Cool News
HERO review
8 and a half years of running Ain’t It Cool News and in that time one of the constant whiney editorial gripes that I’ve consistently had has been with the manner in which Miramax has handled it’s acquired Asian Martial Arts Cinema. The constant butchery, dubbing, re-scoring, hip-hopping of the film. That fucking “Kung Fu Fighting” song… Great film after great film torn asunder, anglicized. I hate it. HATE IT!
With Miramax’s handling of HERO this weekend, I’m left with very few gripes, almost none of which would matter to anyone sitting in the audience watching this unbelievably beautiful masterpiece from director Zhang Yimou and the exquisite camera of Christopher Doyle. I wish it had hit American screens in advance of the 2003 Academy Awards – so it would have helped it in it’s bid for Best Foreign film. So the film would have had more of a sense of urgency and vitality within the fan community. HOWEVER – that being said…
GREAT JOB MIRAMAX!
You guys have managed to take a gigantic leap and God I hope it is rewarded. On 2031 screens this weekend you’ll find one of the absolute best films you’re likely to see this or any year. HERO is exquisitely masterful.
On the surface it is a story about a would-be assassin and a barbaric murderous emperor. In it’s visual poetry, thematic poetry and with every sprocket hole it screams a message of nationalistic pride and thought that permeates modern and ancient China. Essentially, the message beaten into us geeks in STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN that “The good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one.” In this edition in theaters there’s just a few translation problems… the biggest concerns the symbol that Tony Leung’s Broken Sword places in the sand. In the film, it is translated to say, “OUR COUNTRY” as originally intended it was to read essentially, “Everything beneath the Sky” Personally – I prefer that translation.
This is easily Jet Li’s very best film. The fights are of the fanciful kind, often foregoing intensity for epic sweep. The water top fight, the leaves, the rain, the arrows… All these scenes are great on DVD, on the big screen… they’re literally some of the most amazing things you’ll have ever seen. Beauty so intense as to actually shake one in their seat. Doyle’s photography is beyond masterful here… It burns colors into memory, past pure visuals to the emotional level. Where you begin to long for the scents of Green… Yellow… Red…. Blue… I can not possibly express in words how strongly these palates affected me.
Those visuals paired with Dun Tan’s fantastic score… Absolute heaven. I’ve seen this film numerous times… however, after watching it on the big screen in a theater with great digital sound… I feel I can honestly say, I’ve now only seen it once. I will see it many more times. The junk of Hollywood is being disposed of right now… Very bad movies. See this.
Reward Miramax for finally doing a great job! This is one time where our voices and ticket purchasing power needs to be directed for a single purpose… In support of the presentation of exquisite cinema the way it was meant to be seen. Upon watching this, you’ll feel as though you’ve woke up from the summer into the possibilities of great film again.
Wrap yourself in this story, its colors and sounds. Rediscover it with eyes held wide and gasp in awe at the beauty, tragedy and sadness of HERO!
-
+ Expand All
-
Actually I agree with harry, this movie rocks and the version that they are presenting is awesome. It really is cinematic art, the color scheme is executed flawlessly. Could not endorse this more if I tried.
-
i suggested this movie to everyone i know.it is breathtaking.every frame you see on the screen could very well be a painting.it is a beautiful movie.enjoy it like i did
-
Aug 27, 2004 4:40:20 AM CDT
The film is beatiful, but the ending sucked. The film is predict
by grabthars_hammer
-
I'll definetly go see this in the theaters. I don't get to the theater enough with all the damn shit on TV and DVD these days.
-
It's already on DVD here in The Netherlands. Saw it a couple of weeks ago. Not a word is a lie here above. It is a truly masterfull film. See it! No, SEE IT NOW!
-
Aug 27, 2004 5:35:23 AM CDT
jet li's very best film? have you forgotten lethal weapon 4?
by joestokowski
or that one with that rapper.
-
I saw this sometime last year I think.. a friend brought the DVD back from Thailand... the use of colour was the thing I remember. Also the fact that the copy was fairly shitty so I will watch it again when it's released over here...
-
With a top drawer digital sound system as well. I've had this movie on DVD for over a year but saw an advanced print of the Miramax release at a press screening about 4 months ago. Harry's right. It's like seeing it for the first time. Yeah, the subtitle translation to "Our Country" does water down the main theme of 'self-sacrifice for a greater cause' a bit. the translation on my DVD is "All under Heaven" and I prefer that much more. But you can't win 'em all. I'm just glad this 96 minute cut comes with every frame intact. Apparently there is a 2 hour director's cut but I'm a bit apprehensive. I thought the 96 minute cut was pretty tight for a film that has a very meditative pace. Maybe it is better, but I have my doubts. Has anyone here seen the longer cut?
-
Aug 27, 2004 6:09:59 AM CDT
Saw this movie more than a year ago. I can recall it's pretty go
by el zar
It's great to be in Asia. You get to see Asian movies late and adulterated. At least this one's okay.
-
or even "Our Country", both of which sound retarded. A contextual, poetic translation would be "All Under Heaven", which was how it's translated in EVERY COUNTRY except America.
-
Harry's salavating just a bit too much on this one.
That usually means I'll be disappointed. -
I said no text...oops!
-
Because of Harry's over-enthusiastic, geek-tastic rants hyperbole. His love of cinema's infectious, I don't care what anyone else says... Although it should be "Americanised", Harry, not "Anglicised"
-
Now there's an advertising pull quote if ever I heard one...
-
Is this gonna be that ultra hyped Asian "beautiful" "poetic" film that a couple of months later nobody remembers and it's frankly boring as hell? In other words, is this gonna be another Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon?
-
In Chinese, it's neither "Our Country" (yuck!) nor "All Under Heaven". Broken Sword wrote two letters meaning "Heaven" and "Earth". The meaning of this in Chinese culture is completely different from what the Western audience would make of it. I think "All Under Heaven" is a great translation. As for "Our Country", one has to be sorry for yet another attempt at dumbing things down and keeping beautiful things away from the viewer as if he were some sort of wild animal. How can you expect people to be more than morons if they get consistently treated like such?
-
Aug 27, 2004 8:40:53 AM CDT
The great thing about Star Trek 3 is how it turned that philosop
by theginger twit
I'll go now.
-
Aug 27, 2004 10:02:38 AM CDT
The longest versions of Hero I've seen available are 180 minutes
by shan
I've recently seen 180 minute versions of Hero on DVD available in a few different places.
-
That is a bold statement Harry. I passed on the dvd so I could see it in theaters first. I doubt it is on par with CTHD or even Fist of Legend and OUTIC. But heres hoping.
-
...that's probably a typo. According to dvdcompare, the longest version available so far is the extended 108 minute cut: http://www.dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=3161 ......
I'm not sure how different Miramax's cut is of Hero, but fuck 'em for altering it even in the slightest. Instead of catering to ethnocentric dumbasses with the attention span of fruit flies, Harvey, why not try to reverse the trend? Oh, that's right -- you ARE one of those dumbasses. Folks, here's a better way to spend your money and also send a message to Mirafux: order the R3 DVD. -
Aug 27, 2004 11:20:43 AM CDT
I refuse to trust a man who learnt his life lessons from Star Tr
by floyd gondolli
Anyway Harry, Moriaty, and geeks, sing along, you know the words:
Everybody was kung-fu fighting
Those cats were fast as lightning
In fact it was a little bit frightning
But they fought with expert timing
They were funky China men from funky Chinatown
They were chopping them up and they were chopping them down
It's an ancient Chineese art and everybody knew their part
From a feint into a slip, and kicking from the hip
Everybody was kung-fu fighting
Those cats were fast as lightning
In fact it was a little bit frightning
But they fought with expert timing
There was funky Billy Chin and little Sammy Chung
He said here comes the big boss, lets get it on
We took a bow and made a stand, started swinging with the hand
The sudden motion made me skip now we're into a brand knew trip
Everybody was kung-fu fighting
Those cats were fast as lightning
In fact it was a little bit frightning
But they did it with expert timing
(repeat)..make sure you have expert timing
Kung-fu fighting, had to be fast as lightning -
I saw this movie probably about 18 months ago... and it was so bad that I nearly walked out of it (and I never walk out of movies, no matter how bad).
