MovieChat Forums > Dòng máu anh hùng (2007) Discussion > Poorly Produced and Disappointment

Poorly Produced and Disappointment


Charlie Nguyen's The Rebel is such a disappointment in all aspects.
From its poorly acting to its historical settings, The Rebel proves nothing but a tool for the Vietnamese Communist Party Resolution #36 .

The Vietnamese Communist Party Resolution #36 was created in order to spread its propaganda in communism as well as its attempt to validate its war against the US supported South Vietnamese government.

To understand the movie, historical knowledge is required.

The movie starts in 1922 colonial Vietnam, especially in the southern provinces. Little did the author know at that time, south Vietnam, called Cochinchina, was under the French authority and rule. The rest of Vietnam was divided into the North Vietnam, Tonkin, was under the protectorate of the French and the Central Vietnam remained in the court of the Nguyen Dynasty.

In 1922, the south Vietnam flourished economically, educationally, socially and politically.
Economically, the south ranked third in the world, only behind Manyar and Thailand, in exporting rice. Most, if not all, citizens, from peasants to high society socialites alike, in the south had a comfortable life. Costs of livings were low as well as crimes. With an emerging economy in Southeast Asia as well as in the world, the value of piatres, monetary unit used in Indochina, was almost equal to the US dollar.

Educationally, it is a fact, then and now, the French brought their education system to the Vietnamese. Many schools, from elementary to universities, were built. It was an education for the mass without any fees. Additionally, the government of South Vietnam, Republic of Vietnam, offerred many scholarlips and awards to excel students. The South Vietnamese continued this educational system until the Vietnamese communists overran the South in April, 1975.

Socially, the French built many buildings that still exist to this very day to house its political machines as well as to serve its joy of pleasure. The grand opera house , in this example, which later became the house of representatives in the Republic of Vietnam. The Vietnamese, at that time, began to cut off their long locks, a tradition carried from Chinese, in their attempt to better themselves for the country's future. Also, the Vietnamese were strong contenders in sports such as cycling, Tour de Indochines, and soccer.

Politically, many political parties were formed from different political idealogies. The Colonical French tolerated them because they were formed accordingly to the French's rule. Furthermore, the French started many schools that still exist today. Many of students who attended went on later to hold important officials in the former Republic of Vietnam.

In the film, it said there was a mine producing iron ore in which the colonial Frech sent its criminals there for hard labor. It was such a joke when everyone knows the Mekong delta is such a vast land of rice fields.

For the conversation and diaglogue, the actors and actresses, despite their Vietnamese heritage, they mangled the words while speaking. Let alone their attempt in speaking French! The actress lead, Ngo Thanh Van, was most miserable of all. Perhaps it was her upbrining in the communist state, in most of her scences, she shouted to others instead of speaking normally.

The converstational tone and style in the film did not reflect the way people talk back in the day as well. Infact, the tone of the dialogue in the film reflected the current style of conversation in the modern communist controlled Vietnam. Most funny of it was, at the beginning of the film, the grammar and style in the pamplet, was exactly the same as of the communist style of writing.

If this is an attempt to advertise either culture, tradition, history or martial arts for the country of Vietnam, it failed and it failed miserably.


Without a doubt, the Rebel is such a disappointment but it proves the actual author of the film had a very limited knowledge about Vietnam and the cast was poorly made-up as well as their rudimentary acting skills.


6 Bua

reply

As knowledgeable as you are, why can't you realize what a piece of *beep* you are?

reply

thats right!!!, "historians" MUST be hanged for watching movies like this....and coming to IMDB to pour their *beep* !!!

reply

Isn't this a bit like arguing that Raiders of the Lost Ark is a bad movie because there's no historical evidence that the Nazis financed a multi-million dollar military campaign to find the Ark of the Covenant?

It's ok to not like the movie, but I figure that it makes more sense to watch it as a piece of entertainment and a work of fiction, rather than a historical document.

reply

lol yeah seriously

reply

dustin nguyen and johhny nguyen and veronica ngo thanh Van are all great actors, and you should just enjoy this as entertainment you retarded *beep*

reply

go somewhere else and spread your own propaganda, you piece of sh!t.

