雜草哲學～Lyo的點點滴滴

(這是當年的預告)

今早終於跟阿民一起看完「Dog Day Afternoon」了。從一點多看到三點多…雖然已是半夜，但我早立定主意要守歲，就算阿民不跟我一起看這部片，我也要自己找另一部片來看，so…

第一次看有中文字幕的版本，終於把整個故事弄清楚了。其實跟我看英文版時的理解差不多，只不過有些細節當初沒聽懂而已。大概是已看過兩次、熟知劇情，現在時間又太晚的關係，這次我沒前兩次看得那麼感動，但Al Pacino在講電話及最後Sonny被捕這兩段的演出依然令我熱愛不已！他的眼神真的很能表現出複雜的情緒，雖然Al Pacino最為人熟知的是他富有感染力的演講，但在我看來，他沒有台詞，光靠眼神表達心境的演出最為成功也最具魅力。他甚至沒有什麼皺眉或苦著臉的表情，但光是眼睛的睜大與微闔、眼神的流轉，就能充份表現出Sonny的悲傷、絕望、壓抑...可惜阿民對這兩段經典沒我這麼崇尚，或許是有字幕遮住些微畫面的關係吧。

阿民看的時候經常動來動去，前半段結合喜劇與諷刺元素的部份還好，因為較容易讓人因爆笑而保持清醒，到後半段故事變得嚴肅後，阿民笑的時間相對減少，還因時間流逝而顯得越來越疲憊，讓我有點擔心他會因愛睏而無法專心看完整部電影，幸好不但沒有(雖然事後他說他真的很累)，他後半段還看得很緊張，覺得心臟壓力好大呢！！因為阿民在看的時候有許多”期待”與猜測，即不知道角色們(尤其是Sonny)接下來的選擇會是什麼，會不會背叛Sal、會不會(這是阿民的希望)在Sal被射殺後故意有所舉動，讓自己也被殺…等，而劇情演變又很難讓人猜出答案，他才會看得這麼緊張。阿民說他覺得就這點來說，這個劇本或說這部電影寫/拍得很好，它不是”告訴”你一個故事，而是描述一些觀點，讓你用自己的想法來構成自己的故事。很多部份都是留空的，不作任何陳述或說明，而讓觀眾自己思考，這點讓這個故事顯得特別。我頗同意阿民的觀點，但他會很在意電影那些部份忠於原事件、那些沒有，比如人質們的反應，他會有點懷疑現實中是否如此(他是覺得他們太悠閒，不夠害怕嗎？但我覺得這些反應描寫得很真實耶)等，並想以編劇自己的改編來推知編劇的想法，有些時候我就覺得他太鑽牛角尖了。因為改編除了難以忠於事實(例如因無法訪問到Sonny---現實中叫John Wojtowicz---本人而無法推知他的心理狀態，只能自己推測)外，有時僅是為了增強電影效果或戲劇張力，可能沒什麼深刻的含義在裡頭，去猜每段戲的用意在那，只會把自己累死…

Anyway，有一點是我之前未曾想過的，就是最後Sonny出賣了Sal。阿民覺得Sonny或許希望讓人質平安被救出，讓自己和Sal死掉，才會立下遺書什麼的，後來他對Sal說的那些關於搭機逃到另一個國家之類的話，都只是他內心的希望或者幻想，因為他一開始就不甚相信他們能夠順利逃亡，這跟我頭兩次看電影時的感覺都不同說…我一直以為他直到最後都相信自己和Sal能夠順利逃出，因此最後功敗垂成，他望著人質和死去的Sal才會顯得萬般悲痛。我實在不敢相信Sonny會想要背叛Sal…不過聽了阿民的話，仔細想想又覺得蠻有道理的，因為電影中，FBI不只一次向Sonny暗示這件事，而聰明如Sonny不可能聽不出弦外之音，若說他完全沒打算出賣Sal，似乎又不太可能…看來Sonny的心理思考比我之前想的還要複雜許多…@__@

