2008: The Digital Rummage

Discussions on Asian cinemas: Japanese, Korean, Thai, ....

Postby Masterofoneinchpunch » Wed Jul 16, 2008 6:46 pm

cal42 wrote:Well, looking at Mike's list, it seems I'm finally catching up on HK films as there are a fair few familiar titles on there. Who'd have thought it, me watching modern HK films? :P

I've still got a whole bunch to watch as well and I've got FATAL CONTACT and RUNNING OUT OF TIME on the way (well, they're reasonably modern!).

I'll be interested on hearing your thoughts on INVISIBLE TARGET, Shawn.


Yea, I was thinking of adding to your blog on INVISIBLE TARGET (already read it of course; you gave it an 8, I would probably give it a 7); it will be interesting to hear your thoughts on both (I really liked RUNNING OUT OF TIME), had mediocre feelings on FATAL CONTACT (didn't hate it though except for the ending :D wrote a little on it in the http://hkmdb.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=46841&start=120 thread).

I've been watching more modern HK films mainly because of the amount of Triad/Cop films I bought and enjoy (I was a Woo fan years ago; and wanted to know more on that genre besides from Infernal Affairs, Woo, Ringo Lam, etc...)
My Amazon Reviews

“That’s Icky to Infinity.” – The Tick
User avatar
Masterofoneinchpunch
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:24 pm

Four more from the Criterion sale. Didn't have to use the code this time, so perhaps it's automatic now.

SWEET MOVIE (1975)
BLAST OF SILENCE (1961)
RIFIFI (1954)
THE MILKY WAY (1969)

Still a couple of others to mull over, but since virtually everything is now out-of-stock, there's a bit of a window. As with so many Criterions, a lot of these have been on my radar but beyond my budget for ages, so this sale was a great opportunity. I've seen both SWEET MOVIE and RIFIFI ages ago, so it's nice to finally own 'em. BLAST OF SILENCE seems to have come out of nowhere to wide acclaim, which has me psyched (but never sold, of course!), and the Bunuel film was one I didn't even know Criterion had released! Now if I could just find a top-notch DVD release of EXTERMINATING ANGEL, my personal favourite (well, there is VIRIDIANA, too . . . ) There appears to be a special edition in Region 4, so perhaps this "horror" picture also found it's way into Mike T's collection? Not sure I wanna pay $35AUD + delivery is it's better to wait.
Last edited by Brian Thibodeau on Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:09 pm

Masterofoneinchpunch wrote:The Ghoul (1933: US)


Almost forgot to ask about this one! Was this a $3 Big Lots purchase by any chance? I've read that it's one of the (many) titles turning up on displays in those stores. I found a few good Sony/Columbia/HBO titles last time I was home and across the border, and now it appears the selection of $3 titles has been greatly expanded, so I'm thinking of once again braving the scuzzy part of town to see what I can find (and presumably sell to DVD Planet later on for a profit :lol:) I actually bought THE GHOUL a couple of years ago but sold it off after viewing. Quite a good film really, just not one I needed to keep.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Masterofoneinchpunch » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:22 am

Brian Thibodeau wrote:
Masterofoneinchpunch wrote:The Ghoul (1933: US)


Almost forgot to ask about this one! Was this a $3 Big Lots purchase by any chance? ...


Yes. 3 Dollars, so it was an easy decision.

I plan on getting RIFIFI soon (the only one I do not own out of those four). I really liked Bunuel's MILKY WAY though it does delve into esoteric dogma (of course that is the whole film :D). I'm looking forward to EXTERMINATING ANGEL hopefully eventually being R1 released (I have not seen it though; only going off of several critics and my love for other Bunuel films). I still have not see (own though) BLAST OF SILENCE nor SWEET MOVIE. I'll watch RIFIFI as soon as I can get ahold of it (it has been wanted from me for a long time; plus I just saw Le Cercle Rouge and Melville stated that one of the reasons he waited so long to make that film was because of RIFIFI.

Nevermind just bought RIFIFI and VIRIDIANA (shaking my fist at Brian :D).

Blather -> I've been a little slow on my Criterion watchings, though the last two films seen have been Criterions: Le Cercle Rouge and Breathless (the only two Criterions this month; more Kino this month :D).

Brian, how good is SWEET MOVIE? I need to figure where on my Criterion watching list to put it (middle of the pack or back with I AM CURIOUS -- BLUE).
My Amazon Reviews

“That’s Icky to Infinity.” – The Tick
User avatar
Masterofoneinchpunch
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:54 am

Masterofoneinchpunch wrote:I'm looking forward to EXTERMINATING ANGEL hopefully eventually being R1 released (I have not seen it though; only going off of several critics and my love for other Bunuel films).


It's quite a treat in the right frame of mind, like most of his stuff. I thought the concept of bourgeois people trapped in a room, and only increasingly becoming aware of it and falling victim to their petty weaknesses, was fertile ground for a giddy surrealist like Bunuel. Once you sort of "get" what's happening to the people in the house, and how helpless/useless they seem to be to do anything about their situation, it actually becomes quite suspenseful, even terrifying in its own way.

I first saw this in the early 90's on a late night movie program broadcast out of New York called "Off Beat Cinema" which utilized old beat-up movie prints much the same way as the old "Chiller Theater" type horror hosts of the 70's and 80's, with a "cast" of hep cats in a cheap coffeehouse introducing the movies and doing little bits around the commercial breaks. The whole schtick was extremely lame and sadly under-realized, but I just discovered it's still airing. :shock:
http://www.offbeatcinema.com/

Naturally, their print of EXTERMINATING ANGEL was in rough shape, but not enough to obscure its brilliance. But it seems like such an ideal choice for Criterion treatment that I have to wonder what's held it up all these years.


Nevermind just bought RIFIFI and VIRIDIANA (shaking my fist at Brian :D).


:lol: :lol:



Blather -> I've been a little slow on my Criterion watchings, though the last two films seen have been Criterions: Le Cercle Rouge and Breathless (the only two Criterions this month; more Kino this month :D).


I just watched Tati's PLAYTIME last weekend. Based on this, I'd have to say that Tati seems to go along way to present simple gags, but in the case of PLAYTIME, much of that effort is awe-inspiring in itself. The logistics and design of this movie are fantastic, more than enough for me to keep it in the collection.

But, reading up on the film afterwards, it really seems like people who find it boring are accused of "missing the jokes" or, worse, "missing the point" which I think is unfair (unless the unsatisfied viewer is under, say, 20 years old). I think it's entirely possible to "get" the jokes and the subtext and still find the unnecessarily long. I've seen it written that it gets better on repeat viewings, and from a designer's standpoint, I don't doubt that: were I not a freak about production design and architecture, I might have found this a bit dull, too, while still picking out gags in the background (including the cardboard people, which was pretty clever! :lol:). But I'm skeptical about the "you can't see it all in one sitting" and "70mm projection reveals hidden details" mantras I keep reading. Those same articles, when they deign to go into greater detail about even the smallest gags, don't actually reveal anything I didn't see in this first viewing. In fact, a LOT of Tati's gags here were done by others before him, and certainly more efficiently and for bigger laughs by others after this film (Benny Hill? Rowan Atkinson?), but it's tough nonetheless to deny his unique, hubristic approach in this particular project. Still, I can see why something like this would bankrupt him.


