【The New Yorker】Wes Anderson’s Roald Dahl Quartet Abounds in Audacious Artifice and Stinging Political Critique

英語ニュース多読
スポンサーリンク

おはようございます。KANOです。今回はこちらの記事から。

Wes Anderson’s Roald Dahl Quartet Abounds in Audacious Artifice and Stinging Political Critique
Four new short films make clear how crucial the author’s work has been in the development of Anderson’s art.

Wes AndersonのRoald Dahl短編について。
ベネさま出てるしティザー面白そうなんだがNetflixなのよねえ。

minor

意味 さほど大きくない, 比較的重要 [重大] でない

Wes Anderson’s new quartet of films, based on stories by Roald Dahl, which dropped on Netflix last week, may be brief—three are seventeen minutes long, one runs thirty-nine—but there’s nothing minor about them.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

長くないから見たいんだけどね…。

hinge

意味 かなめ, 要点.

This should be no surprise, given the centrality of Dahl in Anderson’s artistic development. The director’s 2009 adaptation of “Fantastic Mr. Fox” is the hinge in his career, the point at which he perceived and heightened the political implications of the stories he was telling, albeit in a way of his own.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

「ヒンジ」しか浮かばなかったけど、これは連想しやすい単語かな。

giddy

意味 目がくらみ [回り] そうな; 目まぐるしい

That’s where the four new Dahl adaptations—“The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar” (the longest), “The Swan,” “The Rat Catcher,” and “Poison”—come in. Though the four films have widely varied subjects, Anderson approaches them all similarly: they are giddy cinematic experiments that take the concept of storytelling daringly literally.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

Lest

意味 …しないように, …しないかと懸念 [憂慮] して, …するといけないから

Lest viewers become even briefly comfortable with the enchantments of his staging and of his actors’ performances, Anderson jolts them alert with ever more audacious contrivances.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

onward

意味 [時· 年齢を示す語の後で]…以後, …以降

Anderson has long mastered the lesson that Godard delivered from “Breathless” onward: that viewers can remain deeply engaged in the events of a drama even while being pulled outside of that drama by fillips of form or fourth-wall-breaking winks and nods. Here he stands that notion on its head; he never breaks the framework of classically realistic drama because he never establishes it in the first place.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

やっぱThe New Yorker難しいな、全然わからん、さすがだw

fop

意味 [C] (やや古) しゃれ男, きざな野郎.

“Henry Sugar” is a story of wide scope. Henry (Benedict Cumberbatch) is a rich fop who becomes obsessed with a magic manual and teaches himself X-ray vision and even clairvoyance; nested within his story is a history of the manual itself—delivered by Dahl (Fiennes), by the doctor (Dev Patel) who wrote the manual, by the magician (Ben Kingsley) whose skills it details, and by Henry himself.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

発音は「 /fɑ (ː)p|fɔp/ 」

repay

意味 〈人が〉〈人〉に報いる, 返礼する; 報復する ((よりくだけて)pay back)

“Poison” is also set in India—indeed, mainly in a single room there, where a British man (Cumberbatch) cruelly repays an Indian doctor (Kingsley) who saves him from the mortal bite of a poisonous snake.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique

Ben Kingsleyとベネさまの密室劇…見たい。

virtue

意味 [C][U] (物· 事の) 長所, 利点 (advantage)

Among the virtues of the age of streaming is a renewed prominence for short films. Recent brief masterworks given streaming releases include Dwayne LeBlanc’s “Civic,” Sophia Nahli Allison’s “A Love Song for Latasha,” Jay Rosenblatt’s “When We Were Bullies,” and Radu Jude’s “The Potemkinists.”

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/wes-andersons-roald-dahl-quartet-abounds-in-audacious-artifice-and-stinging-political-critique
タイトルとURLをコピーしました