MovieChat Forums > M. Butterfly (1993) Discussion > John Lone

John Lone

posted 17 years ago by kzaluska
19 replies | jump to latest

Somewhere in this board (topic: "What about the baby" I guess)some people wrote that, in their opinion, Jonh Lone was too obviously male for the part and that it made the film unconvincing (sorry for my English - it's not my native language).
I wonder if there's anyone besides me, who thinks quite the contrary.
I remember when I saw "M. Butterfly" for the first time, I knew Lone's prior roles and I knew him to be an excellent and handsome (in an undoubtedly male way...) actor. Yet I DIDN'T RECOGNIZED HIM! I missed his name in credit titles, so for the most of the performance I kept thinking: "who is that amazing, Chinese Greta Garbo...?!" Which of course proves the character to be visibly androgynic (as Garbo was), but at the same time it proves the actor's work to be just GREAT. After Song's "coming out" I just petrified and stayed like that to the end of the film. I just couldn't believe I didn't recognized one of my favourite and most appreciated actors! I think generally that, putting together "The Iceman", "The Year Of Dragon", "The Last Emperor" and "M. Butterfly" only, one may say Jon Lone was one of the best and most interesting actors of 80s/90s turn of decade.
Don't you agree?
I said "was", because I wished he played now in something better than - let's say - "Rush Hour 2"

[–] SubtleFury 17 years ago

That's funny, I didn't know much about the film and what it is about. But since I'm a fan of Jeremy Irons, I decided to watch it. And about 10-15 mintes from the beginning I was wondering who the actress that just sang Madame Butterfly and talked to Irons was, because she looked vaguely familiar (but no way had I started to suspect she's not an actress at all)

So I opened IMDB while watching the film, clicked on the first chinese name in the characters list and got linked to Jonh Lone's page. And my reaction was "HUH?! Who's that? Haven't seen him yet, probably comes later in the movie. But why would he be right after Irons' character, how could his role be so signifficant when he still hasn't appeared... O_o"

And then when I read quickly the synopsis to see what was the name of that opera singer, to my amazement it was John Lone's character. Still astonished from that discovery, I compared Lone's photos from IMDB on my monitor with "Madame Butterfly" speaking on the TV screen in that moment ...and my jaw dropped.

I don't know how much time it would take me otherwise to determine that guy's not a woman, but that's just to show that if someone's not familiar with the plot it's quite easy to mistake John Lone for a woman, at least in the first 10-15 minutes or so.

[–] motions-1 17 years ago

Heya, well for those of us who werent familiar with the play I guess it was easy to believe what Irons' character believed himself. I totally believed it till Song came out in a suit so I must say very strong performance by Lone.
I think I have to read the story now because I couldnt get some things.(btw i az sum ot BG)

[–] bobcunk 16 years ago

if he thought he was a woman and got her pregnant didn't he wonder how if they never had sex. and if they did wont he have known she didn't have a vagina?

[–] Pearl_Jade 16 years ago

I haven't seen enough of his movies to judge his acting in general; but in this movie, I found his mannerisms rather stilted -- although that could have been deliberate, since he is playing a "role" in his relationship with Gallimard.

I just found it distracting that whenever he spoke, he sounded just like Michael Jackson.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] vw_hk89 15 years ago

I knew Lone was in this film, knew it involved a man disguised as a woman and still did not recognise Lone as Song!

When Gallimard visits Song backstage and she asks him to light up her cigarette behind the curtain I went to myself "wow! She's so beautiful!" Hell, if I were a man I probably would've fallen in love with her!

I did not realise it was a man until a few minutes later when they are outside her house and Song cocks his head a bit, you see how masculine his features are.

Bonjour! Guten Tag! Ahn-Nyong-Ha-se-yo! Konnichiwa! Ni hao! Hello!

[–] opdiva 15 years ago

he makes a real good-looking man AND woman!

