最近在商场上,看到很多不同的武侠电影。
可是，我却没有购买欲。
很奇特，不是吗？我可以说是个武侠迷。
我发现，我还是喜欢香港电影鼎盛时期，也就是1980-1997之间的武侠电影。
《黄飞鸿》、《洪熙官》。。。。。
那时的电影比较纯，只渲染正义，邪不能胜正的道理。虽然特效和画面是粗糙了点，可是看了之后，心里还是有一股暖流划过。心里总觉得当英雄是好的。
曾几何时，武侠电影变的不一样了？
是因为西方国家爱上武侠电影，所以为了迎合他们的视觉与味觉，我们东方人改变了武侠电影的制作方式？
这是极有可能的因为香港电影界正处于低弥时期，为了抓住全球观众的这块大饼，牺牲本土观众又有什么关系？毕竟制作电影的出发点还是为了钱。
还是因为香港回归祖国后，为了迎合大陆观众不同层次的文化品味而做改变？
有或则是因为东方人有意让武侠电影成为一种最低共同点(lowest common denominator)，让不同文化背景的人都能欣赏，象西方的舞蹈歌曲一样？
我不知道这箇中的原因，可能是综合以上所有吧。
但我知道，《卧虎藏龙》是武侠电影的转（车戾）点，因为它让西方惊艳，让国际社会为武侠电影着迷。
那种唯美的镜头，逼真的特效，悠美的人物是令人为之向往心动。
其他东方导演为之效仿，但画虎不成反类犬。
其实以我个人而言，唯美主义的电影可一而不可多。
其实历史上也有记载。
比如诗词吧。
我记得老师曾说过有一段时间文人很爱唯美主义的诗词，写了大量文词并茂的文句。
然而，这些虚有其表，却空无内涵的文句很快便过时了。来的快，去的也快。
这段其间红的也只有《花间集》中的几位诗词人。
所以，我不知道现代的武侠电影是不是会这样。但是可以肯定的，若是没有内涵的东西，必定让人看不懂。看不懂的东西刚开始会觉得很新鲜，但是久了人会看腻的。
同理，若是留不住自己的文化特色，那文化产品根本没有吸引人的价值。
Showing posts with label new media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label new media. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Stunning news
Yah, you may be wondering why I am blogging at this time of the day. Because I am on 2day MC. Yeah...i got fever as high as 38.3 deg c on sun nite. my body aching like crazy.
Now, feeling much better, I hope to blog somemore as I know, you guys think that this blog may disappear soon sia.
And now for thw dramatic news of the day from Wired news:
Stiffer Cyber Laws to Crack Down on Botnets, Spyware
By Luke O'Brien
WASHINGTON -- Federal lawmakers confronting a plague of botnet infections, denial-of-service extortion schemes and spyware are going on the counter-offensive with two new bills that would make it easier for federal prosecutors to charge cybercriminals, while bringing computer intrusion under the ambit of the mob-busting RICO Act.
Together, the Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act would represent one of the more significant updates to federal computer-crime law in the last two decades.
Around 30 percent of malicious internet activity took place or originated in the United States in the second half of last year, according to information from Symantec. China was second at 10 percent. Prominent among today's threats are bots -- a type of malicious software that secretly puts a vulnerable PC under the control of an attacker, who can direct thousands of computers at once. Organized cybercriminals routinely use networks of bots to launder spam, steal passwords for online banking and launch denial-of-service attacks like those that recently plagued the small European nation of Estonia after it angered Russian nationalists.
"You're looking at a new species of criminal conduct," says Roma Theus, a white-collar crime expert at the Defense Research Institute and a former federal prosecutor. "We have to look beyond where we are today and think about where we might be ten years from today."
The Cyber-Security Enhancement Act, introduced by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California), would do just that, stiffening penalties and sentencing times for cybercriminals by classifying computer-fraud offenses as a predicate offense for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO, law. Authorities could also seize any ill-gotten gains a crook may have obtained through online rackets.
The measure also adjusts the damage threshold that qualifies a cybercrime receive FBI attention. Currently, a financial loss of $5,000 spread out among victims makes an intrusion into a federal case; under the bill, damaging 10 or more computers in a year would automatically qualify, even with no financial harm.
This bill has cheered many advocates for tougher laws on cybercrime. "In our discussions with law enforcement, that $5,000 limit is a major sticking point in terms of not being able to go after these criminals," says Rob Tai, the manager of cybercrime prevention for the Business Software Alliance, which represents the commercial software industry and supports both bills.
The I-SPY Act, introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California), amends the same federal computer crimes statute by setting a five-year sentence and/or fines for anyone caught using subversive software "in furtherance" of a federal criminal offense. Scam artists who distribute software coded with keystroke loggers or other covert functions, and who use it to steal Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords or any personal identification information could face new charges. So could hoods using spyware to "impair" a computer's security system while trying to defraud another person, although the prison time for that offense drops to two years.
The bill is a nice step forward but only part of a much-needed collection of tools to combat spyware violations, according to David Sohn, senior policy counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. "It's adding an additional enforcement arrow to the quiver," Sohn said.
Both measures modify the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the federal anti-hacking bill enacted in 1986. Originally intended to protect only federal government computers and financial institutions, the CFAA has been amended several times since then, most recently in 2001, when the Patriot Act raised the maximum penalties, among other tweaks.
Not everyone thinks the latest crop of bills is the correct response to shifting cyberthreats. "I'm not sure it's completely necessary," says Andy Serwin, a noted cyberspace lawyer and the author of a book on information security and privacy laws. "How much burden do you put on business?"
The Federal Trade Commission already enforces cyberfraud, and state and federal laws cover more than enough ground to allow for prosecution, Serwin argues. Increased legislation might wind up criminalizing legitimate software, such as Microsoft's updater, which automatically installs programs on computers and might technically be spyware under the new legislation, he says.