Is it beautiful? Sure. But it is predictable, boring, innane... horrid, and a piece of JUNK! Unless this movie was somehow saved in the edit (or new edit) I can't imagine it being anything other than a bullshit fluff movie for critics to pretend to like.
Anyone comparison this to CTHD should be executed. -
I acquired a copy of "Hero" about three months ago, and I can honestly say it's one of the most visually stunning films I've ever seen. The translation on my DVD is "All Under Heaven," so I own the original Chinese version, I think. But I thought it was a great movie when I first saw it, and my opinion hasn't changed after three or four more viewings. I'll be seeing it again this weekend.
-
You wrote: "Is it beautiful? Sure. But it is predictable, boring, innane... horrid, and a piece of JUNK!" You thought this movie was predictable, eh? Is that because all your friends told you exactly what happens, or because you're just preternaturally intelligent? If this movie is one thing, it's unpredictable. This is a fact. Unless someone told you what was going to happen, no one could predict the outcome of this movie. This is what makes it interesting and... cough, cough... UNpredictable. Case closed.
-
I really, really, really hate dubbed any movie. They have done it so often recently: Iron Monkey, Drunken Master II, etc. I know there are more stupid people than smart people, but come on.
-
I picked up a copy of Hero last year and i was expecting something a bit more epic, due to all the hype on this site. Don't get me wrong it was good, but it wasn't grand-spankingly good. It was finding 1 dollar on the street good, it was i mean its just a dollar, but its stil good. The fighting was beautiful, especially the first fight with Donnie Yen , the double version of the tales were also good, how it makes the good guys seem bad at first and then *ooops* it was a lie. I dunno about the miramax version or if its a new cut, but i'll pass and wait for a DVD rental. ohk back to how good it was. It was masturbating to softcore porn good, this was brushing against the breast of a hot co-worker good. Uhmmm This was getting a double cheese burger when u only ordered a single good. hehehehe
-
This is for Grabthars_Hammer and anyone else who didn't like the ending of HERO. Head to the nearest Comic Store and find the Graphic Novelization of HERO by Wing Shing Ma. This excellent piece of art actually pulls off the near impossible task of translating the movie to the medium of Graphic Storytelling. The art perfectly captures the colors, backgrounds, physical excitement of the film, even the fights. But here's the big thing, THE ENDING IS DIFFERENT ! ! ! With the full approval of Zhang Yimou, Wing Shing Ma offers in this version a different ending to the saga which I think is just as thought provoking a climax (I won't dare spoil it for anyone) as the one in the film. The HERO graphic novel is available in Comic Stores and in a few B&N or Borders across the country. Check it out.
-
Haven't seen it. I'm waiting for the DVD so I can watch Harlin's and Shrader's versions back-to-back. In that order.
-
"Quentin Tarantino Presents" is why this version of Hero is unlike Miramax's other Asian imports. It's the same reason Disney's DVD releases of the Miyazaki films are so good, someone powerful and on the inside who knows and respects the film - in that case Pixar
-
Aug 27, 2004 12:57:00 PM CDT
I'm not so sure I'm comfortable with a film that advocates blind
by excaliburffolkes
I saw this movie awhile back and that definitely was the main theme it stressed. Somehow I don't think American audiences are going to buy into it, though.
-
To see this dubbed would be awful, but I always found the dubbing of Argento's films MUCH MORE painful than anything else. What's more frustrating than seeing people (whom 95% of are speaking english) dubbed with a wacky unnatural voice? Ugh!
-
Aug 27, 2004 1:07:42 PM CDT
disney/miramax dvds vs originals/imports of same movies
by acne scarface
shaolin soccer (hk version): extended cut, dts audio/shaolin soccer (shitamax version): edited version, hk theatrical cut, no dts audio. spirited away (hk/overseas version): dts audio, full storyboard alternate angle/spirited away (disney version): no dts audio, partial storyboard alternate angle. nausicaa, totoro, porco rosso (overseas versions): available/nausicaa, totoro, porco rosso (disney versions): DELAYED. FUCK BUENA VISTA/DISNEY/MIRAMAX. FUCK THEM UP THEIR STUPID ASSES...
-
That is exactly the problem with large portions of the American movie-going public today. They won't go see films if they think that they somehow espouse a world view which clashes with their own. Instead of relishing an intellectual challenge or just being curious or interested enough to partake in an alternative way of seeing things in cinema they tend to only watch things which reinforce their own political/spiritual/social views, as if exposure to other ideas is somehow threatening to them and their carefully constructed world -- which incidentally begs the question: how firm in their views could they be to begin with to feel so uncomfortable? Unfortunately, cinematic flat-earthers like that are stroked by money-sucking studio execs who are terrified of the remote possibility that they might somehow upset their dopey cash-providers by including some "bran" in their figurative cinematic bowl of sugar-coated choco-blobs. Nice North Sea Hijack nod there, by the way.
-
is not
-
This movie was visually stunning but the execution majorly lagged way behind the production values. And Jet Li was a poor choice. He can't project emotion and his way outclassed by every co-star he has in this movie.
-
Aug 27, 2004 1:48:36 PM CDT
I completely agree that people should see films (and art in gene
by excaliburffolkes
All of your points were totally accurate. I was just saying that I didn't like what this movie said (though I did enjoy watching it), and I don't think many other Americans will either. The movie will probably do decent business since Miramax is shrewedly marketing it purely as an action flick; but, once the audience members start thinking about it and specifically the implications inherent in the main character's choice at the end, they aren't likely to leave the theater excited by it or ready to recommend it to others. Of course, I realize I am going out on a limb by assuming that the average audience member will actually stop and think about what it all means.
-
" If this movie is one thing, it's unpredictable. This is a fact."
A fact? In what grade did you learn --and in turn, unlearn-- the word "fact?" I knew within the first 30 minutes where the plot was going. It was obvious. What other point is there to have the "hero" move closer with each telling of the story? It was projected from a mile away.
If you didn't see it coming then I suspect that you were making no effort to dissect the purpose the opening setup.
For me, the opening was completely predictable. I saw it with four friends and none of us had seen or heard of this movie before, and we all felt it was awful and predictable. -
I hope you're not American, because the irony of that statement (Somehow I don't think American audiences are going to buy into [a film that advocates blind loyalty and sacrifice for the needs of the State]) would border on the ridiculous (and if you are, don't take it personal, because i certainly don't mean it that way). I haven't seen a people (this is a generalization) more brainwashed into going to war, with moral justification obviously, in my whole life. How do you explain all the flag waving? All the vitriol against those who don't fall into file and rank? The political polarization? Not to mention the infinite ignorance as to the real state agenda? And finally, but certainly not least, the veneration of a puppet who has no understanding or capability to run the country without a hand up his ass. He brought down all the companies that he worked for to the ground, and this qualifies him for president? Sorry, got a bit carried away, but really, what in the world makes you think that Americans are above such nationalist propaganda? Like the other poster mentioned, what about ID4? Or "The Patriot"? Or "How the West was Won", or how about all those John Wayne movies? It's ok when it is homegrown propaganda, but as soon as the Chinese or whatever try to peddle their ideology (or artistic worldview, depending on your tastes i guess), Americans must be up in arms? Maybe what they need is the subtelty of Paul Verhoeven... I would love to see a Starship Troopers 2...****** End with a quote: Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." Hermann Goering
-
I didn't mean for my post to sound like I was countering yours, and I'm sorry if it did. I agree with you completely. The message of Hero -- by that interpretation -- is definitely one I don't support in any way. It's just such a shame that so many people habitually surround themselves with unthreatening or unchallenging expressions and things that they mistake ignorance and prejudice for some sort of high moral standing. On good days I sort of feel sorry for them. Most of the time I think they're merely cretinous.
