1. Technical Problems
As China increasingly has no shortage of large-scale investment in movies, the cost of shooting a disaster blockbuster is no longer a problem. The biggest problem is technical problems.
If you still use the rough model and the amount of water in the bathtub to shoot disaster blockbusters like last year's "Super Typhoon", then you should cut off this idea as soon as possible. When the special effects of this movie have begun to be as close to reality as possible, they are still using that kind of fake model to make disaster movies. This is an insult to this type of movie, and it is also an insult to the audience's IQ. insult. As a disaster blockbuster, visual effects are the primary issue. Even this issue is so perfunctory that people can't help but doubt the sincerity of the film. You are welcome to say that it is better to shoot disaster films such as "Super Typhoon". Ultraman.
But it is clear that China does not seem to have the technology to make disaster blockbusters yet. When shooting "The Day After Tomorrow", the special effects personnel completely simulated a New York City on the computer, and then specially designed a program to calculate the state of the water flow when it was rampaging through the streets of New York. The workload and complexity of this were unimaginable. Therefore, if China wants to make a disaster blockbuster in a short period of time, the special effects part can only be outsourced, and outsourcing will undoubtedly increase a lot of costs. The charges of foreign special effects companies are unbearable for most domestic film companies, and the biggest cost of disaster films is special effects. . If the cost reaches the cost of a Hollywood disaster film, then this film will definitely lose money. You don’t expect our first disaster film to enter the North American market, and the domestic box office simply cannot afford the high production costs.
The problem of consciousness
The "zero death" joke made in last year's "Super Typhoon" is ultimately a matter of consciousness. That is, our propaganda agencies seem to be constantly conveying the concept that under the leadership of our government and wise leadership, in the face of a huge disaster, there will be no major casualties. This is a typical self-deception, it seems that the harm caused by the disaster depends entirely on whether the leader pats his head. And it is this ridiculous ideology that was brought into the so-called first disaster blockbuster in our country. This allows us to see the ridiculous plot in the film that such a big typhoon did not cause one casualty. This kind of plot that almost insults the audience's IQ is so grand and swaggering on the screen.
At the same time, it also involves the question of whether it is possible to criticize government leaders. As we all know, in foreign disaster blockbusters (including this time "Haeundae"), there is always a decision maker who does not believe the protagonist's warning at a critical moment and delays the best time for the people to evacuate. There isn't really much irony to this setup, it just provides a fitting justification for the later disaster footage. Because if everyone is evacuated safely, what's the point of a ghost town that's been hit by a natural disaster and lacks screams? However, it is difficult for such a setting to appear in our films. To say that it is too small is to satirize the leadership, and to say that it is too big is to attack the government. Well, then we can only make a "super mayor".
3. The problem of location
This is simply the place where the disaster occurred in the film. Because most of the disasters on the screen are disasters that have never happened in reality. Therefore, it is necessary to find a suitable place to settle this unwarranted disaster. Therefore, in foreign disaster films, well-known cities such as Washington, Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, etc., have naturally become the primary locations for the "attack" of disaster films. Because there are many landmark buildings in these places, and the collapse of landmark buildings in disasters arouses the audience's sense of identification with disaster films, "Haeundae" also adopts this quasi-Hollywood method this time.
But this kind of bad model used in disaster films doesn't work in China either. Where is this location set up, the leaders are not happy. Chinese people are extremely sensitive to patriotism. If a foreigner blows up a famous Chinese building once in the film, it will be an insult to China. Although the foreigner has already bombed his own iconicity in the film, he doesn't like to blow up, but "patriotism" "People" just turn a blind eye and say that you have insulted China. In fact, foreigners who bombed your building in the film also looked at you. Who called your building famous? But it's useless, our thinking is so rigid, no matter what your purpose is, if you blow it up, it will be an insult to China. The same principle applies to location choices in disaster films. While the director may choose you simply because your city is famous, and your city has enough iconic buildings to destroy, there are people in that city who think you are insulting the city and insulting the city The government - how could our city government lose to that and go to a natural disaster? Letting those natural disasters happen to our city in the video is a suspicion and slander of our work! Having said that, we come back to the second problem mentioned above - the problem of consciousness.
Well, you can't choose this, you can't choose that, you can only make up a city out of nothing (this is very common in Chinese TV dramas), and then make some buildings that have never been seen before - but such a disaster film, also How many people are watching?
View more about Tidal Wave reviews
