MovieChat Forums > Shi mian mai fu (2005) Discussion > style over substance again

style over substance again

posted 16 years ago by JoeyRamone
44 replies | jump to latest

The following quote from the top review of the film on this site explains quite precisely the problem I have with people who rave over films like this...

"I don't complain when the dead rise from their graves. I don't complain about the lack of reason behind the ideas that aliens would have less intelligence than humans or that the living dead would harbour grudges against the really living. I complain when it just looks simply uninspiring and frankly visually boring."

In his own words, he values visual style over plots that actually have any reason behind them. Call me an ignorant popcorn muncher if you like, but that sounds a lot like reading a novel and basing your entire criticism on what font was used.

This film, Hero and Crouching Tiger are all the same - examples of the kinds of films that were already old and boring in Hong Kong 40 years ago, but which suddenly get rave reviews when they throw money at the idea and make it look visually impressive.

I know films students like to bang on about how supremely important direction and cinematography are to the cinema experience (probably because they all want to be directors), but most uneducated heathens like me occasionally like some sort of narrative depth thrown in as well. Or are we missing the point of cinema?

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jmbwithcats 11 years ago

I respectfully disagree.

House of Flying Daggers was style WITH substance. A movie about honor over romantic love, sacrifice, and depth of characters and development of what it means to fight for what you believe in, even if it means you give up fighting to redefine everything you've ever understood. A movie about what real love is, not just a word but an action, sacrifice not for ego but for something more important, the safe passage of the good.

Web www.jmberman.com
Fcbk https://www.facebook.com/catnipdream

[–] land-on-the-moon 9 years ago

Well put.

It's a wuxia movie, characters have superhuman traits, there's lots of fighting, lots of glorious scenery , wonderful cinematic experience - though, all of it is intended to sustain and help develop the main themes & love-story.

[–] bringbackberniew 10 years ago

Did you think this was meant to be historical fiction?

Learn 3 words:

Style

Symbolic

Symmetrical

[–] bringbackberniew 10 years ago

Much.

[–] shred-com 10 years ago

I didn't care for the story much. Yes, the romance is nice (and the characters very likeable), but the film doesn't have any real meat to it. We learn a bit about the characters, and that's good, but that's about it. However the film looks fantastic, and there's also some good action.

[–] akapellaakademy865 9 years ago

Amazing human race. I was overwhelmed by the beauty, the history, the robin hood theme (which isn't really addressed), the color and cinematography, the pacing, the stunt flying and dueling, well, every frame of the movie.

Thought i'd see what others found. I found pretension and nonsense. I'll have to stop looking at commentary. It could rot my brain to think I'm sharing this planet with such dolts.

Sayonara.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] alioth4 9 years ago

Well, film is largely a visual medium.

It has other elements of course, and there are all kinds of ways those elements can be balanced or emphasized. I've appreciated films of just about every kind of balance/emphasis--they can entertain me in different ways.

This one is one I wish I'd seen on the big screen in a theatre (I just saw it on DVD on my modest TV). I don't go to theatres often, but when I do it's usually for movies that emphasize the visual. Excellence in writing or plot can be a bonus of course. In the movies I rent or otherwise watch on DVD (and especially those I purchase for my collection), I tend to favor excellent writing or storytelling regardless of the visual; but my big screen choices will usually emphasize the visual, because the big screen itself is designed to accentuate that.

And this movie isn't "CGI-tricks visual" either, but has some stunning natural scenes, well-crafted ornate period sets, and stunning choreography. Classically artistic cinematography. I love beautiful natural scenery probably best of all.

That said, the acting was well-done as well. I don't know Chinese so I don't know how "natural" the dialogue sounded as a native ear would, but the facial expressions often spoke volumes. I did come to care about the three main characters, and felt the separate pain of each of them in the end scene. So even without the big screen, it satisfied me enough. But yes, the visuals were definitely the salient point--but in this medium, there's nothing really wrong with that.

Understanding is a three-edged sword.