万福玛丽亚

  今天看了《国家的常识》，讲到墨西哥那章，讲到毒品cartel，我就想到Uli当时打工时给我讲到的墨西哥的，和哥伦比亚的毒品交易。今天在中来大寝室搜搜，就想看这部电影。
  哥伦比亚，其实是一个很美丽浪漫的名字，西班牙语虽然让我觉得不如法语好听，优雅，但依然是很有味的语言。平静的小镇，只有剪玫瑰花的工作；而首都波哥大，只让我看到所有大城市的弊病，脏乱差，这可能在发展中国家表现得更明显，或者说，拉美给我的感觉就是这样的。
  看了电影，总是会觉得这个世界上的生活会有这么多不同，当我还在烦恼考英语，继续学习，追求degree的时候，有多少哥伦比亚，墨西哥少男少女在干着毒品的工作，在拉美，很多人就以此为生，不会觉得很惊讶。
  生活是残酷的，如lucy这样的，拉丁裔这么多人生活在美国，似乎也喜欢说西班牙语，让我想到亨廷顿的《我们是谁》，这是一些联想。

This is the harrowing story of a (not quite) typical mule: Maria Alvarez (Moreno), an intelligent and fiercely independent 17-year-old girl from Colombia who agrees to smuggle a half-kilo of heroin into the United States.

Walking out of the theatre, I found myself at a loss of words.

What struck me the most about the story was how un-exaggerate everything was. Let it be Maria’s job, her village, or her family. They were portrayed with moderation and care. The result was impressively real and honest. Maria’s job was not uncommon for a third world country’s village girl of 17. I’ve read far worse treatment and horror stories of factory workers in ShenZheng, China. The real evil was in the lack of a choice. All Maria had was the job in the flower factory. It was the only economic opportunity presented to Maria. It was what her family, even her entire village depended on. Sounds familiar? I thought of that British mining town in Billy Elliot.

Like all country girls who rebelled against their fate, Maria made a choice, the same choice all country girls in her shoes made, to go to the city. On her way, she was tempted away from the possibility of becoming a rich family’s maid; instead, she was offered an adventure. Traveling, America, and American dollars added together proven to be too big a temptation to turn down for a rebellious country girl. Was there really a huge difference for her, between pulling thorns off roses and swallowing cocaine pellets and carried them to America? Both were rich people’s merchandises, both were beyond her reach. She was one little link in the economy chain. The latter sounded a lot more exciting than the former, and it would take her beyond the depressing village outside of Bogota. She was, finally, presented a choice.

The subsequent story made me admire Maria’s intelligence and coolness. But it also chilled me to the bone to see how cruel and brutal the drug world was (is).

Would legalizing drugs clean up all these brutality? Would legalizing drugs prevent Maria and her fellow Columbian women from participating in this dark and ugly trade?

If so, then why wouldn’t any country take that step?

“Because drugs are evil and hurt people who use them. How could you legalize something so damaging to our very selves? How could any government give out any signal that drug abuse is ‘legal’, therefore, ‘ok’?”

Because not legalizing it made it worse? Because the huge profit margin is driving the drug trade into a frenzy, and it is killing poor people like Maria left and right? Cigarette is legal, isn’t it? It is harmful to people’s health, too. Why is that okay to endorse but not drugs? Since when human being became such innocent creatures?

“If you legalize drugs, then more people will become drug addicts. That would be disastrous and self-destructive.”

Okay. People have self-destructive tendencies. There are evils in these world, too many. People always have the choice of whether to become drug addicts, just like people have the choice of whether to smoke a cigarette. Are you saying that government has the right to make the choice for its citizens that the government knows what is best? What about education? What about the fittest survive? It is not like I don’t get drug offered when I walk down Telegraph Ave. in Berkeley, it is not like high school kids don’t get drug offers in parties, at playground, on their way to school, anyways. It is happening right now. How much worse could it get? Besides, once it became legal, it could take away the “adventurous lure” it has right now to the rebellious type. Couldn’t it?

Drug abuse is part of modern societies already. We have to deal with it. But if legalizing it could take away the huge profit for the drug lord, then it could reduce their incentive to produce them. It could dry up so many money sources for terrorist groups and anti-government organizations. It could save Maria and girls like her the fate of dying on ruptured cocaine pellets that they carry in their stomach. It could save them from being treated like animals (”mule”), whose stomach was cut open so their cargo could be retrieved. Mule’s life was of no consequence. The dehumanization of Maria and her fellow mules was not caused by drug’s own evil-ness directly. It was made possible by the huge profit of drug trade, and its huge profit came from their illegal status. It was made possible because of human being’s own greed.

If government wants to do good to the society, then it could place the choice into everyone’s own hand. Take away the possibility to make people even more greedy than they already are. Don’t tempt them. Trust them.

