论文部分内容阅读
At the 2)premiere of 3)Rise of the Planet of the Apes, a clutch of 4)impassioned animal activists gathered on Hollywood 5)Boulevard. But they weren’t there to throw red paint on fur-coat-wearing celebrities. Instead, one demonstrator—dressed in a full-body monkey suit—had arrived with a sign complimenting the filmmakers: “Thanks for not using real apes!”
The creative team behind Apes used 6)motion-capture technology to create digitalized 7)primates, spending tens of millions of dollars on technology that records an actor’s performance and later layers it with 8)computer graphics to create a final image—in this case, one of a realistic-looking ape.
Yet Apes is more exception than the rule—in fact, Hollywood has been hot on live animals lately: The nonprofit 9)American Humane Association, which monitors the treatment of animals in filmed entertainment, is 10)keeping tabs on more than 2000 productions this year, 100 more than in 2010. Already, a number of 11)high-profile 2011 films, including 12)Water for Elephants, The Hangover Part II and 13)Zookeeper have drawn the 14)ire of activists who say the creatures featured in them haven’t been treated properly.
In some cases, it’s not so much the treatment of the animals on set that has activists worried; it’s the off-set training and living conditions that are raising concerns.
For studios, dealing with such questions is often a small price to pay given the box-office payoff for animal films. From the 15)Lassie movies of the 1940s, to 16)Flipper in the 1960s and more recent hits like 17)Free Willy and 18)Seabiscuit, animal films often 19)resound strongly with audiences, 20)raking in huge ticket sales.
One more high-profile film that prominently features animals has been released this year—21)Dolphin Tale, which is about a boy who befriends a marine mammal named Winter that has lost his tail in a crab trap. Another will be released this year is Cameron Crowe’s 22)We Bought a Zoo, which has wildlife including tigers and 23)porcupines.
“I think it’s very disturbing, the trend that we’re seeing of more and more animals appearing in movies, and I think we should be moving in the other direction with the technology we have,” said Matt Rossell, campaigns director for the U.S. branch of 24)ADI, a nonprofit group. “We’re calling on these studios to really take a good, hard look at their use of animals in fictional entertainment.
The practice of monitoring the treatment of animals on sets dates back some 70 years. After a horse went over a cliff and fell to his death during the making of 1939’s 25)Jesse James, Hollywood designated the AHA as the sole authorized on-set monitoring group. Any U.S. production under a contract with the Screen Actors Guild or the 26)AFTRA union is required to inform the organization if animals are to be used.
It has a film and television unit whose office, headquartered in Studio City, employs about 24 staff members, half of whom are safety representatives. The AHA also has about three dozen representatives 27)on call around the country who are used on an as-needed basis. It does not charge for its monitoring services in the United States.
But because of its limited resources, the AHA says it is not able to supervise animal activity on every set. When the organization does send out a representative, that individual takes note of a number of different factors, including temperature, noise levels and 28)enclosures. If the filmmakers meet all of the regulations, only then can the famous “No animals were harmed.” 29)disclaimer be used during the end credits of the movie.
Jone Bouman, director of communications for the organization said, “Animals are part of our lives. They are a part of the stories that filmmakers tell, and if they’re not onscreen, we’re losing one of the best tools we have to remind people that we share the Earth with other creatures. They just have to be humanely treated.”
Periodically, the AHA has faced questions about its ability to supervise such a heavy load of productions given its limited funds. The group says it does not have the resources to oversee the treatment of animals by trainers off-set. Just as the movie—which got the AHA 30)stamp of approval—hit theaters, a video claiming to be of an elephant used in the film, Water for Elephants, Tai, began circulating on the Internet; it 31)purported to show the animal being trained with electric shock devices and 32)bullhooks.
Partly as a result of the Elephants controversy, the AHA is looking into creating a symposium that would “engage trainers along with the studios and networks about positive training methods,” said Bouman.
