Chapter 1942

From "Captain America 2" to "Godzilla" and then to "X-Men: reversing the future", the summer stalls in 2014 were lukewarm and failed to detonate completely. Not only did not appear the works with the box office exceeding 100 million yuan at the premiere weekend, but even the trend curve of the follow-up box office seemed to be suppressing the energy and waiting for the outbreak, and the overall market was slightly dull.

"Star Trek" is still not able to change the status quo.

But then the topic effect contained in the name of "Langley hall" began to ferment slowly. Although the box office figures failed to ignite the market, the discussion boom began to spread rapidly on social networks.

For unsuspectingly hard core science fiction fans, and for amateur spectators who make complaints about their fur, they have launched a fierce attack on the theory of film. The former is a sincere analysis of the film from the perspective of physics and astronomy, while the latter is an innocent expression of self righteous ideas, trying to prove their sense of existence by criticizing the film. However, whether it is the former or the latter, they work together to detonate the controversy completely - an unintentional cooperation.

Objectively speaking, all sci-fi films, novels and other related artistic creations are more or less bruised. After all, films are not scientific research papers, and the creators do not have such profound ability to establish a theoretical framework or discuss a theoretical knowledge, Otherwise, the artist should be a physicist or an astronomer - even if the preparation is detailed, serious and real, loopholes are inevitable.

"Interstellar crossing" and "gravity" are both like this. They are re created on the basis of the theoretical framework, and then evolved into an art. For dramatic effects, they often need to create ups and downs of the plot, or even unrealistic romantic ideas——

Taking "gravity" as an example, former astronaut Garrett lesman said from an official standpoint that the overall theoretical framework of the film is authentic, but the details of the play, such as the use of fire extinguisher for space walk, independent flight without ground support from Houston, switching aircraft from different countries, are divorced from the actual situation. However, the reason why a film is a film is to recreate art on the basis of reality, and then achieve the effect of entertainment and edification. Therefore, Garrett still likes the work gravity very much.

At the beginning, when gravity was released, it also caused a lot of controversy and refutation, but Garrett's explanation still convinced the audience, which also foreshadowed the box office explosion of the film.

However, the loopholes of "interstellar crossing" are so obvious that it is extremely difficult to ignore them.

First, large wormholes are difficult to exist, and humans cannot cross them; Second, after entering the black hole, everything is bound to be torn apart and it is impossible to survive.

This also make complaints about "star crossing" become the target of countless people on the major professional forums and social networks. Compared with the rigour of gravity, Nolan brothers have encountered obvious theoretical loopholes in the screenwriting level, which make complaints about countless audiences.

In particular, those haters who don't know how to pretend to understand are eager to make a mistake and step on "Star Trek" to prove their "specialty" and superiority over the Nolan brothers. They shout that "even if they don't know this basic knowledge, they still write sci-fi scripts" and show off their sense of existence with pride.

However, the reason why the dispute is controversial means that there are supporters on the other side of the opposition.

The space picture presented by "Star Trek" is undoubtedly a page worth remembering in the history of science fiction movies. Nolan presented the magnificent wormhole and black hole influence on the large screen for the first time - and all the models were from Stephen Hawking's prototype, presenting all the theoretical knowledge in those lessons and papers on the picture, and the shock is self-evident, And those theoretical loopholes have become the beautification part of Hollywood movies.

Furthermore, the protagonist still survives completely after entering the black hole, just like the dramatic effect of "gravity". Similarly, the impossible task in real life presents a miraculous ending of the confrontation between human and nature, human and space through the re creation of film art, which eventually leads to emotional resonance, The ending of "interstellar crossing" is undoubtedly a full-scale outbreak of family love, and it is sublimated through the performance of lanli.

Supporters say it's an acceptable change, "we don't need to read papers anyway.".

It can be seen that the supporters did not refute from the theoretical level, but expressed their affirmation from the standpoint of film creation.

As a result, the opponents and supporters spoke in this way. The views of both sides were completely different. All attacks and counterattacks failed to face each other. As a result, no one could convince anyone. The scene was a bit chaotic and funny - but in fact, the smell of gunpowder was getting stronger and stronger!

