Sigma’s Simulacrum of Reality

Being a new Sinophile nowadays, gonna try catching this movie soon. Looks good. Fulfills three of my criterias:

1. Is about Chinese/Mongolian history
2. Is an independent film (ie non-Hollywood)
3. Is in Mongolian

Although I cannot as yet claim to be a ‘hardcore’ Asian movie lover due to the fact that I haven’t seen as many Asian movies as I would have liked yet, I can say that I am an Asian movie fan nowadays.

So I was pleasantly suprised when I found a BBC documentary on Asian cineme on YouTube, entitiled ‘Asian Invasion’. Apart from the Pommy host’s somewhat annoying accent, this was a good documentary. It is split up into 3 episodes, focusing on Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea respectively. Check them out below:

Ep 1: Japan

Ep 2: Hong Kong

Ep 3: South Korea

From my personal experience so far, I’ve found that I really like the Korean style of movies right now. They better utilise location cinematography than those other two countries. I also like the way Koreans portray themselves in their films. Korea is given an image of being a modern mega city with a heart. Lastly, I think of those three countries (okok, so HK technically is China, but what the heck), Koreans make the best sappy melodrama romantic stories, complete with beautiful chicks and for the girls, hot guys March on the Korean Wave!

Hong Kong movies are fine, but they somehow lack that refined technical touch that Koreans have which make their movies look ‘clean’ and ‘crisp’. Hong Kong’s movies, with the exception of a few more exceptional ones, generally looks ‘rougher’. Although Hong Kong has always produced great cops vs triads films and a few good romantic comedies, they seem to lack in the drama department.

Somehow, I just don’t like Japanese movies, based on what I saw in the documentary. The Japanese seem to have this thing for sadism and pain. Either that, or outright wackiness (see The Squid). Both type of styles which I have always steered clear from. Their animes are a different story though. I especially like their deep sci-fi animes.

All in all, I am still partial towards the great Korean films that are coming out from Korea right now. They seem the most appealing to me. And apparently, I’m not the only one with these sentiments. Many people are now into Korean pop culture ala its movies, dramas, and music due to the Korean Wave pop phenomenon which swept across Asia in early 2000. I have discovered that I am not immune to this as well. Apart from their hot chicks, I have found that I also like the way their language sounds. It’s more guttural when compared to Mandarin or Japanese. Lower and deeper. Cool. Japanese sounds especially sissy to me, what with their high pitched style of talking. And the Korean culture itself, especially its male culture, is decidedly ‘macho’, what with beating each other up or what not. Rockin’ No wonder they’re known as the hotheaded Irish/Italians of the East!

To me: Korean > Hong Kong > Japanese

Was channel surfing today when I came across a HK show on SBS. Just out of curiosity I watched it for a while, but then I got hooked by the prettiness of Gillian Chung, and ended up watching the whole show because it turned out to be pretty good.

Beyond Our Ken is about an ex-girlfriend Ching (Gillian Chung) who wants to get some revenge from her boyfriend Ken (Daniel Wu) who dumped her and posted naked pictures of her on the net. She enlists the help of his current beau, the Mandarin-speaking Shirley (Tao Hong) after convincing her that Ken is a bastard.

After this show, I have now officially added Gillian Chung to my list of cute babes, along with Cecilia Cheung and Jun Ji-Hyun (of My Sassy Girl). Damn Gillian’s cute! Checked her out on the net, and apparently she’s one half of the popular HK pop duo called ‘Twins’ (even though she and the other singer aren’t twins. Wtf…?)

Anyway, the friendship that was formed between both of those girls was very interesting to watch. Along with this, there was also a lot of great shots of Hong Kong in it, and nice camera-work to go with it.

Daniel Wu was also great as the boyfriend. Reserved acting.

I was watching this movie leisurely until the end, thinking it would just end normally. Well, that didn’t happen. I was caught off-guard by the fact that there was a pay-off at the end. A pretty good one as well.

Anyway, good movie. Ridiculously pretty Gillian Chung.

Verdict:

The ridiculous has happened. Even after I had hoped that it wouldn’t.

The Departed won Best Film in the Oscars.
It also won Best Adapted Screenplay.