But there are even on-set issues that the AHA is not yet able to tackle, such as ensuring access to the sets of U.S. productions abroad. Although the group provides services free domestically, it charges what it describes as a “minimal fee” when representatives are sent to the overseas sets of U.S. productions.
In the case of The Hangover Part II, the R-rated comedy that has collected nearly $580 million worldwide since opening in May and features a 33)capuchin monkey named Crystal, the AHA says it was not allowed on the film’s set in Thailand. Warner Bros., which produced the picture, declined to 34)elaborate upon the decision.
In the film, Crystal the monkey is shown smoking—a scene that enraged 35)PETA. The movie’s director, Todd Phillips, said the smoke had been digitally added, but because the film did not have the AHA’s stamp of approval, the group was unable to 36)vouch for it.
Yet even movies that do have the association’s 37)A-OK have come 38)under fire lately, as with Zookeeper, a family-friendly comedy with Kevin James about a man who takes care of the animals at his local zoo and discovers he can communicate with them. PETA members were on hand at the Zookeeper premiere but with an entirely different attitude than they displayed at the Apes event.
Charles Martin Smith, director of the upcoming Dolphin Tale, said he went to extreme lengths to avoid such criticism. The film is based on a true story, and he used the actual dolphin that had been injured—and now lives 39)in captivity because it would not survive in the wild. The movie was shot at Winter’s home at a marine hospital in Florida so the dolphin didn’t have to be transported anywhere, and the animal was never working for more than a couple of hours, he said.
“I certainly hope we don’t face any criticism because we worked so closely with her trainers to make sure she was okay. I can’t imagine anyone saying we should put her back out into the wild, where she’d very quickly be dinner for a shark. But animals have to be dealt with properly in a film, so I think it’s very 40)legitimate to raise questions about these things.”
在影片《猿族崛起》的首映式上，一群慷慨激昂的动物保护主义者云集好莱坞大道。但他们去那儿不是为了向身穿毛皮大衣的名人泼红漆。相反，一名全身猴子装扮的男示威者来到现场举着牌对制片人赞许道：“感谢你们没有使用真的猿猴！”
《猿族崛起》剧组采用动态摄影技术来创建灵长类动物的数字化影像，花了数千万美元在录制演员表演的技术上，然后使用电脑绘图将它逐层叠加起来，从而生成最终的图像——就这样，一个活生生的猿猴形象就诞生了。