-
I hated Crouching Tiger and Kill Bill Volume 1, but you can rest assured Volume 2 is NOTHING like that first piece of garbage. If they had been combined into one three hour movie, it would have been perfect.
-
if its dubbed I'll wait for the DVD. I really hate dubbing. I watched CTHD dubbed for five minutes and it annoyed the hell out of me, subtitled I felt the film played much much better.
-
I don't think Exff was suggesting that Americans aren't susceptible to propaganda. He was just pointing out that a large sections of Americans would react negatively to foreign ideas and politics. And there actually IS a Starship Troopers 2 -- albeit not by Verhoeven.
-
that should of course be "large SECTION."
-
minor detail: the characters written in the sand (tianxia) can be translated as "everything under heaven" or "everything under the sky". however, the Chinese at the time believed that everything under the sky WAS China, or at least all that was worth mentioning -- the name for China in Chinese means "middle country", as in "middle of the universe", afterall. so, the translation of the words as "our country" isn't exactly wrong, it's just less ethnocentric (and more than a bit less poetic...)
-
The movie certainly has it's point of view, but I seriously doubt the creators of the movie are intentionally trying to convert anyone. Yes, of course people from every country and society in the world are susceptible to manipulation. I wasn't saying Americans (of which I am one, to answer your query) are immune; merely that most Americans are likely to be turned off by the choice the main character makes at the end since it's so different from what an American movie character would do. To borrow your example, John Wayne would never make that same choice in a million years.
-
you're gonna LOVE "HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS" (LOVERS)!!!
-
I didn't think you were arguing against me, but I wasn't quite sure whether or not you were including me in the "cinematic flat-earthers" (great phrase by the way!), so I thought it was better to clarify myself.
-
Yeah, i see that now after reading his other posts. I must admit though that i too felt uncomfortable with the ending of the movie and the message it seems to suggest, though i realize that it is based on an old chinese myth/legend, but plead ignorance as to how faithful it is to it. But i've always felt this way towards any film or work of art, article, theory or whatever that advocates allegiance and submission to a state, institution, or doctrine. I do agree with both of you on the importance to be open about other movies (etc.) and experience their points of view, for only in that way do we create a common 'heritage' from which we can all learn a thing or two (like Rorty's "edifying converstations", but that's a lttle more complicated to explain), and hopefully not commit the same mistakes. This whole sticking our heads in the sand ritual stinks to high nirvana, specially when it is postulated as some kind of moral highground. I love a lot about America, and get along really well with Americans (i grew up within the American educational system), but i am saddened to see what is going on right now. But i do not for one moment forget that that could happen to my own countries (double nationality), or any other country for that matter, for this has occured on too many occasions throughout our history, in many different ways and contexts. Unfortunately, at this moment in time, what Goering says in that quote can only be classified as a 'truism', until we stop depending or relying so much on 'our' "leaders". And as far as Starship Troopers 2 is concerned, is it any good?
-
sound good to me
-
The scene with the Qin army marching in to destroy the Zhao village was more awe inspiring than any in Lord of the rings. Probably because I could tell most if not All was real. The sound when that army marched through the desert gave me goose bumps.
-
Snoopy, you've got a point there. Consider this, though. One thing is to use the word "country" in a place and a time where, out of sheer physical isolation, people don't know any other countries. In that case, the word couldn't conceivably be applied to anyone except their own people. Another thing is to use that world in the year 2004, when there's hardly anyone left in the world who still believes their own birthplace to be the only "country" in existence.
-
I was lucky enough to see this on it's original dvd last week. I had to guess how to navigate the menus because they weren't in english. I watched this with subtitles of course. Amazing movie. I can't wait to see it on the big screen. Now... I also just rented shailin soccer and watched both versions of that and was just shocked to see what the American version left out. I am very happy to hear that this hasn't happened to Hero. Thanks for letting us know Harry. I really appreciate it.
-
that Li doesn't sacrifice his life until he realizes that the emperor is worthy of it, and that some good will come of it (reunification of the empire and an end to internal wars). That said, the fact that the emperor is unable to stop his execution shows you that even leaders aren't always capable of acting with complete freedom/impunity, and have to take into consideration historical traditions, if not risk alienating popular opinion or conservative groups that attach too much importance (whether rightly or wrongly) to past customs and institutions, and thereby place at risk any radical or progressive agenda, or even the status-quo. Nothing is black and white, and certainly not nowadays. However, a spade is still a spade, atleast it was the last time i asked.
-
You said one thing in it that really interested me: you tried to list American films that could qualify as propaganda, and you included "...those old John Wayne movies". And that brought an interesting question to my mind. Can one be sincere, and at the same time engage in propaganda? I think of propaganda in its pejorative sense as implying a certain calculation: someone, somewhere, employing imagery in a way calculated to achieve a certain goal of persuasion. This would further imply that you can't engage in propaganda if you actually believe what you're saying, or if you sincerely select the imagery you deploy. In other words, the difference between "The Longest Day" and "ID4" is that the people who made the former were sincerely patriotic, and the people who made the latter were merely cynically imitating the conventions of sincere patriotism, because they sat around in a conference room one day and said to each other, "What if we made a movie where America had to save the world from aliens, and included a lot of patriotic-seeming shit in it? LOTS of people would pay to see that!" And the difference between the two of them is palpable during the viewing experience. Or am I just grasping at straws here?
-
Democracy is an unknown concept at that time. You were either ruled by one tyrant or the other. Although the emperor was known for his ruthlessness, he managed to unite all kingdoms and ruled them in harmony. Killing him would only replaces him with another tyrant with millions more people dead while seveal warlords fighting for the throne. The concept of hero is to realize this and let it go even though it goes against your belief and duty.
-
Aug 27, 2004 5:08:01 PM CDT
FluffyUnbound: here is the reply and apologies for its length
by octaveaeon
No, i don
-
Aug 27, 2004 5:27:18 PM CDT
Two millennia of unification hasn't exactly helped the Chinese p
by excaliburffolkes
They've been unified under 2000+ years of emporers, khans, and party chairmen yet they're still in perpetual servitude to the will of the State. All the cultural relativism that's being thrown around this talkback is charming, but peace and security in exchange for being a slave is never a preferable option in any age. "Hero" is more a tragedy than anything else, since the main character could have accomplished something important, but was talked out of it.
-
"Doyle’s photography is beyond masterful here… It burns colors into memory, past pure visuals to the emotional level. Where you begin to long for the scents of Green… Yellow… Red…. Blue… I can not possibly express in words how strongly these palates affected me. "
Huh? I just ahve to say that I'm prepared to be underwhelmed judging by Harry's review. He always does this to good, not great, movies he has a thing for... -
Thanks a lot for the post, it was indeed helpful. I agree with what you write, except what you mention about Chinese history which i know next to nothing about and thus can't comment on. I certainly agree with what you say on the dichotomy between the individual and the collective, and the Pavlovian manner in which people assume they should either be in one camp or the other. There is plenty of examples in AICN forums of this type of behavior, and it's too bad because all it does is cement people's convictions that they have to defend as aggresively as possible their positions. It seems more like trench warfare than an adult and honest discussion. On a personal note, I always think of mankind as a whole, and try to find ways of making sense of our predicament, and hopefully a solution, but at the same time don't like engaging or participating in group activity, other than going out and having fun. I don't go to my university classes because I'm weary of being influenced by group-think or institutionalized ideologies (i took me a long time and a lot of effort to deprogram myself from the education i received at school, not a pleasant experience). I am not part of any religious movement, though I am a very spiritual person. I'm not a member of any club or organization because I get bored of the same people and the same rituals. I do not affiliate myself with any ideology or doctrine because then it makes it difficult to revise them if they fall short or are mistaken. I am not patriotic in any shape or form because i believe that nationalism is an anachronism, but if anybody attacks my country or any country in which i find myself without any justification whatsoever, then i will defend that community. I could go on but i think you get the picture. So in that sense i do understand what was being said in 'Hero'. My only fear in such cases is the ease with which others may appropriate such sentiments and ideals in order to fit their own program. So when i finished watching that movie, i put it into the context of contemporary China, not the China that figures in the movie, and thought to myself of what i would have thought of it had i been a chinese living in China watching that movie. I know that i can't be objective about it, specially since i know very little of what life is like over there, or what life is like as a chinese person in general, but knowing what i know from my own historical context, which is a purely greco-roman judeo-christian liberal-scientific perspective, i would have thought twice about that movie, and probably seen it as propagandistic. That probably has to do with the fact that the Chinese leadership doesn't figure high in my list of benevolent and enlightend rulers. But that's just me.
