| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] |
| Index | 25 reviews in total |
32 out of 38 people found the following review useful:
Director/producer should have read book, 28 January 2002
Author:
connorblake from Canada
Am I the only one out here who read 'Pavilion of Women'? This film took a great book and what would have been a fantastic female role and turned them both into porridge. In the book, the relationship between Brother Andre and Madame Wu was that of a wise teacher and a brilliant pupil until, literally, the day he died: it wasn't until that day that she realized that she loved him. Pavilion of Women is not a 'romance': it is the awakening of a woman to her own humanity, and, through the transforming power of love, to the humanity of others, whom she has previously regarded only as problems to be solved or duties to be performed. To turn it into a 'romance' is an insult to the author, Pearl Buck, who, for the record, did not write Harlequin-level trash, and the audience, who would have been quite capable of understanding the story as it was originally written. Whoever's responsible for foisting this 'dumbed-down' mess on the universe should be ashamed of themselves.
17 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Missionary Drama, 14 December 2002
![]()
Author:
dromasca from Herzlya, Israel
Director Ho Yim's movie is based on a novel of Pearl Buck. 60-70 years ago,
this writer's books were cross-cultural best sellers, bringing to the US and
Western audiences the image of the Far East which soon will have become part
of the daily lives, when WWII broke. The film story line has all the
elements of the time - melodrama, clash between the Western and Chinese
traditions, and a missionary message which is probably the most problematic
part of the movie.
However, this is a good movie. Certainly, we have seen much better and
original ones, coming directly from China without the intervention of the
Hollywood producers. Having the film spoken in English may have won some US
audiences, but certainly lowers the credibility. However, the filming is
exquisite, the historical background is very well re-created, and the acting
is fabulous. Is this really Luo Yam's first or second role? This is what
IMDB's information says, I simply cannot believe it. She is giving an Oscar
level performance, and I am certainly flattering some of the ladies who won
feminine role Oscars lately.
Worth seeing. 8/10 on my personal scale.
12 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
A touching love story, 19 February 2003
![]()
Author:
cotu from Bistrita, Romania
Somehow I always feel that Willem Dafoe and the films he starrs in are
drastically underrated. It is also the case for this exceptional movie set
in pre-comunist China. A simple, touching story about tradition and the
constrains that it sometimes brings.
The plot outline is simple. When Ailin turns 40, she decides it is time to
retire from her husband's bed, the rich Mr. Wu. In order to do so, she finds
a second wife, a woman that would take her place and pleasure the
oral-sex-obsessed Mr. Wu. But the young new wife has trouble adapting to her
role and the old pervert is not satisfied with her. Meanwhile, Ailin
befriends her son's teacher, an American priest named Andre (Willem Dafoe).
From here on, the story develops in various directions but I don't want to
spoil it for you.
Very good acting and directing on a classical subject.
8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Very enjoyable, very beautiful to see., 18 March 2002
![]()
Author:
Stephen Roat from Creemore Ont. Canada
Very enjoyable. Perhaps flawed but very beautiful. The acting quality from character to character was uneven but most of the principals were outstanding. The sets and cinematography were very pleasing to the eye. The story was more like we would see a few years ago when offbeat tales were not mostly told to shock but to enlighten. I hope Yan Luo will have the opportunity to present another story and I hope we will see her in more pictures soon.
16 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
Silly and obvious, 2 September 2002
![]()
Author:
rosscinema (rosscinema@comcast.net) from Oceanside, Ca.
I could not believe how lousy this film was and I tried to think why. Well its co-made by China and a United States film studio and I think thats where the trouble lies. Its americanized. No original angle or aspect into the chinese people. All the characters are one dimensional and act on the most basic of emotions. Only actress Luo Yan has a few decent moments but the rest is all hokey nonsense. It plays out like a mediocre mini-series and I kept expecting one of two things to happen. Either Richard Chamberlain was going to stumble in OR the characters were going to burst into song and sing "Getting to Know You". The last half hour is so overly dramatic that it puts daytime soaps to shame. Bad filmmaking!
