MovieChat Forums > Cheung foh (1999) Discussion > Doesn't deserve relatively high rating o...

Doesn't deserve relatively high rating of 7.1 (spoilers)

posted 17 years ago by foob-5
13 replies | jump to latest

I just watched it and found it pretty unremarkable. How it won so many awards is just shocking to me. There was a slick and cool feel to the movie, other than that, everything else sucked.

Some gripes

1. The rifle at the abandoned warehouse shoot was definitely a semi-auto. There was a gas piston in one of the frames. Yet the shooter always pulled back the bolt for each shot. Looked like an SKS (bolt, chamber, rear sight matches), don't think the gas can be shut off. Also he shoots a remarkable amount of shots and never reloads. Would be cool to see him use a stripper clip.

2. Comaraderie between characters not sufficiently developed. Yeah sure after what looks like a few days/weeks together, and kicking a paper ball around, they'll risk death to save one of them who had sex with the boss' wife. Unbelievable.

3. Boss gives money to ex-bodyguard. Immediately after that, ex-bodyguard sacrifices body to protect him. Brilliant scriptwriting there........

4. Probably because people in countries outside the US don't have much access to firearms or firearms training, they probably think the shootouts were realistic. Would explain the rating. Nobody faults John Woo's shootouts because we know he's exaggerating it, but for a film that tries to portray realism in firearms and close quarters battle, it's pretty bad. I guess it could be explained that none of the bodyguards have actual firearms training, they are just whinging it from years of gangster experience.

5. Throwing a jacket up to somehow trick an expert hitman (hope he was an expert anyway) to fire and reveal his location? WTF???? And the fake security guard that threw his cap, WTF????

6. No reason for one of them suddenly to get a red dot on his pistol. Just magically appeared. Likely the director wanted something different. Different isn't better.

7. If I was a rich triad boss, I'll hire some professional bodyguards. Why the hell would I tap small-time gangsters for protection? They don't even use holsters, and only one of them bothers to get a bullet resistant vest (and luckily for him, he's the only one that gets hit).

8. Minimal info on the bodyguards' backgrounds. Did they have military or police experience? Why are they better at protecting the boss? Where did they learn how to operate handguns? What was the point of the cops at the start and later harrassing one of the bodyguards?

9. Pretty pointless installation of home surveillance equipment. One single monitor that never seems to switch to different camera views. At least have the home get attacked or something. With such *beep* surveillance equipment, the boss would be dead with them all seating around chatting together.

10. Attempt on boss at the lifts. Then all five bodyguards, unbelievably, go chasing after the fleeing hitman instead of their main duty of protecting the boss.

11. I like how in the first shootout a guy with a scoped rifle more than 100 yards away can make 1 out of 1 shot on the walking boss, and then suddenly turn into a really bad shooter and fail to hit any non-moving bodyguard. Especially with some bodyguards standing up revealing their entire body against the rifleman.

12. Zero bullet holes and zero glass impacts/shattering on the 3 cars during first shootout. I know those cars are expensive, but come on...

13. 2 bodyguards infiltrate the abandoned warehouse, kill everybody holding pistols and leave the guy with the rifle to continue shooting at the other bodyguards outside. I suppose they want to keep one guy alive to find the mastermind, but come on, at least bother to ask the guy to stop shooting at their fellow bodyguards......

14. Some reviews mention the bodyguards work well together. Assuming they do (dubious to me), does it make sense? They just met and have no professional training.

15. Zero car action. Why bother having one bodyguard practice driving earlier in the movie? And he was just driving circles in a parking lot. At least have some aggressive driving techniques or something...

-----

Good movie with good firearms handling is Collateral. Tom Cruise got professional training from firearm instructors.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] foob-5 17 years ago

Thanks for the response. Not sure whether I've seen those movies you listed, I usually only remember the chinese names.

With respect to the characters in the movie, I thought there wasn't enough bonding between the bodyguards, and the dialogue was pretty bad. Just no emotional impact, and I didn't feel like they would back the bodyguard who had sex with the wife.

Just seemed to be a very superficial movie with no substance. Oh well, the movie 300 has a better rating and is nearly as bad, so can't complain I guess.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] frAnkzOnE 17 years ago

Obviously you are not a Chinese, so it's probablly hard for you to understand a lot in this movie. I'm not going to elabrate on everything you put forward here, but there's a notion of "Yi" in the Chinese culture, actually one of the five priciple beliefs Chinese hold, it's like morality, some kind of bond between brothers and fellowmen, sort of, above mere individualism logic. Literally people could sacrifice themselves for others if they think it's in the meaning of Yi, whether they know each other for life or just meet ten min ago, at least that's what many literatures and documents advocated for thousands of years. Does it exist in reality? Well, since it's in the Chinese mentality or blood for so long, and many still do believe in it, yes, it does exist.

Also, you seems to have this wrong impression that these guys just met on the mission, which is not true. As clearly stated in the movie, these folks were former members of the gang/mafia who retired to assume their own lives, one became a hair stylist, one a pimp, one controlled a small club, and of course a newbie who just wanted to become a gang hero...it's only that when things happened, when the mafia(community/company as it was called in the movie) needed them, they can't denied that request because of also Yi. They have to interupt what they do, and come back to serve the community. So they are not only professionals, but also have a deep tie among them that goes a long way back.

[–] foob-5 17 years ago

I'm Chinese...... I'm also a little biased, and judge asian movies with a lower standard than western movies, so for me to find this movie pretty bad gives an idea how bad I think it is.

"yi" would also include loyalty to one's boss, and one's triad. Screwing the boss' wife basically means you have no "yi", which means nobody would bat an eyelid if he was punished by his fellow brothers.

If the guy had any "yi", he would have killed himself instead of putting him brothers in a quandary.

