萨缪尔·富勒(1912—)阐释电影《狂人彼埃罗》的用语可说是枯燥,直率,咄咄逼人,简直是怀有敌意,仿佛是从一个富勒剧本上撕下来的。但这篇文章的开头好像提出一个全新的形象比喻,认为电影是以前各类艺术的集大成者,是从马雅可夫斯基到麦凯里的一个综合。但当富勒继续评述电影具备把文学名著,名曲和美术名作带给亿万人民(他自己离萨尔伯格比批评他的人所认为的好像更接近些)的长处时,他自己的作法却与此相去甚远了。实际上,拍摄了《天箭座的行程》、《恐怖的走廊》和《裸吻》的那个富勒直到文章结束都没出现,倒是突然冒出“一种能够抓住创作者的形式”,“燃烧着新思想的青年”以及“激情……像一只蚊蚋一样被碾死了”这类句子。一贯热情有余的富勒总是比喻过分。富勒原是一名记者,同旧《纽约杂志》有联系,三十年代中走遍全国,专门报道凶杀案件。他的电影作品总是离不开他原先随第一军团在非洲和欧洲征战的那段经历,连非战争作品都充斥着战争片所具有的安排好的戏剧性冲突。富勒的文体论在他的叙事作品中体现得最充分,他的最佳作品表现出的纯电影化能量在战后的美国电影中几乎无出其右者。但富勒追求荣誉还须寄望于英法,因为美国的导演都自命不凡,不轻易著文捧人。当然,彼得·波格丹诺夫例外,他眼下正在给? Samuel Fuller (1912-) interprets the term “Mad Men Piero” as boring, straightforward, aggressive, and hostile, as if torn from a Fuller script. However, the beginning of this article seems to present a brand new image metaphor that the film was a masterpiece of all kinds of previous art and a synthesis from Mayakovsky to Mackay. But when Fuller continued to comment on the merits of the movie with bringing the literary, prestigious and prestigious monographs to billions of people who themselves seemed closer to Salber than those who criticized him, his own approach But with this far gone. In fact, the Fuller, who shot “The Sagittarius”, “The Horror Corridor,” and “Bare Kiss,” did not appear until the end of the article, but “a form that captures the creator” suddenly emerges, “Young people burning new ideas,” and “Sentimental ... being crushed like a mosquito.” Fuller has always been more than enthusiastic over analogy. Fuller was originally a reporter who was associated with the old New York Magazine and traveled all over the country in the 1930s to cover homicide cases. His film production is always inseparable from his previous experience of expeditionary with the First Corps in Africa and Europe. Even the non-war works are filled with well-planned dramatic conflicts of war films. Fuller’s style theory is best illustrated in his narratives, whose purely cinematic energy exhibited by his best works is almost nonexistent in postwar American films. However, Fuller’s pursuit of honor must also be placed on Britain and France because the directors of the United States are pretentious and are not easily editorials. Of course, Peter Bogdanov exception, he is giving now?