Amon's Chopsticks
Ni Hou Ma?
Since Paul (to my surprise) enjoys Three Time, and its 2/28, let me dig my claws into the flesh of Hou Hsiao-Hsien for a moment. Since I can never write about Hou in an elegant nor on an academic plane as Paul can, I’ll leave the review for Flowers of Shanghai on the table for Paul. If you are familiar with Hou, it is easy to just dismiss him as a self-indulgent, pornographer of nostalgia. Like all myths and facts, this is half true and half false. My best description of Hou, if labeling people is your thing, would be that he gives an emotional response to the social and political climate of his youth. We are all nostalgic creatures, if you are not there yet, trust me, you will be, eventually; for Hou, I think these are his personal reaction of the particular period as it is references to changing ideas and values (jacked it straight from Paul, I’m a lazy, lazy man), without a particular answer or solution. I don’t necessary believe that he’s suggesting there is anything wrong with the social norms of a particular period, e.g. how the social consumption of opium was an accepted doctrine in Taiwan’s history, i.e. Flowers of Shanghai. Hou let us peek into these periods through his non-judgmental eyes, as if these are contemporary pieces and all of the actions and ideals of his character are the ideals and believes of modern sensibilities. Hou is a true transporter of your emotions, a bus driver that takes your emotions back to a different time with a different frame of mind; alas, a pornographer of nostalgia (bus driver, would it be better if I said train conductor? Airplane pilot perhaps? I apologize for such a pointless digression). I don’t believe that he is so concerned with shifts of social paradigm from one period to the next, or the obvious similarities or differences in people of different periods or class, this would seem too trivial to address. So then; what is he trying to say? How can anyone be so neutral about such a dynamic period; youth, and more importantly youth in the fluxing politics of Taiwan, China and Japan? Every period, within its own construct is a “period of change”; no generation ever defined itself as a generation of complacency, “well, we never really did anything in my generation, son, nothing really happened, just went to school, got a job, got married, paid taxes, and accepted everything for what it is.” But the current US administration and the lack of response by its denizens come pretty close to a generation of complacency; but that’s another rant all together, but we all believe, in a very pompous and self-righteous path that WE (our generation) changed the world is some way, in some form, be it the inconsequential revolution of fashion, music, pop culture, at least WE will be remembered for something, right? Nice try… as mentioned, en mass, in the past, besides from being lazy, I am an optimistic pessimist, I endearingly await the end, and in that end, nothing WE did will really amount to the dirt we will rest on anyway. So why make films about our beloved youth, why write bloggs about other people’s movie about their beloved youth? I need something to do to past the time before my box lands in the hole. I’m sure Hou, to some simplistic sense of existence agrees with me. Anyway, in the end, either over-complicating or over simplifying Hou’s intentions, or hoping it’s somewhere in-between, his movies seem to provoke a fundamental character of the human condition that entertaining or not, artistically sound or not, cannot be denied or overlooked as well as dismissed for self-indulgent boredom… whether its boring or not. So the best I can do after wasting people’s precious internet porn surfing time is to suggests some of Hou’s right hand movies, only if you enjoy Three times and want to elevate this relationship to the next level (I hope it works out for the two of you in the future, keeping my fingers crossed). His quintessential, I believe, is City of Sadness. The nostalgia in Three Times does not even come close to the nostalgia in City of Sadness; mainly because it deals with the taboo subject of the 2/28 incident. A good movie to watch… well today, no other successful directors of Taiwanese origins, not a one, would even go near 2/28. I would highly point you to City of Sadness before Flower… though Flower fits nicely into the number #3 slot. I eagerly await Western debut, currently in post-production, Le Ballon Rouge (the Red Balloon). But do give some attention Japanese language Café Lumiere, and take heed to Millennium Mambo, and least we neglect Goodbye South, Goodbye. These should keep you nice and cozy during these cold winter nights or at least a weekend or two.
Labels: Taiwanese Director
Paul's Great Review of Three Times
For some reason I could not comment on you posted review of Three Times. How retarded is that? Can't use the site...shameful, so I am posting a new blogg to answer your review.
What a great review! Man, let me post a question in SAT form: Paul's review is to Goddard as Amon's review is to______.
