Japan’s Abe Visits Controversial Shrine

[Developereo]

When one has absolutely no knowledge of something, how is that one scene going to help? He would either be totally clueless or brush it off as "movie scene"

That's where you need good writers and good movie makers. There are many movies where people only remember one or two key scenes and talk about them.

For example, in a romance movie, the lovers can meet near some Nanking memorial. While waiting for the guy, the heroine walks around the memorial and reads some plaques. And the audience reads them with her.

Don't underestimate the cumulative effect of such scenes. Why do you think companies pay millions of dollars for "product placement" in movies if such exposure has no effect on audiences?

And how much money can companies afford to lose making such one scene movies?

A 90-minute movie about Nanking will lose money.
A 90-minute movie about romance or crime/thriller has a better chance of making money or breaking even.

 

[Fattyacids]

That's where you need good writers and good movie makers. There are many movies where people only remember one or two key scenes and talk about them.

For example, in a romance movie, the lovers can meet near some Nanking memorial. While waiting for the guy, the heroine walks around the memorial and reads some plaques. And the audience reads them with her.

Don't underestimate the cumulative effect of such scenes. Why do you think companies pay millions of dollars for "product placement" in movies if such exposure has no effect on audiences?

If you need some plaques or the scene set at Nanking memorial, the script has to be based on Nanking. It will be more than a "one scene" movie.


A consumer product is not the same as historical event, is it? Anyone can relate to a new consumer product, but not everyone can relate or know about Nanking, or say the famine of bengal.

A 90-minute movie about Nanking will lose money.
A 90-minute movie about romance or crime/thriller has a better chance of making money or breaking even.

A 90 mins movie with one scene to Nanking will go unnoticed simply coz the public is unaware of it.

A 90 mins movie on Nanking will lose money in the US, but much awareness is generated, people will read up and discuss if they would want to watch it.
And if the same movie is screen in CHina, it may still be profitable.

 

[Developereo]

If you need some plaques or the scene set at Nanking memorial, the script has to be based on Nanking. It will be more than a "one scene" movie.

There are different degrees of plot integration.

In the simplest case, the Nanking memorial is incidental background and could just as easily have been replaced with a public library or Trafalgar Square in London. The plaques are used as almost subliminal communication and no more.

In more complex scripts, the memorial and plaques have a crucial tie-in to the story line. Maybe the clues in a crime thriller are encoded using the plaques as reference, for example.

The first time, the audience will ignore and forget the Nanking references. But do it in a few movies, and the effect will add up. Trust me. This is how advertising works.

A consumer product is not the same as historical event, is it? Anyone can relate to a new consumer product, but not everyone can relate or know about Nanking, or say the famine of bengal.

It's the same thing; it's about creating brand awareness and the brand in this case is "Nanking atrocities".

The concept is no different.

A 90 mins movie on Nanking will lose money in the US, but much awareness is generated, people will read up and discuss if they would want to watch it.

No one is going to read up on Nanking.

People who already know about it will go to see the movie. You may get a few curious people who will go to see such a heavy movie. Everyone else (the vast majority) will ignore it and go see some entertainment movie instead.

And if the same movie is screen in CHina, it may still be profitable.

Forget China. People in China already know about Nanking; they don't need a movie.

This discussion is about educating people outside China.

 

[Juice]

He is visiting a shrine to war dead. Big whoop. The Chinese need to stop making a big deal out of it. You guys are blowing it out of proportion....it would cease to be a big deal in Japan if everyone else said "meh"

 

[Developereo]

He is visiting a shrine to war dead. Big whoop. The Chinese need to stop making a big deal out of it. You guys are blowing it out of proportion....it would cease to be a big deal in Japan if everyone else said "meh"

Are you taking a break form trolling the Indians to come and troll the Chinese now?

 

[Juice]

Are you taking a break form trolling the Indians to come and troll the Chinese now?

Lol....kind of. I am serious about this though....as far as the Indians....just jerking their chain. I can only read so much idiocy before I have to say something. (and you are right about the movie....little new interest...only those familiar with the story would go...but a surprising amount of people here are quite familiar with it already)

 

[Developereo]

Lol....kind of. I am serious about this though....as far as the Indians....just jerking their chain. I can only read so much idiocy before I have to say something.

This matter is serious for the Chinese.

It would be like telling the Jews to "get over it" about the Holocaust, or the Americans about 9/11.

 

[yue10]

By placing Class A war criminals in a holy shrine where politicians regularly visits, it shows a lack of remorse for past wrongs. Those that failed to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and it seems the Japanese government has not learned. You cannot have a sincere apology if no lesson was learned.

Does England put the officers who ordered the Amritsar Massacre in their most sacred churches? If it does, it voids all of their apology.


