小大人

This part beginning from a dark movements, From the back view, a group of students entered the painting, and the protagonist followed the paintings of everyone. The director's handling of this picture deliberately makes the backlight of the scene brighter than the foreground, so that the audience can shift their attention away from the students who have passed the foreground.Then the lens is very slight, and it is very imperceptible to push to the Jake.

Other students have a good exchange and itobviouslyseems that he is lonely and quiet. From Jake's back shot to Tony in the middle of others and withclassmates for a lively communication, andwith just previous shot thatJake just walked quietly in stark contrast.

The director gave Jake a reaction lens that placed him at one-third of the picture. At the edge of the picture, he formed a protagonist with a sense of inner crisis, and the state of the protagonist looked up, which added to the expression of the protagonist'semotion.After the camera washorizontalshaken to the left, after Tony and the others walk out of tjepicture, Jack returned to the center of the screen.Using painting as a transition, it seems that the character's emotions are cut off here, making the emotions extremely restrained and the lens expressionseemsmore objective.

With the beginning of background music,director added a close-up of Jake's classmates with four different scenes and different positions. Finally, it is a close-up of the main character. It is very interesting to convey that the people around Jake have changed, just like the people around everyone in the real world are constantly changing, sometimes spreading outand getting together.

The background music is only repeated for a whilein the same way, and it can clearly hear its editing points, as if it implies that everything is actually circulating.

I am very appreciatethat the director described the emotions of the characters with an extremely cool lens movement.Most of them are fixed lens.Using a fixed lens can make the audience move away from emotions and turn into thinking.The friendship of Jake and Tony in "Little Men" carries that kind of bittersweet weight. Jake and Tony hold hands over the growing abyss between their parents. They're only 13 years old. Do they know that relationships are fragile and need protection? Do they understand how precious their friendship is, how much they need to hold onto it, how much they will miss it if it ends? These questions carry intense reverberation long after the film ends.

In the class,wealsoreadthis part of the script. In the front part of the script, the screenwriter used the enthusiasm of the guest to describe the alienation of their relationship, echoing the scene of their mother's first meeting.From the lens or the script are deliberately creating a distance between them.But after the script, it was too straightforward. The director simply used the movements and the lens to sublimate the whole movie.Using gestures to describe mental activity is the most difficult task in terms of scriptwriting.I thinkfilmsmainly needs to use the lens language to show the theme and emotions. I think this is the place where fabulous in <Little Men>.The director knows how to do appropriate subtraction in the film.Its smallness makes it grand and moving. These are the things, these little moments, decisions and consequences that most human lives are made of, after all.

This film is very different from the general run of ingratiating middlebrow indies that pop up on screen periodically, drenched with implausibility, sentimentality and lame bet-hedging humour.It is composed with scrupulous observational intelligence and Care. It is really engaging.

关于电影《小小人》little men

也许我们曾经怦然心动，也许释然了…

青春期的无可奈何，失落和焦虑

在现实迅速的成长中只剩下微微一笑……

只看过Ira Sachs的爱很怪，当时被电影里满溢的生活感迷住，安静朴素的的琐碎生活，感情柔软绵长，被两个老爷子的爱情所感动…小小人和爱很怪的风格是一致的，依旧缓慢的将一些微小的情愫串联起来，矛盾和冲突都给予足够的缓冲，很多时候，电影呈现的生活化让我觉得自己像一个电影中没有入镜的老邻居，沉默的注视着这两家人的喜怒哀乐，当jacob玩着直排轮经过小公园，那阵午后的微风混杂着阳光和泥土的味道，轻抚过我的脸，仿佛jacob刚刚经过我的身边旁，我捕捉到了他和tony的相视一笑……