Brian, how good is SWEET MOVIE? I need to figure where on my Criterion watching list to put it (middle of the pack or back with I AM CURIOUS -- BLUE).


It's . . . different. Knowingly transgressive, but with a lighter tone than other films that seek to push boundaries, most notably SALO, a film that often gets mentioned alongside this one. Both films still have the power to shock in this day and age, even though that power is blunted somewhat by our far more permissive modern tastes. Personally, I think it's better, and far less boring and one-note, than SALO, though the third-act is a bit of a gross-out gauntlet, in spite of some interesting subtexts being put across. Assuming I AM CURIOUS BLUE is at the bottom (?) of your stack, I suppose SWEET MOVIE could be moved a fair bit ahead of that based on what I've read about it, though SWEET's an entirely different experience. I've only seen YELLOW, though, not BLUE, so perhaps that would change things. Incidentally, I AM CURIOUS YELLOW gets a phenomenal chapter devoted to it in the book "Profoundly Erotic" by Joe Bob Briggs, which I've been reading lately thanks to an awesome bookstore downtown selling remaindered copies for only $10. Quite the colourful tale surrounding the release of that picture in the U.S. In fact, the whole book so far has been extremely enlightening.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Mike Thomason » Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:14 pm

Brian Thibodeau wrote:Still, I like to think that no one's love of Hong Kong cinema--or any other--could be diminished in any way because of behaviour in an internet forum...


Well, I've had some interesting interactions out of forum posts...but then, I've also had some crackpots take swipes at me in private email, via the dormant review blog, on other forums and around the place in other mediums -- all for having a differing opinion than those in question. And I'm not really that thick-skinned that I can take persistent abuse, or God complexes, ad nauseum. I end up switching off after a while or end up turning my back on things... :(

But I'm probably being a bit evasive -- there's been many things going on in the real world that have also affected my mood swing away from Asian cinema. My wife and I have been pretty disappointed in a large share of Asian movies we've watched of late (often, Asians end up being the worst critics of Asian cinema, natch?), she loves horror movies and I've always had a soft spot for them, we've gravitated towards Western cinema as it's common ground for us...and I've not long changed jobs and we've got a baby due in a few weeks. Accordingly, priorities have changed quite a lot. Apart from my regular gig with American cult movie magazine "Screem", I just don't have the time to write about what I'm watching much these days. Time's taken up with parenting classes, baby shopping and preparation, working hard to impress in the new job and so on...

Time has been changing me...and we all know I've never been one to allow myself to stand still or be self-indulgently retrograde... ;)
http://eyeswidescreen.wordpress.com/ (Due for a sporadic return throughout 2010)
User avatar
Mike Thomason
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:34 am

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:30 pm

Mike Thomason wrote:(often, Asians end up being the worst critics of Asian cinema, natch?)


Boy, you got that right! My girlfriend is especially harsh on Korean stuff with all its heavyhanded melodrama and derivative storytelling, and yet . . . she keeps going back for more, dragging me right along with her, like a glutton for punishment! In the case of younger Koreans, I wonder if it's a sort of "fascination/repulsion" complex at play. :?



Well, I've had some interesting interactions out of forum posts...but then, I've also had some crackpots take swipes at me in private email, via the dormant review blog, on other forums and around the place in other mediums -- all for having a differing opinion than those in question. And I'm not really that thick-skinned that I can take persistent abuse, or God complexes, ad nauseum. I end up switching off after a while or end up turning my back on things...


Yeah, I can see where that would take its toll, actually, especially for folks like yourself who've been doing this whole forum thing since the early days of the medium. I gotta give hesitant kudos to anybody who's been able to stick it out that long, but I've secretly wondered about the personal toll it can take on a body, which is precisely why I joined the party so late and then limited myself to one or two places as a contributor. Perhaps the kiddies today have it easier being literally born to this stuff and, hopefully, finding a better online/real world balance. When I've perused ancient threads at ancient forums circa the mid-90's (via links hereabouts usually), I realize that I probably would have gone batty had I even tried to be a part of it all, and not just from the excruciating slowness of the internet back then. :lol: I needed, and still need, the great outdoors! And I know a few others here do too, so you're not alone in your "real world" pursuits.

But cranks will be cranks, unfortunately . . . Hell, even I got on your bad side after posting in your blog if memory serves! And of course various times herein . . . :oops: :lol:




and we all know I've never been one to allow myself to stand still or be self-indulgently retrograde...


Well, if I was to go on some of your shopping lists this year . . . :P :P ;)



.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Masterofoneinchpunch » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:42 pm

Brian Thibodeau wrote:...
Naturally, their print of EXTERMINATING ANGEL was in rough shape, but not enough to obscure its brilliance. But it seems like such an ideal choice for Criterion treatment that I have to wonder what's held it up all these years.

...
I just watched Tati's PLAYTIME last weekend. Based on this, I'd have to say that Tati seems to go along way to present simple gags, but in the case of PLAYTIME, much of that effort is awe-inspiring in itself. The logistics and design of this movie are fantastic, more than enough for me to keep it in the collection.

But, reading up on the film afterwards, it really seems like people who find it boring are accused of "missing the jokes" or, worse, "missing the point" which I think is unfair (unless the unsatisfied viewer is under, say, 20 years old). I think it's entirely possible to "get" the jokes and the subtext and still find the unnecessarily long. I've seen it written that it gets better on repeat viewings, and from a designer's standpoint, I don't doubt that: were I not a freak about production design and architecture, I might have found this a bit dull, too, while still picking out gags in the background (including the cardboard people, which was pretty clever! :lol:). But I'm skeptical about the "you can't see it all in one sitting" and "70mm projection reveals hidden details" mantras I keep reading. Those same articles, when they deign to go into greater detail about even the smallest gags, don't actually reveal anything I didn't see in this first viewing. In fact, a LOT of Tati's gags here were done by others before him, and certainly more efficiently and for bigger laughs by others after this film (Benny Hill? Rowan Atkinson?), but it's tough nonetheless to deny his unique, hubristic approach in this particular project. Still, I can see why something like this would bankrupt him.

... Incidentally, I AM CURIOUS YELLOW gets a phenomenal chapter devoted to it in the book "Profoundly Erotic" by Joe Bob Briggs ...


Really looking forward to getting EXTERMINATING ANGEL whenever that will be.