The heat of debate even exceeds the impact of the original brain burning plot of "Inception". The side also shows that the disadvantage of the rash promotion of "Star Trek" has been completely wiped out. Now the whole North American market has known about this work, and whether the audience is willing to go into the cinema is another matter.

If the "controversy" can't reach a conclusion, I'm afraid the average audience still resists going into the cinema: they don't want to see a movie "divorced from reality". Although all Hollywood action movies have been divorced from real life, they still have a sense of rejection in their habitual thinking.

In fact, the same was true of "gravity" at that time.

Similarly, as Warner Bros. publishes publicity works, the company can naturally draw on the experience of "gravity", but different publicity teams have developed different strategies, which also makes the "Star Trek" coping style seem a little... Funny - not bad, but interesting.

The Warner Bros. publicity team produced a behind the scenes short film, which included the shooting scenes, the production and special effects of hypercube, and interviews with directors and actors. In addition, the famous physical astrologist Kip Thorne was invited to explain the theoretical framework of wormholes and black holes for the audience.

It's not so much a short film as a short documentary, which lasts for 45 minutes and shows the audience the production process behind the scenes in an all-round way.

There is no doubt that this is a very, very gratifying move. Audiences always like to see the secrets behind the scenes of the film. Whether it is the production process, or the private images of the actors and directors, it is enough to make people interested; But the problem is that the documentary shooting is too serious and serious. The presentation of theoretical knowledge is even more rigid. A large amount of theoretical knowledge is crammed into the audience without considering the audience's "acceptance rate".

The publicity team of "gravity" cleverly invited Garrett lesman and Langley to the "Tonight Show" to pass on the theoretical knowledge in the way of talk show, and felt the professionalism in the laughter. Even if the audience could not fully understand the theoretical knowledge, they could still understand a simple truth:

"Expert certification", then there is no need for controversy.

This is the right way to open propaganda.

The publicity team of "Star Trek" chose the form of recording short films to reveal secrets behind the scenes. Objectively speaking, this is also a routine operation. In the era of grass-roots entertainment with the full rise of social networks, it is also popular, but the problem lies in the positioning: the needs of senior fans and the general public are different——

Senior fans are willing to learn more about the behind the scenes production of movies, and the more professional the movie is, the more attractive it will be; On the other hand, the general public are more inclined to have fun and relax. It's enough for them to understand some anecdotes, frameworks and anecdotes. Those so-called arguments are just eating melons.

This deviation also makes the "star crossing" propaganda team have a little deviation in positioning: the content of the short film is too professional! The professional level has even gone beyond the understanding range of senior fans, and then... And then it's like this, stiffly smashing all the theoretical knowledge towards the audience, regardless of whether the audience can accept it or understand it, which really makes people laugh and cry.

In fact, the general audience only need to know one thing: these theoretical frameworks are established after the research and discussion of professional physical astronomers, that is enough.

For the general public, what they are more curious about is the dislocation of time - the powerful emotional impact created by the age gap between Cooper and Murphy. Is this really possible? If it is true, can it create such an exaggerated gap? Are you sure it's not dog blood from the brain?

This is also the core idea of the whole film. The conflict and gap twisted by time and emotion, home and loneliness, and the opposite and harmonious explosion of huge energy, enough to move everyone's inner softness, deeply moved every audience through lanli's delicate and profound performance.

After secretly wiping tears in the cinema, the audience are also curious: is it true that they are moved?

After that, the audience also interpret the work from their own perspectives and experiences. Everyone has his own ideas and views on the entanglement of family affection, love and friendship, the emotional fetters of real life, the mutual support between individual and society, the choice between ego and ego, the understanding of time, and so on.

However, Warner Bros. failed to catch the hot spots in time and further pushed the discussion upsurge to a new climax, which can also be regarded as a small mistake in its propaganda strategy; But at least Warner Bros. has provided an official answer to the online controversy:

There are no mistakes in the theoretical framework of "Star Trek". In fact, all the theoretical knowledge in the film has been strongly supported by science.