MovieChat Forums > Dai si gin (2004) Discussion > Parts of the movie confused me

Parts of the movie confused me


1. What was the point of establishing a relationship with Yuen and Rebecca?

2. The part where the criminals hid in sheets/garmets confused me. Two groups exited out to the media: where the hell did the criminals find another cluster of hostages? I thought they just had Yip and his two kids..

3. Who was that guy in the picture? Somebody the hitman was supposed to kill?

4. Yip abandoned his kids to escape through the window? More of a nitpick than a plothole, but it seemed out of character.

5. Another nitpick: why was Cheung so one-dimensional?

reply

[deleted]

1. Since Rebecca wanted to broadcast to Hong Kong (and maybe, to the rest of the world) that the HKPD can take on Yuen and his gang, Yuen decides to turn the tables by showing the world that they can humiliate the HKPD again after a reporter pictured an officer being threatened by one of Yuen's gang members.

2. I think that was Yip and his kids. I'll have to watch it again. Asked my old man to get the HK DVD for me.

3. Which guy? You mean in the report? He was one of the mainland Chinese robbers who was forced to team up with Yuen after he taught that he was his fellow gang member. He got killed by officers for trying to stage an ambush on an armored car on daylight.

4. He was desperate.

5. One-dimensional in what way?

reply

[deleted]

Question 1 was answered by the previous poster and i agree.
2) The police were still evacuating the 7th floor when they found out that the criminals were on the 8th floor. So they evacuate everyone on the 7th but there were still people on the 8th, because the police told the tenants to stay locked in their apartments till the police came for them.
3) Yup the guy in the pic was somebody the hitman was supposed to kill. Somehow the last two bad guys decide to switch missions i.e. hitman tries to rob the armored car and Chueng(?) tries the assassination.
4) Yup Yip does try to escape through the window. I dont know why you think it was out of character because earlier we find that his kids cook for him which just shows what a dead beat he is.
5) Beats me.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

1. They each secretly (openly?) admired each other, thus proving the theory of "opposites attract." Each had something the other coveted. Recall also how the bad guys, especially Yuen, were giving "pro-cop" advice to Yip's little son.

2. The film did not follow-up or explain every single scene -- there would have to be a big book written about them all. That is actually not why most people would want to watch a filmed entertainment piece, anyhow.

3. Right. In the elevator shaft, the two baddies switched assignments, which also explains the closing narration sentence of the film. It was Yuen's job to whack the mark, whereas the hitman was doing the bank robbing the next day, to predictably fatal results.

4. I did not get that part at all.

5. Well, the police was certainly NOT idolized in this film, like in most American cops and robbers films, where the cops are always the greatest and bestest human beings and ultimate professionals. Yes, by the end Cheung had turned into a comic novel character, having been shot numerous times and yet kept on ticking and shooting.

The film, overall, is more of a spoof or farce of a serious cops and rubbers flick than a real attempt to be one. Very original, perhaps paying homage to such earlier films as "Network" and "Natural Born Killers."

reply

2. That part was very confusing, but I just watched it again and am a little clearer on the situation.

Two important things to note: Firstly, the police did not evacuate all of the residents from the building, only those in the lower floors, while those higher up were told to lock their doors and remain in their apartments until evacuated. Secondly, there are four groups of people covered in sheets.

The SDU were ordered to retreat after seeing Yip hanging out the window. The two criminals positioned on the ledge outside the window confirmed this (not sure how the police never spotted them from outside). Yeun (the leader of the criminals) then calls the other two criminals outside and tells them he has an idea. They round up hostages from other apartments on the same floor (most likely gaining entry by pretending to be police and telling them it was time to evacuate) and cover them with sheets and grenades to act as a diversion. Rebecca Fong senses they will attempt to escape and orders the SDU back in.

At first, in one shot, we see one group come out covered in plain sheets, then the camera pans around to show another group come out covered in sheets with a striped pattern. A cop says they are coming out of "3 units", and at that point we cut to the surveillance video inside the command post showing a third group come out covered in sheets with a chequered pattern. The group covered in the chequered sheets is seen going upstairs past Cheung and his men (and never seen again), where the other two groups go out onto the street in front of the media.

Cheung goes down to the eighth floor where they came from to see a fourth group come out covered in sheets, and when Cheung confronts them, they pull the sheets off revealing all the criminals are there. The hostages were justa a diversion to lead the police away from the eighth floor.

reply

Yeun (the leader of the criminals) then calls the other two criminals outside and tells them he has an idea. They round up hostages from other apartments on the same floor (most likely gaining entry by pretending to be police and telling them it was time to evacuate)


That makes sense, but none of what you describe was shown in the movie. The movie should have explained it more clearly, because the way it was, the sequence of hostages coming out of apartments in groups covered in sheets, was very confusing. It was not at all clear as to how the criminals suddenly obtained so many groups of hostages.

reply

I think there are two reasons for that.

Firstly, the scene is supposed to be confusing to a certain degree. All these people come out covered in sheets, and nobody, neither the police or the viewer (us), has any idea of who is who and what is going on. Instead of us having this omniscient view of events where we know information that other characters do not, in this scene we are denied the ability to see and know what the criminals are doing, which makes us see these events from the point of view of the police. By enforcing the idea that the police have no idea what is going on, we are (theoretically) more accepting that the criminals could escape in the confusion.

Secondly, the scene is just not particularly well written or executed in the film, and is a poor resolution to the siege which the story focuses on. I love this movie, but it's not without it's problems.

It kind of reminds me of my favourite scene in the anime film Patlabor 2, where the air force are scrambling jets to respond to enemy fighters on their radar. The scene is supposed to be confusing as the characters being shown are unaware of what is happening. However, most of the confusion is an unintentional result of the director's poor skills in plot exposition and narrative discourse.

reply