Change Your Image
xiaoguan
Reviews
On the Water (2010)
the cycle of life
'On the water' is truly a story everybody can relate with. Though short (merely 8'20''), simple (almost minimalistic), it manages to build up a world in which every grand topic of human life is addressed: birth, family, inequality, struggle, love, competition, aging, sickness, and by the end, death.
The reason a short animation film can achieve such things, is mainly thanks to the smart metaphor it bases itself on. Life is a process in time actually, and time only flows in one direction. Thus by depicting time as streaming water, and the physical beings of each individual as row boat, a metaphor system is established. The reality issues can now be mirrored in this metaphor world with accuracy and efficiency.
The film does not stop as mere copy of reality. It strives to answer the time-old question too, namely 'what is the meaning of life?' Perhaps life is not more than this - what 'On the Water' tries to bring to us - a brief glimpse of the world, a poem, an experience, an unforgettable moment of beauty, joy and sorrow.
Unagi (1997)
a typical Japanese film - shallow, melodramatic and pretentious
I might have given it a higher rating had the film admitted its own hollowness. When this film tried to dress itself as something deep things start to get worse. All the life philosophies preached by it via 'the reel' is nothing more than mere commonsense, and far-stretching to the theme story, to say the least.
During the viewing I wished that the director had bothered to show us what exactly the main character spoke to his eel when they two communicate, because the eel seems the only connect he had and mean a lot to him. Then we might be able to understand the main character a bit better, and understand the tie between him and his eel better. However, the one and only time we see this is: the main character crouched by the side of the glass tank and asked the eel with a tender voice, with his face full of concern and with the presence of a neighbour, "Do you like it here?" The whole scene is so absurd and out of place that it hurts.
What bothered me most is the attitude of the main character towards his crime. It is so important that it forms the foundation of the entire film. Therefore a weak and blurred conception will undermine everything. But again the director hauled us a muddled mess.
Now it is left to ourselves, we seemingly have two options to work with. First, he repented his murder. Then what we see basically from the film is how a man's murdering of a woman is redeemed by accidentally saving another woman's life. Due to the fact that everything about the saved woman happened totally independent of the main character (Not much happened in the film actually, mind you), and no sacrifice or endeavour of any form is required from him, the redemption seems cheap and convenient to the viewer.
Then if we come to the second conclusion that he never repented, we are then facing a more intimidating mentality. Why does the main character deserve the 'happiness' by the end of the film? Had the main character really killed his wife out of hallucination? Is the director hinting on the impending of another tragedy? The undertone of the film will then be entirely altered. But the ending of the film, where the saved woman watches smilingly and peacefully the car driving away in the warm dusk after handing over the lunch bag, is blatant enough to overthrow this consumption. On the other hand, if it is the conviction of the director that the merciless crime committed by the main character is forgivable after only 8 years prison, he does not give enough clue to justify it. We never get a chance to hear the murdered wife's self-dependence in front of the appending kitchen knife. From the very little information we get about the murdered wife, she seems, if not faithful (that is, if the adultery DID happen), at least a caring and competent housewife and there hasn't been any serious confliction between her and the main character.
If the stoic personality of the main character, though forgettable and one dimensional, can manage to make sense, all other characters in the film verge from bizarreness to insanity. Many, especially the mad mother, should be left out for good. No one can simply stands for logic. For example, the saved woman. What caused the transformation from her being desperate and suicidal before to suddenly optimistic and strong in action after? How come she, as a daughter of a rich family, has experience of working in a barbershop? And most importantly, what aroused her affection towards the main character, besides the fact that he spotted her body and called the police, therefore indirectly saved her life? If the binding up of the cut finger can be looked upon as a sort of set up for this plot development, then it comes as abrupt and trite as all other plot developments in this film. The concern from the distant main character over that cut finger feels sudden and out of nowhere. Did the director forget that his character is determined to shut himself in and keep distance from everyone else, especially woman?