-
They're marketing this as an outright good vs evil, action film and they SHOW THE FUCKING ENDING IN EVERY TV SPOT! I expect many people are gonna be disappointed simply because this movie is being sold as something that it's not.
-
I think you shoud be cautious here BladeRunnerUnit, and not fall into the trap of historical determinism by thinking that only because something happened a particular way that, it necessarily happened that way. I think our imaginations are more powerful than that, though we shouldn't let them get carried away and deny the contextual limitations that were at play at the time. At the time of the first World War and particularly the second one, there was a lot of government effort necessary (propaganda of the obvious kind, which really impressed the Germans before WWII) before the public accepted the idea of sending their own kids on a war they knew little about, and which they considered had nothing to do with them. There is a lot of evidence adding weight to the idea that top U.S. officials, including the President, were aware of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor well in advance, but did nothing because without it they would not have been able to mobilize the american people into going to war. This coupled with the fact that it was the Americans who initially cut off oil shipments to Japan in the first place, which surely didn't happen without taking into consideration the consequences. But that's another story, and in this forum controversial too, but fits in with my conviction that there is NO war that has been fought for "noble" reasons, no matter how much our governments or movies tell us so.
-
Why should Miramax get any praise?
That's like rewarding a kid getting "F"s 40 straight times than freaking out when he gets a "D+".
Kinda opposite what's happening with USA basketball. -
...I must say, both on the nature of propaganda and China. Valid points have been raised on both sides. By nature I detest cultural, political and moral relativism because in this day and age it's mostly used as a disguise for political, moral and ethical lethargy. After all, why bother making difficult decisions about the nature of man and civilization when you can devise a blanket statement which makes you both look both magnanimous, incisive and wise? Taken to its natural extreme, moral relativism can be (and is) used to excuse the crimes of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Pinochet's Chile. Granted, there are vastly different interpretations of what it means to be a human being and what one's place is in the scheme of things - both in society and in the world at large - and cultural differences should always be respected. However, if there are certain aspects of one's own society which one is convinced could help other societies become better places, then one should feel free to champion those causes. This does not mean invading countries on a whim and restructuring society in the image of one's own. Although conversely, if the invaded country were culturally relativistic, it would understand and tolerate its own invasion and subjugation since there aren't any moral absolutes to rely upon as a frame of reference. It could very well be that China one day invents the perfect form of democracy, but what's to say that won't be the result of incorporating the ideals of other nations, much as American democracy has roots in ancient Greece and Rome? In short: cultural differences should be respected and appreciated, but we should never let those same differences discourage us from seeking a universal betterment of mankind's situation by opposing totalitarian regimes in all their forms - including China.
-
i see that one of your replies is at the top of the list (when is AICN going to get this problem fixed?!). I'm not suggesting that Hero is propaganda. For the record, I loved the movie and am recommending it to anyone willing to listen. All i was expressing, in agreement with what you wrote, is my conflicting view of the message being portrayed in the movie. I enjoyed it for what it is and what it tries to say, but that doesn't mean i agree with everything. This goes for many of my favorite movies, such as Fight Club, Hable Con Ella, or even Close Encounters of the Third Kind. The thing is, I'm very interested in systems of control, and see in movies a perfect medium in which to introduce ideologies that can be manipulated by anyone willing to do so. This doesn't mean that this is the case, though there is a lot of evidence in my opinion of movies that share particular ideologies that mirror doctrines that are manifested in the "real" world. I'm not suggesting that movies are being consciously manipulated by those making them or distributing them, but the possiblity certainly exists, so it would be naive to think otherwise. Lately i've been starting to see a lot of parallels between religious (these are more easy to spot since we are more aware of what they entail and how the are manifested), occultist or cult-like doctrines. Take all the people who have or have been involved, to varying degrees, in religious movements like The Church of Scientology. Or what about Landmark Education? I read somewhere that Chuck Palahniuk and the Wachowski Brothers were or are still involved in it. If that's the case, then I'd like to know because personally i like being aware of what I'm allowing into my mind, which may influence me, even if subconsciously. That's just the way i am. I don't like to feel i'm being manipulated, even by movies that i love and agree with. Concerning the Wachowski bros, i thought the Matrix trilogy was an unparalleled masterpiece and easily the most important movie since a long time because i thought that the ideas put into it were so cleverly thought out, and there is so much in these movies that you'll never run out of things you missed before (i am referring here mainly to the IDEAS, not the movies in themselves in the traditioaal sense, which i can see why people had such a hard time identifying with them). More than anything, i thought the Matrix trilogy came out at just the right time, since so much of it is relevant to what is going on right now. However, for me to truly understand the movies i think it is important to have atleast a basic understanding of those who made them and what they were trying to achieve. This is the same with all the books i read. If i read a book by Hobbes, i may come out repulsed by some things and enthusiastic about others, but i will not approach a proper understanding of it until i put it in the context in which it was written. This is basic for everything. SO, to make a long story short, I agree with you. I think. Well, not as far as John Wayne not making the same movie, since you're comparing two distinct and incommensurable contexts. But he would have made Black Hawk Down or other similar fare...
-
Aug 27, 2004 7:22:11 PM CDT
BladeRunnerUnit: on historical determinism and Pearl Harbour
by octaveaeon
As far as the first part is concerned, the reason why i don't agree is that history itself is an imperfect tool in presenting all the relevant information with which to make a proper assesment of what "actually" happened at some point in the past. It just happens to be the best tool available (empirically), but one should atleast keep in mind its limitations, particularly the fact that it depends on human investigation (which consciously or unconsciously is selective, even necessarily so if one wants it all to fit in a book) and human interpretation. And then we have to add the interpretation of the interpretation, and the communication of the interpreted interpretations which, in a process inherent in social evolution, will leave one or more paradigmatic or conventional interprations standing which are bandied about by most. That said, i do believe that things happen for a reason, but at the same time i adhere to a more varied view on the nature of reality, somewhere between general relativity, quantum physics, and superstring theory, which makes it difficult to describe but atleast allows for a much richer experience of the nature of life (sorry, now i'm getting mystical..). As far as Pearl Harbor is concerned, i think it best to leave that one on the side for the moment. I don't feel like going into my books for other evidence, though that's not to say that all my books are in disagreement with what you wrote. Some believe, and provide evidence (whether correct or not, i can't say at this moment), that U.S. officials were indeed aware of Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor specifically (something about not only diplomatic codes being deciphered, but also military, though i don't quite remember). Then some other books describe the official version, which are mainly the books I had to buy in school and university. One book i had an exam on today even manages to talk about the Vietnam War without even mentioning the false pretext behind the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, nor Daniel Ellsberg or the Pentagon Papers (I trust you don't disagree with this example...). Anyways, better leave this subject on the side.
-
Any flick that generates this much conversation qualifies as a must see! It is a beautiful film, and it obviously stays with you long after the film ends. How many recent films have birthed this many theories and opinions on this talkback? Not many. Go see Hero.
-
Aug 27, 2004 8:31:57 PM CDT
R.C.'s opinion; Compared to 90% of the films made today (whethe
by r.c. the "wise"
Get a life, please!!! We don't need a dissertation from each of you about your opinions on this film, genre or any other topic that is discussed on the website.
