A. A failed opening The
first episode of a TV series is the hardest to write, because you have to grab the audience or you will fail miserably. Obviously the first five minutes of the movie are the hardest to write. In the first 5 minutes of the story, the importance of You Ba to Huang Bo and Xu Zheng could not be noticed at all. The scenes of Xu Zheng and Tao Hong Qingqing completely distracted the audience's attention. Let the audience speculate that Tao Hong is causing trouble for Xu Zheng?
B. Let the
drama work describe every scene and every conflict in detail. The most exciting part is naturally the wrestling between the two main characters. And such a play is the most difficult to write, and the contradiction can be easily dealt with by a third party involved in the outside. But such a story is extremely ugly when it is presented to the audience. For screenwriters, it is the most amateur, the least skillful, and the least mindless writing method.
This problem exists from the beginning of the film.
Huang Bo tried to confirm whether Xu Zheng also knew that Lao Zhou was in Thailand. The most exciting and most difficult way to write a screenwriting is the confrontation between Huang Bo and Xu Zheng, you come and go. Xu Zheng tried hard to convince Huang Bo that he really didn't know Lao Zhou's whereabouts. After one, two or three times, Huang Bo almost believed it. Tao Hong suddenly broke into the door and said, "I'm going to get a divorce, do you still have the intention to go to Thailand?"
Maybe I don't have enough heat, but this kind of bridge should pop up in my mind.
Wang Baoqiang's role is completely wrong.
From the structural analysis, his only role is to prevent Xu Zheng and Huang Bo from having a head-on conflict. Is Xu Zheng and Huang Bo chasing in Thailand, you come and I are wonderful, or do you prefer to watch Wang Baoqiang work hard to show that his IQ is about to exceed the average line?
For example, at the airport in Thailand, the screenwriter made another mistake.
Do not use lines to make the character act. Audiences love to see stories with characters moving.
In the toilet at the airport in Thailand, Wang Baoqiang told Xu Zheng with his lines that Huang Bo had also come to Thailand. The screenwriter worked hard to write the lines tactfully, leaving the audience time to think. But the highest purpose of the story is suspense, why not let Xu Zheng go to the toilet by himself, and then hear someone in the small room secretly say that the virus has been implanted?
There are many bridges in the play.
Xu Zheng sent Wang Baoqiang to steal Huang Bo's passport. Letting Wang Baoqiang come out is obviously another idea that doesn't understand the brain. One of the essentials of American screenwriting is to write about the things that frighten you the most.
If Xu Zheng was afraid to go to Huang Bo's house to steal his passport, then he should write about Xu Zheng to steal it. Besides, if Wang Baoqiang was in the room where he played 3P, wouldn't the comedy effect be better?
There is only one reason for the slow pace of the story, all conflicts are pseudo-conflicts. It seems that a group of people fighting and killing is very exciting, but in fact, no new information is provided.
Why are American dramas so good? It is every explosion of information that makes you have to accept new things before you have time to think.
The most typical mistake is that Xu Zheng found the wrong temple and did not intend to enter an underground cultural relics trading site. The entry of Huang Bo and Wang Baoqiang made the scene look very exciting. It's fun to fight and kill! The way to identify a false conflict is to cut the paragraph and consider whether the story holds true.
The answer is obvious, the story still holds true. This paragraph is redundant.
The best plot in the whole article should be that Xu Zheng and Wang Baoqiang put on makeup for each other and stole Huang Bo's car.
Why is this scene so good?
The purpose of Xu Zheng and Wang Baoqiang playing is obvious, and their actions and counteractions are very clear. But more strictly speaking, this one is still a big problem. Because Huang Bo didn't have a clear purpose for playing, he could be anyone driving that car.
,
C. The conflict is too easy to resolve. The
movie is easily seen as a Thai-style movie, although Xu Zheng has been struggling all the way, his knees have also been broken. But it never gave a particularly hard feeling. No shortage of money, no shortage of this, and no shortage of that. The most stupid is Wang Baoqiang.
Because the conflict is too easy to resolve. All inconsistencies, from passports lost, mail messages received only half. These are very good pits, but the protagonist just tiptoes lightly and jumps out.
There is one more thing about the essentials of American screenwriters.
If your protagonist is not on the edge of the meat grinder all the time, no one cares if he lives or dies.
It seems that the story of "Thai 囧" has barely reached the level of not gibberish, but some logic. Suddenly it turned out to be great. But the peak of Chinese comedy is still in Hong Kong, which belongs to Stephen Chow. The story of perfect succession and twists and turns has deeply excavated the grass-roots plot.
It's not that I'm harsh, because I do this too. The mistakes I've listed are all mistakes that I've made, and would never be more wrong on the big screen.
We still have a long way to go.
View more about Lost in Thailand reviews