All puzzles, no satisfactory answers given...... Maybe the biggest puzzle is how on earth did this garbage win in Cannes that year? This is not a satisfactory film. This film failed in almost every aspect, like most of other contemporary Japanese films.
Death and the Maiden (1994)
if Faye Dunaway could play Paulina....
this movie will be more than merely an good movie. It will achieve the elusive greatness....But of course, she was too old for that then. Another actress I can think of is Sissy Spacek. Anyway, many will play this role more convincingly than Sigourney Weaver. Sigourney Weaver just doesn't have the hysterical disposition of the character. No one can buy that she can be mad. She is just too determined, tough, calculating, all the time. When Paulina was re-accounting her nightmarish memory, that is when the soul was most tormented and desperate, Sigourney Weavers' lack of fragility is also most undermining. This film could have been an classic. This miscast ruined it.
Amadeus (1984)
overrated
It is not a bad movie, certainly not a masterpiece as claimed by most people in this web page either. In total it is mediocre and forgettable. I really prepared to like it. I love this kind of theme: 'the burden bestowed together with gift. By the end you are not sure how to look at a genius mind: a blessing or a curse.' But it turned out to me a major disappointment. I was most deeply let down by the portrait of Mozart. I wouldn't have mind it so much if the movie hasn't kept on pressing the point via the statement of Salieri: the contradiction within Mozart - God's voice from a unworthy man. The movie totally failed itself in this aspect. On one hand Salieri went on and on with how magnificent and brilliant Mozart's music is that my head starts to ache. On the other hand Mozart has shown himself as a funny, sincere, self-confident man, cute and cuddly, with an off-beat laugh, a loyal son, a tender husband, simply an example of morality. It is a mystery that how come he didn't become the most popular man in Vienna. So many other works have done it much better, 'moon and six pence' and 'shine' to name a few, over the dark anti-social side of genius that 'Amadeus' in corporation only offered a very pale and shallow endeavor. Another thing bugged me is the other main character Salieri. He blamed himself to madness and tempted suicide. For what? What EXACTLY had he done to Mozart? True, he has not been a true friend to Mozart. Is that the reason Mozart died? No way. Those little tricks he had applied to harm Mozart, did they succeed? You better be kidding me. From what I can see they either missed miserably or by the unexpected turn of events helped Mozart instead. He hated Mozart and wished him dead, but that didn't make him a murderer. The director overdid the contrast between the two main characters and massed it up. And, the maid, played by the one of the ladies out of the sex and city. What an annoy! She lamenting 'Oh I am scared!' For what! and tears over Mozart's death. Again, for what? When did she grow so emotional over Mozart? What the director was thinking, did he forgot the story? Everybody hates Mozart, right? In conclusion, everything is pretty lame here, plot, direction and acting. Only recommended if you are an opera nut. Otherwise, skip it.
Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo (1966)
who is the good?
Will somebody please help me out here? Who is 'the good' among those greedy killing beasts in that western jungle framed by this 'cinematic master' Sergio Leone?
You mean Blondie? Is there anything he has said or done stands for any tiny weeny goodness and righteousness? I tried to look for it but failed.
I am totally confused. If it is up to me, I would call this film 'the bad, the worse and the worst'. Or 'the ugly, the uglier and the ugliest'. Which one I can't make up my mind. But certainly these titles are much more appropriate to the content.
Dung fong sam hap (1993)
see if only because Michelle Yeoh is in it
Go to see if only because Michelle Yeoh is in it. But in fact she, Anita Mui and Maggie Cheung are all excellent in this movie. This movie has the one of the strongest female cast in Hongkong cinema history. The three are balanced in the movie very well, each with different character. Mui is mature, Yeoh spiritual, and Cheung is more mundan and funny.
Sien lui yau wan (1987)
pure beauty
Just read the original story which is written by Pu in 18th century. Strikingly, the movie despict the original spirit very well, though the plot was modified tremendously. The film language, the rhythm, the special effect are all from hollywood, but still there is a chinese core. It is amazing how Hark Tsui managed to combine them together. The result is pure beauty.