I had high expectation before I watched it.But it completely let me down.shallow story line,hollow character,mediocre performance.I didn't feel touched at all after I watched it.I don't know how it won prize in France film festival???????!!!!!!!
share[deleted]
I'm Chinese from Beijing, I prefer Beijing Bicycle too. Maybe Wang Xiaoshuai is more familiar with Beijing than Guizhou province. I think he showed real emotion of Beijing in Beijing Bicycle
Edward Norton rocks!!!!!!!!!!!!
[deleted]
Well said my man, well said.
shareWow, these are really strong words against this film. "Utter garbage"? I saw it at the London Film Festival and liked it just fine. I liked most of the acting, especially the father who was believable and natural even though he was in some ways a stereotypical strict parent. There was sadness and helplessness behind his strictness.
I loved the scenes with the teenagers in the dance party, and I thought it captured the era, the mood and the fashions really well. Great dancing to Boney M too.
I am an avid fan of Chinese movies and put Qing Hong high on my list of favourites. I thought the acting was understated but superb all round. The dialogue (ie the English subtitles) was excellent. I often fall asleep during films but thanks to the quality of film making here, the two hours passed by quickly even in a cramped and uncomfortable London cinema. Highly recommended.
share[deleted]
Responding to Kaze22, apparently you are Chinese and perhaps actually know a little something about the behind-the-scenes manouvering in the Chinese. However, having seen Shanghai Dreams last night, wanted to point out some disagreements and inconsistencies in your comment. First, though you might be speaking generally, the director used quite a bit of camera movement unlike Ozu - and in my opinion, to very beautiful and subtle effect. Second, I'm disturbed by your comment about "pointless story that drags..." - maybe, if you're Chinese, you're more familiar with the history - but for many non-Chinese such as me, it was a very eye-opening, complex look into the disillusionment of a generation and the disconnect it has with the next generation. It's epic but intimate, and if you think this is a reflection of China's "poor film industry," I would ask: what countries do you think have strong film industries right now? Finally, I'm interested that you point out Zhang Yimou and Chen Kaige as exceptions - though I admire both their work, they seem about as "non-Chinese" as you can get, seeing as Zhang Yimou doesn't even seem to do post-production for his films in China anymore (and is Chen Kaige even really a presence on the world cinema scene now??)
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
You mention Crying Fist as a film with subtlety? Any subtlety the movie had along the way (and it wasn't much) was ruined by the clichee sappy ending.
I find that a lot of new Korean films are somewhat ruined by laying it on a little thick with the negative stuff. When the feel-bad elements of a movie get to the point that the movie turns into a parody of itself, and it's otherwise trying to be serious (as in not a parody), I immediately stop believing in the picture and it fails. This is true of all of Kim Ki Duk's movies, except The Isle, which is the first one I saw and I thought it balanced the dark material pretty well with the tone of the movie. Spring... is the most pretentious and ridiculous movie of his that I've seen. No character believability.
Oldboy also kind of had this problem. It's difficult to believe that the characters are real and not just constructed by a "clever" film maker. But Oldboy had a lot of things going for it, mostly in style, so it kind of worked anyway.
The other thing I wanted to say was about Qing Hong. You say the director is a hack, but I can't see it. Maybe you base your opinion on other things that you know about Wang, but I base mine solely on the movie, which I just saw. I didn't think the movie was great, but it was ok. I agree there were too many static and slow shots, and you could maybe say that was hack, but slow shots in and of itself have been used for many years and will continue to be used by directors who have geniune visions. As the cinematography and direction itself was ok, I can't really say that the use of slow shots was hack, only that it was too much and got a little boring. The proof however, that the direction in the movie is not hack, are the characters. Especially the father, who was one of the most sympathetic, multidimensional realistic jerks I've seen portrayed. This is due to the dialogue (also by Wang) and the great acting from the actor. I assume the director had something to do with that.
[deleted]
Actually I find that people can disagree wildly on what good acting is too. For example I think Julia Roberts is an absolutely terrible actor, but many people who may have good taste otherwise do not. If you actually sound like you're reading off cue-cards that's one thing, but there are many other subtleties to acting that make people disagree.