6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Hollywoodish love story -- light years from Pearl Buck's book, 6 June 2008
![]()
Author:
Carolyn Bloomer (cbloomer@Ringling.EDU) from U.S.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Pavilion of Women was billed by People's Daily, China's official
newspaper, as the "first Chinese-made Hollywood film", and indeed was
jointly produced with Universal Pictures, and shot in both English and
Chinese.
If you never read the book, and come to this movie cold, and accept it
as a Hollywood-style romantic epic melodrama set in 1930s China, then
you probably won't be disappointed especially if you know nothing
about Chinese society at the time. The film has high production values
and compelling narrative elements in terms of western values that
heroicize transgression: the irresistible romantic attraction between a
Chinese wife and Western priest transgresses both social and religious
propriety; the attraction between Chinese son and his father's
concubine transgresses generational lines.
The problem is that the film is a contemporary love story masquerading
as an historical drama that seeks to accrue legitimacy by referencing
Pearl Buck's novel of the same name. The entire plot, the setting, the
characters, their motivations, and their interrelationships are all
utterly at odds with Buck's novel. The filmmakers took Buck's
thoughtful story of a women's personal spiritual and philosophical
odyssey in the context of traditional family relationships, and
transformed it into a fairly ordinary story of physical and material
lust to which is lent false importance through the crutch of
sensational scenes of fire and war, and the pathos of orphaned
children. Buck must be turning over in her grave.
The movie is set in Suzhou (rather than in an area remote from the
war); it has omitted characters (two of the four brothers, one of their
wives, and Fengmo's wife), changed the personality of every major
character (Mr. Wu, Madame Wu, Andre); and created events that never
occurred in the book (the orphanage fire, the Japanese invasions),
manufactured encounters that would have been impossible in Chinese
society of the time (e.g. conversations and meetings between Madame Wu
and Andre, between Fengmo and Qiuming), and falsified the very social
structure and gender relations that the novel sought to critique and
explore.
The mutilations are legion, and surface right away, in the first
moments of the film even before the credits. 1) In the movie bringing
in a concubine is presented as the mother-in-law's idea whereas in the
book it was Madame Wu's idea for freeing herself from childbearing
(which makes Mr. Wu's fixation on oral-sex in the movie pure
lasciviousness). 2) In the book, Madame Kang's birth difficulty occurs
many months after Madame Wu's birthday and follows a series of
conversations between the women about age and births. 3) In the book
the priest Andre plays absolutely no part in Madame Kang's birth
crisis; instead Madame Wu commandeers Mr. Kang to assist in the birth
as a way of demonstrating to him the consequences of his sexual
appetite so that he will leave her friend alone. Madame Wu emerges the
hero, but the movie makes the white male the hero (surprise!). 4) The
movie presents Mr. Wu as a domineering husband, whereas in the novel he
is actually quite compliant and loving and resistant to the idea of a
concubine. 5) In the book the concubine's arrival in the Wu household
is discreetly maneuvered not proclaimed with a wedding, and
absolutely not publicly revealed as a face-losing surprise to Mr. Wu.
6) The necklace in the movie is complete fabrication. The only thing
Qiuming (correct transliteration for "autumn brightness") brings with
her to the Wu household is the embroidered jacket in which she was
swaddled as a foundling -- in the novel this later leads to a reuniting
of Qiuming and her daughter (where is the daughter in the movie?) with
her birth mother (the movie just sends her off all alone on a boat with
some silver coins). 7) The novel's Andre was born in Italy, not the
U.S., had a full beard, and was hired to teach foreign languages to
Fengmo. It would have been prohibited for Qiuming to participate; even
Madame Wu herself had to eavesdrop from another room. Because of the
domestic and social controls on interaction between the sexes, the
conversations and encounters in the movie could never have taken place.
8) The orphans in the book are all girls (basically only daughters are
abandoned). And 9) in the book no one was directly involved with the
army, the Communist Party, or the Sino-Japanese War.
There are many, many more discrepancies, and I could go on and on about
them. But suffice it to say that this movie should not have been given
the name of the novel; and indeed, the title makes no sense in the
context of the film. The movie should have been given a different name
so that it could stand on its own merits instead of cheapening Buck's
literary work and inviting the kind of harsh criticism I have felt
compelled to give here.
