Overall, it's cute. Six directors for one movie. On the plus side, it's interesting to see how different directors present the economic question in a distinctively entertaining way. On the down side, the movie is segmented, absent smooth transitions and a unifying genre. If you have no patience for the original book and care less about detailed corroborating evidence, this movie is a good alternative.
这个片子最大缺点就是太散,总共有6个导演,5个制作团队来完成: 1. Intro & Transitional Segments (including Real Estate, Parenting, Cheating, Cause & Effect, Incentives) 1 director 2. A Roshanda by Any Other Name 1 director 3. Pure Corruption 1 director 4. It’s Not Always A Wonderful Life 1 director 5. Can you bribe a 9th grader to succeed? 2 directors
下面为主要内容及观感,有兴趣的可以挑相应电影片段来看: 0. Real Estate Does real estate agent really represent your interest? Incentives matter!!! If you can figure out what people’s incentives are, you have a good chance of guessing how they are going to behave.
1. Parenting (4’26’’-) Levitt explains what he does in research: to figure out tricky ways to get a causality. There’s a difference between causality and correlation.
2. A Roshanda by Any Other Name (莎翁名句:A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.) (出自原书第六章) Does name matter? Does name define your destiny?
Resume experiment: African American names vs. White names View point: Name may not define your destiny but it can dictate the ways other ppl perceive you.
3. Cheating (3&4出自原书第一章:教师和相扑运动员有何相似之处?) Teachers could cheat.
4. Pure Corruption (24’20’’-47’48’’) Corruption in the Sumo World with reference to Bernie Madoff (corruption in the realm of high finances) *误译:S.E.C (not S.C.C) 很像犯罪纪实片,有点故弄玄虚之感。本可以独立成片的题材,过短而语嫣不详。日本文化对于西方观众/读者本身具有神秘吸引力。也提到了日本和美国媒体的self-censorship,有一定自我批判的意味。
Levitt: The only way to combat corruption is to change rules and undo corruption incentives, unleash more investigative reporters and to develop strong protections for whistle blowers.
5. Cause & Effect (47’49’’-49’10’’) Does ice cream cause polio?
6. It’s Not Always a Wonderful Life (出自原书第四章) Reasons why crime rates drop considerably in the 1990s? 观感: 全片最有意思和最令人惊奇的发现。
6 most popular explanations (with authors’ verdict): More innovative policing (0%), harsher criminal policing (30%), changes in the crack market (15%), increase gun control, a strong economy, more police on the street (the last three about 10% in total). (具体怎么得到这些数字的没有解释,这也许是有经济学家批评两位作者是在描述计量经济学的原因,原书中是不是也没有解释?)
Almost half of the drop left unexplained. Levitt’s answer: Roe vs. Wade (the legalized abortion in 1970s) Unwanted children were not born… “Unintended consequence of legalized abortion”
7. Incentives How Levitt failed to potty-train his daughter with her favorite M&M chocolates within three days.
8. Can a 9th grader be bribed to succeed? Interesting (but costly) experiment again!
观感:This is the most touching part of the movie and it sort of resonates with the segment on Parenting. But again the authors’ view on parents’ role in a child’s growth is ambiguous.
喜欢
funny but..
推荐看书
所讲的道理太浅了
对看过原书的人而言,电影仅限于重温。
挺好的,喜欢这种纪录片类型。要去看看原著。片中小孩Kevin好帅,EQ也小高~~心,黑人母子相处模式也不错( ^_^ )
不知道为毛让我最喜欢这部片子的原因是我觉得Stephen Levitt好帅啊~~
开篇说的是边际效益,名字和相扑和经济学没任何关系。最后的激励机制真的很有启发。激励用于引导效果之所以好,在于对象没有形成固定认识;相反用于改正观念就难得多。说到底,激励和管理学有关,还是和片名无关。
物理学来说,伦理道德是理想无摩擦状态,经济学是现实中带阻力情形
中间关于日本相扑的非常有趣,开头起名的那个很无聊...
咋说类~~看的我头有点晕~~原书对我来说很经典~~
好烂!比起 inside job 和 too big to fail 差远了。
传媒派电影
超级PPT,太不错了~哈哈
还不错的纪录片
还是书好
一家之言,而已
赞呢 很久之前看的书 就赞 一个记录片 拍的很不错 津津有味嗒~
他不是在讲一个经济学,而是在围绕经济学家面临和看待世界的东西。这是典型的美国人的思维。对啊,为什么我们非要把很多东西强加在看到的东西身上。。。围绕一个问题,我们呢可以看到不同的世界。
观点可以不完全认同, 但是非常有意思啊!