I don’t care if the actors in it won stuff. But those 2 categories above, I do take offense. How could a remake be awarded Best Film? I mean, since it’s based 95% on the superior Hong Kong film, Infernal Affairs, maybe they should just have given that award to Infernal Affairs instead.

Apart from great acting, the one main thing which made The Departed ‘good’ among critics and cinema-goers alike was its terrific plotline of ‘double diametric moles’. But this strength is directly 100% taken from IA. So how does it justify winning Best Film then?

And Best Screenplay? Omg, that’s even worse. It’s like taking my friend’s great Mandarin essay, paraphrasing it a little and translating it into English, and then winning an essay competition with it. Have the screenwriter for TD no shame? What a hollow win for him. Luckily Hollywood is aware enough to award Best ‘Adapted’ Screenplay to it than to give it an outright Best Original Screenplay award. For that at least we can be thankful.

Notice I didn’t bag out Scorsese winning Best Director. I can still accept that, since a director’s job is to coax out good performances from his actors, and he did that.

For the record, I am still saying that IA is the better film compared to TD. IA has much better pacing, suspenseful built-up, ending, and cinematography.

I am also maintaining that Scorsese bordered on dishonesty in not clearly acknowledging IA in his film. He should have done like what The Lake House did and clearly stated that it was a remake at the BEGINNING of the film. It’s just not enough to do that in tiny fonts during the end credit rolls.

And I’m not the only one saying this. The Australian has also got readers who are pissed that The Departed won. They’re also pissed with the arrogant attitude of Hollywood and Scorsese in not clearly acknowledging Infernal Affairs, whether in-film in TD or during the Oscar ceremony.

And Delwyn, just continue to suck your thumb, ok? Either that, or come up with better arguments to defend your pro-TD stand. If not, you’re just opposing for the sake of opposing man.

In case you aren’t a regular reader of my blog, or that you’re just dumb, I am somewhat of a movie geek. Became one sometime when I was in Year 12 in 04.

Neways, I absolutely love unique movies. Either in terms of the plot, multiple interpretations, or cinematography. So now here’s a short list of the movies that I like and ones that I intend to watch soon:

1. Donnie Darko - Great weird movie bout a weird boy and a 6-foot rabbit. You can interpret it in many ways. Great unique structure. My review of it here

2. The Virgin Suicides - Enthralling whimsical film about 5 seemingly perfect sisters committing suicides. Great dreamy cinematography. Mysterious and a bit scary in some bits as well. My review here

3. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - Great unique romance story. About a couple trying to erase their memories of each other due to their souring relationship

4. Memento - A mystery film about a guy who lost his ability to retain his short term memories. It’s told in reverse. Quite depressing though

5. The Prestige - A new good film about magicians and magical sleigh of hands. The whole film is also a magical trick. Review coming soon

Other Unique And Weird Movies, But Ones Which I’m Not Really A Fan Of:

6. Being John Malkovich - A truly bizarre film in which a couple of people finds an entrance into John Malkovich’s mind

7. Mulholland Drive - Drug-induced vision vs reality intertwined in this story about a Hollywood actress trying to make it big in Hollywood. Very weird, and depressing for me. I couldn’t understand it even after a second viewing. Didn’t like it at all. Typical David Lynch’s style of weirdness, of Twin Peaks fame, which I liked incidentally.

Haven’t Seen Yet, But Recommended By People As Being Good In The Same Vein:

8. Adaptation - Another film by Charlie Kaufman who brought us Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. About a writer with writer’s block writing about a writer with a writer’s block

9. Garden State - Have no idea what it’s about. From the sypnosis, it seems to be a romance film

10. Abre Los Ojos (the original film which spawned the US version of Vanilla Sky) - Me thinks this film is about a good-looking chap who’s face got damaged, which then confuses viewers about which of his visions are reality and which are his dreams?

So neways, that’s all the films of the same style that I can think of. Feel free to add others which you think I’ve missed out. Also feel free to correct me about the premises of those films which I haven’t seen yet. Just please don’t reveal any spoilers to me for them please!

Cheers then!

