Reviews

It's truly a shame that Wong Kar-Wai (WKW) isn't getting the recognition that he deserves. His film are some of the most beautiful and original tales of the past 15 years. Though well respected in Asia, he continues to be ignored by Hollywood and the western audience. Much like Luis Buñuel or Yasujiro Ozu, his message is often lost, and his work is ahead of its time.

But thank God for Criterion (get the DVD) for coming through and releasing what is arguably his best work, `In the Mood for Love,' however the title is misleading; the film is more of a drama then a true romance. Nevertheless, though it has a more simplistic plot then his other works, `Mood for Love' still remains a wonderfully crafted film; insightful, haunting, and never boring to look at.

The story begins with Mrs. Chan, played by Maggie Cheung, who is looking for an apartment for her and her husband in 1960's China. On the same day, Mr. Chow, played with precision by Tony Leung (a John Woo regular) moves in to look for an apartment next door for he and his wife. The two both agree to the separate leases, and coincidently, begin moving in on the same day. There is much confusion as the movers move from apartment to apartment attempting to sort out the mess.

As the story develops, Mrs. Chan and Mr. Chow both spend more time together. They soon find out that Mrs. Chan's husband and Mr. Chow's wife are actually having an affair. The two grow a close bond with each other, somewhat intimate, and always caring, but the two are careful never to fall in the same trap as their spouses. As their relationship continues, issues are revealed, and their love, a love that cannot be, develops further.

The film is beautiful. It's wonderful to look at, and has some of the best cinematography I've seen in a film. Though WKW is oftentimes prone to using his camera more, in this film, it is much more restrained. He allows the film to flow gently, from scene to scene, and as akin to his style, allows much more to be done with looks, brief glimpses and silent moments rather then dialogue. In fact, the most important facts of the story itself are simply understood; you understand the characters' emotion simply due to their taciturn performance in a scene.

This film is not for everyone; those looking for a completely coherent plot and suspense will be disappointed. Rather, the point of the movie is not the goal, but the journey that is taken to achieve it. The events, ths subtle humanism is so amazing, that it almost hurts.

Watch this film if you consider yourself a fan of foreign-cinema. Lovely, absolutely lovely.

1999: May 18th. Multitudes of people are waiting in line to witness the first full-length Star Wars film in 16 years. Anticipation is mounted; fans are dressed as Vaders, Fetts, and Skywalkers. Many critics have already called the film "a disappointment" and blamed it for "not living up to the hype," however a few critical reviews as Roger Ebert and the New York times have taken the opposite stance and have stated that it's imaginative worlds easily rank up there with the original trilogy. Finally, the doors open, and floods of fans are allowed to see the film.

Two hours and thirteen minutes later...

Fans walk out, comments such as "wow, that looked great," and "that pod race and final lightsaber fight were amazing" are directly contrasted by, "what was with the kid," and "Jar-Jar is the worst thing ever." As time goes on, Episode I's glory fades, and is seen as a mediocre entry into the Star Wars realm.

But here we are again, I've just walked out of the midnight showing, anticipating and hoping that this one, would do the Star Wars universe some justice. I was scared; scared because of Roger Ebert, the same Roger Ebert who had hailed Episode 1 as "an astonishing achievement in imaginative filmmaking" now called Episode 2 "a technological exercise that lacks juice and delight." Similarly, many other critics seemed to take the safer route and go in with a negative attitude. As the lights finally dimmed, and the Fox fanfare played, I thought to myself how if this one failed, Episode 3 would have absolutely no hope.

As I write this, I cannot wait for Episode 3, and I have a big silly grin on my face; a grin that hasn't been there since I was anticipating Episode 1.

Yes, the critics have been harsh, but they've always been harsh. "Empire Strikes Back," which is now hailed as the best of the trilogy was met with poor reception by critics. Only in time have they come to appreciate it, and in 1997 with the re-release, it was nearly unanimous that it was spectacular. I feel the same will happen to Episode 2.

Right now, the trend in film enthusiasts is to criticize any Star Wars film, because of the simple fact that it stands as a Star Wars film. Though Episode 1 may have deserved much of its criticism, much of the criticism directed at Episode 2 seems merely nit-picking.

Yes, there is much that could be critiqued about "Clones." Much of the exposition is still lowly political quarreling, many points of dialogue are lacking, and the love story, despite its attempts at sincerity fall short of greatness.

Then again, so was Empire. What the hell is a nerf-herder anyways?

