"The word 'revolution' to us Frenchmen is not a vague term. We know that Revolution is a rupture, that Revolution is an Absolute. There is no such thing as a moderate revolution, there is no such thing as a planned revolution—as one speaks of a planned economy. The revolution we are announcing will overturn the entire existing order or it will not take place at all. If we believe that the present system is capable of being reformed, that it can, in itself, check the fatal course of its evolution towards Dictatorship—the dictatorship of money, of race, of class, of the Nation—we will certainly refuse to run the risk of an explosion capable of destroying precious things that can only be rebuilt with much time, perseverance, selflessness, and love. But the present system will not change the course of its evolution for the good reason that it is no longer evolving; it is merely reorganizing itself with the view of lasting a little longer, of surviving. Far from professing to resolve its own contradictions, which are, in any case, impossible to resolve, it seems more and more inclined to impose them by force through strict regulation of individual effort that grows more rigid and more particular every day, carried out in the name of a sort of State Socialism, which is the democratic form of Dictatorship. Every day, in fact, brings us another proof that the purely ideological era has long since passed, in New York as well as in Moscow and London. We can see the Imperial English Democracy, the Plutocratic American Democracy and the Marxist Empire of Soviet Dominions walking, if not hand in hand—far from it!—at least pursuing the same goal, that is to say maintaining at all costs and even while appearing to oppose it, the system in which they have acquired wealth and power. For, in the end, Russia has profited no less from the capitalist system than America and England; it has played the role of the Member of Parliament who makes a fortune in Opposition. In short: regimes formerly opposed in ideology are now directly united by Technology. A world dominated by Technology is lost for Liberty."

"The word 'revolution' to us Frenchmen is not a vague term. We know that Revolution is a rupture, that Revolution is an Absolute. There is no such thing as a moderate revolution, there is no such thing as a planned revolution—as one speaks of a planned economy. The revolution we are announcing will overturn the entire existing order or it will not take place at all. If we believe that the present system is capable of being reformed, that it can, in itself, check the fatal course of its evolution towards Dictatorship—the dictatorship of money, of race, of class, of the Nation—we will certainly refuse to run the risk of an explosion capable of destroying precious things that can only be rebuilt with much time, perseverance, selflessness, and love. But the present system will not change the course of its evolution for the good reason that it is no longer evolving; it is merely reorganizing itself with the view of lasting a little longer, of surviving. Far from professing to resolve its own contradictions, which are, in any case, impossible to resolve, it seems more and more inclined to impose them by force through strict regulation of individual effort that grows more rigid and more particular every day, carried out in the name of a sort of State Socialism, which is the democratic form of Dictatorship. Every day, in fact, brings us another proof that the purely ideological era has long since passed, in New York as well as in Moscow and London. We can see the Imperial English Democracy, the Plutocratic American Democracy and the Marxist Empire of Soviet Dominions walking, if not hand in hand—far from it!—at least pursuing the same goal, that is to say maintaining at all costs and even while appearing to oppose it, the system in which they have acquired wealth and power. For, in the end, Russia has profited no less from the capitalist system than America and England; it has played the role of the Member of Parliament who makes a fortune in Opposition. In short: regimes formerly opposed in ideology are now directly united by Technology. A world dominated by Technology is lost for Liberty."

《盛世里的工匠技艺》是一支内容精致、拍摄细腻的纪录片。分别以“唐英”、“多宝格”、“果园厂”与“明人出警入跸图”四个段落，展现十数件明清精品。 　　镜头前的文物，安静、浑厚，隐隐散发出浓重的感染力，让人直接领受盛世工匠的用心与千年文化的厚度。　　侯孝贤说：“我们之所以喜欢古的东西、手工的东西，是因为我们的美感来源，就是由这历时久远的技艺中，逐渐形成。” 　　法国人类学家李维 · 史陀所言“技艺，是人在宇宙中为自己所找到的位置”成为全片的点睛之笔。