後來我上網查了一下IMDB及Wikipedia等網路資料上關於這部影片的介紹，也看了John Wojtowicz本人的影評(看以自己為藍本的電影，感覺一定很怪吧XD)，才知道電影真的改編蠻多的，比如讓John Wojtowicz很不爽的”出賣Sal的暗示”及演他母親和妻子的演員表現方式(他說他母親並不是這種”過度保護”的類型，他妻子也不是這種又醜又囉唆的女人，他討厭這種好像把他搶銀行的罪過推給她們的描述，或至少暗示觀眾他會愛上男人是因為娶了這種女人)；現實中他也沒有腳踏兩條船，而是先與妻子離婚才和Aron(電影中的Leon)結婚的。看了他的抱怨，讓我對這部電影的感覺變得有點複雜，雖然喜歡，卻又覺得它應該寫”this is inspired by the event…”而不是”this is based on the event…”，不然對當事人實在不太公平。就像Sal明明不是同性戀，卻硬被電視台描述成同性戀一樣，會給觀眾錯誤的訊息與印象。

除此之外，我也覺得編劇好像有企圖把Sonny描述成一個悲劇英雄，讓他搶銀行的動機更加悲劇性，即讓他有個never listen to him的母親和老婆，又債台高築之類的，即使他真正的動機就是為了Aron一個人…這樣真不知是好還是不好？

不過，我很高興John Wojtowicz本人也非常欣賞Al Pacino的演出(他去搶銀行的計畫還是以當天剛看的”教父”為基礎咧)，說他把這個角色演得精彩萬分，應該頒個奧斯卡獎給他之類的，也很喜歡演Leon的演員的表演方式，認為他把Aron該有的神態及說話方式揣摩得非常逼真，許多他倆的片段都令他看得感動不已，甚至落淚(比如念遺書那段)…

下面就是John Wojtowicz的影評完整版。

Real Dog Day hero tells his story
by John Wojtowicz
from Jump Cut, no. 15, 1977, pp. 31-32

What follows is an article John Wojtowicz originally sent to the New York Times about his reaction to the film DOG DAY AFTERNOON, a film partly based on his life, and the Times’ interesting rejection letter. Jump Cut has reprinted this article from Gay Sunshine: A Journal of Gay Liberation, No. 29/ 30, Summer/Fall, 1976, ($10 for 12 issues. $15 Canada and overseas. Free to those incarcerated in prisons or mental hospitals. P.O. Box 40397, San Francisco 94140.) Gay Sunshine reviewed DOG DAY AFTERNOON in issue No. 26/27, and Jump Cut reviewed the film in issue No. 11/12.
In May, 1976 John Wojtowicz was transferred to the Federal Correctional Institution at Lompoc, California. where he still is. —Eds.
••••••• 

December 22, 1975
Mr. John S. Wojtowicz
P.O. Box 1000
Federal Penitentiary
Lewisburg, Pennsylvania 

Deer John:
I'm very sorry to say no to this after all of our correspondence, but this article just won't work for us. The problem is that I just don't believe you have profoundly come to grips with the motives for your crime, and the complex relationship between art and reality in this instance.
Sincerely,
William H. Henan
Arts and Leisure Editor
The New York Times
••••••••• 

This is the first newspaper article I have ever written, but it is necessary so you the people can know the truth. On April 23, 1973, I was sentenced to serve 20 years for armed bank robbery even though I made a deal and pleaded guilty. The powers that be did not keep their part of the deal even though I am a first offender. I'm now serving time at the U.S. Maximum Security Fortress at Lewisburg, Pa.

A movie entitled DOG DAY AFTERNOON starring Al Pacino (of THE GODFATHER) was made by Warner Bros. and based on the events of August 22nd and 23rd of 1972 for which I am now serving time. I am presently in the courts with the assistance of Mr. George Heath, another inmate in here who is a jail-house lawyer, because the Movie People (Artists Entertainment Complex. Inc. and Warner Bros.) have violated my contract with them. I have an agreement in writing for 1% of the net profits and a verbal agreement for 2% of the gross from the movie. It seems now that everyone involved is denying this. “Exploitation” is a dirty word, but I have been exploited as well as my family and friends.