In Chinese modern history, there was a much revered national hero, General Lin Zexu. Who initiate the fight against the British in 1840’s. He burned all the opium he could gather in a huge public display. His angry words are still recited in today’s Chinese elementary school classrooms, “Opium is evil, it weakened our people, our soldier, our country…” But the fact was, Chinese society was weakened from inside before opium even appeared. The closed society has been quietly rotten away from top to bottom for centuries. There was little outlet for real talent of the society. There wasn’t much progress happeneing for the society as a whole. Corruptions were prevalent. Opium provided an escape. A dying plant happened upon a killer disease. It was easy to blame the disease. Even though General Lin Zexu won his opium war, the final treaty between the British and the Qin Dynasty turned out to be the first of many humiliating treaties to come in China’s Modern History. Burning Opium didn’t help General Lin’s cause. Burning the entire country might. That was exactly what Chairman Mao tried over a century later.

There is a little analogy in gardening. When a flower attracted diseases, it was often because the plant itself was weak and unhealthy, either from lack of water, light, or too much water, etcetera. To prevent disease from happening, you either make the plant strong and healthy, or you try to shut down all disease sources. The latter has proven to be a harder path. Shutting down flow of air would usually cause more problems to the plant. Exposing the plant to the natural elements was usually more healthy for the plant. As long as the plant was healthy, often it could fight off many diseases using its own strength.

片子当中最感动我的就是 Lucy 姐姐 那句”我的孩子将比我有更多的机会——说这句话让我很痛苦，但是这是事实。“

哪一个国家的人民没有自己民族的自豪感，愿意承认自己的社会不如人？而为什么一批又一批的愿意忍受移民程序的繁琐，种族间的歧视，重建生活的艰辛？ ——为下一代人，可以有更多的选择。我想这个可能就是Full of Grace 的定义，为了另外一个人可以自己做出牺牲。

那些从穷困地区扛着行李落脚在北京上海深圳忍受城管大叔呼来唤去，从事最脏最累最让人看不起的职业的那些同胞，何尝不是如此？为了自己的孩子能够和城里人有同等的机会！

导演在洛杉矶长大，从小看到从拉丁美洲移民潮，这些不能够在美国政治和媒体上代表自己的人民，却占有美国加利福尼亚，亚利桑那，新墨西哥，德克萨斯这四个省三分之一的人口。那么只能由美国人来为他们说话。

主人公的年轻美丽，加上勇敢和倔强的性格只是吸引观众的基础，真正的故事是在讲述她经历中的一个有一个的充满风险的劫难。让人时时刻刻为Maria的未来捏一把汗，为她的命运同呼吸共命运。

这些劫难是谁造成的呢？是邪恶的罪犯？霸权的政府？还是腐败的警察么？

我喜欢这种没有恶人，只有厄运的故事。这是一个较高层次的世界观。

故事里面没有坏人，就连毒贩都是基本上盗亦有道。Maria和这些命运凄惨的女同胞们，都是因为贫穷，社会问题，政治原因成为命运中挣扎的可怜人。这和《悲惨世界》中的人们不尽相同。

这个故事在美国HBO 电视网上播放。希望能够提醒广大本土长大的美国人，他们周围的这些”外来者“，经历过什么样的艰辛——或许也是在提醒他们，他们的父母或者祖辈为了这一代有”更多机会“，付出多大的代价。

     演员表演真实自然。在看B超时露出像孩子一样天真甜美的笑容让我动容。而此之前都是沉重压抑，小小年纪就已沉稳世故。片子是对现实生活的直接陈述，没有站在道德的任何一面，每个人都有生存下去的理由，做着自己的选择。当人生活在不堪的最底层时，就很难有所谓正确的道德上的价值观。如果这部片子早几年看到，恐怕我是不会接受，觉得太过黑暗；而现在心智成熟可以接受到，不对别人做批判，但你可以，可以做出自己的选择。

如果她老老实实在当地体面的花工企业工作，怀着孩子与不爱的三无男人凑合结婚。生儿育女，在那个村子里过完自己的一生。那该多悲惨。

村子里，产业单一（花），贫穷，闭塞，一眼望透自己接下来几十年的生活了，她的姐姐和妈妈就是写照。她17岁啊，都是做梦青春年华的时候，却要做着富士康一样的活，分担家庭无谓的重担，和不爱的人结婚生子，挤在小小的房间。

她的脸上确没有屈从的表情。

契机来了，因为和上司不合愤然辞职。这里注意，她的姐姐和妈妈知道后立马呵斥抱怨她，赶紧回去请求原谅跪舔上司恳请重返工作。而不考虑她是不是被上司欺负，她愿不愿意在那工作灯。总之一句话，我把你养大，现在不管死活，赚钱回来。
贫穷，贫穷让一个人没有了尊严，让人的价值判断都是功利的。甚至这个人是自己的孩子，亲人。

另一方面，她怀孕了。胆怯、平庸的男人和她想法不一致，分开了。注意，玛利亚很勇敢，她追求真爱，而不是随随便便找个人嫁了（像极了红楼梦的鸳鸯，贾赦娶妾），不爱就不爱，不爱就分开，就算孩子要自己抚养。这里的后果她很清楚。