I found I AM CURIOUS YELLOW to be anything but erotic (I did not like it :D which is why I've put BLUE way, way back unless I get the urge to get it over with -- which I occasionally do when I feel a film might be that bad). The Briggs books sounds quite interesting. The Criterion release of I AM CURIOUS have enough extras explaining the whole tale of the release -- making it one of the highest foreign grosses of all time in the US (if they did not make a fuss, very few would have seen it -- ala The Tin Drum which is not my favorite either, though that film does have some excellent scenes).

I have yet to see PLAYTIME (it is high on my buy list), but I loved Mon oncle (1958), and Vacances de Monsieur Hulot, Les (1953). His humor influenced so many including every Monty Python, Peter Sellers, Rowan Atkinson and more. By the time PLAYTIME came out, his humor had already been copied (analagous to Chaplin by the time MODERN TIMES (1936) came out he was considered a bit passe at the time) but his earlier influence cannot be overstated.

But, I agree, I tend not to like people stating "you just don't get it" when in fact you do (for example, I understand the use of three quarter face shots in John Cassavetes FACES as it puts the emphasis on emotions and makes you uncomfortable because it is so close, but just because I dislike that does not mean I don't get it :D).

By the way, have you seen: Mon oncle (1958), and Vacances de Monsieur Hulot, Les (1953)?

If you have seen his short: Soigne ton gauche (1936: this is on M Hulot's Holiday Criterion DVD), I swear that it has influenced Jackie Chan in a few of his films like FEARLESS HYENA (who was a big fan of older movies; though I read nothing of him seeing Tati).

Don't forget that Tati's next film after PLAYTIME, TRAFIC has just came out this Tuesday on Criterion.
My Amazon Reviews

“That’s Icky to Infinity.” – The Tick
User avatar
Masterofoneinchpunch
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Postby ewaffle » Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:54 pm

Brian wrote:
But, reading up on the film afterwards, it really seems like people who find it boring are accused of "missing the jokes" or, worse, "missing the point" which I think is unfair (unless the unsatisfied viewer is under, say, 20 years old). I think it's entirely possible to "get" the jokes and the subtext and still find the unnecessarily long. I've seen it written that it gets better on repeat viewings, and from a designer's standpoint, I don't doubt that: were I not a freak about production design and architecture, I might have found this a bit dull, too, while still picking out gags in the background (including the cardboard people, which was pretty clever! ).


It is entirely possible to "get"--understand, explicate, be able to explain--a joke and not consider it funny. It is annoying when the assumption, if one doesn't appreciate a work, that he simply doesn't get it. In other words if he were just a bit smarter, more sensitive or less close-minded then the full glory of the work in question would be revealed. But since he persists in being stupid, coarse and intolerant he will remain among the unenlightened masses.

Which is annoying but no more than that.

Still, I like to think that no one's love of Hong Kong cinema--or any other--could be diminished in any way because of behaviour in an internet forum...


No kidding--especially if this is the forum in question. HKMDB is the most businesslike, effective and non-hysterical internet forum I have ever been a part of.

A comparison might be with some opera forums. I am a member/contributor in two of them and even though they are pretty well moderated, the level of antagonism, vitriol and calumny that occurs in any one day is more than I have seen here in several years.

But all of that wierd behavior--which I have not always been completely successful in avoiding--has no affect on my love for opera nor could I imagine an instance in which it would.

It is the love of the art work itself that leads us to internet forums not the other way around.
User avatar
ewaffle
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:53 am
Location: Motown, Michigan, USA

Postby cal42 » Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:45 pm

ewaffle wrote:
No kidding--especially if this is the forum in question. HKMDB is the most businesslike, effective and non-hysterical internet forum I have ever been a part of.



Here here. Why more people don't post on here is beyond me. I've been on lots of HK movie forums but I tend to visit this one the most and find its content a lot more useful.

I visited this site's Wiki page the other day and I have to say it seems to make this place a little unfriendly and forbidding. Well, perhaps I'm over dramatising it a bit, but it did seem a difficult place to get into if you read the thread on the second footnote, which I did in full.

I have to say I know nothing about any "application form" to join here or anything like that (as one poster claims). I do remember PMing Guilao to get access but that was it. Maybe I caught you all in a good mood :wink: .
Heroes of the East - the only blog in the world with the world famous Lam Suet-o-meter!
User avatar
cal42
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:45 am
Location: Birmingham, England

Postby Masterofoneinchpunch » Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:02 pm

cal42 wrote: ...
Here here. Why more people don't post on here is beyond me. I've been on lots of HK movie forums but I tend to visit this one the most and find its content a lot more useful.

I visited this site's Wiki page the other day and I have to say it seems to make this place a little unfriendly and forbidding. Well, perhaps I'm over dramatising it a bit, but it did seem a difficult place to get into if you read the thread on the second footnote, which I did in full.

...


FYI (took me a sec to find these links):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hkmdb
http://adg.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=601&hl= (This was a little harsh)

I'm a big fan of this site and always use it for review (occasionally add something of use here :D). I still miss the front page though.
My Amazon Reviews

“That’s Icky to Infinity.” – The Tick
User avatar
Masterofoneinchpunch
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:43 am

cal42 wrote:Here here. Why more people don't post on here is beyond me. I've been on lots of HK movie forums but I tend to visit this one the most and find its content a lot more useful.

I visited this site's Wiki page the other day and I have to say it seems to make this place a little unfriendly and forbidding. Well, perhaps I'm over dramatising it a bit, but it did seem a difficult place to get into if you read the thread on the second footnote, which I did in full.



Masterofoneinchpunch wrote:FYI (took me a sec to find these links):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hkmdb
http://adg.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=601&hl= (This was a little harsh)



Oh, the memories! :lol: That ADG thread is a classic (so to speak) and a perfect example of the kind of unproductive pissing and moaning that plagues that forum on a reasonably regular basis to this day. Typical that in only one post each (to date, no less!), both Ryan and Bob, along with several posts from the venerable Simon Booth, handled defense with such dignity, against the same two or three people who STILL decry the "exclusive club" ideology even now. Funny how quickly they turned nice back in 2005, even going so far as to think the site "opening up" a bit more was because of their constructive criticism! :lol: I noticed one contrib even bemoaned the loss of rank in Google searches, but how could he have known it was something Bob did on purpose? It's a shame, really, because the folks at places like ADG are all sources of excellent information when they're not spending page after page arguing semantics with each other. For nothing more than a simple sign-up procedure, they could do a tremendous service here, but better to stand on principle I suppose.

While nowadays I can give credit to a lot of people here and there (and at other forums and DB sites) for slowly but surely giving shape to the massive amounts of unwieldy information about Hong Kong cinema, the fact remains that it was at least some of these self-same fanatics/maniacs/what have you, undoubtedly driven by their love of the form, who flooded this database with untold amounts of misinformation back when it was too "open" to everyone, and then it just went downhill from there. That "reboot" or whatever Ryan called it at the time, was the best thing to happen to this site in, like, ever.