No, I don't speak Mandarin, but I've seen many movies where Mandarin is spoken, so I think I have *some* feel for differences in acting. AND, acting is *at least* 50% emotions as shown in the actor's face. When I said that the father was a great character I was not "taken by" any camera shots - as I said it had to do with the acting (his face and also what I perceived as good delivery of the lines) and also with the lines themselves, i.e. how the character was written - also by Wang. I observe that you didn't answer that part. We can disagree on the acting abilities of the actor, but are you also going to tell me that the father wasn't a richly written character?
to Kaze, I'd say that clearly you know Chinese (and to some extent world) cinema pretty well and SOME of your thoughts and observations are fairly interesting. But then you'll say something really stupid, like your last posting about only being able to judge the acting in Shanghai Dreams if you speak Mandarin. So, I take it that unless you're fluent in Italian you don't really understand acting in Antonioni, or with French the acting in Bresson? And actually, many would say "acting" in these two masters' work IS just like reading off a cue card - do you even understand what an incredibly complicated question that is when you start judging what is "good" acting in a film? For the record, I am Korean, and I find a lot of the acting in Korean films to be pretty weak - especially in Kim Ki Duk's and Park Chan Wook's work. I find both these directors to be pretty crass and commercial, and Park's Oldboy is one of the most tired rip-offs of Tarantino I've seen in a long time (and the much-praised hallway fight scene is incredibly overrated, a big yawn).
For anyone interested in a genuine Korean talent, I'd recommend the quiet, beautiful films of Hong Sang-Soo, his most recent (and probably difficult to find) being "Tale of Cinema" but also "Woman is the Future of Man"; and also films of the old Korean master Im-Kwon Taek (most recently, Chi-Hwa Seon).
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Ok, you also think the dialogue itself was fake. I know I can judge the dialogue (unless the translation brought *a lot* to it that wasn't really there), so I see now why we disagree on almost everything in this movie. (The translation was actually better than usual, meaning it was good and well-written. In bad translations there are often short poorly crafted sentences, not just grammatically. You can just tell a lot gets lost. I didn't get that feeling at all here. It seems highly unlikely that good and well-written dialogue would also be incorrectly translated.)
Your side note brings up a very complicated question, and I would think you would know that yourself, but apparently not since you ask it in that fashion. First of all, some people do think all art is subject to personal opinion, but I don't agree with that. I believe there are bad films and good films, bad music and good music, and so on. But my taste, or the tastes of most of us who take the time to discuss films in this way, are most often very different from the popular taste. A hell of a lot more people like Britney Spears, or Too Fast Too Furious, than Stan Kenton, or Raise the Red Lantern. So who decides what's good and bad? By our standards, certainly not the majority.
Another level of this is that often people like you and me, who agree that Vin Diesel and Van Damme movies suck, don't agree on other things. Friends of mine who have great taste in some things, have terrible taste (according to me) in other things.
So my original point was this: Yes, we have to have our opinions, and argue to defend them if we want. But this goes for movies as a whole as well as for acting. You can't say that we can disagree on whether the movie is good or bad but acting is straight forward. I have seen movies that have writing and characters that I think are totally hack and I can't believe everyone *who should know better* can't see it (The Lord of the Rings for instance), but... they can't. So acting might seem straight forward, but it's up for discussion as much as everything else.
I've seen Raise the Red Lantern, and liked it, but it was a long time ago and I can't remember that much sadly. I've also seen Yellow Earth, and a few other movies by Chen Kaige, but I didn't really get into them. I really love In the Mood for Love (which was mentioned) and all of Wong Kar-wai's films, and also the one film of Hong Sang-soo's that I've seen, Turning Gate.
[deleted]
Well, I can't see that the actors are B-rate, I can't see it on their face or hear it in their voice. So if you say they're flubbing their lines, ok but I have only your words for it.
Actual mis-speaking of lines aside, you did talk about wooden unprofessional acting. I take that to mean that the acting is not natural and you don't think the actors make the characters believable. That's the kind of low quality that I see in Lord of the Ring's script, dialogue, etc., and in Julia Roberts' acting for that matter. But I think we've said all there is to say about this.
To your last point: In my one post I specifically said that the characters were well *written*, to which you replied: "Your right the facial expression are there but it's fake, the dialogue is there but its fake...."
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
having seen this movie today i can only say that the original poster is a complete tird
sharethe Cannes film festival is retarded, and should be ignored like film awards generally should.
that said, however, i very much enjoyed the film. i can understand you didn't enjoy it, but try to be reasonable, the acting was really good
Of course it was a great film. Anybody can just say 'excrement' and get attention. I was taken in by the slow beginning, just a tiny bit of red in the right bottom corner, and slowly becomes the Red China flag. Then the factory worker punching pieces of metal, taking a caliper and verifying them. It was extremely well made. It deserves time and attention of cinephiles and just plain folks alike. I am going to tout it with pride.
I miss Big Band music and talented singers. Leonard is my Cohen/idol. Civility, harmony, unity!