"Clones" is a tighter film; much neater, cleaner, and one that flows better then its predecessor "The Phantom Menace" despite the fact that the editing is sharper and more distinct. The characterization is deeper then "Menace" and actually pretty deep by Star Wars standards, and you find yourself caring about the characters. There are scenes that approach brilliance if you allow yourself to please the child within. However, some things do not work as well as they should.

Let's get the bad out of the way. Despite the presence of Jonathan Hales as co-writer, the dialogue still remained rough during the first 45 minutes of the film or so. Though the dialogue between Obi-Wan and Anakin was well done, the love scenes in particular did not work. Unless Lucas was purposefully trying to make Anakin seem like a bumbling fool when talking to Padme (which is possible) then he did a good job. In fact, the entire scenes work well if taken in this frame of mind, but I think that much of it was not intended. However, this rough patch only lasts for about 15 minutes of the entire movie.

In fact, I liked some of the love scenes; not necessarily regarding the dialogue, but the scene between Anakin and Padme by the fire at night was beautifully shot, and beautifully lit. Had the dialogue been a bit better, the scene would be flawless.

I have to say, I've always liked the more dramatic Star Wars events rather then the action pieces. The Yoda scenes on Empire were my favorite of the film, and the quiet scene between Luke and Leia on Endor in "Jedi" also sticks out in my head. Thankfully, "Clones" has several scenes. The tender scene between Anakin and Padme before they're wheeled out showed Portman acting the best she did in the entire film, and is reminiscent of the "Binary Sunset" from the original.

But one last negative is this: the score was ruined. Now I don't consider myself some elite film score enthusiast who thinks that if it doesn't appear exactly as on the music it's not worth experiencing, but what happened in this score, or rather what happened in the editing of it was pretty bad. John Williams created several tracks of music for this film, most of which are looped constantly, re-edited, and even lifted, not transcribed but directly lifted, from "Menace." While it does work within a viewing context, it still pains me that Williams' brilliant score was not able to be heard as intended.

But what about the rest of the movie? Well, what you want to hear, is what's being said in every other review. The action is great and exciting. There's several moments which remind me of the original trilogy, and none of it is done with the frivolity of "Menace's" sequences. The last 45 minutes, has to be seen to be believed. It's a dream come true for Star Wars fans everywhere, or even just action fans in general.

Pretty much, this film has everything you'd expect from a Star Wars film; action, a bit of romance and suspense. There's far more that I could mention, but that's essentially the core of it. In all honesty, this movie hearkens back to the original trilogy more then "Phantom Menace" (though there are some moments which seem "Menace"-like, especially during the rocky first 45 minutes or so.)

Again, it seemed like critics went in looking for flaws, and yes they are there. However, these same critics that lambasted "Clones" for it's cheesy cliched-riddled love story are the same ones that praised "Spiderman" for a similarly placed love subplot. But if you have any idea about what Star Wars is about, it's possible to look over these flaws, and just enjoy a great cinematic, old-fashioned epic. Those looking for Bergman-esque grasps on humanity will be disappointed. Those looking for space-age Kurosawa epics will be thrilled.

9 and a half stars out of 10.

I'm mixed about this one, honestly. As far as Korean cinema goes, this is a decent one, important for the Korean film industry as it was another big-budget-esque sweeping epic, (though one of the first for its fantasy style) and was a hit in Korea. If "Shiri" announced to the world that Korean cinema was a world player, "JSA," "Tell Me Something" and this, "Bichunmoo" solidified that sentiment.

But a film does not necessarily work because of these facts. The simple matter is that "Bichunmoo" isn't anything too special. Sure, there "Crouching Tiger" comparisons come into play, but honestly, even without having to be in "CTHD's" shadow, Bichunmoo still wouldn't be all that great.

The story revolves around Jinha, a young man who grows to be one of the greatest warriors of his time, and his love for a woman. As chance may have it, complications arise, and they're separated, in which time she learns to move on with her life, and he adopts a new name, and identity.

The account above is a very crude and general overview of the story. In actuality, the story is much more complicated. Yes, he adopts a new name, but there are other things at play; Mongol Forces, Anti-Mongol Forces, the girl's husband and children, and the protagonists partners as well as his ex-but-may-not-quite-be rival.

And this is where the cracks start to show. The film is very, VERY busy. Too much occurs, too quickly. Yes, Korean filmmakers are told almost by necessity to cut down the running times (in order to get more showings in) but this is ludicrous. The film moves at an amazingly brisk pace, that more then once, I was confused. It also doesn't help that a very crucial and important scene is cut out of the print I watched which states that Jinha has changed his name, introduces two major characters, informs us that he's sided with anti-Mongol forces, gives an outline of the group's attack, and explains who the hell those guys that are fighting with Jinha are. Had these been retained, I as well as many others would not have been as confused.