A. Uwe Boll
B. Ed Wood Jr.
C. Joel Schumacher
D. All of the above
I think it's obvious.
BTW, I have a copy of Region 2 Curse of the Golden Flower, just came out today, I will let Raul pass it to you, and also look for A Battle of Wits, The Banquet, and A World Without Thieves. A little old but worth the time nonetheless.
Have you scene the trailer for Premonition, they don't seem to mention the Japanese Premonition of 2005 at all and the story does not sound that much alike, but coincidence or straight-up jackin' with a slight tweaking? To be debated once I see this series of masterpieces of Hollywood creative bankruptcy.
Low I.Q. on Vali's day
Since its Valentine’s Day, I guess I should get all of the romantic comedies out of the way. I.Q. 1994 Directed by Fred Schepisi (the same talent that brought you mediocre films with high profile casts, Russia House, Fierce Creatures, Roxanne, Mr. Baseball), a talented “mismanager” of talent. At least he’s in good company. What can I say, Walter Mathau as that-smart-old-guy-that-you-just-put-frizzy-white-hair-on-another-old-guy-it- automatically-becomes-that-smart-old-guy. I think his name is Einstein or something like that, brought a man back to life using lighting bolts or something to that effect. It’s sad when you get to the age where you can play Einstein, and that role annuls all the other great roles before it. Walter will be mostly remembered for Grumpy Old Men, and sadly, Dennis the Menace and sadder still, Grumpier Old Men, but there are entire libraries of great films that this generation will probably never care to pick up and ignore completely, that Walter Matthau did some beautiful works. To name a few, Hopscotch, Little Miss Marker (come on, I was a sentimental kid), Bad News Bears (nobody plays Buttermaker better, I like Billy Bob Thornton just fine, but nobody), The Taking of Pelham 1, 2, 3 (one of his best foul-mouth roles ever), actually there’s too many to name, but I have to mention King Creole, Elvis’s 4th movie, dark movie for the king and Matthau as crook/mentor played with amazing calm intensity, my favorite of The King’s movie BTW (digression – originally the lead role was intended for James Dean, but Elvis lobbied hard and won it in the end after Dean passed on it. On a sad note, this was the type of roles The King really wanted to do, something with a lot of weight, but ended up as a whore to the money making and exploitative machine of the Colonel Tom Parker, and ended up making fluff pieces to promote his music, a true Greek tragedy). Since is Vali’s day, let me be nice, I actually like I.Q. It’s been out since 1994, and amazingly, this is my first viewing, yes, I know, not that there hasn’t been an equal share of people urging me throughout the years to watch this movie, but it all just came down to the fact that I believe at the time that there are better movies for me to spend my time watching than Matthau playing Einstein and Meg Ryan play his equally smart niece (that right, that is comedy enough if you ask me). But to be fair, it not a bad movie, nothing fantastic and a bit over indulgent with lighting and composition with for what it is, your typical cookie-cutter romantic comedy, that at times seems to be quite impressed with itself than the audience. And for the love of god, can all of these actresses stop playing scientist, please, huh, please, before I loose it and take a rifle up to a clock tower to solve this problem. They are driving me crazy: Elizabeth Shue: The Saint, and Hollow Man (I guess she felt she didn’t say what she wanted with the idiot blond scientist role in the Saint so she had to reprise), Mira Sorvino: Mimic, Meg Ryan: I.Q., Helen Hunt: Twister, Kathleen Turner: Baby Geniuses, even though the list is endless, let’s just end on Baby Geniuses shall we. At the very least they should try to understand a tenth of what they are saying, or else how do you expect us to accept the fact that you understand what your character is saying? I rather pay to see Walter Matthau playing Einstein as the futuristic cyborg terminator sent back in time (programmed with an Austrian accent, which Einstein had – well, more of a Swiss, but Swiss, Austrian, German, the Nazis didn’t seem to know the difference) to kill the mother of the future leader of the human race, just as appropriately ridiculous as John Wayne playing Genghis Khan, wait he did play Genghis Khan, The Conqueror, I gracefully withdraw my ranting. Hollywood, you win again. Some great movies to watch for you romantics out there, Needing You (HK, 2000) and it’s companion piece A Moment of Romance (HK, 1990, don’t let the title fool you, it’s a sad ending) Chungking Express (HK, 1993), Love Undercover (HK, 2002), Love Letter (Japan, 1995), and where would love be without the French? Amelie, Hiroshima Mon Amor, The Lover, and the Americans, Sixteen Candles, Casablanca (if you’re alone, a little Boggy goes a long way), Say Anything and the Sure Thing, oh what the hell, make it a Cusack triple feature with Hi-Fidelity, Black Belt Jones (just seeing if you’re paying attention) Xanadu (I know, I know, give it a shot, you’re obviously dateless if you’re reading