As someone whose been using the site for my own meagre writing for over ten years (cast lists, crew credits, etc), it's more than a little frustrating to have to do a "find and replace" every so often because yet another piece of mis-info here has been thoughtfullly corrected. Naturally, I'm grateful, but the frustration stems from the fact that I trusted the info here from, say, 1997 onwards, when it was provided quite often, at least in part, by exactly the kinds of people who ruled the discussion forums of the day and, all these years later, position themselves via their contributions at other forums (and their endless and mean-spirited bickering over details, as at ADG), as experts in the field. And to top it all off, they no longer contribute here because of narrow-minded principles, which in a perverse way is almost as high-minded as they've long accused Bob and Ryan and the HKMDB of being.

Kudos to those who stuck around, I say.

I'll never be an expert. I don't wanna be. That's when the fun dies, it seems, and people start looking down at the newbies who want to play in their sandbox, too. I need a site like this. And as it becomes more accurate, so does my work (and such assistance would be duly credited were it ever time to do so). I'm not ashamed to admit that I'm still a greenhorn when it comes to Hong Kong cinema, which might explain why, after nearly 20 years or learning, this fella ain't ready to turn away just yet.

Personally, I have no doubt whatsoever that the ADG link at Wikipedia was planted there by someone from ADG. Membership at Wikipedia is a remarkably simple procedure, and I'm sure many of us here already have it, so here's one BIG vote for removing that link toute suite. ;)
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:18 am

ewaffle wrote:It is entirely possible to "get"--understand, explicate, be able to explain--a joke and not consider it funny. It is annoying when the assumption, if one doesn't appreciate a work, that he simply doesn't get it. In other words if he were just a bit smarter, more sensitive or less close-minded then the full glory of the work in question would be revealed. But since he persists in being stupid, coarse and intolerant he will remain among the unenlightened masses.

Which is annoying but no more than that. .



Well said as always, Ed.

I'd hoped my thoughts on PLAYTIME above wouldn't give the impression that I disliked the film, and it appears they haven't. Mostly the opposite, in fact, which is why I'll likely keep it in the collection. Although I mentioned comedians doing similar gags to Tati's more successfully after him (which is a lazy observation, I know), my main point was that, based on my experience with comedy PRE-1967, which is the primary filter through which I watched this film (what came after doesn't matter to the film at hand, theoretically), I was aware that several of his gags had already been done by other comedians PRIOR to the year he made this film. Yes, he made them his own, pwn'd them if you will, but his take on them just didn't grab me because I either predicted the gag before it happened, or realized upon the delivery of a gag that someone else had done it, albeit in a different setting or medium, before Tati. It's a mild criticism, to be sure, but it's the kind of criticism that, when not properly articulated, seems to draw ire at some forums/databases (including--shudder--IMDB and a couple of others) that I visited after watching the film, especially if the viewer doing the criticising doesn't articulate themselves properly (and just to clarify, it was me receiving the ire in this case, but I noticed others who did). It also turns up in a few reviews I've seen, wherein the writer, rather than sticking to his own thoughts about the film, decides he just must weigh in with how he/she predicts that others will dislike the film because they just don't "get it". How presumptous! Just about the only time I don't mind a reviewer best-guessing an audience reaction to a particular film is when Variety's writer's do it, because then it's more about commercial viability (of, say, a Hong Kong movie in the North American market) rather than a point-blank assumption that people are dumb.

Similarly, there's little that bugs me more as a cine-geek than reviewers (professional, online or otherwise) who compare a movie (or its themes, or its gags, or its production design etc. etc.) unfavourably to what came after it. That's just not fair. If you're noting an influence on later works, fine, but to say someone did something better, later, is unfair baggage to hang on a work that came earlier in the timeline. Thus my own mention of what came later should only be taken as a token nod to Tati's undeniable influence of later comedians, particularly Rowan Atkinson. That some (but certainly not all) of the gags in PLAYTIME were done more efficiently, and perhaps funnier, later on is a moot point. But when one realizes that Tati, at least in this film, takes potentially very familiar visual gags (and again this will depend on a viewer's knowledge of comedy/vaudeville pre-1967) and dresses them up in some of the most elaborate production design ever put on film, well, it still holds the power to disappoint, at least in small ways. And yet I still find it hard to deny the overall importance of the film.




No kidding--especially if this is the forum in question. HKMDB is the most businesslike, effective and non-hysterical internet forum I have ever been a part of.

A comparison might be with some opera forums. I am a member/contributor in two of them and even though they are pretty well moderated, the level of antagonism, vitriol and calumny that occurs in any one day is more than I have seen here in several years.

But all of that wierd behavior--which I have not always been completely successful in avoiding--has no affect on my love for opera nor could I imagine an instance in which it would.

It is the love of the art work itself that leads us to internet forums not the other way around.


There could be backstage shenanigans here that I'm far less aware of, but generally speaking, defending/praising/discussing or even disagreeing about something like Hong Kong cinema always makes me want more Hong Kong cinema! Even the new stuff! :D But I do have to wonder if the very "restrictions" that people bitched about back in 2005 had the unintended side-effect of keeping these forums less active but far more civil! :lol:
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby cal42 » Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:55 am

Civil is the word. Good points, Brian. One only has to look at the message boards on the IMDB to see what this Forum could be like.

I always feel guilty for not contributing more than I do. I've done one image in all the time I've been here, a few cast names and a bunch of reviews. Trouble is, like Brian says, I do feel like a novice in a lot of ways and don't want to screw things up. But if I can do more, just point me in the right direction and I'll do what I can.

I believe in the HKMDB, which is why I found the Wiki page a bit "off". It seems to subtly imply that we all sit in massive armchairs in an old library smoking cigars and talking about the war.

I don't think I'd be alone in saying that without this site, I'd be well and truly f*cked when it came to decent resouces on HK films.
Heroes of the East - the only blog in the world with the world famous Lam Suet-o-meter!
User avatar
cal42
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:45 am
Location: Birmingham, England

Postby Mike Thomason » Fri Jul 18, 2008 10:54 am

Brian Thibodeau wrote:But cranks will be cranks, unfortunately . . . Hell, even I got on your bad side after posting in your blog if memory serves! And of course various times herein . . . :oops: :lol:

and we all know I've never been one to allow myself to stand still or be self-indulgently retrograde...


Well, if I was to go on some of your shopping lists this year . . . :P :P ;)


Well, Brian, you've never got on my bad side -- I can't remember the blog thing, but maybe it had something to do with old reviews versus re-evaluations? If that was the case, then no...no bad side; it's sometimes a little humbling to look back at my older stuff and realise how hideous some of it was by comparison to the tact I prefer to take these days. Indeed, the majority of folk here are amongst the better forum personalities I've interacted with over the years (the old, old alt.asian-movies forum was one of THE most horrendous forum experiences I'd ever wish on anyone -- the whole mindset there seemed to be who could blow their bags bigger than anyone else or how big they could blow up a flame war ad nauseum...revolting, juvenile and appalling stuff. Thank yourselves lucky you missed the "fun"...).