And in moving this quickly, much of the attention is lost, and one never cares for the characters. The two characters in love received no sympathy from me, and I became so restless that I was tempted to fastforward to the next fight scene.

But anyhow, but fight scenes, choreography, and cinematography all are excellent. They are not polished, but I believe this was intentional. The film does not rival by any means the best Hong Kong martial swordplay films, but they are well done, nonetheless.

All in all, Bichunmoo is an entertaining film, but not a great film. It left me feeling a bit hollow, and as stated earlier, attempts to accomplish too much. Had they split the movie into two, and taken their time with the story, it would have been much better.

I've never cried because of a movie. I always sympathize with characters, yet I never empathize. I can never feel the true emotion. Sure, "Schindler's List" had amazing worksmanship, but it didn't do anything for me, and "Grave of the Fireflies" is equally as good, but neither, as well as pretty much any other film I've seen, has made me cry.

But "Failan" made me come pretty close.

At first, I was skeptical of the film. Korean films have come a long way, yet I trust their action and flashy stylish movies more then their dramas. "JSA" and "Shiri" are great, "Jakarta's" a lot of fun, and "Nowhere to Hide" is stylistical live manga if I've ever seen it.

But "Failan" comes out of nowhere, and makes me wonder why this didn't make it out of Korea. It's hands down one of the best films of the last year. Storywise, it avoids cliche, and other traps of romantic/tragic films, and comes out on its own.

The story is simple. A wretched bum Kang Jae(Min-Sik Choi of Shiri fame) who sells pornography and is involved in the organized crime syndicate in Inchon marries Failan (Cecilia Cheung in an amazing performance,) a young Chinese girl abandoned and alone in the world in a marriage of convenience; she gets to stay in Korea and work, and he gets some cash for it. The two never meet, yet Failan is eternally grateful.

The thing is though, Failan is not even mentioned until 45 minutes into the story. Until that point, you're following the life of Kang Jae. But as you soon discover, both are tragic characters. Failan, is one of the most beautiful characters put onto film; not just in terms of outer aesthetics, but in terms of inner beauty. She is the sweetest character I've seen in a film, and that fact makes it even harder to watch.

The film borders on drama and melodrama, but thankfully, most of it is not melodramatic. Oh sure, there's some parts where the audience scoffs, but there are other parts when what is happening is so tragically beautiful, that you can't help but get involved emotionally. Thankfully, most of it is subtle and not slam in your face "Pay it Forward" style. What affected me was when Kang Jae was reading the letter from Failan thanking him for being the kindest person she's met. What's said isn't long prose, and if you're familiar with the Korean language, the sentence structure is very simple. However, the way in which the Failan's voice-over reads it is so innocent, so sweet, and so full of emotion that I choked up at that point.

The rest of the film is equally as wonderful. The group I saw it with, 2 girls and 3 guys all in college, were all equally affected. It surprises me that Shiri, conceivably a Hollywood-esque film (albeit very well done) gets a release in the U.S but this one doesn't.

If you get a chance to see this film, do not hesitate. It took me a while to get into it, as the first 45 minutes seem to have little bearing on the story, but they actually do. Beautiful acting, cinematography, and a story. Highly Recommended.

I'm still replaying this film in my head, and in doing so, finding little things that I missed. Much like "The Usual Suspects," this one throws you for a loop.

However, the great revelations in "Jakarta" don't come in one momentous moment such as the above mentioned "Suspects," or "The Crying Game" but rather, the intricacies of the plot unveil themselves throughout the second half of the film. It's kinda like the Christopher Nolan's "Memento" in that matter.

In terms of plot, saying even a little would give away too much. However, what seems like a simple scenario of bad timing on account of three different groups of thieves turns out to be much more complicated, and much more intricate then what's on the surface.

That being said, this film plays out almost like a Korean "Reservoir Dogs" meets "Memento." You have suggested torture scenes, a warehouse where the thieves take their victims, as well as the inter-quarreling amongst them. However, while "Reservoir Dogs" only mentioned and hinted at what really happened at the bank heist, you do get to see the whole thing done in its glory in "Jakarta." All of this isn't done in great seriousness however, and the film is very funny, finding some very darkly humorous moments.