[–] LPurch6636 13 years ago

My assumption is that Rene Gallimard didn't recognize that there are two orifaces by which people can have sex. I have only seen the Hollywood Chinese" documentary where there are scenes from the movie and a discussion of "M. Butterfly" by the actors but there was a scene where Gallimard demands that "she" shed her clothes before his eyes; so I assume that he was getting suspicious- ?

Flanagan

[–] fanaticita 13 years ago

John Lone was very convincing in his role as a woman. He was brilliant in fact. The film was especially disturbing at the end. Almost creepy. However, the performances of both actors, Lone and Irons were brilliant.

[–] skyblazeeterno 10 years ago

here I am replying to a 7 year old post...

Butterfly had me fooled right up to the court scene.More than that though I can easily see why the guy fell for "her" IRL for me it would never last years as I like my sex visual and open but I can imagine that a man who doesnt like sex in the light could be fooled for a long long time

I suspect that many people were fooled and they dont like to admit it because they feel stupid being attracted to someone who was in reality a man - it confronts their sexuality a bit to blatantly

[–] brock22 14 years ago

I don't agree that it was obvious. I knew going in that it was a man playing a woman, and I was still impressed with how fairly convincing it was.

[–] monica_vzla 14 years ago

I could not agree more! I just happend to switch channels when this movie was on, and since I love Jeremy Irons I kept watching, I also know John Lone from his other movies, I was totally shocked when he appeard as a man in court! I never noticed! Thanks God I did not had any spoilers and fully enjoyed the fantasy Mr. Lone produced for us. I think he deserved more recognition that he got, I think he was superb! (pardon my bad english too ;)

[–] RashaTheGreat 13 years ago

Yeah, I’ve got to agree, it was a terrific performance, he had me completely fooled. It’s funny even after he walks through the doors in a suit my brain couldn’t comprehend what I was watching, I tried to rationalize it as a coincidence that this new male character looked exactly like Butterfly, haha.

As far as the one poster asking if they ever had sex, there was a scene where they are shown having anal sex, now why René doesn’t know you can’t get pregnant from that, or if he couldn’t tell what hole he was in, I don’t know that exactly, but I think it’s something along those lines.

And to make an off-topic point, was I the only one bothered by the fact that Cronenberg didn’t even attempt to have any of his actors do French accents, I guess it doesn’t really matter since if they were French they wouldn’t just speak with French accents, they would speak the full French language. But I don’t know, the British accents everybody had were really distracting for me. It’s all good though, Cronenberg is still the man.

"...and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory for ever"

[–] info-9206 13 years ago

Well, it just came on tv and since I recognized her as HIM, I decided to see if I were right and looked the movie up on imdb and here I am. I've seen him in several movies and I recognized him and like I said, just wanted to see if I were right or not but so far in the movie, he seems to do a great job (just started it).

George

[–] kporter101 13 years ago

I wish now that I hadn't known already that Song would turn out to be a man, then I would know for sure whether or not I would've been surprised. However, I honestly don't think I would've. The performance itself was great and b/c im perhaps too young to have been familiar with the play this is based on, the twist could've been a surprise.. BUT I really think Lone was a bit too masculine looking. I think a masculine female actor wouldve been more effective if the intention was to surprise the audience. Or do you think that maybe the point is that he wasn't *that* convincing and a lot of it was just that Gallimar blinded himself to the fact that Song was a man?

[–] pausner 13 years ago

Absolutely the point is that we know it's a man and that we are struggling with how Gallimard perceives her. I'm not sure it matters, after we've seen the movie, whether he is male or female. In my view, Gallimard had constructed his perfect love, not necessarily our perception of a perfect love.

[–] Bishop_of_Battle 12 years ago

I wish now that I hadn't known already that Song would turn out to be a man, then I would know for sure whether or not I would've been surprised.

I felt the same way while watching The Crying Game a few years back. That one's been referenced in popular culture so many times that it's just about impossible not to know the reveal.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]