Yeah, the shopping lists have been a bit "retroactive" this year, but they've pretty much been that big final blowout of catch-ups while I've got the money before the baby arrives and everything changes for good, or at least until both of us are working.

Anyway, interesting discussion I've stirred up here! :oops:
http://eyeswidescreen.wordpress.com/ (Due for a sporadic return throughout 2010)
User avatar
Mike Thomason
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:34 am

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:36 pm

cal42 wrote:I believe in the HKMDB, which is why I found the Wiki page a bit "off". It seems to subtly imply that we all sit in massive armchairs in an old library smoking cigars and talking about the war.


Well, if that was the case, I'm not sure I'd complain as long as I could have a big white walrus moustache, a chest full of war medals, and a snifter of brandy in one hand. Oh yeah, and say "harummph" a lot. Then the elitist tag would at least be earned . . .


I don't think I'd be alone in saying that without this site, I'd be well and truly f*cked when it came to decent resouces on HK films.


In that old ADG thread, a couple contributors mentioned that they would henceforth use other databases like HKCinemagic or HKFA (not bad choices, but we're still better, and increasingly more accurate and complete) and the HKMDB would thus start some kind of sad, inevitable slide into obscurity! :lol: Looks like we'll be waiting a while for that to happen, but to think how easily they could have sourced the truth! (mind you, I do wish Bob was more forthcoming with updates, overhauls, redesigns, etc. :( )


And speaking of war . . .


Mike Thomason wrote:(the old, old alt.asian-movies forum was one of THE most horrendous forum experiences I'd ever wish on anyone -- the whole mindset there seemed to be who could blow their bags bigger than anyone else or how big they could blow up a flame war ad nauseum...revolting, juvenile and appalling stuff. Thank yourselves lucky you missed the "fun"...).


This was the primary forum I was thinking of in my previous post, though there were others back in the day I'm sure. Somewhere here there's a thread where one of you folks directed me to it, but I can't find it at the moment. I remember perusing it very occasionally in the (mid?) 90's but very quickly soured on it as a source of info because of all the fighting and hatred that tended to cloud some fairly essential information being shared. Not that I could have joined in anyways as I had no home computer until 2004! :lol: But even if I did, I doubt I'd have had the stamina of Mike and others to duke it out there, let alone the time.

Looking back all those years later thanks to that link hereabouts, I was somewhat dismayed at how little had changed through the years I'd sorta forgotten about the place. Still plenty of good info, but so much of it cheapened by flame wars and the like, as Mike says. There are times when you wanna just throw your hands up and laugh at the wild, increasingly chaotic direction of some of those old discussion threads, but such moments are tempered by the sad realization that a forum like that could have, with proper moderation, become a real hot spot for civilized discussion of HK and Asian cinema that might still be with us today, flourishing.

Then again, that was then, as they say, and alt.asian-movies was hardly the only internet forum prone to such behaviour. In fact, it was probably de rigeur for the time: here you had this new technology that suddenly allowed fans of just about everything under the sun to suddenly unleash years of pent-up knowledge upon one another with only superficial moderation in place. It was bound to get ugly. But worse is seeing it still happen at certain forums more than 10 years later! :shock:


I can't remember the blog thing, but maybe it had something to do with old reviews versus re-evaluations? If that was the case, then no...no bad side; it's sometimes a little humbling to look back at my older stuff and realise how hideous some of it was by comparison to the tact I prefer to take these days.


That was the incident! But if I recall correctly, I also caught you on a bad day, so after a few emails, peace was made. I still find "re-evaluations" by writers of strong, even forceful opinion such as Mike to be fascinating, expecially a near-"one-eighty" turnaround as was the case with the film in question, but I realize drawing attention to it can easily be miscontrued as a cheap attack. I suppose it was the very availability of a before-and-after pair of reviews by someone I knew that intrigued me (I've stumbled across other such examples by other writers on subjects both related and unrelated, and will sometimes bring it up while trying to avoid seeming bratty). The internet makes it much easier for all of our pasts to stay with us, whether we like it or not, and I guess I just find that kinda cool.


Anyway, interesting discussion I've stirred up here! :oops:


You have Lindsay Lohan to thank for that.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby ewaffle » Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:31 pm

cal42 wrote:
It seems to subtly imply that we all sit in massive armchairs in an old library smoking cigars and talking about the war.


You didn't get your invitation? :oops:
User avatar
ewaffle
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:53 am
Location: Motown, Michigan, USA

Postby cal42 » Sat Jul 19, 2008 9:34 pm

ewaffle wrote:
cal42 wrote:
It seems to subtly imply that we all sit in massive armchairs in an old library smoking cigars and talking about the war.


You didn't get your invitation? :oops:


No, I was blackballed buy someone with a big moustache who "harummph"ed a lot :cry: . But I managed to keep my HKMDB smoking jacket and slippers and if you want them back you'll have to pry them from my cold dead fingers!

Back to the Rummage, I just ordered MACHINE GIRL. Actually, you can blame Brian for that, too :P .
Heroes of the East - the only blog in the world with the world famous Lam Suet-o-meter!
User avatar
cal42
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:45 am
Location: Birmingham, England

Postby ewaffle » Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:39 am

cal42 wrote:
Back to the Rummage, I just ordered MACHINE GIRL. Actually, you can blame Brian for that, too :P .


I liked it although the reasons I did aren't completely clear to me. One person I loaned it to said that he found some continuity errors--not the first criticism that comes to mind in an over the top comic/tragic gorefest like this one in which the slicing and dicing starts under the opening credits.
User avatar
ewaffle
 
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:53 am
Location: Motown, Michigan, USA

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Sun Jul 20, 2008 8:25 am

cal42 wrote:I just ordered MACHINE GIRL. Actually, you can blame Brian for that, too :P .


Hey man, Ed got his first, so I blame him for mentioning it in another thread. Mine's still waiting for me at my U.S. postal box until next weekend! :lol:

Watched a few Korean films this weekend, but nothing that screamed greatness, just a few standard-issue comedies, which of course only adds to my frustration with Korean cinema. Great looking movies, accomplished actors, but who's writing this stuff?