Last night, I was in a dilemma. Channel 7 was showing ‘Flashdance’, while SBS was showing ‘The Virgin Suicides’ at the same time. Thank omnipotent being that I finally bet on The Virgin Suicides, as if I didn’t, I would have missed out on a movie which I now place in my Top 10 list of films.

The Virgin Suicides (TVS) is Sofia Coppola’s directorial debut, and what a debut it turned out to be! Yeap, that Sofia Coppola is none other than the daughter of the legendary director Francis Ford Coppola of ‘The Godfather’ fame. Her father would be proud of her first attempt at his craft.

Starring the terrific Kirsten Dunst and a young Josh Hartnett, TVS is a story of the 5 beautiful Lisborn sisters belonging to two disturbingly dysfunctional parents. It starts when the youngest of the sisters, aged 13, tried committing suicide by slashing her wrists. She was saved from that attempt and hence we are introduced to all the sisters and their gawky admirers, 5 young boys. Eventually, as you’ll know from the title, the sisters all commited suicide, but that’s not really the main point of the movie.

It is actually very hard to discuss what the film is about, because it doesn’t really have a storyline. It is basically the boy’s recollections and musings of the girls, whom they think were just about the most heavenly creatures they had ever seen in their young lives. So basically, it’s like a ‘lost of innocence’ kinda film. Or it could also be a film which warns us of the situations which can drive youngsters to commit suicide these days. But then, all these descriptions of the film still doesn’t do it much justice. It’s much more than these things. I would suggest that you watch it yourself to understand what I mean.

This film has bucketloads of surreal atmosphere, something which I found truly enthralling. The closest film with a style that resembles this film would be Donnie Darko, minus the sci-fi and religious interpretations. TVS has a dreamlike quality about it, with imaginative scenes intersperse together with reality. It is also a very open-ended film, leaving viewers to came to their own conclusions on what happens in the film. I also found this film very mysterious, not knowing what to expect in each new scene. Which makes for an absolutely delicious viewing experience.

I’ve wrote before how some films, such as Donnie Darko, has the ability to make me feel melancholic, and I found that TVS also has this effect on me. It is one of those few movies which continues to linger in your mind long after it has ended. To say that this was a sad movie is not accurate, as it wasn’t really that sad. Instead, it evokes a kind of nostalgia. Again, watch it yourself to understand what I’m blabbering about

This is also a film which the actors take a back seat and the director the front. Kirsten Dunst was great as the ‘most perfect’ of the Lisbon sisters, and Hartnett played the part of the school ‘dream guy’ to a tee, but one can only fairly attribute the film’s hypnotic style to Sofia Coppola.

I bow to her after watching this film.

Watch it.

Surreal movie experience.

Verdict: 1/2

Hahahaha. Sorry, had to first laugh before beginning to write this review. After all those hype and superlative reviews by idiotic Yankee movie reviewers on Rottentomatoes.com, I at least thought TD would at the very least give its original progenitor, Infernal Affairs, a good run for its money. To paraphrase TD, how “fucking” wrong I was

*Warning: Contains some spoilers in my review below

The Departed is supposedly one of the best ‘works’ by director Martin Scorsese in recent years, if we are to believe those US horsecrap reviews of it. Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, and Mark Walhberg, it is in actual fact a remake of the 2002 Hong Kong hit thriller ‘Infernal Affairs’. Heck, Scorsese even followed IA in the casting department by hiring an all star cast for it.

The storyline, a complete rip-off from IA, is basically this: There are 2 undercover agents, one in the police force and the other in the Irish mafia, each feeding tip-offs to their respective bosses. One fine day, after a botched transaction dealing, both sides discovered that they have a mole in their midst. Each then attempts to flush their moles out by appointing the moles on their sides to discover themselves I know, I know, great plot eh?

Being a remake, it’s inevitable that I should be allowed to compare it with the original. And heck, it definitely cannot hold a candle beside IA. For starters, the great plotline and terrific twists were all taken from IA. The only additions that TD have is a pointless love triangle between DiCaprio (the undercover police in the mob) and Damon’s (the mobster mole in the police force) character with the psychiatrist. The other one was again, the meaningless character addition of Sergent Dignam (Walhberg). I really had a tough time trying to take his character seriously, what with his constant laughable stream of invectives.