故事关乎于两家人，敏感内敛的艺术小天才jacob有着一个郁郁不得志的演员父亲和一个忙碌持家的心理医生母亲，叛逆洒脱热爱表演的tony那未露面的父亲也许在非洲拼命的工作着，阴郁焦虑的母亲经营着并不景气的服装店…两家人因为jacob爷爷的去世而联系到一起，jacob的父亲成为了tony家新的房东。两个男孩暧昧的友谊火速升温成为了最要好的朋友。此时，双方家长因为实际的经济利益产生矛盾，期间父母和孩子的矛盾爆发，经历了短暂的焦灼和反抗后，两个男孩随父母的决定就此分开，也许再遇见也只是远远的注视…

tony和表演老师练习解放天性的那场戏特别有趣，现场的所有学生以及表演老师都是本色出演，特别真实，不禁想起了我大学上表演课时的各种撒泼卖丑，就这么疯得自得其乐。

导演Q&A中，最后关于片名Little Men, 导演说其实是指每一个角色。

题外话，jacob和tony两个人的面相模样神似emma和小evan（这对貌似订婚，可怜的小快银哈）,我默默在心里期待了好久cp！

想起来小学时候玩的最好的朋友LB，一个特别有绘画天赋的女孩子，笑起来甜甜的肉肉的，她是我至今见过最有绘画灵气的姑娘，以至于那个时候我会照着她的画临摹。任何东西在她的画笔下仿佛都充满生命，信手拈来。仿佛她就是为绘画而生。

那时候我每周都会去她家玩，一起看漫画书一起上绘画课，她会把每期《漫友》的海报留给我，借给我她最爱的杂志。要知道那时候一张《漫友》的海报对小学生来说有多珍贵。我们会在课堂上偷偷传纸条，课间厮混在一起，就连放学后也会用家里的座机给彼此打电话聊天。分享各种有意思的心事和秘密，连老师后来都找到我们的家长说我俩太爱粘着，耽误学习。然而我对她的记忆就只停留在那个时候。

高中虽然两人在一个学校，但是却不经常来往，她的性格也变得没有从前活泼，我也有了其他好朋友。两个人不知道为什么就渐渐疏远开来。没有过争吵没有过分歧。我一直觉得是因为她去了不喜欢的初中所以性格变得不爱交谈。起初我们还会打电话彼此问候，可再后来就断了联络。

再后来大学假期两人约见过一次，说来奇怪，记得清儿时一起玩耍的细节，却记不得最近一次见面的事情。想不起来两人见面干了什么聊了什么。似乎是一起吃了冰淇淋和甜品，我还开玩笑说她怎么瘦了那么多。然而那次见面结束后我内心似乎就知道了那是我们最后一次见面了。

所以当看到最后美术馆里Jack 望着Tony 的背影却没有去say hi的时候我想Jack 也是知道两人的缘分至此，各有各的生活，再亲密无间都只是存活在过去的影子。看似Jack 在地上平静的画画，其实内心早已把他和Tony以前的日子像放电影一样的放了一遍又一遍吧。就如自己知道的，有些人的进度条在你生命里走完了就是走完了。

我只是觉得最受不了的地方是，为什么大人的矛盾要牵扯到孩子，关于商业的部分为什么要牵扯到人情，之前一直以为我穷我有理是一些地方才会出现的，原来是世界性的。

说点别的吧，小杰在东尼帮他拿东西的时候，东尼主动分担了很大一部分，有男生在照顾女生的感觉，有种暖暖的不是兄弟的感情在流动，我很喜欢导演笔触的细腻，两个人一起去做对方喜欢的事情，陪伴在一起，细细的感情在滋生。

最开始的时候，我以为导演是要揭露出不一样的感情，比如东尼妈妈和小杰爷爷有过一段感情这样，要不然很难解释，东尼妈妈在面对房租问题的时候为什么会频打感情牌，直到律师过去，东尼妈妈哭起来的时候，才知道是真的付不了那么多的房租。

最后那个凝视，真的很触动，久别的人，看见一个相似的背影，都会凝视很久，导游留了白，不知道两个人最后有没有相遇，有没有抱在一起欢呼，只是看见扎着小辫子的小杰，在凝视那个背影的时候，没有太多的动作，却传达出了一种害怕一眨眼对方又会不见，却没有勇气去确定是不是对方的感情。

