正午1952

好片就是不怕晚，老片越看越有味，今日观看1952年上映的电影《正午》，故事讲述了西部小城里有一位即将卸任的警长Kane和未婚妻Amy在朋友的见证与祝福中举行婚礼，他们正准备开始度蜜月。忽然间有三位不速之客打破了小镇的和谐氛围，他们在等候被Kane抓住的恶人的到来。

🌸原创：小孙字典没输字

Kane来到了酒吧与教堂，里面的民众用冷言笑语，冷漠旁观的态度敷衍着他，他们纷纷劝Kane离开，而他们带着家人一起躲避，不与曾经心目中的英雄参与这场混战。

🌸原创：小孙字典没输字

Kane的尽职尽责保卫这片领土的安全，他的有情有义是配得上这座寂寂无名的小镇，而小镇上制造舆论的人们配不上这位被他们的所作所为心寒的英雄。

🌸原创：小孙字典没输字

不惧战友的临阵逃脱，不怕一人行走的孤独，孤立无助的他成了自己的英雄，Kane没有极度的痛苦，也没有大声嘶吼，可是本人只觉心里不由得一阵发酸，仿佛内心里有一把钝刀磨出鲜血淋漓。

🌸原创：小孙字典没输字

Kane的故事里肩负着无处呐喊的孤独与痛苦，牛羊成群躲避，猛兽独行于小镇。幸好还是有他的未婚妻最终坚守在他身边，看着绝世美貌的Grace Kelly,目光温柔中带着悲悯，华衣春衫点缀她介于Audery Hepburn的清纯高贵和Marilyn Monroe的内敛优雅之间的气质，纵观Grace Kelly的一生，婚后因各种原因无法再继续施展自己的艺术风采，再看着电影里未婚妻Amy勇敢击杀敌人，心中激起阵阵波澜，这皆是命运之神给她描绘的人生底色。

🌸原创：小孙字典没输字

这个像潮水一般的故事终于在涨落后不急不躁地告一段落，仿佛什么也没有发生就这么结束了。这部不过时的影片饱含着对现实生活的冷观与深省，愿人心如初，守住一颗赤诚的少年英雄心。

当年这个片子看得很是偶然，仅仅为了替同学签到，就上了一堂影视欣赏课，而那个老师放的第一部电影恰恰就是这个《正午》，那时远不知此片的伟大，只是为了坚持到课间签到走人，才静静呆着看完了这85分钟。 　　记得那个文学院的老师在放映前就提示说这部片子是影史上第一部实时电影，电影的85分钟就是现实的85分钟。尽管他放的其他片子品味很差，我还是要感谢他，否则以我那时的感知能力根本不会在观影时体会这些。 　　后来再看《24小时》，就会得意地说,这算个甚，你家先人五十年前就用过的～是的，尽管时间过去了五十年，美国那帮搞影视的精英们换了一茬又一茬，金刚都攀上了帝国大厦，影片还是需要钟表来作为此类片子的重要叙事道具，只有从大钟到电子计时器的差别才显示出二者不同之时代。这样的差别也不时提醒我们《正午》的超前与伟大。

( 哲学课小作业）

High Noon is not a typical Western film (at least on the plot) like A Fistful of Dollars or My Darling Clementine. There is no doubt that it shows that two main characters (Marshal Will Kane and his wife, Amy Kane) as heroes that thwarted the criminals’ conspiracy; but the significant difference is that Fred Zinnemann spent a lot of time to describe the conflicts between town residents and the marshal, also Amy’s moral conflict. Will Kane hopes that the residents of the town and his subordinates can accompany him to fight the criminals who are coming to town. However, none of them wants to accompany him, actually, one person is willing to go with him at first; but after the person knows that only he and marshal are in the group, he gives up very quickly. According to Kant, when people measure the total worth of our actions, duty always takes the first place, and it contains a good will. The duty that marshal contain is completely different from people in town. People judge their action merely by the end, which is they may lose life in fighting. On the contrary, marshal focuses on duty as intrinsic value, he does not care about what consequences of his action. Marshal’s action, like Kant said, “from duty has its moral worth not in the purpose to be attained by it… but merely upon the principle of volition… without regard for any object of the faculty of desire” (4:400). The heroism of the film is embodied by the different treatment of moral duty between people in town and marshal. Besides, the other person who opposed the marshal, his wife, Amy Kane, has a different reason. She is a Quaker, so she disapproves her husband using violence to fight with criminals. When the choice is coming, she gives up rational thinking without hesitation because of Quaker’s doctrine. “It is difficult for any single individual to extricate himself from the minority that has become almost natural to him”. But she is struggling throughout the whole film because she loves marshal and does not want to be a widow. In the end, she took her gun and shot a criminal. I think if Kant is watching this scene, he may be proud because it was a victory of the Enlightenment. If Amy follows the Quaker’s doctrine without using reason to think this choice, she just like a pastor preaching in church, which is private use. But she chose to stand out from her doctrine that she used to believe, all her action becomes a kind of public use, and she accepts this unrestricted freedom to make her own choice by human’s rationality. Just like Kant suggests, — “Have courage to make use of your own understanding”.