電影道具被指為偽鈔，港片兩工作人員獲刑
偽鈔被藏了起來。警方找出了藏匿處。正義得到了伸張。
It may sound like a film noir plot, but the fake bills had been used as props in an award-winning crime thriller filmed in Hong Kong. And the two suspects — who received suspended four-month sentences on Thursday — were not hardened criminal counterfeiters but members of a film production crew.
這可能聽起來像是一部黑色電影的劇情，但這些偽鈔是被用作香港一部犯罪驚悚片的道具，該電影曾獲大獎。而且兩名嫌犯——他們在周四被判入獄四個月，但獲緩刑——也并非造假慣犯，而是電影劇組的工作人員。
The question, local cinephiles say, is why the police even bothered to seek charges.
當?shù)赜懊员硎?，問題在于，警方為何要多事。
They say the case illustrates how onerous rules are needlessly hampering a local industry whose golden age of Bruce Lee kung fu films and Wong Kar-wai dramas seems long past, and which is now struggling to compete against rising competition from studios in South Korea and mainland China.
他們說，這一案例說明了繁瑣的規(guī)則是如何不必要地阻礙了當?shù)仉娪爱a(chǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展。該產(chǎn)業(yè)的黃金時代曾產(chǎn)出李小龍的功夫電影和王家衛(wèi)的劇情片，那似乎是很久以前的事情了，而它眼下正艱難地與來自韓國和中國大陸的電影公司日益激烈的競爭相抗衡。
“It’s hypocritical,” Kevin Ma, the founder of Asia in Cinema, a news site for the regional industry, said of the convictions. Even as Hong Kong officials talk of supporting local filmmakers, he said, “they have these really weird, arcane laws that prevent the industry from putting in serious production values.”
“虛偽，”地區(qū)性電影業(yè)新聞網(wǎng)站Asia in Cinema創(chuàng)辦人馬樂民(Kevin Ma)如此評價兩人的定罪。他說，盡管香港官員談到支持本地電影創(chuàng)作，但“他們有一些非常奇怪、晦澀難解的法律，令電影產(chǎn)業(yè)難以投入大的制作價值。”
In a statement, the Federation of Hong Kong Filmmakers called the sentence “unprecedented in the history of film industries around the world.” And the Hong Kong Film Arts Association said it was concerned because local laws governing the industry were hopelessly outdated and full of “gray areas that make it exceedingly easy for people in the industry to become accidentally entrapped.”
香港電影工作者總會在一份聲明中稱，該宣判“在全球電影業(yè)界史無前例”。香港電影美術(shù)學會擔憂當?shù)赜嘘P(guān)該行業(yè)的法律極為過時，“處處灰色地帶，令從業(yè)人員極為容易陷入犯法陷阱。”
The two men convicted on Thursday, Cheung Wai-chuen and Law Yun-lam, are veterans of Hong Kong’s film industry who were charged in late 2015 with having more than 230,000 counterfeit notes in Hong Kong dollars and other currencies, according to local news reports. The police had found the bills in a vehicle and an office associated with the production crew. The fake currency lacked the proper permits for storage and transportation, authorizations that the film’s producers were responsible for securing.
根據(jù)當?shù)匦侣剤蟮?，周二被定罪的兩名男子張偉全和羅潤霖是香港電影業(yè)的資深人士，他們在2015年末被控擁有超過23萬元的港幣和其他貨幣的偽鈔。警方在一輛車和一個與該劇組有關(guān)的辦公室里找到了這些假鈔。它們沒有適當?shù)膬Υ婧瓦\輸許可證，這些授權(quán)應(yīng)由電影制片人負責獲取。
The money was used on the set of “Trivisa,” a thriller about three criminals in the lead-up to the former British colony’s 1997 handover to China. “Trivisa” won five awards at the 2017 Hong Kong Film Awards, including best film, but it was later banned on the Chinese mainland — perhaps, observers said, because of scenes that show the criminals bribing Chinese officials.
這筆錢被用于電影《樹大招風》中，片中故事發(fā)生在香港這個前英殖民地于1997年移交給中國之前，是關(guān)于三名罪犯的驚悚片?！稑浯笳酗L》在2017年香港電影金像獎上獲得包括最佳影片獎在內(nèi)的五項大獎，但后來在中國大陸被禁——觀察人士說，或許是因為在幾場戲里，罪犯對中國官員進行了賄賂。
“You could just go to it as a crime movie, but I’m sure it echoes what a lot of people feel about the handover and how the new boss is China, and not the U.K.,” said Ross Chen, founder of the website Love HK Film and a member of the Hong Kong Film Critics Society.
“你可以把它當作犯罪電影來看，但我確信它反映了很多人對交接的看法，以及新老板怎樣變成了中國，不再是英國，”Love HK Film網(wǎng)站創(chuàng)始人、香港電影評論學會成員陳竹蓁說。
Hong Kong’s Film Services Office regulates and promotes the city’s film industry. In a statement Friday, the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, which oversees the film services office, said that it received occasional enquiries on the use of prop money, and that it tried to “provide assistance” and “help resolve any problems.”