然而，《猿族崛起》“不走寻常路”的做法远不止此——实际上，好莱坞最近热衷于用活生生的动物进行拍摄：非营利性组织美国人道协会对电影娱乐节目中使用动物进行拍摄的情况进行了监测，发现今年此类电影有2000多部，比2010年多了100部。目前，2011年的一些备受瞩目的影片，包括《大象的眼泪》、《宿醉2》以及《动物园看守》，都引起了动物保护主义者的不满，他们称用于拍摄这些影片的动物没有得到善待。
有些时候，动物保护主义者并非担心动物在拍摄中受到不善对待，他们更多地担心动物在镜头外受训的情况和生存条件。
考虑到动物类电影的票房回报，对于电影工作室来说，处理这些问题只是小事一桩。从20世纪40年代的《新灵犬莱西》到60年代的《海豚的故事》，再到更近期的一些热门电影如《威鲸闯天关》、《奔腾年代》等，动物主题的电影常常能引起观众的强烈反响，带来丰厚的票房收入。
今年，另一部颇有知名度的动物电影是《海豚的故事》。这部电影讲述了一个男孩与一只名叫温特的海洋哺乳动物结为好友的故事，温特在一个捕蟹笼里失去了尾巴。今年将上演的另一部影片为卡梅伦•克罗执导的《我家买了动物园》，影片中有老虎和豪猪等野生动物。
马特•罗塞尔是非营利组织美国文献资料协会的活动总监，他说：“越来越多的动物出现在电影里，这种趋势让人不安，我认为我们应该凭借现有的技术朝另一方向迈进。我们呼吁这些工作室在用动物拍摄娱乐故事片时要非常谨慎。”
对出镜动物的待遇进行监控的做法大约可以追溯到70年前。1939年，在拍摄电影《荡寇志》时，一匹马坠崖摔死了，在此之后，好莱坞指定美国人道协会为拍摄现场唯一授权的监管机构。任何与美国演员工会或美国电视与广播演员联合会联盟签订合同的影片制作，在需要使用动物进行拍摄时都必须告知美国人道协会。
美国人道协会设有一个电影和电视部，办公室总部设在电影城，约有24名员工，其中一半是安保代表。该协会同时还有约三十几名随时待命的安保代表，在有需要的时候到全国各地进行监督工作。在美国，该协会对监控服务不收取费用。
但由于其有限的资源，美国人道协会说他们无法对每一个使用动物拍摄的场景进行监督。当协会调派出人手到现场，那名代表需要对一些不同的要素做好记录，包括气温、噪音水平和动物围蔽设施。如果制片人符合所有这些规定，才能在电影片尾时使用“无动物受伤害”的免责声明。
该组织的沟通主管琼•波曼说：“动物是我们生活的一部分。他们是电影制片人所讲述的故事的一部分，如果他们没有出现在荧幕上，那么我们就失去了提醒人们‘我们与其他生物共享地球’这一讯息的最佳方法，但前提是它们要得到人道的对待。”
美国人道协会定期面对这样的问题：自身资金有限，是否有能力去监督如此繁多的影片拍摄。该组织称，没有足够的资源去监督非拍摄期间动物受训的情况。正当《大象的眼泪》这部电影（它得到了美国人道协会的批准印章）在影院里热播时，网络上盛传一个视频，声称要曝光片中那只叫泰伊的大象被训练员用电击装置和驯象刺棒进行训练的内幕。
部分由于《大象的眼泪》所造成的争议，美国人道协会正准备筹办一个研讨会。波曼说，这个研讨会旨在“吸引动物培训师、电影制片厂以及网络了解积极的动物训练方法”。
但就算是对片场内的监控，美国人道协会也有解决不了的问题，例如当美国电影在国外拍摄时，确保到达片场进行监督的问题。虽然该协会在美国国内提供免费服务，但当需要派遣安保代表到美国电影海外拍摄现场时，就要收取“最低费用”。
限制级喜剧《宿醉2》自从5月开播以来在全球范围内已赚取将近5.8亿美元，这部电影的主角是一只名叫水晶的僧帽猴。美国人道协会称，该协会在进入其泰国的片场进行监控时被拒。该电影的制作公司华纳兄弟公司拒绝对此决定作出详细解释。
在电影中，这只名叫水晶的猴子有吸烟的镜头，这个镜头激怒了善待动物组织的成员。电影导演托德•菲利普斯说，烟雾是通过数字化处理添加上去的，但因为该电影没有得到美国人道协会的批准印章，所以他们的团队无法对此加以保证。
然而，即使获得美国人道协会批准印章的电影，如《动物园看守》，最近也遭到了攻击。《动物园看守》是一部合家欢喜剧片，讲述主演凯文•詹姆斯照顾当地动物园里的动物并发现自己能与动物进行交流的故事。在该影片的首映式上，善待动物组织成员也来到了现场，但却摆出了与对待《猿族崛起》完全不同的态度。
影片《海豚的故事》即将上演，其导演查尔斯•马丁•史密斯坦言，他竭尽全力避免类似的批判。影片源自一个真实的故事，使用了一只曾经受过伤的真实海豚。这只海豚由于已不能在大自然中存活而被圈养起来。他说该片拍摄于佛罗里达州一家海洋医院，也就是温特自己的家，所以它不用长途跋涉，而且它也从来不需要连续工作几小时。
“我当然希望我们不用面对任何批评指责，因为我们与她的训练员密切合作，确保它安然无恙。我想象不到任何人会说我们应该把她放回到大自然中去，因为在野外她将很快成为鲨鱼的晚餐。但是，在电影的拍摄过程中，我们应该友善地对待动物，所以我认为提出这些问题是非常合理的。”
The creative team behind Apes used 6)motion-capture technology to create digitalized 7)primates, spending tens of millions of dollars on technology that records an actor’s performance and later layers it with 8)computer graphics to create a final image—in this case, one of a realistic-looking ape.