That being said, you both had some sound points. Just be sure to take my advice into consideration. -
your contribution has made this talkback! good to be able to open a talkback with intelligent comments from Doc P, Your Excellency, et al, instead of a solid block of Hulk Hogan jokes and "my dad is bigger than your dad" type insults... maybe there is hope for AICN yet. ****glad you finally saw INFERNAL AFFAIRS. a key film for me... it really proved to me that HK cinema is going thru its 70s in creative terms. will be watching HK cinema very closely from now on (and yes, i have IA 2 and 3 :)
-
I just got back from seeing Hero and I definitely have mixed feeling about this picture for sure. First of all, the trailers for this movie definitely gave a different expectation for what this movie would be. I did not dislike this movie, but I cannot say that I loved it. It was for sure visually stunning and the sword fight scenes were well choreographed. As far as the message goes, I am not going to say it was a wrong message because who am I to say that. The message for sure goes along with the Chinese philosophy of self sacrifice for the state, no matter how corrupt. I do not feel ripped off, but in the same sense, I didn't get the product I thought I would be. It's a good movie, but nowhere on the same level as Crouching Tiger. The biggest problem I have with the movie is how Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi was portrayed as a patriot for China in the postscript. While the film was trying to argue he was doing what was unfortunately necessary to unite China and its' people, it excuses the fact he was a tyrant and the uniting of China was nothing more than any other conqueror has done throughout history. This definitely could be see as a modern propaganda piece for the Chinese government...the nation is more important than the individuals who are oppressed by that Nation. In summary, Im glad I saw it during the matinee, but still upset I got the popcorn and drink.
-
as far as my memory serves me, the definitive book on the events surrounding pearl harbor (for academics at least) was written in the late 80s (i think the title was "AT DAWN WE SLEPT") and basically put the whole debate to an end. basically, it debunks the conspiracy theory by showing that although yes, all the information that japan was going to attack was available, there was so much information that it could simply not be sorted through in time. the same sort of investigation is going on now with the Bush/9/11, etc ****the bottom line is that it is one thing to accuse the powers that be of incompetence, but it going too far to claim treason, collusion, etc. ***THE MOST DEFINITIVE NOTE on the whole question is the fact that the US did not need to have its fleet destroyed to enter the war; an attack on the States with the americans prepared and fighting back the japanese, would have been sufficient cause to enter the war. WHY ALLOW SUCH a blow to be inflicted on your armed forces unnecessarily? this basic fact undermines the whole Pearl Harbor conspiracy thesis.... but it is a compelling topic nonetheless...thx -jack
-
...it was OK. Lots of PG13 wire-fu. It looked pretty and the sound mix was so-so.
-
JackBurtonLives: From what i can understand you're saying that there is a book written in the 80's that puts the matter to rest. Does that mean that the possibility of another book on the matter coming 20, 30, or 100 years in the future would by definition be wrong if it refutes the book you are referring to? If so, then I'd like to read it because I just don't get why these people i was referring to still continue to go on about pearl harbor. If they're full of shit, then I'd like to find that out for myself. Then I'll be able to judge which version makes the most sense, combined with convincing evidence. The 9/11 commission, on the other hand, is an obvious whitewash having had its objectivity neutered and its scope reduced to a minumum, not to mention any form of effectiveness hampered by constant obstructions put up by the White House. And the official version makes absolutely no sense, because it is predicated on the longest list of coincidences and mistakes that defy explanation. On this, there is ample evidence, all out there at one's disposal. The best list of events, in the form of a timeline, can be found at: http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/index.jsp. Mind you, I'm not talking about conspiracy theories, because there are a lot of those. I'm talking about making up one's own mind in light of the available evidence. We can disagree on theories and opinions. However, going back to pearl harbor, i disagree on the definitive note as well I'm afraid. On my previous post i mentioned the u.s. cutting off oil shipments to Japan to begin with, which is what turned the Japanese against the u.s. Or am i wrong on that as well? Like i said... not an expert... and too lazy to check on the internet.
-
Glad to see some good dialogue among my fellow talkbackers that (most of the time at least...there are still a few retarded trolls in here flinging poo at one another...you know who you are) does'nt resort to name calling. BTW, I plan on seeing Hero very soon and would rather see it sub-titled and NOT dubbed. Crouching tiger, Hidden dragon was MUCH more effective when it was subtitled and it actually made me sad at the end. BUT when I got it on VHS (this was a couple of years ago) and found out I got the DUBBED one...I was shocked to see the impact completely missing from the last 10 min. Seriously, dubbing is a waste of time....stick with sub-titles!
-
and let me say just this: a truly magnificant work of art. art, a term that is bandied about much too often that it has lost some of its meaning. this movie restores the power and passion of art. the inhuman scream of Snow, the calm acceptence of Nameless, the battle-tested wisdom of Sword...and beneath and above it all, the overarcing themes that are brought out beautifully without hitting you over the head. i don't care if it was a Tarantino movie, or that it smacks strongly of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (i couldn't tell where tarantino's fingerprints were, and it's better than CTHD), it's just a superb film that you should see. why can't americans make more movies like this? i don't want to start bashing our culture or the film industry, i just wish we could make movies like this. oh, and thank you Harry for providing this forum where we can get together and discuss this. i think you get the long end of the shaft more times than is fair (and to be sure, sometimes i'm not as sympathetic) but you've got courage to put yourself out there so kudos.
1 cross + 3 nails = 4given -
you're quite right: another book may come out. 'definitive' was too strong a word; definitive as far as a small group of academics feels, which doesn't mean much. it is a very interesting subject and i'm afraid that the truth may never be known. if you look though at some of the great battles of history, it is quite surprising (in hindsight) how certain events could not have been foreseen... in hindsight though, things are much clearer of course:)
-
What's wrong with claiming treason and collusion if one believes them to be true? The only way it would be wrong is if it in fact were, which can not be proven at this moment. Innocent until proven guilty? Certainly, as far as legal matters are concerned. But in the court of public and academic opinion, it is not always necessary to have a smoking gun to put two and two together, if one happens to believe that to be the case. If by going too far you're suggesting a limit to tolerance, then my question would be what should be the reprisal? Jail? A beating and your own private home movie? A fine? A phone tap? Lay off? Banning from a chat room? An insult or just a plain dismissal? Or finally, ignore the very notion being implied? I'm curious to separate the rational response from the knee-jerk reaction, and the reason for it. I'm not, however, suggesting that you'd do any of those. Just making sure there is no 'lost in translation'... heh I do think it's relevant in mind of the upcoming RNC convention and the level of security and urgency being created just because a lot of people are willing to make use of their first amendment rights. I doubt it's because of terrorism, because there is nothing more stupid that Bin Laden could do than bomb a bunch of protesters against the very man he is against, unless he wants to look bad so that he can get the U.S. to drop even more bombs and missiles killing even more innocent civilians and independence-seeking terrorists (just like they did against the British, though Americans know all about them too, no?), thereby getting more people to join "the resistance". The retaliation would probably take the form of even more innocent U.S. civilians on their own soil, therby warranting even more retaliation by the U.S. government, which in turn... you know what i mean. In the end, someone should win. Anyways, there is no need for all this recursive baloney, since the U.S. government is doing that all by its lonesome, by screwing up Iraq and getting the whole world (ok, the powers with the most to lose and the best means to do something about it) into a dangerous geostrategic bid to control what remains of the cheap oil our economies depend so much on. Like i've mentioned before, wait until the world realizes that the era of cheap oil is gone, and that global oil reserves have plateaud, or will very soon. Then the fireworks will certainly go off, specially if monkey boy is still behind the wheel. There, finished with disagreement. Hope that's the last of those... hehe
-
...is To End All Wars with Keifer Sutherland and Robert Carlyle. see this movie if you never see another.
-
Maybe in the future we'll have a better opinion on the matter, pearl harbor that is, and we might agree on what actually happened. Till then, like Quint or Moriarty says, i don't quite remember, i bid you adieu. I really need to get to sleep...
-
In response to your earlier comments, you're lying through your teeth.