Instead, it would more likely be "ren" which would result in his brothers saving him.

-------

You are wrong.

The guy who screwed with the boss' wife is new obviously. He doesn't know any of the four others before the mission (except maybe the bar owner, but not close).

The hair stylist and gun guy/dance dance revolution guy know each other beforehand and look to have a close relationship. The others don't look like they have a close relationship (if any).

All this is easily noticed during their initial meeting.

From the movie, it seems only the hair stylist guy comes due to "yi", the rest come based on money and other reasons.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Dragon_Eye_Morrison 17 years ago

All your complaints about the ballistic stuff sure sound a bit like nit-picking

About the friendship between the main characters, yes, it lacked more developement. Still, it was beliavable enough, Jhonnie To manages to handle characters so well, even by giving so little info about them. In Throw Down he did this a whole lot better.

"I believe the common character of the universe is not harmony, but hostility, chaos and murder."

[–] chianti 16 years ago

You state your gripes as if they were fact.

"2. Comraderie not sufficiently developed..."

For you, maybe. I found this aspect of the film to be developed just fine. Loi obviously risked his life for the rookie because they worked together before the mission and like he stated, the guy was like part of his family.
And 'yi' is more of a brotherly 'yi'. If you watch enough triad films, you should notice that more often than not, where your yi belongs is who you've gone through most your trials with - if you're engaged in most of your sword/gun/machete fights with your brother backing you up, your loyalty will lie with him when it comes to the bottom line. If your boss was especially nice to you, then you may be conflicted when your brother has slept with the wife, but otherwise, not really. And let's face it, Simon Yam wasn't playing an especially nice guy - and all the other guy did was offer them coffee that one time.
It's a common theme. I seldom see triad films advocating the selling out of someone they've gone through life and death ordeals with, even if it means losing the boss or even their woman. Feel free to list some that I might have forgotten. Usually it ends badly when someone turns their back on their buds (On The Edge is a good example I can think of right now).

Yes, 'yi' is oversensationalized in film, and four guys in real life are probably not likely to risk their lives for one guy who really did mess up, but it's an idealized concept in an Asian movie. You really had to expect them to save Jackie Lui's sorry ass in a Hong Kong triad movie by Johnnie To. Otherwise, *beep* would have happened to them later (karma - don't sell out yo' brothas!)

Ok I'm done being faux-ghetto.

[–] FilmGeekWannabe 16 years ago

Why does it have to be realistic/deep in plot? Some of the questions you asked aren't directly answered in the movie, but are there. You're being spoonfed with information in the action flicks you normally watch, so you want everything presented to you. Maybe you should stick to Western movies since it doesn't seem like you'll ever appreciate HK Cinema.

[–] waldomarek 12 years ago

well, thing is, roy said in the movie: who did the boss' wife NOT try to seduce?

the woman is basically a biatch, a whore (whatever her reasons is, perhaps the old guy was not satisfying her). they'd rather have a brother alive than kill the brother because of one worthless woman.

if the woman was loyal to the boss and the rookie still had sex with her, then they'd surely punish him, but this wasn't the case.

[–] jamasian_man 13 years ago

2. Curtis faked Shin's death to everyone but Mike. Curtis told Mike to get him a gun before 10, that way Curtis could get a different gun with fake rubber bullets. This way, everyone else would think that Curtis had real bullets. He supposedly shoots Shin to appease Frank's man outside, by having Roy and the other guy really act angry because they think their friend is dead. It's only luck that Roy did not blast away Curtis.

3. That guy was an ex-bodyguard, but was injured on the job and had to take up a janitor job instead. Lung gave him some pity money and the man felt grateful, and risked his life out of instinct. He did used to work for him.

4. Not really into super realism, but none of them are trained. They are all gangsters.

5. The jacket trick did not work.

6. The scope was to try and match the sniper's scope. He didn't hit that many people with it anyway, including the sniper.

7. The one with the bullet proof vest is the one who gets it for the boss. I don't know why the other wouldn't have one, but if they did then the sense of suspense of them dying would be taken away. Also, the boss is not sure who he can trust and that is why he hires these 5 guys.

8. The movie never addresses this but there's plenty. The one guy is weapons expert. Another is a cold hearted assassin with a reputation. Roy is a hothead but protects his guys. The one guy with the smokes is a jokester with his exploding cigarettes, and the last guy is the rookie.

9. The montage was to convey that the boss never had this before and had to do multiple measures in order to be safe and secure. You're really reaching with this gripe since the plot never goes back to the surveillance equipment in any way.

10. Curtis already killed Hoi, the man closest to the boss. Their only lead to stop the attacks just left, and they had a chance to get him. Without this, the story never progresses to the twist where we find out who is behind all the hits.

11. The sniper had the element of surprise. The next morning, the boss tells them its not their fault if he were to die. After the sniper reveals his presence with the first shots, they shoot back and take cover.

12. The sniper shot the car doors.

13. If they had asked the man to stop or shot at him he might have turned the gun on them and forced their hand. They wanted him to know he was caught, out of bullets, and was out of options.

14. Curtis seems to be the leader, and does a favour for Roy after wronging him. They do seem to bond over the course of the picture and they convey this with the paper kickball scene.

15. Not a worthy gripe. It did not have a car chase because they did not write one into the story. That's like saying: Why no bazooka scene?

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BelmontHeir 12 years ago

Good rebuttals! I think this movie seems to be underrated in some circles. A 7.1 is too low for one of the last great Hong Kong 'action' movies. I put action in quotes because, while this movie features plenty of shootouts, it has more in common with the style of Jean-Pierre Melville than John Woo.

Johnnie To's camera and characters make very specific, precise movements...even though no one is diving through the air and there aren't a million bullets being fired, everything feels very calculated and choreographed. It's a top notch movie.