Danorma
I'm devotion, not obsession.

reply

your title shouldve been "historically inaccurate" instead of poorly produce and disappointment. The movie was produce on a 500k usd budget, compare to american movies which all over 20mil and most turn out crap, it a great movie.

second, it is true that the french help vietnam flourish in the early 1900s, but not because they did it out of vietnamese interest but because they were hugely profited, most of the profit made from vietnam economy went into the French pockets, you made it sound like they were saint to the vietnamese or something. Vietnam was also one of the major harbor country, the one who get access to those countries get access to asia-trades.

thirdly, it a fcken movie, stop reading so much into it, "OOO LOOK AT 300! they so great! and they speak english IN ROME! AND WITH ENGLISH ACCENT AT THAT!!!"

if the movie get a 7+ rating on IMDB, maybe it not that the movie, but just you.

reply

This was meant to be an old-fashioned entertainment featuring a unique martial arts system and it succeeds wonderfully at that. Your argument is like saying Donald Duck is not realistic because ducks don't wear sailor suits. Did you care that Americans were shown as the only force that invade Normandy (Saving Private Ryan) and Mel Gibson single handedly won the American War of Independence (The Patriot) and God knows what they did with the 1,000 Greeks died along the 300 Spartans (300).

Lighten up!

reply

Wow you really have an obsession with the US government... We get it, you think you're smart for pointing out the wrongdoings of the american government, even though everyone else on the planet already understands its malicious nature. There's no need to tell complete strangers on the internet about it... so how about you tell us this: what government since the dawn of time hasn't been malicious? That is to say, those people in power seeking wealth & prosperity for themselves and their partners with little regard to the health and well-being of their citizens. I'll save you the time... no government has ever existed. How about you tell us the real reason for your weird, misplaced anger against the US (which probably stems from watching one or two documentaries on 9/11 or the like) instead of spouting stupid, uninformed bullsh*t

reply

To: hitekfraud-1. While you were accusing the movie of being "a tool for the Vietnamese Communist Party Resolution #36 . ", your review rakes of third-class cold war propaganda and your "historical settings" aren't that accurate either.

Nowhere in the film is there "propaganda in communism" or "attempt to validate its war against the US supported South Vietnamese government." The film portrays the struggle of the Vietnamese people against foreign/colonial rule, something almost all Vietnamese, communist and anti-communist alike, endorse and honor. The majority of the French people have also since denounced colonialism and admitted their rule in Vietnam was unjust and unwise.

When the French attacked Vietnam in the 1860's, they were invading an independent and unified country, one that had been opened to foreign trade for several centuries (the Dutch in the North, the Portuguese in the South. The port of Hoi An was one of the most active trading posts in Asia). I submit that the Vietnamese would have modernized themselves anyway and even better had they been left to their own device. Just look what they've been able to do in recent years (1986-present), free of foreign interference.

The southern third of Vietnam, what the French called "Cochinchina" (and you undoubtedly still prefer that name as well) was relatively prosperous because of its fertile land and industrious people, not because of French rule. It was fertile and agriculturally productive before the French and it is now even more so. In the struggle for independence, the Vietnamese of the South were just as vigilant as those in the rest of the country, except for a few fat cats, landowners and Frenchmen wannabes. Ever heard of "Nam Ky Khoi Nghia"?
During their rule, it was a fact that the French built more prisons than school. They did not found one single college or university in the South. The one that they reluctantly built was in Hanoi, in the North, in 1906 with the primary purpose of training "natives" to be their underlings. The Vietnamese have since built close to 300 colleges and university, most since 1975.

The central part of Vietnam did not remain quite "in the court of the Nguyen Dynasty" as you claimed. The part of Vietnam that the French called "Annam", a degradotory name originally coined by the Chinese to refer to all of Vietnam was only nominally under the Nguyen dynasty. The French had a say in who was to be the monarch and any one of them who dared to contradict their rule risked to be dethroned and sent to exile such as Emperors Duy Tan and Thanh Thai. The French Resident in Hue was the true ruler.