-
Aug 28, 2004 1:32:42 AM CDT
I hope this isn't like most Asian films I've seen: full of spiri
by lezbo milk
I hate that metaphysical crap. I get the same vibe from Asian films that I get from the occasional movie with Native American hocus pocus. It's all so damn silly. Oh well, at least it looks cool.
-
Sounds too good to be true. Jet Li in a real movie?
-
The movie was beautiful and well made, so you don't have to agree with the message to like it.
But, it is also thought provoking. You guys have brought up one of the greatest ethical debates of 200 years, which is, do the ends justify the means?
There are two sides to that argument: Utilitarians and Kantians. Utilitarians say whatever provides the greatest happiness, or utility, to the most amount of ppl, is right. Kantians, those who agreed with philosopher Immanuel Kant, would say that it's never right to kill or use innocent ppl, even if you think it would save others. In their opinion, it is wrong of the Emperor to attack other countries and to kill Jet Li, even if he has a greater good in mind.
You can also argue with the movie on a Utilitarian basis: did unifying China really save lives? Has the Chinese state really saved lives? Probably not. Mao Zedong and the Communist Party are probably the biggest murderers of all time, 40+ millions killed since 1949. What was their excuse? "The ends justify the means. We're doing it for China." -
Just saw the film and it's now read as "Our Land". Not as poetic as all under heaven, but better than saying "country".
-
morGettePrime had a bit of a problem with this, at first, but got into the movie so much she didn't notice. A bit slow in parts but I thoroughly enjoyed it and I'm not even a big fan of this genre. What a visual treat! And thanks to poster freeview for distilling it all quite nicely. Better said in a few words than a thousand.
-
And equally brilliant movie, but unfortunately not known to the general audience. If you love Hero, you'll love Emperor and the Assasin also (although well shot, it doesn't have Chris Doyle's terrific images). Chris Doyle fucking rules! I have never seen a movie shot by him (Psycho remake excluded) that didn't look stunning.
-
Sorry. I would rather just go back and watch some Bruce Lee rather than this wire-fu stuff. It's not interesting to me in the least to see people flying around OBVIOUSLY on wires. Give me ground-based kung-fu flicks, instead. No superhuman powers. No "magic" or gods. -Unless it's Big Trouble in Little China, which is grounded by the American characters and kept from being ridiculous, and besides, BTiLC didn't take itself so damned seriously. These wire-fu flicks are so stoic it's annoying. Dude- You're FLYING AROUND ON A WIRE! How can I take you seriously?
-
i thought it was decent. the directing and cinematography was beautiful of course. but it was a little... eh.
-
I guess you don't like Lord of the Rings, either? Or Star Wars? They have lots of "magic" and fantasy elements in them. Or what about Die Hard? No person can get whacked in the face as much as John McClain and come out of it all with hardly a scratch. Or Raiders of the Lost Ark? That movie has spirits at the end, and an almost supernatural Hero, who again, goes through Hell without even so much as a nick on that pretty face. Or what about Shakespeare? His stories are often full of ghosts and other such paranormal occurances. Ghostbusters? The Good the Bad and the Ugly(Pistols in the old West were not very accurate at all - what they do with them in those Westerns is technically impossible.) The Exorcist? The Sixth Sense? The Others? Dragonslayer?
Damn - What CAN you watch?
The point is that the "flying" in wuxia movies from China is absolutely no different than the fantastical elements that are trotted out in American movies all the time - but you probably don't get all in a twit when Gandalf slams his staff down and light comes out of it, do you? Because that's a CONVENTION of our storytelling here.
"Flying" Heroes is a CONVENTION of storytelling in China, too - and at least it's actually based on something real, or an extension of something real, unlike the "magic" in the Lord of the Rings. That is, the use of Chi in martial arts for many purposes - in this case, legends say some old masters were so powerful using lost techniques to cultivate Chi that they could "lighten" themselves and leap great distances, walk on tree-tops, etc.
How is this any different from Gandalf shooting fireballs out of his staff again?
If you don't like ANY fantasy movies, then fine. But don't hold Asian fantasy to some higher standard than you do American fantasy movies because you simply aren't familiar with the conventions. Just accept it like you do American fantasy and get over it. Otherwise you're just being shallow and culturally stupid.
Fantasy is fantasy anywhere. But complaining about one brand of it because you haven't grown up with the convention, while giving other fantasy such as Lord of the Rings a complete pass, is just ignorant.
-
not to speak for him, but i think his main gripe with wire-fu is the obviousness that they're hanging from wires.
the effect of someone hanging on a wire is just that... someone hanging on a wire. there's nothing special about it as a special effect, and it completely takes one out of the scene to see someone bouncing up and down from a cord.
i adore the fantasy element. but they would be better served to develop a 'flying' effect that looked less like an elementary school production of peter pan. -
China wasn't one country back when these warlords started ruthlessly expanding. They weren't trying to unify a country torn into pieces by civil war, they were trying to enlarge their own domains by force. A suitable analogy would be if modern day China decided that not only Taiwan, but also Vietnam, Cambodia, Japan, Mongolia, etc, were all part of its destined empire and invaded them one after another. Hero is a piece of visually impressive, vile propaganda, much like Leni Riefenstahl's films for the Third Reich, or Birth of A Nation.
-
As someone already mentioned:
Watch "The Emperor of the Assassin" starring Gong Li. It's a fantastic historic drama although i heard from many people that the this film is not always historically correct.
Hero: Please, help me: I need to know the full length of Hero because it seems that there are millions of different versions/cuts around the world?! What about the HK or Chinese DVD including Director's Cut? I mean it's called Director's Cut right, so i hope this is the real thing?
-
Go to this site. It's perfect for all your DVD comparison needs: www.dvdcompare.net
-
Yeah, sure Hero had beautiful visuals. But it just seems laughable these Asian kung fu movies where the characters can float and do these dance like HIGHLY CHOREOGRAPHED fight scenes. I can't enjoy these fight scenes. Why? Cos they are too staged, TOO CHOREOGRAPHED! The actors are just going through the motions! Yeah, I know, every movie fight is like that -- but it is not supposed to LOOK like that. People just laugh and titter when these people float in the air on strings -- why exactly can they do that in Crouching Tiger and this movie? Always wondered about that. I'd rather see Kill Bill again. This movie had pretty pictures -- but was a drag in many scenes.
-
"Dude- You're FLYING AROUND ON A WIRE! How can I take you seriously?"
Zero Corpse you hit it right on the head! People flying around on wires IS LAME!
Unless the movie establishes that the characters have the power of telekinesis, etc. Or they are in an environment where gravity doesn't matter like The Matrix -- but this cheesy OBVIOUS wire work is SO lame -- it was pretty lame in Crouching Tiger too. If you are gonna fly around on wires it shouldn't look to obvious. Even the obvious wire shots in Kill Bill I didn't care for and I LOVED that movie. -
I'll make this simple - if you liked Crouching Asians Hidden Wires then don't bother reading anything else, go see this right away.
But here -
Aug 29, 2004 4:11:20 PM CDT
I heard the original sucked because it was basically rewriting C
by spectrebeeyatch
I was not being serious but some of you guys are saying over the top things. First of all about Independence Day, why do you think it was titled that? It had nothing to do about any Revolutianary war, it was about humans coming together and coming to the conclusion that we shouldn't be fighting each other because we together can do better things, like killing aliens in giant frisbee ships. Also this movie looks like a lot of other Chinese films so I don't see why so many people are creaming their pants. I'll see it though for the fights and also Jet Li's best film is Lethal Weapon 4 where he kicks that chick in the face when she opens the door, that rocked
-
an estimated 17.8 million, making it the biggest opening for a film late august
oh yeah, the movie is really frickin' good. -
I keep waiting for a "bad-ass" George Washington movie, where on his own initiative and with no legal authority he cliff-dives his way across the Appalachian frontier like a colonial Indiana Jones, cutting the throats of Frenchmen and massacring Indians, and escaping from entire French armies doing that "inept pursuit" thing that Spielberg and Lucas villains always do. I want a movie about the Washington Parisian newspapers in 1763 called "the greatest monster in the world today". I want a final scene where he asks for a British Army commission and gets turned down, and says, "You people just HAD to fuck with me, didn't you? Time to kick some Tory ass!" and then starts banging heads together like melons. THAT'S the Washington movie we need to see. Maybe Jet Li can star.
