公仔箱論壇 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 为什么<冲上云霄1/2> 都不用真的航空公司/飞机呢 [打印本頁]

作者: keropi88 時間: 2013-7-17 10:28 PM 標題: 为什么<冲上云霄1/2> 都不用真的航空公司/飞机呢

如果大家有看过日本的一部类似冲上云霄的剧集<Good Luck!>，他们用真的航空公司"All Nippon Airways(ANA)"，真的飞机，等等，虽然很久了，但是很真，很好看
既然国泰航空/香港航空,都赞助了，飞机都借他们用了，为什么不能用他们公司的身份呢，每次看到剧里的假飞机，真是美中不足

作者: reevekane 時間: 2013-7-18 10:36 AM

可能航空公司给的广告费不够呢

作者: PepsiCola7Up 時間: 2013-7-18 12:55 PM

有假飞机看也不错了。。

作者: jassq788 時間: 2013-7-18 05:20 PM

可能牵涉版权问题。

作者: evilster 時間: 2013-7-18 07:02 PM

飞机如果在戏里出事，对航空公司的形象会有受顺！

作者: xiaoruan84 時間: 2013-7-18 07:20 PM

因為是版權的關係，我也發現他們的劇集就算真的有那家公司，他們也會改了名字才播出的~~

作者: maverick0760 時間: 2013-7-19 10:06 AM

好简单.. 因为真实座舱空间唔大.. 特别喺冲1个阵嘅波音747.. 仲有.. 飞机如果借俾你拍戏.. 拍一日租金好贵.. 唔收你租航空公司又少部飞机赚钱.. 一部机闲闲哋都飞百几二百人.. 747载四百几人.. 今次330都都载200几三百人.. 仲有.. 整烂维修费好贵.. 冲1个阵都仲有好多用训练用嘅模拟舱.. 但喺今次连话入模拟舱都喺TVB嘅布景舱.. 唉..
个拍摄座舱比之前粗糙.. 况且貌似D顾问无跟足.. 有D细节都喺错嘅.. 例如第一集喺停机坪直接就起飞了.. 一般都会喺地面控制(Ground)指挥其到跑道头包括走边条滑行道..然后Call上塔台(Tower).. Tower批准后先可以起飞.. 冲2已经将好多嘢都忽略晒.. 忽略到有小小唔专业..

作者: wilson6339 時間: 2013-7-19 10:20 AM

好简单.. 因为真实座舱空间唔大.. 特别喺冲1个阵嘅波音747.. 仲有.. 飞机如果借俾你拍戏.. 拍一日租金好贵.. 唔收你租航空公司又少部飞机赚钱.. 一部机闲闲哋都飞百几二百人.. 747载四百几人.. ...
5 u0 T$ t! f, L% G* [9 d/ [: Cmaverick0760 發表於 2013-7-19 10:06 AM

8 p" f/ G+ \; E/ [7 b

公仔箱論壇4 L/ |: K$ Y/ n- V' n
完全赞同你的说法。。

作者: keropi88 時間: 2013-7-19 09:36 PM

correct, agree ... this season 2 they skipped many flying stuff, focused more on love love thing , s4 ^* v8 ] K

normallly request push back and start, then taxi, at holding point take off.. this one the take off clearance ady given while they r still at the bay ... where got so early one, small airport maybe got la, international airport impossible.

作者: lcytvb 時間: 2013-7-19 09:58 PM

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: jsl3000 時間: 2013-7-20 09:24 AM

Yes, I have watched the Japanese Series Good Luck plus the Japanese Movie Happy Flight many times. Both of them use a Real AirPlane from a Real AirLine. Very realistic plus the story was excellent. I felt like I was inside those planes most of the time. When I try to watch 冲上云霄 II, I felt CHEAP! One look at the plane, everyone can tell that that is NOT a real plane. Plus the Cockpit was a JOKE! Even a kid can tell that that is NOT even come close to any type of Cockpit. It is really sad that TVB is getting cheaper and cheaper when making series. I actually enjoy more on watching those older series from both TVB and ATV back in the 70s and 80s. At those times, they used to film them at some realistic places like an actual auto shop, an actual factory, an actual restaurant, an actual airport...etc. An actual place can make the series come to LIVE!