On to the actors. This film really made me realise how some actor’s abilities in Hollywood can be ‘institutionalised’ by automatically being thought of as ‘good’ in any film he stars in. This situation perfectly describes how I felt about Nicholson’s efforts as the mob boss, Frank Costello. He overacted in this film, to the point of being embarrassing. I think the audience will get it that he’s supposed to be this ‘tough crazy mobster’ without needing to bombard us with his swearing-saturated dialogue or giving us so many sexually-charged hints to try to nudge us into believing he’s also an oversexed old man to boot. Total overkill with Nicholson. In addition, his original character in AI was just supposed to be a good supporting actor. Here, just because he’s Nicholson, Hollywood had to expand his role, so now when compared to the smaller role of his opposite, the police head Queenan (Martin Sheen), they’re no longer evenly-balanced opposite characters.

DiCaprio and Damon were alright, but Andy Lau and Tony Leung was definitely the better duo in terms of their performances. The latter duo could express a lot more of their inner turmoil in a restraint kind of way. Of the former duo, DiCaprio nailed his role better by being suitably angsty. However, I felt that Damon (or Scorsese) had completely misunderstood how his role were originally conceived to be. In IA, Lau’s character was suitably ambiguous in terms of where his allegiance lied. Obviously, in the beginning, he was a bad guy courtesy of being a triad mole in the force, but as he began to rise in the ranks as an ‘good guy’, he begins to question his actions, culminating in ultimately deciding to side with the ‘good guys’ in the end. In TD, Damon’s character did not do that. He was a ‘crook’, and ultimately stayed a ‘crook’ throughout the whole development of his character. So it lacks depth actually. There were many instances where viewers could actually even empathise with Lau’s character, but there was never a moment where I could do that with Damon’s character. I just wanted DiCaprio to beat the crap out of him at all times, full stop.

Typically, Hollywood has decided to to ramp up the violence and sexual material in TD. Again, this is a totally unnecessarily change. Whereas AI looks sleek and uber, TD just looks, well…. ‘Hollywood-ised’?

There were many good, some even iconic scenes from IA that were incorporated into TD. However, most of them did not turn out as well as in IA. Firstly, the terrific feeding of information through modern cellular technology on one side versus the archaic Morse code on the other and by those two moles during a drug transaction with the Thais in IA was completely omitted in TD. Instead, a boring ‘SMS match up’ was used in its place. The cast-breaking scene lost all of its objectives and unexpected impact in TD. It was just more of senseless, gratuitous violent act in in TD. Lastly, in the scene where Martin Sheen dies totally cannot compare with IA’s original scene in terms of dramatic impact. The failed drug/microprocessor chips (???) transaction scene which was supposed to reveal to both sides that they each had moles among them was also delayed way to long in TD. In fact, the whole film of TD was dragged overly long (an extra 30 mins compared to the original), and in the process, it did not feel as taunt and thrilling as IA.

The cinematography in TD pales in comparison to IA. TD just used regular camera tints and shots, while Christopher Doyle painted IA in shades of subdued blue and dark shades. The symbolism for ’self-reflection’ or ’self-identity’ were also a constant theme in IA, especially in those rooftop scenes with all those reflective buildings around it. TD lacked any of those things.

Lastly, the ending. Being Hollywood, like the Communist China, they cannot stomach anything less that the bad guy getting what he deserves. And this was what happened in TD, through a new scene which was added. In AI, ambiguity remained, where Lau’s character remained unpunished by external forces, but he was slowly punishing himself instead (hence the Chinese meaning of the title). TD took the elevator-shootout ending too, but made it less dramatic though.

Also, TD should have acknowledged that it was a remake to Infernal Affairs at the beginning of the film, like what The Lake House did. Instead, it tried passing off as a Hollywood original and only acknowledged IA in tiny print in its credits. Pathetic. Legalised plagiarism anyone?

To cut the story short, TD disappointed me. Scorsese disappointed me. Nicholson annoyed me. And I have lost all respect for US movie reviewers.