Yet Apes is more exception than the rule—in fact, Hollywood has been hot on live animals lately: The nonprofit 9)American Humane Association, which monitors the treatment of animals in filmed entertainment, is 10)keeping tabs on more than 2000 productions this year, 100 more than in 2010. Already, a number of 11)high-profile 2011 films, including 12)Water for Elephants, The Hangover Part II and 13)Zookeeper have drawn the 14)ire of activists who say the creatures featured in them haven’t been treated properly.
In some cases, it’s not so much the treatment of the animals on set that has activists worried; it’s the off-set training and living conditions that are raising concerns.
For studios, dealing with such questions is often a small price to pay given the box-office payoff for animal films. From the 15)Lassie movies of the 1940s, to 16)Flipper in the 1960s and more recent hits like 17)Free Willy and 18)Seabiscuit, animal films often 19)resound strongly with audiences, 20)raking in huge ticket sales.
One more high-profile film that prominently features animals has been released this year—21)Dolphin Tale, which is about a boy who befriends a marine mammal named Winter that has lost his tail in a crab trap. Another will be released this year is Cameron Crowe’s 22)We Bought a Zoo, which has wildlife including tigers and 23)porcupines.
“I think it’s very disturbing, the trend that we’re seeing of more and more animals appearing in movies, and I think we should be moving in the other direction with the technology we have,” said Matt Rossell, campaigns director for the U.S. branch of 24)ADI, a nonprofit group. “We’re calling on these studios to really take a good, hard look at their use of animals in fictional entertainment.
The practice of monitoring the treatment of animals on sets dates back some 70 years. After a horse went over a cliff and fell to his death during the making of 1939’s 25)Jesse James, Hollywood designated the AHA as the sole authorized on-set monitoring group. Any U.S. production under a contract with the Screen Actors Guild or the 26)AFTRA union is required to inform the organization if animals are to be used.
It has a film and television unit whose office, headquartered in Studio City, employs about 24 staff members, half of whom are safety representatives. The AHA also has about three dozen representatives 27)on call around the country who are used on an as-needed basis. It does not charge for its monitoring services in the United States.
But because of its limited resources, the AHA says it is not able to supervise animal activity on every set. When the organization does send out a representative, that individual takes note of a number of different factors, including temperature, noise levels and 28)enclosures. If the filmmakers meet all of the regulations, only then can the famous “No animals were harmed.” 29)disclaimer be used during the end credits of the movie.
Jone Bouman, director of communications for the organization said, “Animals are part of our lives. They are a part of the stories that filmmakers tell, and if they’re not onscreen, we’re losing one of the best tools we have to remind people that we share the Earth with other creatures. They just have to be humanely treated.”
Periodically, the AHA has faced questions about its ability to supervise such a heavy load of productions given its limited funds. The group says it does not have the resources to oversee the treatment of animals by trainers off-set. Just as the movie—which got the AHA 30)stamp of approval—hit theaters, a video claiming to be of an elephant used in the film, Water for Elephants, Tai, began circulating on the Internet; it 31)purported to show the animal being trained with electric shock devices and 32)bullhooks.
Partly as a result of the Elephants controversy, the AHA is looking into creating a symposium that would “engage trainers along with the studios and networks about positive training methods,” said Bouman.
But there are even on-set issues that the AHA is not yet able to tackle, such as ensuring access to the sets of U.S. productions abroad. Although the group provides services free domestically, it charges what it describes as a “minimal fee” when representatives are sent to the overseas sets of U.S. productions.