7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
A Wonderful Epic Romance of Forbidden Loves in Traditional China, 4 August 2003
![]()
Author:
Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
In 1938, Ailian (Yan Luo) is the forty years old wife of a wealthy man,
Mr. Wu (SheK Sau), who belongs to the traditional Wu Family in China.
In order to get rid off her sexual obligations with her husband, Ailian
gives Chiuming (YI Ding), a very young concubine to him. Andre (William
Dafoe) is an American priest and doctor who takes care of an orphanage
and becomes the tutor of her eighteen years old son Fengmo Wu (John
Cho). Father Andre starts giving classes to Fengmo, Ailian and
Chiuming. Then, two forbidden loves will rise: between the priest and
the first wife, and between the son and the concubine, having the
invasion of China by the Japanese in a big picture.
Summarizing this wonderful epic romance is not fair: it seems that this
movie would be a soap opera. But it is not. This Chinese-American
production is indeed a romantic drama, dealing with forbidden loves in
an old and traditional China and involving different cultures. The
screenplay, photography and soundtrack are very beautiful. The cast and
direction are sharp. A worthwhile movie that deserves to be watched
more than once. My vote is nine.
Title (Brazil): "Pavilhão de Mulheres" ("Pavilion of Women")
5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Culturally revealing but shy of high marks, 8 February 2002
![]()
Author:
davidscruggs from Atlanta, GA
The story and set behind Pavilion of Women were grist for a powerful
movie.
It's about an American priest (Willem Dafoe) running an orphanage in Asia
who becomes entangled with a proud Chinese family's tugs of war over love
and duty. While Pavilion is engaging enough to keep you awake, it didn't
project any of the majesty of greater love-versus-duty romances that come
to
mind. Its characters cried, but not amid enough conveyed tragedy for its
viewers to join in sympathy. Dafoe seemed to absorb his role, but not
wholely, for soft-spoken and even-keeled as Dafoe can be, the priest in
this
movie would have been better portrayed by someone as unknown in the U.S.
as
the movie's Chinese cast members, whose anonymity aided their credibility
and certainly carried the show. There are several wonderfully intense
scenes
that might even take you back to a love-struck moment in your past. The
cinematography gave me pans of the city and garden life now and then, but
it
left me wishing it had lingered on Asia's beauty and austerity long enough
to arouse a connection in me with these people living in 1930s China.
I wouldn't say give it a swerve, because the performances of the local
cast
was often great. But neither would I recommend making it a late-night
movie,
if you want to see it before nodding off.
7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
- a fine example of cross-cultural co-production, 14 September 2002
![]()
Author:
gt-14 from Canberra, Australia
Anyone who liked Zhang Yimou's "Raise The Red Lantern" is a prospect for "Pavilion Of Women". Whereas "Raise The Red Lantern" explores the breaking of merely Chinese cultural taboos, "Pavilion Of Women" centres on a romance between leading characters who flout both Chinese and Western mores. This is a cross-cultural romantic story by the prolific American writer on China, Pearl S. Buck, set in the late 1930s. It has first class cross-cultural direction and acting, and was filmed on location in elegant settings of old Suzhou. It is a fine example of what the Chinese film industry can achieve in co-production.
4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Totally enjoyed this movie and was left wanting more, 13 August 2006
![]()
Author:
S O'Dell (oranchapps) from United States
I just watched this movie for the first time, August 2006, and was left
wanting more. I found Willem Defoe charming and real. I will watch it
again and again. I am glad it was "Americanized". I think showing the
true characters of the far east would have made it boring and too
callous in some situations. I prefer an idealized version for a
"Romantic MOVIE", I'm tired of all the Realism in real life and this is
a wonderful escape with just enough reality to snap you back. I can get
all the reality I want with the news. The scenery was spectacular. The
way of life for women showed to some degree how men treat women China.
Made me feel that if I were a man, that is where I would want to be
living. To be pampered all the time and not have to answer to anyone
except mother. I was however, surprised how much respect was shown the
the mother. Guess the father was dead? Definitely see this movie if you
can appreciate a romantic movie. Excellent chick flick.
Thank you for reading my review. A romantic at heart.
| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] |
| Plot summary | Ratings | External reviews |
| Plot keywords | Main details | Your user reviews |
| Your vote history |