作者: wacojac 時間: 2013-7-21 02:07 PM

贊助的航空公司確實想用真名，但監製認為不好，因為戲劇里總要有些驚險的劇情，用真名的話會影響航空公司

作者: mrfusion 時間: 2013-7-21 03:43 PM

It is diffcult to use a real plane because you will need to start removing seats, and lots of things in order to put a camera, film crew, lighting and sound equipments, etc.

作者: zyz2011 時間: 2013-7-21 04:03 PM

太有难度了吧？

作者: mrfusion 時間: 2013-7-21 04:51 PM

my question is why they don't just continue to use Solar airway.

作者: okx321 時間: 2013-7-21 10:32 PM

因為是版權的關係

作者: cleverkaki 時間: 2013-7-22 02:31 AM

Solar was sponsored by Cathy on chapter 1, but this chapter is sponsored by HK Airline. Different company!

作者: kam101 時間: 2013-7-22 08:59 PM

如果你有看過監制的專訪，他們有答過此問題，不要挑骨頭好嗎？

作者: mrfusion 時間: 2013-7-23 11:56 AM

本帖最後由 mrfusion 於 2013-7-23 11:57 AM 編輯

Solar was sponsored by Cathy on chapter 1, but this chapter is sponsored by HK Airline. Different company!' f8 q- E3 Z7 m" s
cleverkaki 發表於 2013-7-22 02:31 AM

Doesn't mean Cathay own the copyright.

如果你有看過監制的專訪，他們有答過此問題，不要挑骨頭好嗎？, o3 ?6 x4 N5 g" g9 x2 v5 n
kam101 發表於 2013-7-22 08:59 PM

1 B3 P; s* t% l# u

I did not watch, what is the official answer? Or please point me to the youtube video.

作者: jackyngo1979 時間: 2013-7-23 12:22 PM

bcos thailand have solar airway...

作者: okx321 時間: 2013-7-23 01:36 PM

成本问题吧

作者: tanghoi 時間: 2013-7-23 11:02 PM

I think its because of copyright and the image of the airlines

作者: kokolee15 時間: 2013-7-24 12:48 AM

真的比多好多錢架..

作者: heeroting 時間: 2013-7-24 09:46 AM

等我仲以为真系系飞机到拍添

作者: iloveyou120 時間: 2013-7-24 09:59 AM

- -系真噶话要买人寿保险了

作者: cry_tolate 時間: 2013-7-24 10:03 AM

航空公司比條機你,佢唔見幾多錢..

作者: alanmandy 時間: 2013-7-26 10:51 AM

我都想知點解。

作者: case123 時間: 2013-7-26 11:38 AM

幾十集的..租架真飛機...傻左咩

作者: miumiu468 時間: 2013-7-27 02:51 AM

TVB always like that.

作者: a72976 時間: 2013-7-27 07:24 PM

内容边有交通百分百安全咖！！！

作者: feizai210 時間: 2013-7-28 10:29 AM

你以为唔使钱啊

作者: ariel999 時間: 2013-7-28 02:48 PM

Hong Kong not allow use real name under the law. Under HK law, cannot shoot while operate the plane and even actors/actress sitting on real plane is illegal. 冲1 didn't even use a real plane so 冲2 already a big improvement.

作者: dxy98 時間: 2013-7-29 02:30 AM

用真名的話會影響航空公司

作者: ken139225 時間: 2013-8-3 04:48 PM

你以为租真飞机不用钱啊，成本问题

作者: hosealiu 時間: 2013-8-3 07:37 PM

港劇就係咁

作者: 屁屁zzz 時間: 2013-8-3 08:43 PM

no buget ma!!