In the case of The Hangover Part II, the R-rated comedy that has collected nearly $580 million worldwide since opening in May and features a 33)capuchin monkey named Crystal, the AHA says it was not allowed on the film’s set in Thailand. Warner Bros., which produced the picture, declined to 34)elaborate upon the decision.
In the film, Crystal the monkey is shown smoking—a scene that enraged 35)PETA. The movie’s director, Todd Phillips, said the smoke had been digitally added, but because the film did not have the AHA’s stamp of approval, the group was unable to 36)vouch for it.
Yet even movies that do have the association’s 37)A-OK have come 38)under fire lately, as with Zookeeper, a family-friendly comedy with Kevin James about a man who takes care of the animals at his local zoo and discovers he can communicate with them. PETA members were on hand at the Zookeeper premiere but with an entirely different attitude than they displayed at the Apes event.
Charles Martin Smith, director of the upcoming Dolphin Tale, said he went to extreme lengths to avoid such criticism. The film is based on a true story, and he used the actual dolphin that had been injured—and now lives 39)in captivity because it would not survive in the wild. The movie was shot at Winter’s home at a marine hospital in Florida so the dolphin didn’t have to be transported anywhere, and the animal was never working for more than a couple of hours, he said.
“I certainly hope we don’t face any criticism because we worked so closely with her trainers to make sure she was okay. I can’t imagine anyone saying we should put her back out into the wild, where she’d very quickly be dinner for a shark. But animals have to be dealt with properly in a film, so I think it’s very 40)legitimate to raise questions about these things.”
在影片《猿族崛起》的首映式上，一群慷慨激昂的动物保护主义者云集好莱坞大道。但他们去那儿不是为了向身穿毛皮大衣的名人泼红漆。相反，一名全身猴子装扮的男示威者来到现场举着牌对制片人赞许道：“感谢你们没有使用真的猿猴！”
《猿族崛起》剧组采用动态摄影技术来创建灵长类动物的数字化影像，花了数千万美元在录制演员表演的技术上，然后使用电脑绘图将它逐层叠加起来，从而生成最终的图像——就这样，一个活生生的猿猴形象就诞生了。