There are some flaws to be mentioned; the DVD that I watched it on had horrendous subtitling. Being able to understand enough Korean, I wasn't too happy with some of the translations, and was surprised to find that some dialogues of speech weren't even translated into subtitles. I guess whoever was doing the subtitling got a bit lazy.

Likewise, while I really liked how deceptive this movie was, it did get a bit confusing in the end, and my friend whom I saw this with was even more confused, as he had only the subtitling to work off of. This is definitely a film that requires a second viewing, and honestly, I don't mind whatsoever.

I remember walking out of the theater on December 19th. I had just witnessed a movie that I had waited for almost my entire life, and eagerly anticipated for 2 years. I was flustered, amazed, and I was for once, excited over the fact that after seeing movie after movie surrounded by hype, that 2 months from then, no justification about how I liked it then as opposed to now would be needed. It's been about 2 months now. How do I feel?

The exact same as I walked out of that theater for the first time.

Since then, I've gone back 3 more times, and I plan to see it once "The Two Towers" footage is added. Despite the nearly 3 hours running time, despite the slow moments, and despite the liberties that were taken with the story, I did, and still do love it. For once, I saw a movie that has still lived up to the hype that was injected into it. Fantasy, was alive; Middle Earth was there. I witnessed the Shire with my own eyes. The dwarves were real; I knew it, because I saw their great castle in the depths of Moria. Elves and Maiar; they were there. I saw Gandalf's fight with the Balrog, and I saw Rivendell in all its glory.

So why the ambiguity in my summary?

Because trying to rank this film is one of the hardest thing any of us can do. A lot of fans were quite enthusiastic when it came out, and quickly put their mouse key over that "10" button in the vote. This made Fellowship's rating soar, and because of that, it polarized people about how they felt about the film. People who had merely liked it now loathed it because of this, and tried to bring it down with ratings of "1." I understand that people grew tired of seeing LOTR at number 1, and saw this as more hype for the movie, but honestly; do people think this is as bad as "Hobgoblin" or "Cop and a half?" This ain't an Ed Wood movie. Despite how you felt about it, I seriously doubt all of you think it's that bad. Likewise, the ratings of 10 are also flawed; this is by no way the best movie ever made, or even in the top 10 or so. Despite how much you loved it (and I do love it) I really think that there are better movies out there; maybe not as entertaining ones, but there are better ones.

I loved "Fellowship" and I can't wait for the other two. However, trying to big-league this in the same ranks as "Shawshank," "Schindler's List" or "The Godfather" is in my mind, not something we can do yet. I remember waxing greatness about "Pay It Forward" until realizing how completely manipulative that ending is. Likewise, I remember ranting about "Unbreakable" because I wasn't happy with the advertising campaign, but learned to realize that it's well made, and not as bad as I initially thought. "Fellowship" is still too fresh, too new. Trying to give an impartial rating on it is something that none of us can do yet. Wait until the third one comes out, and then wait a couple years. Then we'll see.

Forget the fact that this movie is foreign, and forget the fact that this movie quickly broke Titanic's record in the South Korean box-office. Strip away these barriers and look at the movie itself.

What's left is one of the best political intrigue/action movies I've seen.

Ah yes, I've heard many claim that this is a run-of-the-mill actioner on the same lines as "The Rock." Yes, the two contain many similarities; a liquid explosive that's bound to go off in a large city (Seoul, South Korea,) betrayals, cinematic techniques to make you think otherwise then what's occuring, etc. However, what this has that any big budget Bruckheimer explosion-fest doesn't, is a heart. Oh sure, one can claim that "Armageddon" or "The Rock" tugged at the heart strings with their fabricated and completely manipulative tear jerker sequences (bye bye daddy in Armageddon, and Connery and his daughter in The Rock) but SHIRI makes you care, not because the film's manipulative like the U.S fares mentioned above, but because of the fact that the characters come alive. The whole plot is far-fetched, yet the emotions are real.

With that in mind, the story comes alive. What this film manages to do is show the dichotomy between North and South Korea. At the front, it seems to show North Korea in an extremely negative light. Well, this is bound to happen to some extent because of the fact the film was made in South Korea, but it also manages to show North Korea, not as the antagonist, but as a lost soul. It is one nation that's been split in two for 50 years, and reunification is desired at any cost.

Anyhow, this is one of the best Korean films that the country has to offer; not quite as good as JSA, but still quite spectacular. With those two, and the rather succesful U.S. run of the love story "Chunhyang," Korean films seem to be coming into their own.