突然的就想起了小时候，早早的离家，和要好的朋友分开，真的是太小了，那时候还没有QQ，手机也没有普及，没有任何联系方式，试过写信，却没有寄出去，因为没有办法寄信，最后只能选择默默的想念。直到有一年，回老家时，在菜市场，一个抱着小孩儿的女生在买东西，第一眼看着是她，再看好像又不是，有压不住的喜悦，却因为突然想不起来名字而不知道该怎么去打招呼，该怎么去确定是不是她。直到两年后，经过辗转加了微信，聊天时，她说两年前，在菜市场看见一个女生很像你，可是又觉得不像就没有去说，我说，我和你有一个一样的经历......

Checking out of the genderqueer bracket, American indie urban aesthete Ira Sachs’ LITTLE MEN continues with his concern of Brooklyn’s gentrification, in LOVE IS STRANGE (2014), a senior gay couple cannot afford their apartment and has to live separately, a temporary arrangement eventually plunges into a precipitate farewell, here, it centers around a nuclear family, Brian Jardine (Kinnear), a seasoned thespian struggling to pay the bills, his wife Kathy (Ehle), a full-time psychotherapist, and their 13-year-old son Jake (Taplitz), move into Brian’s father’s two-story building, inherited after the latter’s death. They have a tenant, the Chilean immigrant Leonor Calvelli (García), a single mother who operates an artisanal dress shop in the ground floor, by dint of a very low monthly rent arranged between her and Brian’s father for many years.

Brian and his sister Audrey (Balsam), both need money to support their families, revises a new lease demanding a treble amount of fee (still, considerably cheaper than the ballooning market price), which builds a tension between the two families, and what is also at cost is the newfound friendship between Jake and his coeval Tony (Barbieri), Leonor’s son, when their quotidian proximity is discontinued.

More than anything, the two kid actors are phenomenal, both first-time actors, Theo Taplitz remarkably imbues an adorable appearance of sensitivity and androgyny to accentuate Jake’s painter’s disposition, not to mention his heart-rending plea in the climax. Whereas Michael Barbieri is totally on the opposite of the spectrum, with his convivial, animated verve and a naturalistic elocution that betrays his age, which is fit as glove as Tony’s aspiring actor identity. Their friendship seems very organic, albeit their polarized make-ups, mercifully and perspicaciously Sachs doesn’t make a heavy weather of Jake’s budding affection towards Tony, which is tacitly suggested but as in reality, like as not, those little torch-carrying secret is mostly saved for its originator to savor and wallow, bless Sachs for not sensationalize a young boy’s vulnerable, inchoate sexual awakening.

Grownups are also a cracking cluster, almost 20 years after his Oscar-nominated breakthrough in AS GOOD AS IT GETS (1997), Greg Kinnear matures with an understated complexity that is given a full range here, he is a grieving son, a frustrating breadwinner, a glowing actor on stage, a devoted, grateful husband and a caring father, who is saddled with a daunting task to negotiate an unpleasant business deal with a tough-nut in the form of a magnificent Paulina García, nothing is above her Leonor to get what she intends, emotional manipulation, outright humiliation, tactical evasion, even if a child’s innocent, heartfelt plea can do the trick, she has no qualms about leveraging it. García has so many strings to her bow, and each one adds a tangible layer to her character’s humanity, warts and all, which is such an exceptional achievement that defiantly flouts the atrocious typecast of a downtrodden immigrant woman struggling in the land of freedom, here, she fervently digs in her heels and brazens it out in fighting a losing battle.

Sending out a well-meaning message of “letting go the past”, Sachs’ LITTLE MEN is the whole package, a school of hard knocks for an adolescent, a critical looking into the miasma of gentrification and a hyperreal examination of ordinary beings’ interrelations.

referential entries: Sachs’ LOVE IS STRANGE (2014, 7.8/10), KEEP THE LIGHTS ON (2012, 6.8/10).