MY WIFE IS A GANGSTER 3 (2006) This is the one with Shu Qi in it, and she carrys her weight much better than Zhang Ziyi did with her overrated cameo appearance in the last few frames of the second film. Lee Beom-soo, a Korean funnyman whose comedic performances range from exceptional and controlled (in SINGLES) to irritating and unrestrained (in OH BROTHERS) is the Korean hood who, along with two dim pals, is charged with looking after Shu Qi when she arrives from Hong Kong to hide out from Chinese gangsters (led by Ken Lo!) who want her dead as part of a feud with her gang boss daddy (Ti Lung). Added in to the mix is the film's only ace, a withering daisy of a translator played by Hyun Young (from MARRYING THE MAFIA 2) who translates Shu Qi's nasty responses to her hosts' chauvinistic posturing into nice ones, and vice versa, supplying each side with amusing misperceptions about the other, some of which lead to unexpected gang strife as Young grows increasingly confident in the power her position affords her. It's a clever conceit (and a running gag) that creates some amusing setpieces. The casting of Shu Qi in a prominent role has both benefits and disadvantages: the filmmakers wisely underscore her streetfighting smolder with that crumply-chin-and-watery-eyes thing she does so adorably well, which really sells the uncertainty of being in a foreign land for reasons beyond her control, but her romance with Lee doesn't really click, I suspect because of the very same hurdle--the language barrier--that also provides the film's secret comedy weapon, Young's hyper-sensitive translator. It goes without saying that the film looks phenomenal (what Korean film doesn't?), and the Hong Kong sequences are refreshingly staged and shot through an outsider's keen eye. A couple of action bits involving Shu Qi, and choreographed by Kim Won-jin, are, for the most part, unencumbered by obvious tight framing, deceptive editing and film speed tricks, which makes them a joy to watch, although others, like the final confrontation with Ken Lo, are hobbled somewhat by these very same techniques, so it's a mixed bag all in all. A centerpiece car chase sequence, while fun, suffers from the same flaw as most car chases in Korean films: you can always tell the cars aren't going very fast. I really wish they'd do something about that! Considering how long Hollywood's been doing it, and how well, there's more than enough reference material out there! :lol:

Saw a few others; more notes as time permits.


Also saw MAMMA MIA tonight. We both thought it was a pretty good adaptation of the musical, which we saw a few years ago. Wasn't impressed by the film adaptations of RENT or THE PRODUCERS (the latter a stage fave from a couple years back here). Thought Schumacher's PHANTOM nailed that source material quite well (though I hate most of his other films), and I'd put MAMMA MIA in that same class, though I suspect it'll make a lot more money. One quibble: the leading ladies do their "Dancing Queen" blowout at the end, as per the play, then start calling out to the movie theatre audience, asking if they want an encore, which they then deliver, as per the play, in the form of a big splashy take on "Waterloo" (no spoilers if you haven't seen the play, as the sequence has a few surprises). But that callout is really awkward, an unnecessary carry-over from the stage, where it actually works perfectly with live humans on both sides of the stage. Here, only a couple of people actually felt compelled to bleat back at the screen, for whatever reason, and it just felt . . . odd. Otherwise, a good show, possibly even better with the stage version in your mind with which to compare.

Hoping to see the new BATMAN movie (speaking of shitty Schumacher films), but might wait until next week for that, and then see it in IMAX. :D
Last edited by Brian Thibodeau on Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Mike Thomason » Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:26 am

Brian Thibodeau wrote:Watched a few Korean films this weekend...MARRYING THE MAFIA 3 (2006) This is the one with Shu Qi in it...


You mean MY WIFE IS A GANGSTER 3, right? ;)

Btw, of the following Hong Kong/Chinese/Taiwanese films I've missed over recent times which ones would people advise are worth a look?

Dancing Lion (2007)
In Love With the Dead (2007)
Kung Fu Mahjong: The Final Duel (2007)
Mad Detective (2007)
My DNA Says I Love You (2007)
The Pye-Dog (2007)
Trivial Matters (2007)
The Warlords (2007)
Besieged City (2008)
The Empress & The Warriors (2008)
Fatal Move (2008)
Happy Funeral (2008)
Kung Fu Dunk (2008)
L is for Love, L is for Lies (2008)
Linger (2008)
Love is Elsewhere (2008)
The Moss (2008)
My Wife is a Gambling Maestro (2008)
Playboy Cops (2008)
Run Papa Run (2008)
Scare 2 Die (2008)
See You in Youtube (2008)
Three Kingdoms: The Resurrection of the Dragon (2008)
Yes, I Can See Dead People (2008)
http://eyeswidescreen.wordpress.com/ (Due for a sporadic return throughout 2010)
User avatar
Mike Thomason
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:34 am

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:37 pm

Mike Thomason wrote:You mean MY WIFE IS A GANGSTER 3, right? ;)


Yup. As you can see, I even mentioned the MARRYING THE MAFIA series later in the review, as that was partially on my brain since I watched the third installment of that this weekend as well! :lol: I held off on both of these for ages because I wasn't overly fond of the second entries in either series. I just hope neither makes it to a fourth installment! :lol: I never thought the Korean gangster comedy genre had much steam in it anyways; if you combined only the bright spots of all of them, you'd have one of the greatest comedies every made. As it stands, you have to wade through a lot of mediocrity to get to those spots.

Fixed the boo-boo above! No more thread updates at 4:30 in the morning, I guess! :lol:


.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby cal42 » Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:15 pm

Mike Thomason wrote:Btw, of the following Hong Kong/Chinese/Taiwanese films I've missed over recent times which ones would people advise are worth a look?


MAD DETECTIVE is definitely worth a look (or two). I would advise you to run screaming from FATAL MOVE though.

Just my opinion...
Heroes of the East - the only blog in the world with the world famous Lam Suet-o-meter!
User avatar
cal42
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:45 am
Location: Birmingham, England

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:43 pm

Just finished another 2006 feature called BEWITCHING ATTRACTION, a debut film (from film school phenom Lee Sa) so pretentious and self-satisfied that the producers or distributors, no doubt realizing they'd never get their money back, cleverly repackaged it via posters and trailers as a sassy adult sex comedy. The film has a nice throughline of dark wit, and Moon So-Ri's fantastic as small-town university professor with a penchant for casual sex and a dirty secret in her past, but this is angsty, middleweight screenwriting perfumed with art house artifice: probably ninety-five percent of the film is painstakingly static one-shot compositions, no camera movement whatsoever, presumably because Lee believed his characters and their secret lives were so fascinating his audience needed no emotional or visual encouragement to understand them. As such, the film looks great (and as I said above, what K-film doesn't?), and the technique is a legitimate one we've seen used the world over in films that usually play in special sections of film festivals. Of course, if the money men behind the film really felt this was one of those, I'm sure they wouldn't have opted for the most deceptive marketing campaign in the recent Korean cinema history. All the goofy sound effects, flaky digital embellishments and the bouncy background music, which you can see via the trailer on sites like YouTube, are the desperate tricks of a marketing department forced to "hard sell" an unmarketable film to recoup some of their investsment. Can't help thinking this would have worked much better as a half-hour short film. At least there, the writer-director could have exorcised his art school demons for a lot less money, and he'd probably be working on a second project by now as a result.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Mike Thomason » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:07 am

cal42 wrote:
Mike Thomason wrote:MAD DETECTIVE is definitely worth a look (or two). I would advise you to run screaming from FATAL MOVE though.