You've already got yourself beaten quite badly by the other reviewers on this site so I don't really want to pour salt on your wounds but you are so ignorant and dogmatic I can no longer remain silent. I'm just wondering what kind of a creature would, in the 21st century, still defend European colonialism in Asia. Even among the most ardent "anti-communist" elements of the Vietnamese overseas community, French colonialism is something to be held in contempt, not admired. You must have crawled out of a hole somewhere?

By the way, your French is very poor, especially for a defender of the now defunct French colonialism. The bicycle race around Indochina, if indeed there was one, would have been called "Tour d'Indochine" and never "Tour de Indochines". As any child who had learned basic French would have known, "de" before a word beginning with a vowel is contracted to "d'" and Indochine is singular, never plural. I guess the French did not do a good job educating their lackeys (or the latter's descendants like you) after all.

Crawl back to your hole, your anachronistic little reptile!

reply

To: hitekfraud-1. While you were accusing the movie of being "a tool for the Vietnamese Communist Party Resolution #36 . ", your review rakes of third-class cold war propaganda and your "historical settings" aren't that accurate either.

Nowhere in the film is there "propaganda in communism" or "attempt to validate its war against the US supported South Vietnamese government." The film portrays the struggle of the Vietnamese people against foreign/colonial rule, something almost all Vietnamese, communist and anti-communist alike, endorse and honor. The majority of the French people have also since denounced colonialism and admitted their rule in Vietnam was unjust and unwise.

When the French attacked Vietnam in the 1860's, they were invading an independent and unified country, one that had been opened to foreign trade for several centuries (the Dutch in the North, the Portuguese in the South. The port of Hoi An was one of the most active trading posts in Asia). I submit that the Vietnamese would have modernized themselves anyway and even better had they been left to their own device. Just look what they've been able to do in recent years (1986-present), free of foreign interference.

The southern third of Vietnam, what the French called "Cochinchina" (and you undoubtedly still prefer that name as well) was relatively prosperous because of its fertile land and industrious people, not because of French rule. It was fertile and agriculturally productive before the French and it is now even more so. In the struggle for independence, the Vietnamese of the South were just as vigilant as those in the rest of the country, except for a few fat cats, landowners and Frenchmen wannabes. Ever heard of "Nam Ky Khoi Nghia"?
During their rule, it was a fact that the French built more prisons than school. They did not found one single college or university in the South. The one that they reluctantly built was in Hanoi, in the North, in 1906 with the primary purpose of training "natives" to be their underlings. The Vietnamese have since built close to 300 colleges and university, most since 1975.

The central part of Vietnam did not remain quite "in the court of the Nguyen Dynasty" as you claimed. The part of Vietnam that the French called "Annam", a degradotory name originally coined by the Chinese to refer to all of Vietnam was only nominally under the Nguyen dynasty. The French had a say in who was to be the monarch and any one of them who dared to contradict their rule risked to be dethroned and sent to exile such as Emperors Duy Tan and Thanh Thai. The French Resident in Hue was the true ruler.

You've already got yourself beaten quite badly by the other reviewers on this site so I don't really want to pour salt on your wounds but you are so ignorant and dogmatic I can no longer remain silent. I'm just wondering what kind of a creature would, in the 21st century, still defend European colonialism in Asia. Even among the most ardent "anti-communist" elements of the Vietnamese overseas community, French colonialism is something to be held in contempt, not admired. You must have crawled out of a hole somewhere?

By the way, your French is very poor, especially for a defender of the now defunct French colonialism. The bicycle race around Indochina, if indeed there was one, would have been called "Tour d'Indochine" and never "Tour de Indochines". As any child who had learned basic French would have known, "de" before a word beginning with a vowel is contracted to "d'" and Indochine is singular, never plural. I guess the French did not do a good job educating their lackeys (or the latter's descendants like you) after all.

Crawl back to your hole, your anachronistic little reptile!

reply

Interesting point of view except for the last line, which was quite unnecessary.

reply