I have had other problems with the movie, and I even had to launch a massive letter writing campaign after the Associate Warden, Mr. D.D. Grey and the Warden, Mr. F.E. Arnold in here both refused to let my movie in here after Warner Bros. had agreed to send it free of charge for all of us to see. I can report now that the outside pressure from both the Gay and straight newspapers was enough to make the officials hare relent and on Friday might, 10/3/75 and also on Sunday afternoon, 10/5/75, we here finally were able to see the movie. I was allowed to see a special preview of it on Friday afternoon, 10/3/75 all alone with the exception of a guard being there. It was a very moving experience.

The movie. DOG DAY AFTERNOON, contains everything from laughter, tears, love, hate, devotion, religion, to hope, drama, and thrills. The reason I call it a ”?” is because it leaves so much out and so many unanswered questions. What you are about to read are my own personal comments and feelings even though they may result in the movie losing money. They must be made.

The main reason I did what I did on 8/22-23/72 is never explained in the movie, and instead you the viewer are left with many questions. I did what a man has to do in order to save the life of someone I loved a great deal. His name was Ernest Aron (now known as Ms. Liz Debbie Eden) and he was Gay. He wanted to be a woman through the process of a sex-change operation and thus was labeled by doctors as a Gender Identity Problem. He felt he was a woman trapped in a man’s body. This caused him untold pain and problems which accounted for his many suicide attempts. I met him in 1971 at an Italian Bazaar in N.Y.C. after two years of separation from my female wife, Carmen, and two children.

Ernest and I were married in Greenwich Village in N.Y.C. on 12/4/71 in a Roman Catholic ceremony. We had our ups and downs as most couples do, and I tried my best to get him the money he needed for his sex change operation he so badly needed. I was unable to obtain the funds for his birthday on 8/19/72 and so, on Sunday, 8/29, he attempted suicide while I was at of the house. He died a clinical death in the hospital but was revived. While I went to get his clothes, he was declared mentally sick and sent to the Psychiatric Ward of Kings County Hospital in Brooklyn, NY. I went to see hin and I tried to obtain his release on 8/21, but was told he would not be released and would stay there for a long time until he was cured.

Soon 8/22/75, along with two others, I began what I felt was necessary to save the life of someone I truly and deeply loved. No monetary value can be placed on a human life, and as it says in the Bible - “No greater love both a man then to lie down his life for another.”

I regret the things that happened, but most of all that my friend, Sal Naturale, who was only 18 years old was murdered by the F.B.I.. It was not necessary for then to murder him, because he had been immobilized and unable to do anything, but yet the F.B.I. murdered him before my eyes. I was also immobilized and unable to do anything. The movie never shows this as it truly happened, as it does with so many other scenes in it. I estimate the movie to be only 30% true, even though it states - “This movie is based on a true incident that occurred in Brooklyn, N.Y. on 8/22/72.” All through the movie they take facts that were true but then present them differently. For example: It is true that the third person involved with us did panic and fled the bank at the beginning, but not as they have him doing it in one of the comical scenes, which are so rampant throughout the movie.

They have a scene with my mother and I outside of the bank talking to each other, but in real life we never did talk, and I never went out to see her even though she was there. A third scene shows me speaking to my female wife, Carmen, on the telephone. (The actress who portrays her in the movie is an ugly and greasy looking women with a big mouth, when in real life my wife is beautiful and very loving wife.) I did try to call her, but the F.B.I. cut the phone lines and air conditioning before I could get to speak to her on the line. I did not like the horrible way they tried to make her the blame or the scapegoat for everything that happened, especially because of the Gay aspects involved.