作者: 840280846 時間: 2013-8-6 05:32 PM

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: KinG-FisheR 時間: 2013-8-6 08:24 PM

如果用真機成本太高

作者: gogo17966 時間: 2013-8-9 10:18 PM

我想　一切都是　預算問題

作者: tedlost 時間: 2013-8-12 01:05 AM

经费不足？

作者: bugbear1945 時間: 2013-8-12 09:39 PM

錢作怪
日本拍一套劇乜都收返哂
加上用得真機咁認真
就唔會有咁多捉錯處啦

作者: racing_ken 時間: 2013-8-14 02:28 PM

budget budget budget

作者: liu_yang 時間: 2013-8-15 04:12 PM

不管啥原因，還是顯得小家子氣了，不夠大場面……

作者: 阿阑仔 時間: 2013-8-15 05:24 PM

睇完大家的回覆也解惑了1 `& I. W# Y) K+ ^1 k$ ^2 H! O7 q
原本是以為錢的問題，原來仲有其他原因

作者: kyjumie 時間: 2013-8-15 08:36 PM

也許某D牌子/服務不可以作置入式廣告吧?

作者: appleapple2 時間: 2013-8-17 03:09 AM

如果用真的航空公司名稱來拍攝，一定被投設到爆，因為這是真真正正的植入式廣告，現在那支「健康飲品」，已經看得很厭了...

作者: garciabox 時間: 2013-8-18 05:25 PM

以免日後有任何責任

作者: sy05wm 時間: 2013-8-18 10:42 PM

算啦，TVB。。。。

作者: WinstonLau 時間: 2013-8-19 09:26 AM

费用不够

作者: jyhliang 時間: 2013-8-20 05:21 PM

牵涉版权问题

作者: jundywoo 時間: 2013-8-20 10:20 PM

my question is why they don't just continue to use Solar airway.+ ]* `: h8 X, L( A% J: V L
mrfusion 發表於 2013-7-21 04:51 PM

飛揚系映射國泰，當年都系國泰城拍。依家系映射香港航空，包括當年高薪挖角嘅內容。

作者: angj 時間: 2013-8-25 01:17 AM

應該是會影響航空公司的專業度吧公仔箱論壇3 v% M! n9 D* M
畢竟戲裡有很多現實生活沒有的愛恨糾葛/ I, g. i3 K& K) P1 ~7 p7 Q
怕觀眾誤認機師不專業啊 :P

作者: hei0325 時間: 2013-8-25 03:07 AM

sponsors has changed

作者: aawoo 時間: 2013-8-29 01:30 PM

完全赞同

作者: bigheadmanken 時間: 2013-8-29 03:20 PM

I don't see fake or real airplane make any differences in the story. We just have to enjoy the story and acting only!!!!!

作者: 鬼虎 時間: 2013-8-29 11:55 PM

點解要幫佢地賣廣告??

作者: msi54 時間: 2013-8-30 06:54 PM

有影响囖~~~

作者: babbywong 時間: 2013-9-3 04:05 PM

如果下下用真野，现代就唔会有“青景”拍摄咗咯！

作者: edwinsan 時間: 2013-9-3 04:45 PM

Agreed.

作者: ilovehack 時間: 2013-9-3 09:18 PM

這樣在台灣會有廣告嫌疑

作者: oblivious 時間: 2013-9-9 01:16 AM

That's simple. It's too cost-inefficient. To fit the whole filming crew in the cockpit or an airplane, you need a lot of room to make that happen. It will also be an inconvenience with the real-life crew to just use a real airplane when it's meant to fly hundreds of people around the world instead of taking shoots. Makes me wonder how high the fees will go if that's the case, but I doubt TVB would like to pay for stuff like this at this time. =P

Then there's also the lack of use or cockpit/plane scenes in the second installment. Saves them a lot more money... For example, when the cadets were in training about how to be conscious about other plane's whereabouts, they used a parking lot with BIKES instead of having them fly on private planes as they did in the first...
www2.tvboxnow.com$ |/ x& w- J% x
I kinda wish they kept the Solar Airways, but as this is a different story with a different focus (due to lack or original cast), I see why they need to change the name. I mean, they never showed who the executive of Solar Airways was in the first one and out pops 景家駿 for Skylette. It seems like they're just milking the first, but too little too late~~

作者: mysteriouskazk 時間: 2013-9-11 10:46 AM

版權？維他命水勁出鏡喎...

歡迎光臨公仔箱論壇 (http://www2.tvboxnow.com/)