《戰疫(감기)[The Flu]》

The Flu Poster
(from IMDb;Fair Use/Fair Dealing)

我錯!是我有眼無珠!
我以為這是部認真的「瘟疫片」,原來得啖笑!

「瘟疫片」是災難片Disaster Film)的分支。除非戲中的所謂「災難」,是喪屍蕃茄(《Attack of the Killer Tomatoes》)之類,否則總是以貼近現實為上優秀的例子世紀戰疫(Contagion。雖然戲本身我覺得只屬普通,但實在拍得很真實,尤其注重細節準確,可謂災難片的典範。

這部韓國片,以H5N1禽流感為主題。乍看,似乎很實在的選擇,我們經常都聽到有關「乜乜流感」的新聞,也似乎很有威脅的樣子… 但這部戲拍出來完全不是這回事!

其實流感的徵狀實在很多變化,可參考維基頁,在那個表上隨便選一些放到戲中,也不算錯了。不過,戲中用作初步確診的徵狀,居然是「紅點/紅斑」(或稱:「瘀點(Petechia/Petechial Rash)」?其實我不肯定有沒有分別,或我能否認得其分別,不過反正聽不懂韓文,總之是那一類徵狀吧。),那實在太奇幻了吧!?

維基頁有引述一篇文章,提到流感的可能徵狀包括「紅點」,但同一篇文其實有再引述其他文章,指出其實只是小部份病人有這徵狀吧…

“The classic illness due to influenza A virus infection consists of the sudden onset of fever, chills, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, cough, sore throat, and rhinorrhea. In younger children, the illness may present with different patterns including classic disease, a nonspecific febrile illness, or other respiratory tract manifestations such as croup, bronchitis, bronchiolitis, and pneumonitis. In addition, this age group may have gastrointestinal symptoms, and other findings such as seizures and rashes can be seen in a small percentage of patients.

The rash in influenza virus infection is usually macular or maculopapular but has been so florid that it has been mistaken for measles. In an extensive evaluation in a general practice in England, Hope-Simpson and Higgins noted that about 8% and 2% of influenza B and influenza A virus infections, respectively, were associated with rash. The rashes were not described however. Ryan-Poirier reported that macular, maculopapular, and petechial rashes occur in a small percentage of children with influenza virus infections, but no specific cases were presented.

The petechial rash in this child could have been due to the administration of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole rather than the viral infection. However, the lack of a maculopapular component to the rash and its short duration favor a viral etiology. In the absence of thrombocytopenia, there are no reports of isolated petechial rashes associated with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole therapy." (emphasis added)
Monica E. Silva, James D. Cherry, Richard J. Wilton, Negar M. Ghafouri, David A. Bruckner, and Marjorie J. Miller, “Acute Fever and Petechial Rash Associated with Influenza A Virus Infection," Clinical Infectious Diseases: an Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (1999) 29 (2): 453-454 doi:10.1086/520240 PMID 10476766

再想想,整部是怎樣描述病情進展的呢?
病人由接觸病毒病發至死亡,不過三十六小時,徵狀如下:

咳→發燒→紅點→嘔血→死

啫係… 雖然我不是醫生,不過… 這真的是流感?其實,會不會是「出血熱(Viral Hemorrhagic Fever, VHFs)」呀?例如:伊波拉病毒出血熱(Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever)?(病原當然就是「伊波拉病毒(Ebola Virus)」)

此病毒早在七十年代已經發現,其後也有過多次爆發。一九九五年時,有一部《極度驚慌(Outbreak》,就是講一種類似伊波拉的病毒。此片上映不久,剛果就發生了一次爆發,巧合得可怕。

(可參閱:Ali S. Khan, F. Kweteminga Tshioko, David L. Heymann, Bernard Le Guenno, Pierre Nabeth, Barbara Kerstiëns, Yon Fleerackers Peter H. Kilmarx, Guenael R. Rodier, Okumi Nkuku, Pierre E. Rollin, Anthony Sanchez, Sherif R. Zaki, Robert Swanepoel, Oyewale Tomori, Stuart T. Nichol, C. J. Peters, J. J. Muyembe-Tamfum and Thomas G. Ksiazek for the Commission de Lutte contre les Epidémies à Kikwit, “The Reemergence of Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever, Democratic Republic of the Congo, 1995," The Journal of Infectious Diseases (1999) 179 (Supplement 1): S76-S86. doi: 10.1086/514306 PMID 9988168

港產片當然不甘後人,也有一套《伊波拉病毒》,是著名CULT片。

極度過份誇張的病情,令整部戲搖身一變,成了不倫不類的「喪屍末日片

簡直是個笑話。

果然,到了後半部份重點完全轉成了強權、軍事管制城市,美韓角力漠視人權濫殺平民等議題。而最終的「英雄」,是敢於反抗「美帝」的南韓總統。

(但其實,除了那一刻,那個總統簡直是「全廢瘓」。除了說了幾句廢話,似乎無任何權力… 握有實權的,似乎只有總理一人。當然,我不熟悉南韓政制,本不應說三道四,隨便質疑南韓片描述的南韓政制… 但無論怎麼想也太奇怪了。

純粹讀維基資料,南韓總統有權委任總理;總理不用是國會議員或其他特別身份,只需要總統任命,國會確認就可以了,體制上跟民意、選舉也無直接關係;現任南韓總理(정홍원)就是前檢察官。

而南韓總統,也應該是三軍總司令;似乎不像戲中所述,軍權全由總理掌握,總統只有首都軍權?

就算是根據美韓聯合司令部的體制安排,一旦開戰,軍隊指揮權也應該落到駐韓美軍司令手中,而不是南韓總理吧!?

總之,看得我莫名其妙。)

簡而言之,後半部就像一部拍壞了的《韓流怪嚇(괴물)[The Host,想拍政治,但拍得一塌糊塗

==

簡單評分:

D-(☆★)

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s