密室殺機：封閉空間電影裡的圍困、逃逸與宰制建制

Abstract

在電影領域裡，不論是犯罪、災難、恐怖或科幻等跨類型文本，長久以來存在一種以封閉場景為主舞台的敘事模式。在內容與主旨殊異的情況下，這些電影都會強調被困在裡面的人因為無法自由離開，而漸漸表現出有別於一般社會情境下的失控言行，基於自保、搶奪資源，或是不擇手段地想要逃離，開始以殘忍的方式對待其他受困者。這種文本特色一直未曾以模式化、系統化的角度深入解析，本研究首先為散布在不同年代與國籍的這類文本，建立能夠描述共通輪廓，對照內部差異的整體架構；進而探討各項電影組成元素，可能讀出的社會象徵意義。 電影裡的封閉空間，營造出一個令角色與觀眾都感到窒息不已的場域。本研究將它們視為社會上各種「宰制建制」的視覺化象徵，證明電影的空間符號可以指涉物質性的監獄、實驗室等機構系統，以及社會性的內規、制度、階級與刻板印象等具有箝制作用的要素，也就是任何可能進一步改變受管束成員的主體性，或使他們感到自己「被困住」的結構化力量。 在此前提下，角色衝突事件可以權力與異化視角分析。受困者之間的相互傾軋，可視為不平等社會制度下的弱弱相殘，而回應困境的不同方式，則反映各種意識形態或政治取向在真實世界運作的機制。不僅是封閉界線內部，外界旁觀者或救援者保有更多自主性，由此形成權力位階的落差，也會對受困者造成負面影響。而製造困局的始作俑者，則以管理人、元兇等身分代表宰制建制的既得利益者，他們維持受困者的苦難，展演相對掌權的一方剝削弱勢階級的權力關係。 分析困境必然引申出有關逃逸的討論，封閉空間電影可說是以圍困態勢與逃逸慾望的對立，建構文本的敘事內涵，本身就蘊含社會結構與能動主體折衝的機轉與辯證。以封閉空間為表徵的圍困態勢，體現宰制結構僵固、役使內部成員的歷程；通過集體暴力實現的個人脫困，則突顯結構控制、疏導脫困慾望的本質。本研究從祭獻「替罪羊」換取秩序與合理解釋的機制，解讀受困者以指向同處境成員的暴力行為，說明剝削性的思維與行動準則，正是封閉體制傾向的運作模式。它令逃逸能量轉化成徒然的衝突，使受困者永遠滯留在裡面。無路可出的焦慮持續製造暴力的犧牲者，長遠來看並非少數掌權階級的優勢，而是促使封閉結構更加牢不可破。從外界掌權者最終被納入圍困場域，或是內部掌權者最終成為集體暴力消耗的目標，顯現任何剝削法則都是製造榮景幻象的機器，其無所不吞的本性終將瓦解所有安全位階。本研究揭示封閉文本蘊含的共同訊息：脫困的同時反思自身在宰制結構中的共犯位置，才有接近真正出口的可能。

Across movie genres, there has been a narrative structure based on confined spaces as main scenes; despite the contents and motifs are various, these films emphasize on characters being held against their wills. As the detention goes on, pressure accumulates, the characters gradually become aggressive and violent toward each other. This narrative structure has never been conceptualized as a research topic; hence, the purpose of this research is building a framework to depict common traits and to discover symbolic meanings among this sort of texts. Confined spaces on screen create suffocative situations for both protagonists and audiences, and in this research they are seen as visualized symbols of dominant institutions in reality. I aimed to prove the spatial elements in these films can refer to material entities such as prison, laboratory, or other systematic institutions, and to social ones as regulation, regime, class, stereotype, or other boundaries with qualities of restraint. Under this premise, the conflicts between roles can be examined from angles of power and alienation. The aggression among captives refers to mutual devouring among social disadvantages under living pressure caused by uneven structures. Different ways the roles react reflects diverse ideologies or political approaches in reality. The bystanders and rescuers have relatively more autonomy; therefore, the unequal power relationship could also impose some negative effects on captives. Furthermore, the culprits of imprisonment represent the vested interests benefit from exploitative systems. The analysis of captivity must lead to the topic of escape. Films of confined space are constructed on the antithesis between captivity and escape; themselves convey the dialectic of structure and agency. Confined space is the emblem of structure alienates and appropriates its members, and captives’ aggressive reactions are induced by the structure which intend to control and distract captives’ desire of escape. The concept of Scapegoat has been introduced in this situation. Instead of approaching exit or reason of captivity practically, group violence gives the captives a sense of delusion that survivability has increased, or the social order has been restored. In fact the forced sacrifice reinforces the confined system itself. There are common narrative patterns such as the culprit end up under captivity as well, or the perpetrator of group violence become victim in the end. These examples reveal everyone has a chance to be labeled as a target under social order fueled by Scapegoat mechanism; hence, the sole way to access real exit is being aware of one’s own role in the structure of accomplice.