Mr. To always seems the reliable one, yeah? I was kind of pre-figuring that about FATAL MOVE -- after enduring the steaming piles of overbaked cactus that were SPL and FLASHPOINT (as well as not being all that taken with Dennis Law's FATAL CONTACT) I surmised that Simon Yam+Sammo Hung+Dennis Law = dead loss. :P

The ones I am "guessing" would be okay, or better than brain-death were:

MAD DETECTIVE (2007) (Johnnie To)
THE PYE-DOG (2007) (Derek Kwok; he's been involved with some decent films)
THE WARLORDS (2007) (Peter Chan)
BESIEGED CITY (2008) (Lawrence Lau)
AN EMPRESS & THE WARRIORS (2008) (Tony Ching; the sole selling point!)
HAPPY FUNERAL (2008) (Barbara Wong; who hasn't done anything beyond hideous so far IMO)
LINGER (2008) (Johnnie To, again)
PLAYBOY COPS (2008) (Jingle Ma; coz I like his movies)
RUN PAPA RUN (2008) (Sylvia Chang; always makes a decent movie)

I see SHAMO and Tsui Hark's MISSING are up for release in HK shortly...but I can't say I really saw much by way of positive reviews for either on cinema release; in fact, Tsui's film has taken something of a savaging from what I've read. This does not bode well...

What do you all reckon? Stick with the above films and wait for the others to drop down to back catalogue prices before I waste good money on them? :?
http://eyeswidescreen.wordpress.com/ (Due for a sporadic return throughout 2010)
User avatar
Mike Thomason
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:34 am

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Mon Jul 21, 2008 3:45 pm

Brain death! Steaming piles!! Hideous!!! :lol: ;)

Boy, when it gets that bad it's time for new hobby! Thank goodness you've got one on the way!

Honestly, I guess if I were your shoes Mike, I'd wait until every single one of those (and the others mentioned earlier) dropped down to catalogue prices, or maybe even lower. I do this myself, though only because I work through stuff at a relatively slow pace compared to a lot of you guys, but in your case, and especially based on your star rankings a few posts back and your palpable disdain for most of what the industry produces nowadays compared to the past, this cinema seems to offer so little enjoyment that purchasing new releases at new release prices is an unnecessary risk, cheap though they may be. :( I kinda wish it wasn't so for you, and obviously I've never shared the sentiment despite sitting through some dodgy material of very recent vintage, but we've seen it coming for a couple years now really.

Oh yeah, and ignore reviews until after you've seen the films! :D Especially internet ones, unless there's some decent academia backing them up.

EDIT: SEVERANCE was a blast. Well, I thought it was anyways . . . I'd start there. ;)
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Mike Thomason » Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:50 am

Brian Thibodeau wrote:EDIT: SEVERANCE was a blast. Well, I thought it was anyways . . . I'd start there. ;)


...and I did. And I enjoyed it quite a lot, though that's probably commentary for another thread (or blog?). :)

I think, moreso, the HK movies are just feeling a bit flat for me this year based on the ups and downs of last year's movies. I've even found Wong Jing's usual crass commercial cash-ins and nonsense just a bit more underwhelming that I usually find it (and I like that silly commercialism he's famed for). ANNA & ANNA with Karena Lam was really just about the total deathknell for me -- I'd read very good reviews and when I got around to watching it, it was just statically boring. Even EXODUS, after an inspired first half hour, petered out for me and ended up feeling like a movie made by a fanboy for fanboys. Engagement factor has been sadly low over the last twelve or eighteen months...

Mind you, THE DETECTIVE was really good, as was BROTHERS -- but the whole trying to regrab the glory days of HK action cinema just falls flat on me; especially when Hollywood is pumping out fantastical, high budget, action nobrainers like WANTED, SHOOT 'EM UP and DIE HARD 4.0. How does HK compete with that, when Western cinema has now adopted the over the top, cartoon theatrics that HK cinema used to be renowned for? The last Bond film, CASINO ROYALE, which was Bond rebooted (and a series of which I am immensely fond of) tramped just about all-comers from every region when it came to thrilling, engaging action fare, IMHO. HK cinema needs to take stock of what it does well on its lower budgets and then hone that back into something that still differentiates it from other world cinema and is entertaining -- trying to compete with foreign territories, who have absorbed the style and ramped it up with a huge cash-injection, on Hollywood catering budgets just won't make this stuff viable product for international markets any more...well, beyond the diehards who populate forums like the one linked to above whose memories of the past negate their willingness to join the present.

I have to admit, Pang fan that I am, I thought their first (and maybe only?) American film, THE MESSENGERS, was quite the stinkeroo -- that was a horror flick that could have been made by anyone; apart from a handful of distinctive moments there was nothing within it that I could truly claim was vintage, or even contemporary, Pang brilliance. :?

Some of the present stuff I've been watching has been awful tripe too (like the BLACK CHRISTMAS and FOG remakes and THE RETURN with Sarah Michelle Gellar, to name a few), but you never know unless you watch 'em and find out. Same could be said of contemporary HK cinema, but the number of failures versus money spent of late has been higher in that area than almost anything else (even Korean flicks), so now I'm tending to be a LOT more wary of where I spend my money. :wink:
http://eyeswidescreen.wordpress.com/ (Due for a sporadic return throughout 2010)
User avatar
Mike Thomason
 
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:34 am

Postby Brian Thibodeau » Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:01 pm

Mike Thomason wrote:...and I did. And I enjoyed it quite a lot, though that's probably commentary for another thread (or blog?). :)


SEVERANCE caught me off guard. Wasn't really expecting the humourous element. It was a festival premiere, so I pretty much went in expecting standard dose of "hardcore" contempo horror but came away feeling rather refreshed. Too bad it didn't get a wider release here, though. :(





I think, moreso, the HK movies are just feeling a bit flat for me this year based on the ups and downs of last year's movies. I've even found Wong Jing's usual crass commercial cash-ins and nonsense just a bit more underwhelming that I usually find it (and I like that silly commercialism he's famed for). ANNA & ANNA with Karena Lam was really just about the total deathknell for me -- I'd read very good reviews and when I got around to watching it, it was just statically boring. Even EXODUS, after an inspired first half hour, petered out for me and ended up feeling like a movie made by a fanboy for fanboys. Engagement factor has been sadly low over the last twelve or eighteen months...



I think I get a more well-rounded idea of where you're coming from about Hong Kong cinema when you put it the way you did in this post! :D

And in these two cases, I'd agree. Liked EXODUS a bit more, but still felt it missed some golden opportunities between that excellent first half hour and the final reel. I still give the director credit for trying something like it, as it's not exactly well-trod ground in Hong Kong cinema, and that was enough of a difference for me to give it a cautious thumbs up. But it definitely could have been stronger, as my own review here will attest.