-
Support Miramax for finally getting it right?!?! How did they get this right? They co produced the movie (so it's not like they had to negotiate rights)then sat on it for almost two years. I got sick of waiting and got an import DVD of it a fucking year ago. As good as this flick is, it ain't no Star Wars or Indiana Jones, so there's no way you're getting my ass to pay the rediculous ticket price to go see something I've got on DVD.
-
sounds good, bladerunnerunit. right up your alley, since i think such a project would embrace a number of your diverse interests. but wouldn't a modern one be more interesting? apparently some of the jesus boys have taken up arms in central america and are going against the pope's will.... 'liberation theology'? when will we see a movie like that? i guess the answer is .... never. too politically and religiously charged as an issue...
-
i'm typing the script now ! we cast a who's who list of action heroes as the founding fathers: Jet Li, Stephen Seagal, VanDamned, Arnie, etc. Box office gold ! i wonder what michael dudikoff is doing these days! i can see him as an ass-kicking paul revere...
-
I'm glad this movie found box office success. Regardless, it is a superb movie and I'm just happy that Americans are finally given the chance to see it on the broadscale. Excellent. I can't wait to see it again. With the US Mens' team losing to Argentina in hoops on Friday, I really needed this movie later that night to calm my nerves. ;)
-
Aug 30, 2004 12:40:23 AM CDT
Holy crap, the wire-fu element makes you HATE this film???
by the killer-goat
Jeezus, guys... The minute you see anything like wire-fu gone apeshit in the trailer, best NOT to see the film, especially if you hated that stuff in CTHD. Speaking as someone who got used to the overdramatic but very balletic sword-fighting, I can easily say that the movie would have been just as good with or without it and I imagine Hero will be the same thing. So you can't suspend your disbelief over supernatural swordfighting enough to appreciate a good story when it's in front of you? So you aced your final exam on "The Laws of Mystical Relativity" that proves the physics in this film are "unrealistic"? Damn, I could understand getting upset about some of the flakiness in a superhero film like Spiderman-- that takes place in modern New York-- but holy narrow-mindedness, Bat-Sac! Get over yourselves!
-
... but I agree with you, that the score was awesome. It is rare these days to step out of a theater with a musical theme stuck in your head. Also, did anyone else notice that if you took the Taiko drums out of the music, that it would have sounded alot like Ennio Morricone's spaghetti westerns? Very cool!
-
Aug 30, 2004 8:32:04 AM CDT
Fucking great movie. THIS is the stuff to get excited about, it
by minderbinder
-
It was a beautiful film to look at but not engaging in any way. For a movie where many of the characters flit around on wires like a stage production of Peter Pan it takes itself way too seriously. I really lost it with the water duel. They spend more time flying than fighting and then Broken Sword dotes on his lovers corpse while Nameless can be seen thrashing around like an epileptic in mid seizure behind him. WTF?
-
I am so glad to read a review from Harry that doesn't go into excruciating detail about his personal life and other weird things. And I loved this movie! I didn't find it at all predictable, and the ending is thought-provoking. I found Flying Snow to be the best character. Beautiful, as noted, but also touching. I was involved from beginning to end, never bored, never felt my intelligence insulted. I would actually give this flick a "10." Hwever, my friend (both of us loved CTHD) only gave it a "6" because he felt the multiple tellings of the same story thing was too confusing. I had some misgivings about the end, but that just made the whole thing better--more provocative. The only criticism I would have is that the whole movie is dead serious, and a lot of people will miss the comic reliefe.
-
Good TB! There are various things I would like to ramble about, but I'll stick to propaganda for now. There has been some suggestion that propaganda is by definition insincere. The definitive characteristic of propaganda is surely not the relationship between the beliefs of its creators and the beliefs it is intended to instill in the viewer, but the fact that it is intended to instill beliefs of any sort. In so far as any work is intended to win its audience over to a particular point of view it can be regarded as propaganda for that attitude. I see no qualitative distinction that can be drawn between propaganda and "putting your view across": whenever a person expounds their opinion they do so in the hope of bringing others round to a particular way of thinking - the objective of propaganda, but not of communication with aims other than conveying an opinion, such as the aim to entertain. The selection and structuring of language, assertions, interpretations, corroborations and so forth by a person expounding an opinions is dictated by this objective - a pattern characteristic of propaganda, but not of communication with other aims. You can distinguish between sincere and insincere, honest and dishonest, but not between persuasion and propaganda. To take the example of The Green Berets, if I recollect correctly, Wayne made it because he disapproved of the way in which the war was being presented to the American people and wished to propagate an alternative view of events in Vietnam and their significance. The overriding purpose of the film was to get that message across, which would place it squarely in the category of propaganda, regardless of other factors. **** It was suggested by Your Excellency (now there's a sly ID) that propaganda is "an inherently top-down process, set-up by those already in a position of power". Since when, exactly? Not only has propaganda always been used by those seeking to change or destroy existing power-structures, it is almost invariably a method far more important and central to their activities than to those of existing authorities. Those who hold the reins of power have less need to convince, those whose position is supported by inertia have less need to agitate. Can you imagine a protest movement or a revolution not suffused with propaganda?
-
Like many of you Asian cinema fans, I've had a copy of this film on DVD for at least a year and I think it's fantastic. But that's not the point. The simple fact is: a movie with subtitles is currently #1 at the US box office. Think about that. Isn't "Hero" a truimph for that fact alone? Perhaps American audiences aren't as unintelligent as some would like to think.
-
Personally I don't have any strong objection to the "flying people" business, but I think Dagan is being a little unfair to those who do. The "fantastical" elements of the stories mentioned are either set in the context of another world, where other norms apply, or in a "real" world in which they are commented upon, treated as strange and remarkable, with characters reacting to them much as one might expect real people similar to them to react. When people in Shakespeare's plays see a ghost, their response tends to be along the lines of "Fuck me, that's a pant-filler and no mistake! Is it a ghost? A demon? Or am I hallucinating?". They don't say thinks like "Evening Banquo. Lovely weather we're having." Stories like CTHD and Hero are set in the "real world", but nobody so much as bats an eyelid at the fantastical components. The intrusion of the fantastical is not an element of the story itself but is imposed on it from outside by convention. The nature of the suspension of disbelief demanded is therefore of a rather different sort. The audience are separated from the characters not only by the circumstances of the life in which the author has placed them but also by an artificiality in which the characters collude with the author. A sense of alienation from the characters and their story resulting from this need not be the product of stupidity or narrow-mindedness as some have suggested. Nor can it be written off as purely the product of different cultural antecedents. The real parallel for this sort of convention lies not in fantasy but in the genre known as magic realism. That's a Western genre, but plenty of people in the West object to it in much the same way that others object to the conventions of wuxia.
-
I don't object so much to the fantasy element of wire-fu, but to me it takes away from the truly awesome acrobatics these people actually perform. You can stick Keanu on wires and make him do cool flips. I'd rather see the real thing.
-
Flying is just an artistic interpretation of a form of Kung Fu called Heng Gung, an ability to make oneself lighter to the point where one can make great leap and land softly. It is commonly assumed (at least by wuxia fans and all characters in any wuxia story) that if one knows Kung Fu, one also knows Heng Gung. The introduction or explanation is redundant and unnecessary. A similar assumption exists when we see Clint Eastwood with a Magnum that he knows how to use it and is very good with it. I myself prefer seeing people making big jumps than flying when it comes to Heng Gung, but it's really up to the director's interpretation and style. To say that this is unrealistic within the context of the story is ignorant. Heng Gung is always a part of wuxia story.