What's wrong with that? 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazi regime, which tried to eradicate the Jewish race, the handicapped and the mentally disabled. It seems your brain cell count is in the single digit if you think victims should remain silent regarding past grievances.

you got any proofs there my friend? the China race need to stop dragging the superior Nazi name through muds

To normalize ties, Mao turned to war criminal | The Japan Times
lol

 

[Fattyacids]

There are different degrees of plot integration.
In the simplest case, the Nanking memorial is incidental background and could just as easily have been replaced with a public library or Trafalgar Square in London. The plaques are used as almost subliminal communication and no more.

In more complex scripts, the memorial and plaques have a crucial tie-in to the story line. Maybe the clues in a crime thriller are encoded using the plaques as reference, for example.

The first time, the audience will ignore and forget the Nanking references. But do it in a few movies, and the effect will add up. Trust me. This is how advertising works.

It comes back to same point I've been saying. No matter how intrigue the plots get, if it's just a couple scenes, the general public would've not discerned it. Logically so, as they have no clue about Nanking.

What you suggest would work if it's a subject that American public is somewhat familiar with.
To effectively inject the message, a significant part of the movie has to be about Nanking.

It's the same thing; it's about creating brand awareness and the brand in this case is "Nanking atrocities".

The concept is no different.

Concept by itself is the same, but the subject matter is totally different.

Consumer product are not historical events. Brand awareness by advertising works as it's something people can relate to.

Brand: Oral B = toothbrush, a consumer product. Everyone uses it.

Brand: Nanking = historical event: war crime in China. Not everyone can relate to it.


In terms of implementation, it is different too.
Advertisement takes a a few mins or less. And it can be screened repetitively.
A movie takes much longer. You can't replay it over and over again.

No one is going to read up on Nanking.

People who already know about it will go to see the movie. You may get a few curious people who will go to see such a heavy movie. Everyone else (the vast majority) will ignore it and go see some entertainment movie instead.

Read = quick look at movie review or synopsis of movie, which is only a few lines or a few paragraphs. (they can explore further if they have interest)

We are talking about movies, not documentary. Entertainment value differs among audience based on culture, age group, gender,....down to individual taste.

An action flick or sing and dancing movie that doesn't need a good script can be good entertainment to some. Many others prefer movie that is thought provoking. Or a combination of both. A movie on Nanking can be as good a war action movie as it is about the somber subject of Nanking. Case in point: The Flowers of War

Forget China. People in China already know about Nanking; they don't need a movie.

This discussion is about educating people outside China.

So wrong, Nanking movies always top the box office in China.

The specific paragraph that I'm replying to is about "movies profitability." Movies are screened internationally, in China too.

 

[Obambam]

He is visiting a shrine to war dead. Big whoop. The Chinese need to stop making a big deal out of it. You guys are blowing it out of proportion....it would cease to be a big deal in Japan if everyone else said "meh"

Your ally South Korea thinks otherwise.

What was the reason for America to dispose Osama Bin Laden's corpse into the sea again?
Was it not to prevent people turning his burial ground into a shrine? "Meh" to your logic indeed.

 

[bolo]

2 nuclear bombs dropped on Japan weren't necessary, Japanese military was in their last leg and exhausted all the mean to fight against all front in Asia. Russia defeated Japanese in Manchuria, China successful defend Japanese invasion, Vietnam overran the Japanese occupation, US attack on Japan mainland, and defeated and retook Manila. 2 nuclear bombs were meant to be tested on Japanese for the potent destruction of it possessed. US military don't want to waste hundred thousands of lives just to occupy Japan.

Actually two atomic bombs were needed because a land war would have caused millions of lives instead of three hundred thousand.
On a side note, Japanese still beheaded American POWs AFTER they had already surrendered. These japs were sneaky and barbaric. They make the Nazis look like choir boys.

US do not want to waste hundred thousands of live to invade Japan. So the two nukes were necessary to bring an end. Also, Russian invasion of Manchuria and Northern Islands play even a more major role. Japan know that if they don't surrender, they would have been torn into 2 pieces like Germany. So they had to suffer the unsufferable.



If Japan have a nuke, they would not use it on Pearl Harbor.

Japanese were sticking broomstick up female children' *** up to their throat and bayonetting babies. These sickos would have used it if the Americans did not have nukes.

 

[faithfulguy]

Actually two atomic bombs were needed because a land war would have caused millions of lives instead of three hundred thousand.
On a side note, Japanese still beheaded American POWs AFTER they had already surrendered. These japs were sneaky and barbaric. They make the Nazis look like choir boys.


Japanese were sticking broomstick up female children' *** up to their throat and bayonetting babies. These sickos would have used it if the Americans did not have nukes.

The first place they would use it is at Panama canal. And then los angeles.

 

[Kyle Sun]

You don't even know what a fascist is, do you. Dumb (Marx) and dumber (Mao).

Ask the million indian ghost who hovered on the west sky agree with you or not .