Verdict:

P.S: I’ve posted a copy of this review (in a more diplomatic US version) on Rottentomatoes.com here and IMDB. Let’s wait for the ignorant replies to come in for the fun to begin, huh?

The Departed, the Hollywood remake

Infernal Affairs, the superb original

Simple. Because what makes The Departed great, the plot and characterisation, is derived from its superb original, Infernal Affairs. We should not give Martin Scorsese credit for the refreshing originality of TD, only for his great directing and casting skills. But I can’t criticise the actors in it, as all they do is act out the material given by them anyway.

Why am I saying this right now? Because The Departed is shaping to be a mega-Hollywood hit. Early reviews at Rottentomatoes.com indicates that the critics all love it as well. And a lot of the kudos will inadvertedly be directed to Martin Scorsese, which to me is just plain wrong. The credits for TD’s great plot twists, storylines and complex characters should instead be directed to Infernal Affair’s Andrew Lau and Alan Mak.

The beginings of the critic’s adulations for Scorsese has moved me to write a post for the first time at Rottentomatoes’s forum. In it, I elaborated on why Infernal Affairs should be given the maximum credit for The Departed’s success. You can read it here.

My reply to another thread here is also relevant.

Okok, before anybody start, the only reasons I went to catch this flick was:

1. My sis wanted me to accompany her, as she’s celebrating the end of her exams
2. I’ll admit that I was interested in the unusual premise of this flim

So on with it then! I ended up going to the cinema with my cousins as well as my sis, and after not ploughing into any trees on the way there, we finally reached the mall just on time.

Now, before I caught the movie, curiosity got the better of me, and I checked out the reviews for it on good ol’ Rottentomatoes.com. Ahem, prognosis wasn’t good, judging from it. Got only a measly 35%!

However, this is a good example of how the critic’s opinions can go to hell. I throughly enjoyed this film, and bear in mind that I hardly ever catch chick flicks I think the last one that I (inadvertedly) saw on TV was “Serendipity”, and man, what a pile of cow dung that was! It had a terribly cliched and predictable plot. There was 2 hours of my life that I’ll never get back…

Anyway, back to the Lake House. Now this was good It’s actually based on the Korean film “Il Mare” (or it’s original Korean title “Siworae”). The premise for the film involves Dr. Kate Forster (Sandra Bullock), a young doctor and Alex (Keanu Reeves), an architect. And a lake house, of course. Kate is leaving the Lake House to move closer to the city, and so she leaves a letter to the new tenant of the house. Alex gets the letter, and is very confused by it, since nobody has lived in that house for ages, and it also spoke of things which had not happened yet (dog prints, people). Eventually, they both find out that Alex was living in the past (2004), while Kate is living in the present (2006). After corresponding with each other via a magical mailbox in the Lake House, they eventually fall in love. How nice

So now Alex and Kate’s all fired up to meet each other so that they can fall into each other’s embrace, love each other till kingdom come, etc etc. You get the idea. The thing is, there’s a problem. If Alex goes off to find Kate in 2004, she won’t know who he is, as they’ve not started writing to each other yet. And she can’t find him in 2006 because……. (see spoiler at the bottom for a discussion on this)

So basically they’re stuffed. Unless…. Catch the movie to find out how they evetually meet then folks. Suffice to say that my sis, cousins as well as myself really feel sorry for poor Alex

The film conveys a suitably dewey feel to it, with shots of autumn leaves falling, beautiful rows of trees, and the picturisque lakeside where the house is located. The soundtrack is also superb, in my opinion. Nicely sets one in a romantic mood. I’m trying to get the titles of the songs played in there now.

Sandra Bullock really is adorable in this film. I found her very attractive here. A bit scary when you remember that she’s 42 (!!) now! A case of “Stacy’s Mum”, perhaps? Incidentally, I’ve always been a fan of Sandra. You just feel like hugging the lonely Kate in this film. Plus, I really liked what she wears in this film. Works well in acentuating her appeal. And I don’t mean in a sexual way lah! More in a ‘girl-next-door’ cutesy way. So all the more reason why I can’t understand why the critics are panning her in this flick. Keanu also does well in his role as the frustrated Alex. And there’s definitely chemistry between the both of them. Towards the end of this film, you can’t help but hope that they’ll eventually find a way to meet each other.