《盛世里的工匠技艺》是一支内容精致、拍摄细腻的纪录片。分别以“唐英”、“多宝格”、“果园厂”与“明人出警入跸图”四个段落，展现十数件明清精品。 　　镜头前的文物，安静、浑厚，隐隐散发出浓重的感染力，让人直接领受盛世工匠的用心与千年文化的厚度。　　侯孝贤说：“我们之所以喜欢古的东西、手工的东西，是因为我们的美感来源，就是由这历时久远的技艺中，逐渐形成。” 　　法国人类学家李维 · 史陀所言“技艺，是人在宇宙中为自己所找到的位置”成为全片的点睛之笔。

在亚洲，将工匠达人尊为人生目标和典范的国家，唯有日本。这个国家绝大多数企业人，在各自的工作环境里力争成为达人。企业的经营者和管理阶层本来就有一种强烈的“武士”志向，醉心于“德川家康式人心掌控术”。相比之下，普通老百姓更喜欢工匠达人。不，这种喜欢的程度不妨说成日本人喜欢工匠达人甚至胜过喜欢“天才”。所谓“工匠达人气质”首先属于赞誉之词，其含义包括敬重工匠达人的倔犟性格在内。工匠中间若有将其本领发挥到极致者，他将享受“达人”的桂冠，受到最大的尊敬。热爱手作，一心坚定不只是为商业利益存在的人们，一定要找这部片来看看，意义远远大于一部纪录片本身。

在亚洲，将工匠达人尊为人生目标和典范的国家，唯有日本。这个国家绝大多数企业人，在各自的工作环境里力争成为达人。企业的经营者和管理阶层本来就有一种强烈的“武士”志向，醉心于“德川家康式人心掌控术”。相比之下，普通老百姓更喜欢工匠达人。不，这种喜欢的程度不妨说成日本人喜欢工匠达人甚至胜过喜欢“天才”。所谓“工匠达人气质”首先属于赞誉之词，其含义包括敬重工匠达人的倔犟性格在内。工匠中间若有将其本领发挥到极致者，他将享受“达人”的桂冠，受到最大的尊敬。热爱手作，一心坚定不只是为商业利益存在的人们，一定要找这部片来看看，意义远远大于一部纪录片本身。

讲述的是两位90后，走遍大江南北，为那些大隐于市、从事着不同行业的手艺人拍摄一部公益纪录片的故事，你能在这看到许多蕴含着古人智慧的工艺，也能听到手艺人们为之传承而奋斗的亲历故事，以及两位当代年轻人初次接触传统技艺时所闹出的各种笑话和趣事。

故事开始于20世纪50年代，北方钢厂锻轧车间有两个八级工匠，二人性格迥异，但都身怀绝技，师兄肖长功（刘佩奇 饰），师弟叫杨老三（孙红雷 饰）。当初正处于全国技术大比武时期，师兄弟之间也不例外，由于二人都争强好胜，这一比比出了半生的恩怨，整个五十年代兄弟两人是在别别扭扭中度过的。一晃三年自然灾害来临，紧跟着又是文化大革命，他们的命运也随着社会的动荡而改变着，由原先的相互挑衅慢慢变成同情与帮助。时光荏冉，岁月如梭，一晃长功的老伴走了，大儿媳也因公殉职，二儿子则患上了精神病。一直以来，长功的妹妹肖玉芳（陈小艺 饰）与杨老三两情相悦，但肖长功却始终不同意他们结婚……

故事开始于20世纪50年代，北方钢厂锻轧车间有两个八级工匠，二人性格迥异，但都身怀绝技，师兄肖长功（刘佩奇 饰），师弟叫杨老三（孙红雷 饰）。当初正处于全国技术大比武时期，师兄弟之间也不例外，由于二人都争强好胜，这一比比出了半生的恩怨，整个五十年代兄弟两人是在别别扭扭中度过的。一晃三年自然灾害来临，紧跟着又是文化大革命，他们的命运也随着社会的动荡而改变着，由原先的相互挑衅慢慢变成同情与帮助。时光荏冉，岁月如梭，一晃长功的老伴走了，大儿媳也因公殉职，二儿子则患上了精神病。一直以来，长功的妹妹肖玉芳（陈小艺 饰）与杨老三两情相悦，但肖长功却始终不同意他们结婚……

该剧根据同名畅销小说改编，故事背景设置在1686年的阿姆斯特丹，述19世纪，一个女人追随新任丈夫来到阿姆斯特丹，然而很快她发现自己眼见的不一定是真实…