Besides, Serwin adds, "The guy who's going to do the really malicious stuff is going to do it anyway. And he may do it offshore, so there's no way to get at him."
Theus disagrees. He says that the government could extradite wrongdoers, or even seize them, ala Manuel Noriega. "If someone is under the misapprehension that they can be outside the U.S. and commit a crime that has effects inside the U.S. (and avoid sanctions), that person is going to be terribly surprised."
So far such extraditions are virtually unheard of. In the U.K., Gary McKinnon, a 41-year-old man accused of penetrating over 90 unclassified U.S. military computers in 2001 and 2002, has delayed extradition for years, even while admitting to the hacking spree. In April he lost a court challenge to an extradition order, and is now on a final appeal to the U.K. Parliament's Law Lords.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/06/bot_law
Comments:
Whoa! That is a very law specific case of regulation. I thought US being very open and democratic will not obstruct free trade and agreement but I guess they have reached the limit of tolerance and use offline laws to restrict online activities. How effective is this? I am not too sure. We will have to wait and see.
But this is one of the interesting piece of news especially for the students of new media.haha...
Now, feeling much better, I hope to blog somemore as I know, you guys think that this blog may disappear soon sia.
And now for thw dramatic news of the day from Wired news:
Stiffer Cyber Laws to Crack Down on Botnets, Spyware
By Luke O'Brien
WASHINGTON -- Federal lawmakers confronting a plague of botnet infections, denial-of-service extortion schemes and spyware are going on the counter-offensive with two new bills that would make it easier for federal prosecutors to charge cybercriminals, while bringing computer intrusion under the ambit of the mob-busting RICO Act.
Together, the Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act would represent one of the more significant updates to federal computer-crime law in the last two decades.
Around 30 percent of malicious internet activity took place or originated in the United States in the second half of last year, according to information from Symantec. China was second at 10 percent. Prominent among today's threats are bots -- a type of malicious software that secretly puts a vulnerable PC under the control of an attacker, who can direct thousands of computers at once. Organized cybercriminals routinely use networks of bots to launder spam, steal passwords for online banking and launch denial-of-service attacks like those that recently plagued the small European nation of Estonia after it angered Russian nationalists.
"You're looking at a new species of criminal conduct," says Roma Theus, a white-collar crime expert at the Defense Research Institute and a former federal prosecutor. "We have to look beyond where we are today and think about where we might be ten years from today."
The Cyber-Security Enhancement Act, introduced by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California), would do just that, stiffening penalties and sentencing times for cybercriminals by classifying computer-fraud offenses as a predicate offense for the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO, law. Authorities could also seize any ill-gotten gains a crook may have obtained through online rackets.
The measure also adjusts the damage threshold that qualifies a cybercrime receive FBI attention. Currently, a financial loss of $5,000 spread out among victims makes an intrusion into a federal case; under the bill, damaging 10 or more computers in a year would automatically qualify, even with no financial harm.
This bill has cheered many advocates for tougher laws on cybercrime. "In our discussions with law enforcement, that $5,000 limit is a major sticking point in terms of not being able to go after these criminals," says Rob Tai, the manager of cybercrime prevention for the Business Software Alliance, which represents the commercial software industry and supports both bills.
The I-SPY Act, introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California), amends the same federal computer crimes statute by setting a five-year sentence and/or fines for anyone caught using subversive software "in furtherance" of a federal criminal offense. Scam artists who distribute software coded with keystroke loggers or other covert functions, and who use it to steal Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords or any personal identification information could face new charges. So could hoods using spyware to "impair" a computer's security system while trying to defraud another person, although the prison time for that offense drops to two years.
The bill is a nice step forward but only part of a much-needed collection of tools to combat spyware violations, according to David Sohn, senior policy counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. "It's adding an additional enforcement arrow to the quiver," Sohn said.
Both measures modify the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the federal anti-hacking bill enacted in 1986. Originally intended to protect only federal government computers and financial institutions, the CFAA has been amended several times since then, most recently in 2001, when the Patriot Act raised the maximum penalties, among other tweaks.
Not everyone thinks the latest crop of bills is the correct response to shifting cyberthreats. "I'm not sure it's completely necessary," says Andy Serwin, a noted cyberspace lawyer and the author of a book on information security and privacy laws. "How much burden do you put on business?"
The Federal Trade Commission already enforces cyberfraud, and state and federal laws cover more than enough ground to allow for prosecution, Serwin argues. Increased legislation might wind up criminalizing legitimate software, such as Microsoft's updater, which automatically installs programs on computers and might technically be spyware under the new legislation, he says.
Besides, Serwin adds, "The guy who's going to do the really malicious stuff is going to do it anyway. And he may do it offshore, so there's no way to get at him."
Theus disagrees. He says that the government could extradite wrongdoers, or even seize them, ala Manuel Noriega. "If someone is under the misapprehension that they can be outside the U.S. and commit a crime that has effects inside the U.S. (and avoid sanctions), that person is going to be terribly surprised."
So far such extraditions are virtually unheard of. In the U.K., Gary McKinnon, a 41-year-old man accused of penetrating over 90 unclassified U.S. military computers in 2001 and 2002, has delayed extradition for years, even while admitting to the hacking spree. In April he lost a court challenge to an extradition order, and is now on a final appeal to the U.K. Parliament's Law Lords.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/06/bot_law
Comments:
Whoa! That is a very law specific case of regulation. I thought US being very open and democratic will not obstruct free trade and agreement but I guess they have reached the limit of tolerance and use offline laws to restrict online activities. How effective is this? I am not too sure. We will have to wait and see.
But this is one of the interesting piece of news especially for the students of new media.haha...