I will be discussing more of the supposed ‘giant loopholes’ that many of the critics on Rottentomatoes are ranting about, as I really didn’t encounter any humongous ones which detract my enjoyment of this film. Check it out below if you’ve already seen the film

Overall, a melodrama romance flick that works.

Verdict: 1/2

Gonna try to get a copy of the original “Il Mare” now to compare!

Spoilers!!! Read this only if you’ve seen the movie.

There were many gripes of the supposedly giant loopholes in this film from many critics, and I personally didn’t spot many of them. For example, read this review by the Boston Globe. Especially this part:

“By this point, the part of your brain that likes kittens has thrown in the towel. The part of your brain that pays the bills is saying, “Now wait just a minute.” Why couldn’t Kate send Alex her 2004 e-mail address or phone number and tell him to just bluff it out? Why couldn’t he tell her where he lives in 2006? Watching them stare at that mailbox until the tin flag flies up of its own accord wears thin after a while; listening to them “talk” their letters to the air is absurd from the get-go.”

I think the reviewer wasn’t paying enough attention to the film, based on these queries:

“Why couldn’t Kate send Alex her 2004 e-mail address or phone number and tell him to just bluff it out?”

Umm, I thought that was because she was still with her previous boyfriend then? If you were Kate, wouldn’t you freak out if a random guy just suddnely calls you up? Wouldn’t she wonder where in the world would Alex had gotten her contacts?

On to the second part:

“Why couldn’t he tell her where he lives in 2006?”

This one really proves that the reviewer was probably staring at some hot babe during the movie. The reason Alex couldn’t do this was because by the time Kate knew him, in 2006, he had already been knocked dead by a bus! He no longer exists when Kate started falling for him in 2006.

Jeez man, it’s a wonder that that reviewer gets paid for his job!

So, tell me what you think then. Agree with me on these points? Point out some of the loopholes that I’ve missed as well please.

I caught Brick with my cousin last night. Krystal, from The Cicak, recommended this movie to me.

When I first caught the trailer, I was suitably impressed. The storyline goes something like this: This outsider cool dude, called Brendan Frye, gets a frantic call from his ex-gf, Emily. A few days later, he finds her dead. Consumed with vengence, and equiped with a cool, searing intelligence, he embarks on an investigation of his own on the cause of Emily’s death. The trail leads him to encounters with various enigmatic characters, who although are all still high school teens, speak, act and look like staple characters of 1940’s hard-boiled detective noir films. A bit like the cartoon “Filmore”, but much more mature.

The first thing that hits you in this film is the peculiar way in which all the characters speak. All talk in a tough, detective/mobster kind of way, again apparently following the style of old 40’s noir films such as “The Maltese Falcon”. It takes a little getting used to, and sometimes it’s hard to keep up with what they’re saying. But if you presevere, it can get rewarding.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt, playing Brendan, is terrific as the intelligent, hard-boiled teen. He has came a long way from “10 Things I Hate About You”, and is definitely an upcoming actor to look out for. His brainy sidekick, “The Brain”, is also a very lovable character, being Brendan’s inside man on school developments, and supplying him with intel. Basically, all of the actors in there are pretty solid.

I must mention the camera-work in this film. I loved it. It’s pretty unique, reminiscent of “Donnie Darko” in style, in that it utilises a lot of wide shots of the locations. It makes you feel like you’re an observer from afar. The director also seems to love capturing the glare of the bright sun in many of his scenes.

One thing to note: Although Brick is set in a high school with high school kids, there is almost no semblence of anything similar to other high school flicks in here. You never get to see Brick’s parents or family, his teachers, or even his class. The high school isn’t really the ’setting’ of this film then. It’s a bit misleading in this regard. Instead, all you see are plenty of the characters itself, sparse spaces where confrontations take place, and an empty football field.

Overall, I like the unique style of this film very much. Not quite in Donnie Darko’s unsettling league, but a very good attempt nevertheless.

Verdict: 1/2