香港電影服務(wù)統(tǒng)籌科負責監(jiān)管和宣傳香港電影業(yè)。負責管理該統(tǒng)籌科的商務(wù)及經(jīng)濟發(fā)展局在周五發(fā)表聲明稱，它不時收到有關(guān)對該道具紙幣使用情況的調(diào)查，并試圖“提供協(xié)助”并“幫助解決任何問題”。
For many in the local film industry, the case is emblematic of how Hong Kong, a semiautonomous city of about seven million, is struggling to maintain its cultural influence at a time when Beijing’s soft power is increasingly dominant.
當?shù)仉娪皹I(yè)的許多人認為，這個案例足以證明，在北京的軟實力日益占據(jù)統(tǒng)治地位之時，作為一個擁有700萬人口的半自治城市，香港正在努力維持其文化影響力。
The film industry is perhaps best known for 1970s-era kung fu movies starring Bruce Lee and acclaimed ’90s-era dramas by the director Wong Kar-wai. But after reaching box-office highs in 1992, revenue plummeted about 80 percent over the next 15 years, to around $28 million in 2007, according to government figures. A rebound in 2015 reached about 30 percent of the 1992 peak.
香港電影業(yè)可能以1970年代李小龍主演的功夫電影和1990年代王家衛(wèi)備受贊譽的故事片而聞名。但根據(jù)政府數(shù)據(jù)，在1992年達到最高點后，接下來的15年間，香港電影票房收入下降了80%左右，到2007年約為2800萬美元。2015年出現(xiàn)反彈，達到1992年峰值的30%。
Mr. Chen, of the film critics society, said that the idea that the counterfeiting charges were motivated by mainland politics seemed far-fetched to him, but he thought the film had plenty of critics in the mainland, especially because of its portrayals of some Chinese officials as corrupt.
香港電影評論學會的陳竹蓁表示，他認為假幣指控受到大陸政治推動的想法似乎有些牽強，但他認為這部電影在大陸受到了很多批評，特別是因為它把一些中國官員塑造成貪污腐敗的形象。
He added that he did not consider the sentences on Thursday to be “punishment” for the film’s politically sensitive elements, though he did find them severe. “At worst, you’d think the prop makers should just get a warning, if not a small fine,” he said.
他補充說，他并不認為周四的判決是對電影政治敏感因素的“懲罰”，盡管他確實認為這些判決非常嚴厲。“最壞的情況，你會認為這些道具制造者也就是遭到警告，或者是處以小額罰款，”他說。
On Thursday, one of the defendants questioned the timing of the sentences.
周四，其中一名被告質(zhì)疑判決的時機。
“You’ve watched movies for years, and those of you who are enforcing the law have seen the issue but you didn’t say anything,” Mr. Cheung said to reporters outside the courthouse. “Why are you only speaking up now?”
“你們看了那么多年電影，你們執(zhí)法的都一直看到這件事，但是你們不去講。”張偉全在法院外對記者說。“現(xiàn)在才來講，對嗎?”
Film industries around the world have tight rules governing the creation and use of fake currency in movies, and this is not the first legal case to arise from trying to use fake money that looks as realistic as possible. Anyone who prints fake money in Hong Kong must apply for permission. They must also make bills with “easily identifiable elements” to show that they are not real, Hong Kong’s acting secretary for financial services and the treasury, Joseph Chan, said in January.
世界各地的電影行業(yè)在制作和使用影片中的假幣方面都有嚴格規(guī)定，這不是試圖使用盡量逼真的假幣引發(fā)的第一起案例。任何在香港印制假鈔的人必須申請許可。香港署理財經(jīng)事務(wù)及庫務(wù)局局長陳浩濂在1月份表示，還必須用“容易識辨的元素”來表明這些紙幣不是真的。
Cheung Kit-yee, the judge in the “Trivisa” counterfeiting case, said that while the bills on the set were marked with the word “props,” it was clear only upon careful inspection, local news outlets reported. She said there was a risk that the bills could be used illegally.
當?shù)孛襟w報道，《樹大招風》假冒案件的法官張潔宜表示，雖然現(xiàn)場發(fā)現(xiàn)的鈔票上標有“道具”字樣，但只有經(jīng)過仔細檢查才能清楚看到。她說，這批假鈔有遭到非法使用的風險。
But Mr. Ma, the film journalist, said that the case was just the latest example of local filmmakers cutting corners because they were unable to navigate the local bureaucracy. He said a few had even filmed car chases on local roads after failing to secure official permission to have them closed.
但是電影記者馬先生表示，這件事僅僅是當?shù)仉娪叭藷o法順利獲得當?shù)毓倭艡C構(gòu)許可，就試圖走捷徑繞過去的最新例子。他說，有些人無法獲得官方的封路許可，甚至在當?shù)氐缆飞吓臄z追車鏡頭。
There is more than a hint of irony in the case, Mr. Ma said. One of the best-known moments in Hong Kong cinema is a scene in the 1986 film “A Better Tomorrow,” where the gangster Brother Mark, played by Chow Yun-fat, lights his cigarette with a counterfeit $100 bill.
馬先生說，這件事很有諷刺意味。1986年的電影《英雄本色》中，周潤發(fā)扮演的流氓小馬哥用假的100美元鈔票點燃手中的香煙，那是香港電影中最著名的時刻之一。
- 網(wǎng)站推薦
