。我的意思是，電影裡的演員知道關於這個家庭的一切，知道自己是誰，以及當自己做這件事的時候，為什麼要做。因此，沒有什麼秘訣可以讓這件事變得困難。但有時，當有驚喜出現時，你會想要拍出它，而這是最難演的事情。例如，當女兒看到她的父親打了兒子——當我們拍攝這部電影的時候，他打了兒子的頭，女兒剛好走進臥室，站在那裡，我們為她重演了這一幕。所以這對她真的有影響。當她偷了鑰匙，我們也拍下了她這麼做的過程，儘管我們沒有把它放進電影裡，所以她覺得她真的做了，然後一直保守著秘密，直到她告訴他們鑰匙在哪裡。我認為用這種方法，你真的會得到更真實的回應。這意味著他們六週內都不用想，「哦，天哪，我現在是不是要哭了？」不管他們做什麼，如果他們真的在場景中的時刻裡面，那就很好了。
Reading the synopsis before watching 「Sorry We Miss You,」 I thought it sounded like a contemporary 「Bicycle Thieves」: needing a van to do a specific job, and selling something to afford that van. Startling to realize that the basis of injustice has always been similar throughout history, but the ways in which it happens change.
記者：在看《抱歉我們錯過你了》之前，我看了劇情梗概，我想它聽上去就像一部當代版的《偷自行車的人》：這個父親需要一輛貨車來做運輸的工作，然後賣些東西，才能買得起那輛貨車。令人驚訝的是，歷史上不公正的基礎一直是相似的，但它發生的方式發生了變化。
Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. It's the eternal struggle between employers and workers isn't it? The employees have to make them money and [employers] pay their workers less than the value of their labor. That's the key to private business you know, that's where the profit is. The worker contributes ten pounds in on the job and you'd pay him six or you'd pay him seven and the rest is profits. And so that's the key and of course it has its permanence [in history]. The conflict of interest between the two classes is permanent, it's inevitable.
肯·洛奇：是的，的確如此，一點兒沒錯。這是雇主和勞動者之間永恆的鬥爭，不是嗎？員工必須掙錢，雇主付給工人的工資低於他們的勞動價值。你知道，這是私營企業的關鍵和利潤所在。勞動者為自己的工作貢獻10英鎊，你卻只付給他6或者7英鎊，剩下的就是利潤。所以這就是關鍵，並且當然它在歷史中有其持久性。兩個階級之間的利益衝突是永久性的，是不可避免的。
And of course the interesting thing is, when you have a right wing government, they say, 「Well, we're all in this together. Remember David Cameron? He was prime minister and he was always saying that, 「Oh, we're all in this together.」 You know, the austerity, [as if] we all suffer the same. But of course, it's not true at all. At the same time, Jeff Bezos becomes the richest man on the planet and people are doing his work.
有趣的是，當你的國家由一個右翼政府執政時，他們會說，「嗯，我們都團結在一起。」還記得戴維·卡梅倫嗎？他還是總理的時候總是說，「哦，我們都是同舟共濟的。」你知道，我們應該節衣縮食，好像我們都遭受著同樣的痛苦。但當然，這完全不是真的。與此同時，傑夫·貝佐斯成為了世界上最富有的人，人們卻都各自做著做他的工作。
In that regard, I do hope people think a little more closely and deeply about the human cost of instant delivery upon watching this film. Did you speak with any delivery drivers as part of your research? While this is Paul Laverty’s script, I am wondering if you were a part of that process.
記者：在這方面，我真的希望人們在看完這部電影後，能更仔細、更深入地思考一下快遞行業的人力成本。作為這部影片資料蒐集的一部分，你是否與任何送貨司機交談過？雖然這是保羅·拉弗蒂的劇本，但我想知道你是否參與了這一過程。
As the writer, Paul did most of the research. I met drivers and care workers through him. He went out with the drivers in the cabs, even though some of them were intimidated about speaking. But in the end he found one or two and he went out with them and just sat with them all day, you know. He said he took some sandwiches at the beginning of the day to one of them, and at eight o'clock at night, they still haven't eaten them because there wasn't time.
肯·洛奇：作為編劇，保羅·拉弗蒂做了大部分的蒐集研究工作。我通過他見到了許多貨車司機以及護理人員。他會坐在駕駛室，和貨車司機一起出行，儘管他們中的一些人不太願意說話。但保羅最後還是找到了一兩個司機，整天和他們坐在一起。他說，他一大早就給其中一名司機送去了一些三明治，到了晚上8點，他還沒有吃掉三明治，因為沒有時間。
And we heard some stories. One in particular; [there was this] man who was a diabetic. He had an appointment at the hospital to see his consultant. He went and he was fined. The company fined him 150 pounds cause he wasn't there even though he told them, obviously.
我們還聽到了一個特別的故事。有一個人得了糖尿病，他約好了醫生，去醫院看病。他去了，卻被罰款了。他工作的公司對他處以150英鎊的罰款，因為他沒去上班，儘管他事先告訴了公司。
Goodness.
記者：天哪。
And then [he didn’t go to] the next appointment. And the appointment after that. The people who he was working with saw him getting more and more ill. His wife was very worried and said, you must go to the doctors, you must go to the hospital. And he didn't go. And then he collapsed and died. And of course the company sent a letter of sympathy and that was it. They had no obligations to him or his wife, [who] had to move out of their home because [she] couldn't put forward the rent. And so she was in real trouble. This is quite an extreme case of course. We thought better to just to tell an ordinary, an average story. It's just the way of ordinary families. It's the life that millions of people are living, really.
肯·洛奇：然後，他就再也沒有去過醫院，以及之後的約診。他的同事看著他的病情越來越嚴重。他的妻子非常擔心，說，「你必須去看醫生，你必須去醫院。」但他還是沒有去，最終暈倒，死了。當然，公司給他們家發出了一封慰問信，也就僅此而已。他們對他或他的妻子沒有義務。這家人不得不搬出他們的家，因為她付不起房租。所以她真的有麻煩了。當然，這是一個相當極端的情況。我們覺得最好只講一個普通、大眾的故事。這是普通家庭的生活。這也是數百萬人的生活，真的。
The story that you just shared with me could have been in 「I, Daniel Blake,」 too. The two films are such close companions to each other.
記者：你剛剛分享的這個故事也出現在《我是布萊克》中。這兩部影片是如此相近。
Yes and that was intentional. It's the same city [Newcastle], it begins in the same way, the voiceover, a dark screen. So you just hear the voices. I mean that was our thought, you know. You're just concentrating on just what other people are saying and then you see them. It was meant as a companion piece.
肯·洛奇：是的，我是有意這麼安排的。這兩部影片都發生在紐卡斯爾這座城市，它們以同樣的方式開始，畫外音，黑暗的屏幕。所以一開始你只能聽到對白。我是說那是我們的想法，你只是專注於別人在說什麼，然後你就會看到他們。它們本來就是一組配對的作品。
Both of them made me feel a distinct anger about the state of the world.
記者：這兩部電影都讓我對當下的社會現狀產生了明顯的憤怒。
Oh good. Be angry. I like to hear that.
肯·洛奇：噢，這很好，變得憤怒，我很高興聽到這一點。
I wonder what one can do to turn that anger into something productive.
記者：我好奇一個人如何能把這種憤怒轉化為某種有益的東西？
Well it's a big question. I think it's political, you know? There is no way to avoid politics in the end. I mean, people join trade unions that make them stronger, to make demands for paid holiday. And so you can be sick and not lose money. [These are the] basic demands. It [all comes down to] political change. In the last election, the party of the left would have made a big change. They would have ended this bogus self-employment, that every worker would get [paid leave]. They would get sick pay, they [would] get an eight-hour day, going back to basic trade union rights. But the campaign against them by the press and the whole establishment was so vicious. It turned people off even though they would have done these very good things. So it was an extraordinary election. I hope the same doesn't happen in the States now.
肯·洛奇：這個問題有些大。我覺得這是政治性的，政治最終是無法迴避的。我的意思是，人們加入工會，讓自己變得更強大，提出帶薪假期的要求。這樣你就可以在生病的時候不會失去工資。這些是基本要求。這一切都歸結為政治變革。在英國上次選舉中，左翼政黨做出了重大改變，他們結束了這種虛假的自我雇佣模式，即每個勞動者都將獲得帶薪休假。勞動者將得到病假工資，他們每天工作8小時，獲得基本的工會權利。但媒體和整個建制派反對他們的運動是如此惡毒。它讓人們望而卻步，儘管他們會做這些非常好的事情。所以這是一次非同尋常的選舉。我希望現在美國不會發生同樣的事情。
We are all very fearful.
記者：我們非常擔心。
I mean, when the press and television is entirely on one side, [it’s hard]. People are used to thinking that the BBC is in the middle, but of course, it wasn't. It was very much on the side of the right wing. So it's, it's very tough to withstand that level of manipulation. And the abuse [of the left candidate Jeremy Corbyn] was something we'd never seen before. But anyway, what can you do? You just have to keep at it. I mean, nothing lasts forever. The history is dynamic, isn't it? We are in an evolving situation and the climate change is now is very critical. And so for the first time, you've got an end game. We can't go on saying, 「Well, if we lose this battle, we'll win the next one in 20 years time.」 Because these years are really critical and the young ones are waking up to this. In our last election, it was the young ones who were voting left. And I think that's what we've really got to cultivate; talk about the climate [change]. The earth is collapsing and that's where the right wing is weak, because they tried to deny it, as we all know. So I think that's where the hope is, where change [can happen].
肯·洛奇：我的意思是，當媒體和電視完全站在一邊時，（這很難），人們習慣於認為BBC持中立態度，但當然不是這樣。它非常偏向右翼。所以，人們很難承受這種程度的操縱。人們對左翼候選人傑里米·科爾賓的辱罵是我們以前從未見過的。但不管怎樣，你能做什麼呢？你只要堅持下去就行了。我是說，沒有什麼是永恆的。歷史是變化的，不是嗎？我們正處於一個不斷變化的形勢中，氣候變化現在是非常關鍵的問題。因此，這是第一次，你有了一個終局。我們不能一直說，「嗯，如果我們輸了這場戰鬥，我們將在20年裡，都將贏得下一場戰鬥。」因為這幾年真的很關鍵，年輕人開始意識到這一點。在我們上次的選舉中，投左派票的是年輕人。我認為這才是我們真正需要培養的——談論氣候變化。地球正在坍塌，這就是右翼勢力的弱點，因為我們都知道，他們試圖否認這一點。因此，我認為這就是希望所在，也是改變可以發生的地方。