Now to one of the most despicable parts of the film. In it they hint very dramatically that I made some kind of a deal to betray my partner, Sal. It hurt me that the same F.B.I. who cold-bloodedly killed an 18-year-old boy can be depicted as having me help then. This is not true and there is no human being low enough in this world who would let the F.B.I. kill his partner in order for him to survive. It can be labeled as just Hollywood trying to sell a movie or just to increase the drama, but I call it sick.

Many of the men in here thought the movie was a good comedy, but most were outraged at how they misrepresented the truth and invented things that were so despicable. I even had some problems as a result of it, especially the part they invented that hinted of a deal with the F.B.I..

Now for a more pleasant side; the directing by Mr. Sidney Lumet was fantastic. The cast did an outstanding and monumental job as a whole. There are only two exceptions to this. First, the actress playing my wife, Carmen, made her look horrible and inferred that I left her and winded up in the arms of a Gay man because of her. This is completely untrue, and I feel sorry for the actress for having to play such a horrible role. Second, the actress playing my mother overdid her role, especially the overprotective Mother type baloney in it. Some of what they both said, as well as the actor portraying my lover, Ernest (called Leon in the movie) were true statements of facts, but did not really happen in the real life event as such,

Al Pacino’s performance has to be called “out of sight” and the best he’s ever done. I feel he deserves the Academy Award for Best Male Actor for his unbelievable performance. For almost two hours he was just fantastic. He made me laugh, cry, sweat, and feel uncomfortable at times all in one movie. His characterization was flawless.

I was very touched and cried in the most moving scene in the entire movie. the one in which he dictates my last will and testament. During this memorable scene over 1,300 men in here were completely silent, and you could hear a pin drop. For an hour and a half previously everyone was laughing, but then it all stopped, and the truth and stark realism was finally presented in one of the most moving scenes I've ever seen in a motion picture.

Chris Sarandon who portrays my male lover in the movie also deserves the Academy Award for Best Male Supporting Actor. It was his film debut and he was too much for words. He had to portray the widest range of emotions but do it in the right way. I feel he did it perfectly. If in real life Ernie had said those things and done those actions, he would have done them exactly as Chris did them. In the telephone scene between Pacino and himself his performance was unfathomable and a tribute to his mastery of an unbelievably difficult role. I was moved to tears by it because the realism was there and so professionally done.

My feelings over all on the movie were that it was a good comedy, but I did not think it was funny because it was about me and my loved ones. I felt the movie was in essence a piece of garbage. It did not show the whole truth, and the little it did show was constantly twisted and distorted. So it left you, the viewer with so many unanswered questions. I fault the screen writer, Mr. Frank Pierson, for not going into a more explanatory and deeper characterization of the people involved. But Hollywood wants to make money, and if sacrificing the truth or exploiting the lives of real people is the way to make money, then that’s what they do.

I feel deeply hurt by the movie, and I hope that you the reader will remember the above if you have seen the movie or are about to see it. I have taken the movie people to court for the exploitation and for their breach of contract. But the battle will be a long and hard one, as will the one against the book people (Delacorte Press of N.Y. and Dell Publishing Co., Inc. and Patrick Mann, author of the hard cover and also the paperback entitled Dog Day Afternoon).

It is not easy for me or my loved ones because of my imprisonment, but I am determined to do what is right as God gives me the light to see that right. Ever since I arrived here at the U.S. Penitentiary, Lewisburg, Pa., I have been treated as a “Second Class Inmate” and denied the same rights that other inmates in here are enjoying. This is because of the homosexual motive and implications of my crime. I have been arbitrarily discriminated against and harassed by the officials here. I have complained repeatedly and also filed administrative remedies to the Warden, Regional Director, and Assistant Director, but I still fail to obtain relief. I am now in the courts over this.

Further, at the present time I cannot even get legal papers notarized by the officials here to send the courts because my jail-house lawyer, Mr. George Heath’s name is on then. Their refusal to notarize these legal papers is another violation of my rights in here. At one time they even refused to let me do this article for the New York Times, but after pressure from the Washington Post, they relented, and so now I am doing this article.

There is a prayer that the Alcoholics Anonymous have in here that I try to live by, and it goes like this: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”