this, what do you have to lose, your millionth viewing of Lord of the Rings?) and Annie Hall, you need a little Woody on Vali’s day. Ones to stay away from, anything with Meg Ryan, yes, including I.Q. and Sleepless in Seattle, especially Sleepless in Seattle, Titanic (trust me), Bed of Roses (as sappy and crappy as they come – I wish I can articulate this better…umm…umm…no I can’t, it’s pretty crappy), Ghost (unless you have bucket near by, then by all means indulge), which reminds me, not that anyone would remember, Wisdom (if you generally like to watch bad movies with friends on Vali’s day or any other day, then this is your movie, Directed by one time boyfriend of Moore, Emilio Estevez, purely priceless) and Xanadu (for the same reason that I said you should watch it).
Labels: GO OUT, It's Valentine's Day, Stop Reading
(s)+Diamonds=gay romantic comedy Partner(s), kinda
With all of my (insert pretentious swagger) accumulated movie knowledge, you’d think I start this blogg with something slightly more…more…well, no easy way to say this without offending Mr. Dave Diamond (the director of this film), well, actually, with a name like Dave Diamond how hard is it to offend, come on, man; meaningful. The film is Partner(s) 2005 written and directed by Mr. Dave Diamond. Somewhere along the line, a marketing intern mustered up enough guts to stand in a boardroom brainstorming session to say “you know what will make this movie cool and unique? Put parenthesis “s” at the end of Partner. That would really make it stand out.” So the wife enjoys renting movies and not watching it, love it, heavy weight champion of DVD rental neglect. I, for one, hate to waste a rental, everything she brings home from Hollywood video or her Chinese rental place (except for the Japanese and HK dramas) I watch completely, beginning to end, even if it’s bad, complaining all the way from beginning to end, I watch. So, meat and potatoes shall we, a young lawyer exploits office politics and homosexual stereotypes to win control over a high profile case (involving a gay man suing a company for firing him because he’s gay) in which if he wins, will lock his chances of making partner of the firm. Without spending more time than I need to explain the intricacies of Partner(s), let me just give you my feeling on an emotional response to this film rather than an academic assessment, which would not be fair to this effort to show the gay lifestyle in reference to heterosexual lifestyles, and how funny the contrast can be. Not very I’m afraid. Partner(s) falls into the pigeon hole of similar gay movies of the 90s (Jeffery, Love, Valor, Compassion!, Billy’s Hollywood Screen Kiss, Percella Queen of the Desert, and I’ll mention To Wong Foo Thanks for everything… just for the sake of mentioning, because I believe this movie is far from what the gay or transsexual community is trying accomplish), trying to be unisex while dispelling sexual stereotypes and prejudices, but in the end, it highlights the differences rather than presenting a case of similarities. Add to the fact that Mr. Diamond seems a bit uncomfortable with the hetero scenes, almost disgusted with the act itself. So the love between the two main characters seems a bit labored and dispassionate, lacking in chemistry. However, surprisingly well acted; the main characters as well as some of the supporting actors are quite good in their roles, the tragedy is they are not given anything decent to chew on, and most of the office characters are one cliché after another (I’ll spare the details) acting in roles that seems to be nothing more than an extended episode of Three’s a Company. And the tragedies keep flowing, Saul Rubinek and Michael Ian Black, two good actors that I can only assume owe somebody a favor. One thing Mr. Diamond is good at is “establishing shots.” Man is he good at that, establishing shots everywhere; however, I have no freaking idea what city this movie is supposed to be in. Elevated train, palm trees, LA sunsets, Canadian skyline? And no, I will allow Mr. Diamond the argument that it’s universal, it can be in any city, (The Matrix can be in any city, Partner(s) cannot) then why the obvious shot of downtown LA? Lastly, there is this long and unexpected post script at the end of the movie telling us what happened to all of these mildly bland characters after the this initial story ends, you mean it continues?! It was surreal to say the least, 1) I don’t really care enough about these people to know what becomes of them, including the supporting cast, even some of the extras got a post script, I’m not kidding 2) the movie is exactly the same with or without the PS, only with the PS will take longer before you finally hit the stop button on the DVD player. My recommendation? Get your hands on a Chow Yun Fat HK flick call The Eight Happiness directed by Johnny To, Chow Yun Fat gives an amazing performance for such a small movie as a womanizer that falls in love with a women but has to pretend he’s gay to get close to her and win her affection. Chow Yun Fat acts gay amazingly well to say the least. In the end, the answer lies in Asia cinema, always the case.