贩毒，这是有着风险的犯罪，来钱快。为了钱，当然也为了孩子，她需要搏一搏。更让她感兴趣是看看外面的世界，高楼大厦眼花缭乱的国际大都市纽约啊。

准备就绪后，她坐上前往美国纽约的飞机，这里展现四个女人，或者说四种类型的玛利亚的面貌。老手一个，熟手一个，玛利亚一个，树墩子一个。结果，老手落网了，熟手意外事故剖肠子了。剩下玛利亚和树墩子了。

这里玛利亚为何看到熟手被杀后，带着毒品跑走呢？难道不知道这美国她人生地不熟的，她还带着毒品，语言不通，贩毒黑社会全国找她们吗？毕竟，毒品犯罪是很严肃的事情，掉链子没好下场的。

这里的过度，还没法理解。。。。

接下来出现的女人深深影响她，可能是一生。怀孕的姐姐，告诉她，她留在美国，不是不想家，而是留在这肚子里的孩子有更多的机会。一个贫穷山区出来的未婚母亲，不得不考虑她肚子里孩子。

她没有防备，相信胖子不会报警，她真心仁爱，出资送友归故里，她不忍，隐瞒实情真痛心。这里看到人性的闪光，这是一个农村出来的女人，我很敬佩。这里树墩子是一个对比，当然也不是说树墩子做错了什么，而是人的选择很重要。

她选择留在美国，而树墩子回哥伦比亚，她没有选择继续贩毒，而是一个人打拼。

我在想，时常我们在城市里碰到的外地人，非本地人，都有自己带来的故事。我想去和他们聊聊天，听听他们的故事。

人生陷入困境是常事，在《万福玛丽亚》中，我们看不见哥伦比亚浓郁的民族风情，听不见那大海温柔的叹息，唯一得知 便是生活在那种穷困环境中的人们。《万福玛丽亚》是导演乔舒华·玛斯顿的电影处女作，有过拍摄连续剧《法律与秩序》的经验，《万福玛丽亚》这样的电影也自然是驾轻就熟。平实流畅的叙事，客观冷静的记录，将每一位观众都引入一个罪恶的魔窟之中。当一个十七岁的小女孩怀着身孕决定运送毒品补贴家用的时候，那种感觉就好像是上帝死了。

生活大概远比电影要残酷。

每次看欣赏第三世界国家电影的时候总要做一番挣扎，在这些国家中，有很多你想象不到的真实故事在上演，大多数故事都是关于绝望和死亡的。导演在《万福玛丽亚》这部电影中，并没有刻意去强调环境的艰苦，而是通过人物的生活，以及他们的对话和行为来展现哥伦比亚底层百姓的情困潦倒。在电影中，玛丽亚一方面受到残忍毒枭的欺压，另一方面受到美国海关警察的冷库对待，对于十七岁的女孩来说，这样的世界，除了残酷，没有更多的形容。女主角玛丽亚的视角和经历是整部电影的主线，观众只能跟随着玛丽亚来了解那个残酷的世界。从叙述手法上看，乔舒华·玛斯顿并没有可以的炫耀自己的拍摄技巧，反而用一种最真实简单的方式来讲述这个故事，平铺直叙，运用剧情本身的张力来推动电影的继续，用演员的真实情感来充实整部电影。值得一提的是，这部电影最大的特色就是配乐。以往，人们在看电影的时候，配乐会成为烘托情绪的一种手段，而在本片中，所有的情绪和张力依靠的都是电影本身的剧情。

十七岁少女的人生挣扎是绝望和悲伤。

在任何一个国家，穷苦的人们想要出人头地，唯一能依靠的就是自己。十七岁的玛丽亚不仅要撑起家庭的经济负担，还要尽量帮助姐姐来养活她的孩子。面对这样的困境，玛丽亚投射出来的是一种不符合年龄的坚韧。虽然导演一直将镜头放在玛丽亚身上，但是，纵观全篇，导演依然将哥伦比亚这个国家中的人民，为了生存而需要担负的代价表现的淋漓尽致。在遥远的第三世界国家，玛丽亚这样的任务比比皆是，年轻气盛的性格和低三下四的工作处境相互冲击着。他们拼尽全力想要得到自己渴望的成功。导演在本片中并没有过分夸大哥伦比亚的经济问题和民生问题，而是用写实的手法，旁敲侧击的让观众了解到哥伦比亚的绝望和悲伤。

整部电影除了玛丽亚的选择和坚持之外，更重要的问题则是所谓的美国梦。在美国式资本主义商业机器的压榨中，他们都认为美国便是掘金圣地。当他们冒着危险来到美国的时候，得到的是冷漠的海关，怀疑的态度。哥伦比亚的毒枭将她们作为运送毒品的工具，而美国司法机构却将她们视为危险的所在，到最后，她们拥有的只是被人宰割和永无止尽的折磨。