然而，《猿族崛起》“不走寻常路”的做法远不止此——实际上，好莱坞最近热衷于用活生生的动物进行拍摄：非营利性组织美国人道协会对电影娱乐节目中使用动物进行拍摄的情况进行了监测，发现今年此类电影有2000多部，比2010年多了100部。目前，2011年的一些备受瞩目的影片，包括《大象的眼泪》、《宿醉2》以及《动物园看守》，都引起了动物保护主义者的不满，他们称用于拍摄这些影片的动物没有得到善待。
有些时候，动物保护主义者并非担心动物在拍摄中受到不善对待，他们更多地担心动物在镜头外受训的情况和生存条件。
考虑到动物类电影的票房回报，对于电影工作室来说，处理这些问题只是小事一桩。从20世纪40年代的《新灵犬莱西》到60年代的《海豚的故事》，再到更近期的一些热门电影如《威鲸闯天关》、《奔腾年代》等，动物主题的电影常常能引起观众的强烈反响，带来丰厚的票房收入。
今年，另一部颇有知名度的动物电影是《海豚的故事》。这部电影讲述了一个男孩与一只名叫温特的海洋哺乳动物结为好友的故事，温特在一个捕蟹笼里失去了尾巴。今年将上演的另一部影片为卡梅伦•克罗执导的《我家买了动物园》，影片中有老虎和豪猪等野生动物。
马特•罗塞尔是非营利组织美国文献资料协会的活动总监，他说：“越来越多的动物出现在电影里，这种趋势让人不安，我认为我们应该凭借现有的技术朝另一方向迈进。我们呼吁这些工作室在用动物拍摄娱乐故事片时要非常谨慎。”
对出镜动物的待遇进行监控的做法大约可以追溯到70年前。1939年，在拍摄电影《荡寇志》时，一匹马坠崖摔死了，在此之后，好莱坞指定美国人道协会为拍摄现场唯一授权的监管机构。任何与美国演员工会或美国电视与广播演员联合会联盟签订合同的影片制作，在需要使用动物进行拍摄时都必须告知美国人道协会。
美国人道协会设有一个电影和电视部，办公室总部设在电影城，约有24名员工，其中一半是安保代表。该协会同时还有约三十几名随时待命的安保代表，在有需要的时候到全国各地进行监督工作。在美国，该协会对监控服务不收取费用。
但由于其有限的资源，美国人道协会说他们无法对每一个使用动物拍摄的场景进行监督。当协会调派出人手到现场，那名代表需要对一些不同的要素做好记录，包括气温、噪音水平和动物围蔽设施。如果制片人符合所有这些规定，才能在电影片尾时使用“无动物受伤害”的免责声明。
该组织的沟通主管琼•波曼说：“动物是我们生活的一部分。他们是电影制片人所讲述的故事的一部分，如果他们没有出现在荧幕上，那么我们就失去了提醒人们‘我们与其他生物共享地球’这一讯息的最佳方法，但前提是它们要得到人道的对待。”
美国人道协会定期面对这样的问题：自身资金有限，是否有能力去监督如此繁多的影片拍摄。该组织称，没有足够的资源去监督非拍摄期间动物受训的情况。正当《大象的眼泪》这部电影（它得到了美国人道协会的批准印章）在影院里热播时，网络上盛传一个视频，声称要曝光片中那只叫泰伊的大象被训练员用电击装置和驯象刺棒进行训练的内幕。
部分由于《大象的眼泪》所造成的争议，美国人道协会正准备筹办一个研讨会。波曼说，这个研讨会旨在“吸引动物培训师、电影制片厂以及网络了解积极的动物训练方法”。
但就算是对片场内的监控，美国人道协会也有解决不了的问题，例如当美国电影在国外拍摄时，确保到达片场进行监督的问题。虽然该协会在美国国内提供免费服务，但当需要派遣安保代表到美国电影海外拍摄现场时，就要收取“最低费用”。
限制级喜剧《宿醉2》自从5月开播以来在全球范围内已赚取将近5.8亿美元，这部电影的主角是一只名叫水晶的僧帽猴。美国人道协会称，该协会在进入其泰国的片场进行监控时被拒。该电影的制作公司华纳兄弟公司拒绝对此决定作出详细解释。
在电影中，这只名叫水晶的猴子有吸烟的镜头，这个镜头激怒了善待动物组织的成员。电影导演托德•菲利普斯说，烟雾是通过数字化处理添加上去的，但因为该电影没有得到美国人道协会的批准印章，所以他们的团队无法对此加以保证。
然而，即使获得美国人道协会批准印章的电影，如《动物园看守》，最近也遭到了攻击。《动物园看守》是一部合家欢喜剧片，讲述主演凯文•詹姆斯照顾当地动物园里的动物并发现自己能与动物进行交流的故事。在该影片的首映式上，善待动物组织成员也来到了现场，但却摆出了与对待《猿族崛起》完全不同的态度。
影片《海豚的故事》即将上演，其导演查尔斯•马丁•史密斯坦言，他竭尽全力避免类似的批判。影片源自一个真实的故事，使用了一只曾经受过伤的真实海豚。这只海豚由于已不能在大自然中存活而被圈养起来。他说该片拍摄于佛罗里达州一家海洋医院，也就是温特自己的家，所以它不用长途跋涉，而且它也从来不需要连续工作几小时。
“我当然希望我们不用面对任何批评指责，因为我们与她的训练员密切合作，确保它安然无恙。我想象不到任何人会说我们应该把她放回到大自然中去，因为在野外她将很快成为鲨鱼的晚餐。但是，在电影的拍摄过程中，我们应该友善地对待动物，所以我认为提出这些问题是非常合理的。”