Mind you, THE DETECTIVE was really good, as was BROTHERS -- but the whole trying to regrab the glory days of HK action cinema just falls flat on me; especially when Hollywood is pumping out fantastical, high budget, action nobrainers like WANTED, SHOOT 'EM UP and DIE HARD 4.0. How does HK compete with that, when Western cinema has now adopted the over the top, cartoon theatrics that HK cinema used to be renowned for? The last Bond film, CASINO ROYALE, which was Bond rebooted (and a series of which I am immensely fond of) tramped just about all-comers from every region when it came to thrilling, engaging action fare, IMHO. HK cinema needs to take stock of what it does well on its lower budgets and then hone that back into something that still differentiates it from other world cinema and is entertaining -- trying to compete with foreign territories, who have absorbed the style and ramped it up with a huge cash-injection, on Hollywood catering budgets just won't make this stuff viable product for international markets any more...well, beyond the diehards who populate forums like the one linked to above whose memories of the past negate their willingness to join the present.


Hopefully I won't tread on toes with some of you folks here, but I've never really though Hong Kong cinema, in even its most prolific eras, could compete with Hollywood, despite the Hong Kong industry's adoption of various styles and techniques over the decades. From a standpoint of craftsmanship (including acting to a certain degree), Hollywood does it better, and always has, and it's denizens are paid better to do it, and always will be, than anyone at nearly any time in the history of Hong Kong cinema. This is not to say the Hong Kong film industry doesn't (or didn't) have scores of talented people who've given Hollywood a run for it's money on Hong Kong soil (where the expectations were and are a bit different from what I've learned), but just not as high a percentage in my view. As such, I'm still not convinced their industry is really trying to compete with Hollywood outside of booking a few screens for local product once in a while; creating something, anything for the Hong Kong diaspora; and/or churning out the occasional action or horror picture with an eye to the western fest or DVD markets. I absolutely DO believe overzealous fans/critics can make them seem that way, though, which is tough to take sometimes.

I don't know, I guess I still find much to admire in Hong Kong cinema, because it still feels like a valid creative antidote to Hollywood's muscular machine to me, even Hong Kong's small but continuing cycle of action pictures. The cinema overall still carries elements of a uniquely Chinese identity in my view. I'll agree there's been too many blockbuster-wannabes these past few years, though I seriously don't include some recent martial arts thrillers among them; those folk are just doing what they do best and should be entitled to keep experimenting with it and updating it for younger, modern audiences, especially when there's a modest international market for it, which is still more than there is for a lot of other genres the city specializes in (too local, perhaps? Good :lol:). This is why I don't see contempo martial arts pictures as horrible old dinosaurs. I wonder if Hollywood-style "Event" pictures (stuff like HEROIC DUO and CONFESSION OF PAIN come to mind, though both had their moments) are inevitable the world over if those industries want to continue to attract funding in the face of global competition, piracy, quotas, etc. Investors want to see a return.

Considering what Hong Kong does still do on a Hollywood catering budget and in an increasingly small marketplace, perhaps this explains why I might be more willing to cut them some slack than yourself? Don't know for sure. All I do know is that the Hong Kong flavour hasn't entirely gone away for me, even though plenty of their films don't always bat home runs, and I guess I don't see it as an industry plagued by Hollywood-wannbe-itis so much as an industry employing globally homogenous technologies and styles (seriously; the means of production really do belong to everyone these days) while keeping at least a partial sense of the Hong Kong "self".

They probably did this with a more identifiable style some ten, twenty, thirty years ago, but that's a moot point now. They gotta work with what they've got, so to speak, and produce a small mix of films for the home audience (and the still-important diaspora who still need a fix every now and then) and films that play beyond the ethnic/domestic base. Even with their decreased output these past few years, I think that mix is still there, and is about as successful as I could expect it to be in the current global climate. Admittedly it's grown weaker over the past few years, which is why I can understand the feelings of someone such as you Mike. New Hong Kong cinema is definitely struggling, and the films can be a struggle to get through sometimes (especially if you've included video productions into the mix over the years, as I have), but to me, at least, there's still a vibrant sense of the culture inherent in its cinema. I just wish there was more cinema to choose from! :lol:






I have to admit, Pang fan that I am, I thought their first (and maybe only?) American film, THE MESSENGERS, was quite the stinkeroo -- that was a horror flick that could have been made by anyone; apart from a handful of distinctive moments there was nothing within it that I could truly claim was vintage, or even contemporary, Pang brilliance. :?


Saw a trailer for their upcoming remake of BANGKOK DANGEROUS at the movies a couple of weeks ago. Looks flashy enough, and they seem to have made it on their own turf, but MESSENGERS was quite the letdown, which might make people wary. Unless they're more interested in Nic Cage.
User avatar
Brian Thibodeau
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Near Chinatown

Postby Masterofoneinchpunch » Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:07 pm

Brian Thibodeau wrote: ...
This is why I don't see contempo martial arts pictures as horrible old dinosaurs. I wonder if Hollywood-style "Event" pictures (stuff like HEROIC DUO and CONFESSION OF PAIN come to mind, though both had their moments) are inevitable the world over if those industries want to continue to attract funding in the face of global competition, piracy, quotas, etc. Investors want to see a return.
...


Flash Point comes to mind :D.

I was thinking of human nature when I read the past couple of posts. The more knowledgeable you get about a subject like Hong Kong cinema, the harder it is to find uniqueness, great plots, etc.. even if the quality remains the same. So many of us in these forums continue to improve our knowledge, so it is more difficult to find films that move us.

I think I benefit from watching one HK film a week, mixing it with so many other genres and countries while working on my movie acumen that I do not get bored (jack of many movie categories, master of none). I do not get tired of HK output and have enjoyed recent fare like INVISIBLE TARGET (2007) and others (while watching stinkeroos like DRAGON HEAT). But I delve into the past so much, though I hope you notice that has been changing, getting into more contemporary movies from HK (especially To of late) :).
My Amazon Reviews

“That’s Icky to Infinity.” – The Tick
User avatar
Masterofoneinchpunch
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Postby cal42 » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:48 am

I'm almost exactly the same as you there, Shawn, in that last paragraph. I have been "modernising" my HK viewing tastes over the past year or so and, as has been noticed, I've found some real gems being made right now, and developed a real pasion for To (even his bad films are better than a lot of people's good films!). I actually think the industry is better now than it was, say, 10 years ago.

I also need to reply to Brian's comments, but I'm a little busy right now for a detailed reply, so watch this space...
Heroes of the East - the only blog in the world with the world famous Lam Suet-o-meter!
User avatar
cal42
 
Posts: 467
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 9:45 am
Location: Birmingham, England

PreviousNext

Return to Asian Movies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests