电影是根据美国电影《12 Angry Men》改编的。这部1957年的经典之作我虽然没有看过，但按Rose原本拍的1997年的电视版本我是看过的，也是因为看了这个电视版本才对《12 Angry Men》有了极度的崇敬。首先，Rose的本子非常之好，不论是情节还是人物的刻画。其次，制作极其精良，即使我看的电视版也有奥斯卡最佳导演William Friedkin掌镜，奥斯卡最佳演员Jack Lemmon和George C. Scott领衔，更小的配角都有Tony Danza和James Gandolfini，以至于看完电视版我都不想看电影版了，把毁坏形象。当然这也是制作这个本子的前提，如果没有一个好导演和12名好演员，那么这个制作会变得极其之装。
俄罗斯版本恰好也有这样的条件。导演和演员都十分之好，虽说除了导演有名以外其他的演员我都不认识。但制作精良只不过是前提条件；如果只不过是俄罗斯版本对Rose直接的翻拍，那么不过是一个猎奇作品，好似《保持通话》一样（但那部片子制作垃圾，表演弱智，而且本身模仿的就是好莱坞B级制作，在此拿它举例就是为了说事，完全没有侮辱《12》的意思）。我本来也早知道俄罗斯有这部作品问世，而且提名奥斯卡，但就是因为怀疑其是猎奇，所以一直没看，直到我电脑网速不用就浪费才将其下载，而那已经是片子问候后的两年了。
But as I watched it yesterday, I realized that this film is far more ambitious than 12 Angry Men can afford. The New York Times or Roger Ebert's film review is right (forgot which one), this film does not need the skeleton of "12 Angry Men" at all, it is a very mature story in itself. For example, many of the good films of "12 Angry Men" are not very necessary, such as reasonable doubt, which seems to be absent in Russian law. In addition, the film does not need a plot twist. The ending of the film (Foreman's words) makes it clear that the plot is only the last part of the film. And copying the original also brings some obsolescence (such as why are there only men on the jury? This is almost impossible in modern society). But then again, if there is no such gimmick, the Western film and television industry and people who pretend to be X who are influenced by Western film and television will not be interested in this film at the beginning, so from this point of view, I once voted for Westerners. Well it's still a must.
Since it is based on "12 Angry Men", the general structure and ending of the story are known. But these, and the aforementioned well-made ones, are just the premise of a good film, and what really makes this film stand out is its broad perspective, deep philosophical, and Russian thinking involved, and it all boils down to for its Russianness.
The word Russian sex is also mentioned in movies. The nature of a country may only be understood by people born and raised there, and ordinary outside observers can only comprehend the fur, I think so (wow, this grammatically unintelligible sentence has a Japanese grammatical structure, I may soon realize it) , hahaha). For example, in the stories in the movie, the actors usually say, this is a good Russia story, and I can't really hear why, after all, my understanding of the country is still influenced by some of its more Western-accepted works. But as far as I understand it, the works of the bigger names in Russia have a characteristic, that is, they try to cover everything at once. I read the preface to Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities yesterday and said how necessary this kind of Russian writing is that William Faulkner said there were only three references to look at before writing a novel: Anna Karenina, Anna Karenina, Anna Karenina . The greatness of this film is also here, that is, it attempts to interpret the status quo and destiny of a country through the communication of twelve people.
And esoteric philosophy is also a manifestation of Russianness. It may also be because the country is cold, so that the Russians like to drink and think the most, and they have no interest in messing around, so that they can even study the technical work of editing. That's where the film wins over the original. Law is a means, but can it really achieve its original purpose and create a harmonious society? Is it ok for everyone to just follow the most basic requirements of the law? I've always said that if you see someone being miserable (like an African refugee) and you just say it's pathetic and then don't do anything yourself (sacrificing yourself or not) then it's not really compassion, it's just It's just satisfying my own psychological requirements (see, how sympathetic I am, without having to harm my own interests). There is another type of person that bothers me the most is doing nothing and then complaining about all kinds of imperfections. This kind of rotten person (the biggest offender is myself) is the most hateful. The film also discusses similar issues at the end. Because of these issues, the film's ending is more thought-provoking than 12 Angry Men.
As for discussions of Russian social issues, Russians may look more entertained (see, the stadium symbolizes the vastness of the country, and the exposed pipes symbolize Russia's crumbling infrastructure). Although I can understand a little bit as a Chinese (after all, it is Big Brother), but most of them are probably for locals.
All in all, despite its minor flaws, this film is still very good, and like the original, it is a masterpiece.
View more about 12 reviews