Labels: Partner(s)
So much, so little
So my lovely wife loves to rents these (sometimes) straight to DVD romantic comedies and then not watch them, and I'm not one to waste a film, especially in the troubled times of excess and wastefulness and global warming and all (just doing my part to save the world...I'm sure my devoting my precious time to watch bad movies is helping the rain forest in some way, I'm sure of it!), nothing can go to waste. So she rents these movie, Partner(s), 2005 dir. Dave Diamond (yes, I know), I.Q. (yes, that I.Q. Walter Matthau as Einstein, and she wonders why I have never sat through this movie in it's entirety...Matthau as Einstein being a major factor, the people that were involved with making this movie lack the obvious...I.Q. to know this was a bad idea...I'm sorry, just couldn't resist the pun), and the third flick, the one and only (her choice BTW, I had nothing to do with it)Rudy Ray Moore in Petey Wheatstraw the Devil's son-in-law, yes, Dolemite himself. So in the end, I end up watching all of these movie by myself while she periodically looks over at the TV from her computer table. I know you can't wait, but I'm tire so what I think of these movies will have to wait...and amazingly, I manages to squeeze in some movies that I want to see, Pen-Ek Rantanaruang's follow-up to his DVD cult success known as Last Life in the Universe, a second viewing of Andy Lau in A Battle Wits, the dismal Chinese interpretation of Hamlet known as the Banquet, and The Queen and a second viewing of The Departed...lastly, the brilliant and the entertainingly hardcore Shaw Brothers on crack The Demon Lute, if you can get your hands on it, grab a twelve pack, a few friend and enjoy...I humbly accept your gratitude in advance.
Labels: Where is the time
An intro...sorta
So I've been putting this Blog thing off forever...really, almost one day shy of forever. I took a persistent and patient friend to actually sign me up to get me feeling guilty enough (since he did all the work to sign me up) to get me here. So why post my movie two cents and share them with the world ("the world" being limited to perhaps an unfortunate few that are absolutely bored with porn or illegal online downloads or both and happens to run into my blog) when any chump that's had the displeasure of sitting through [insert your most hated film here] and with in moments of the rolling credits, made their - perhaps insignificant - opinions known on the internet. I think I just described 99.9 percent of internet users, not even exaggerating one bit...well, maybe a little. I attended a script writing seminar once (misguided youth of very little importance), and they started the seminar with the encouraging words; "writing (in general) is the biggest hobby in the world..." I pay how much for them to tell me this? As if I didn't noticed the hundreds of semi-delusional Trekkies (oh, I know they're Trekkies, trust me) confidently taunting and waving their scripts in their hands, bragging to the guys next to them that, "this is it man, this is the one...it's H-O-T, hot!" as I pretentiously in a very modest, self-righteous way, roll my eyes in the distant back row. So everybody can write, everybody's got a story to tell, and everybody has an opinion about everything, including other people's opinion. So millions of years of evolution and we are reduced to nothing more than bickering to strangers about how much we hate another stranger’s opinion, e.g. IMDB forums, good god, man, get over it. So why this? Because I know more about movies than you...don't think so? Bring it... no, seriously, I have no idea why I'm doing this...
Labels: Intro, yo
Waiting for Amon
We are patiently awaiting Amon's arrival.... patiently ..... waiting....
