Opinions: which version is better?


[Potential SPOILERS Ahead]

I recently watched the 4.5 hour two-part international version at the NY Asian Film Festival - it was my first and only viewing of the film. For the most part I liked it. I thought the first part was really really good. Its exploration of the Seediq's religion, and the history of the formerly warring tribes, made the violence against the Japanese (especially Japanese civilians) very complicated and not at all glorious. The second part however did start to veer into jingoism and melodrama, as all the potentially sympathetic Japanese started turning bad and the Seediq's war becomes one purely of defense. Motivations for the characters' more extreme actions, although comprehensible, were difficult to sympathize with because of the way the movie unabashedly started glorifying almost everything that the Seediq do. It didn't exactly fall apart; I just felt like it didn't fulfill the promises of the first part.

So anyway, my question is, has anyone here seen BOTH version? If so, which do you prefer and why? Does the 2.5 hour U.S. version cut out exposition in favor of preserving the battle scenes, or does it actually cut out some of the fighting and long dramatic deaths of characters in order to preserve the complex story? I have a feeling it's the former, but I'd like to hear what you guys think. The 4.5 hour version gets exhausting towards the end - I'd kind of like to see something closer to 3.5 hours, but I still might pick the longer DVD release over the truncated one when they come out in August. Thoughts?

- Joe

reply

I think it is not meant for us to only sympathize either the Seediqs or the Japanese... it's more like what Aristotle defined as a "tragedy". The 4.5-hour version might be a bit too long, but each part leaves us many things to think about and remember other than just a bloody war between 300 and 3,000 people.

I am from Taiwan and live in Taiwan so the only exposure I have to the film is the 4.5-hour version -- and I think it worths it!


The second part wouldn't be exhausted at all if you think of it as a vengeance. The Japanese who used to be friendly to Temu Walis and his fellow tribesmen was mad because his wife and children were killed in the attack at the elementary school. It was a combination of rage and vengeance for his own family and other Japanese who deceased in the incident, which is exactly the feeling of most of the Seediq men before the incident as well.

The point is, when both sides (or all sides, including those villages who were hostile to Mona Rudao's village in the movie) have conflicts that they could not let go of, and when they all don't seek to take a step back and try to understand the elements of their conflicts, it could turn out to be a great tragedy like this, if not that of Romeo and Juliet.

We see Yahiko Kamada who used to be so ambitious now so enraged that their men couldn't defeat those who they look down on. Now it's no longer a mere vengeance -- it has become a war that he wants to win at all cost. This is how extreme hatred can turn a person mad.

What's also the most important in the second part is the Toda's position and Temu Walis' decision -- historically, this was one of the keys that turned the side over. Like Director Wei says, all the leaders of the tribesmen had to consider the welfare of his fellow tribesmen. Each had to take careful consideration on their own tribesmen's lives and values.

There is also the Hanaoka brothers' dilemma -- Their double identity is their major problem. What could they do?

They mention their own men-creation tale -- this is a very important element to what happens later in the movie.

And most importantly, have they solved the problem of cultural conflict at the end? (You can literally read between the lines near the end.)

reply

In the 2 hr and a half version, the last 40min is just battles, ( plus a little strategy and plenty of suicides.) Looks like I missed a lot.

reply