-
I was expected to love this movie. I've had the VCD of it for quite some time, but have been waiting to see it in the theatres. Frankly, it was disappointing. Yes, the cinematography was beautiful, the fighthing was amazing and the story was clever, but it just didn't really evoke much emotion for me. The characters felt empty - we never got to know them. Even the love story (which could've been very powerful) was muted and tragically downplayed - though Maggie Chueng and Tony Leong were perfectly case for the roles. The ending - well, it kinda left me a little uneasy. I know the message is very Chinese, but I just didn't buy it. And come on, talk about revisionist history! Don't get me wrong, I still liked it. But it ain't Crouching Tiger.
-
First you need to realise that this is a wu xia film based on a legend based on true events. Wu xia novels and films are known to exagerate things to a fantasy and make the setting more romantic. Even the light technique(or trick) that somone else mentioned used in kung fu is over exxgerated. Personally i thought the bouncing on water part was abit silly and it would take a miracle from God to do that and fight entire armies by yourself.
Second as a student of chinese martial arts i have to inform you that "ballet" sword fighiting method is really used. Then again people wont really apreciate it fully unless you have knowledge on how chinese sword fighting goes. Different styles use different methods and mostwestern audiences are used to western european methods so it's understandable that it may look funny or in applicable. Recently a friend of mines has started teaching me on how to use the sword (jien) theory and it is quite useful in combat. My sword skills aren't that good but my friend is very well capable with it and he also has a strong fencing background. Beleive it or not my friend told me that it is very similar to fencing except that you dance around more.
Many sword forms in china are based in dances and others are not. Howeever it is evident that the mothods used in this fil are. There are basicaly different types of swords but the one's they used in the film for personal battle were small and light and you can't really block something with those or it will break. That type of sword is only used for quick parrying,thrusting,stabbing/piercing and cutting unlike the bigger swords that are used more conan the barbarrian type of fighting with large swinging blows to break and cut down the defenses. The end result is that you have to be quick on your feet and do a lot of dodging and striking in order to avoid being stabbed in places like your leg or having your wrist sliced (chinese sword stylist love going for vital points like the wrist and spear fighters can change darting strikes in a second). The wires irritated me also since i prefer less flmaboyant fighting but when they were groundeed it was really good. The part were the emperor and broken sword were fighting was excellent when they weren't gliding all over the place. The sword strikes were centered and precise. The turning of the waist when the swords were used to stab showed a lot of power. Foot work was quick and i noticed it was well balanced. Recently i've been having trouble with moving about with my footwork since i tend to drag my feet and it makes me stumble and slow. The parrying was quick and filled with aweswome counters. It seem's it was more of a martial arts flick than a film.
Brodester--
Well you may hate kung fu bacause you may not understand it and i don't mean being a fan but a martial artist which in understandable. For me i only watch kung fu movies ofr fighting and rarely for story. lol you would hate the 70's flics.30 minutes of acting hour thirty of fighting. Most kung fu flics these days don't have enough fighting for me lol -
Is it as beautiful as people say. Yep. It's a nice looking movie. That being said, I didn't like the movie. One a 1-5 scale I'd rate it maybe a 2, on the sole strenghts of it visuals. There are so many problems with this movie for me...where to start? First off, I have to admit I'm getting a bit tired of Wire-fu. I'd love to see a good gritty martial arts film where everyone stays on the ground, and one person doesn't take on an army (two people defeat an army of 3,000 in this movie by the way...which is stretching my suspension of disbelief to the max, even on a film I know to be fancifal). Second, the movie was predictable. As soon as they made a point of moving closer to the king with each award to "the nameless one", I knew exactly what was going to happen at the end. Third: the storyline was very hap-hazzardly put together, and had a major continuity error. The fight between the second assasins servant, Moon, and his girlfriend assasin (forgive me for not knowing the character name but I just didn't care enough to notice). Jet-Li described this fight in great detail to the King, but Jet-Li wasn't even there in the sceen to witness it. Thats a major mistake in storytelling. The flashbacks were being described to the King from Jet-Li's characters viewpoint...but he wasn't there durring that confrontation and he killed her supposedly in a different meeting just after that, so how the hell did he know what happened? Anyways, I just had to mention that, since I found it totally stupid that his character was telling the king of events that happened when he wasn't even present. Sloppy. Fourth: the character developement sucked. We know Jet-Li was this ass kicking swordsman, but we didn't get to see how this came about, instead we hear a little tidbit about his parents getting killed bla bla bla. As a matter of fact, none of these characters back stories are rooted in anything other than short little blurbs of dialog. Very weak. And the king. We were told his rule was a bloody one. We are told this, but never shown the oppression of his rule...the consequenses of his rule, the cost to the people. So for me there exists no real root for the motivations of the main characters, nor any real sense of the brutality or ruthlessness of the king. Fifth: the visuals though quite impressive also bothered me. Reason being, the locations were so diverse I had no sense of them in the context of place. Meaning, the characters could be on a desolate flat plain, and with nothing around them for miles and miles...and they walk a bit and they are in a beautiful oak grove full of falling orange leave. Or they walk a little bit more and they are in a desert canyon. Or a walk a bit more and they are in barren jagged rocky outcroppings. Or walk a bit more and they are at a pristine mountain lake. Or walk a bit more and they are ....well you get the idea. Every sceen of the movie, the geography changed so goddam much yet they never seemed to have to do any traveling to get there. It would be like showing a western movie for instance. In one sceen they are in the mountains, the next sceen, they are in the everglades, the next sceen they are on the Salt Flats, the next sceen they are at a glacier lake in Alaska, the next sceen they are in Death Valley, wouldn't that throw you for a bit of a loop??? Maybe I'm just really ignorant of the geography of China and all these locals are within easy walking distance. Or perhaps the film did a crappy job of conveying the fact to me that the characters spent shitloads of time traveling? Ok, I guess I'm done ranting about this film. I was just expecting something much more. Having enjoyed CTHD I thought this one was a no brainer.
-
That you're trying to squeeze "Hero" into a set of Western/Hollywood action/epic-pic constraints? (And frankly so are a lot of other posters on this TB.) "Hero" is not constructed like a western (geography not cowboys and indians genius) action flick, why would you expect it to employ the same story telling style, conventions, or character development techniques? "Hero" is more like a beautifully rendered photoplay of an epic Chinese poem in the tradition of "Wuxia" films than it is like "The Magnificent 7" or the Idiana Jones films, or other Western Epic/Action Film archtypes: You've misinterpreted the metaphore. It's the stylized structure of a Chinese fairy-tale form, that gives "Hero" a large measure of its beauty IMHO.
-
Sep 08, 2004 3:07:56 PM CDT
Pontsing Barset, I didn't miss the movies point, but you missed
by lezbo milk
I agree with you. The film looks marvelous. You are absolutely right. But beauty that's only skin deep doesn't make a good movie. As far as trying to place western ideas
onto the movie...well I do live in the USA so maybe that's true, but I believe that good character developement, plot and continuity are fairly basic and universal concepts. Also I didn't compare the movie directly to old cowboy and indians western films...sorry probably a bad example. I would have a hard time with any movie of any genra that jumped locations like that movie did, with no explaination of when, how, where, or why. This movie failed on many
counts and it's sole merit is it's visuals. Of course, movies are forms of artistic expression, and anyone can like any film based on no other reason than it just brings them pleasure. Obviously reading the critics reviews (B's on average going by the yahoo listings of major critics) the visual splendor of this film carried it into the pleasure category for many. I won't deny that I also enjoyed the look of the film, but I was so dissapointed and let down by the other aspects of the film, my overall experience was not positive.
-
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=758
-
i just wasted 2 frickin hours of my life on this crap!!!booooorring!!i kept laughing thru most of this cinematic pretentious tripe..and the water battle....ho ho-dip dip mah sword!flinging water...oh no! a drop hit her face!she can't have water on her face-she's french!and to the idiot who said the ending was predictable-columbo has more suspense.talk about dragging a story out.if i wanted to see a kurosawa movie,i'll see it,m'kay!?fuck yer couch,bitches!this movie was BAD BAD BAD.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts