Roger Ebert really, really needs to leave the house more often.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/eb-feature/roger17.html

"Poetic and more thoughtful than most works in the genre, [Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon] also contains some of the most exhilarating action sequences ever filmed. Viewing a rooftop chase and a heart-stopping fight by two characters clinging to swinging treetops, I assumed it was computer animation of some sort, and was astonished when Lee told me those were real actors up there, hanging from cranes on invisible wires."

Is Rog really so dense? It couldn't have been more obvious to me that the actors were on wires if they had been wearing signs around their necks. Or, conversely, the raucous laughter all around me in the theater was a pretty good sign that these were primitive (and rather goofy looking) wire effects. I'm a little nonplussed that such an experienced movie critic would see this with such wide-eyed fascination.

I was gratified to read that Ebert calls this like I did-- CTHD is a genre film. I personally feel this film is held back by its genre conventions, others feel it manages to transcend them. Two sides of the same coin, I suppose.

Without further ado, I'd like to present to everyone a web-based version of CTHD. I like to call it... "Crouching Pencil, Hidden Stickfigure".

http://12.1.228.185/video/crouching_pencil_hidden_stickfigure.avi

I can't claim credit for this brilliant bit of animation, but it manages to distill the essence of CTHD better than any of my pathetic, sad little words ever could.. and probably better than even seeing the actual movie itself.

And it's dedicated to my main man, Tom Chick. Who else? Here's to CTHD as movie of the century!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. Hey, I just saved someone seven bucks!

Kevin Maynard's take on this sums it up nicely:

http://mrshowbiz.go.com/reviews/moviereviews/movies/CrouchingTigerHiddenDragon_2000.html

"They aren't mere bloodthirsty duelists, but soulful warriors fighting for their chance at love. But in this regard, critics have already vastly overpraised this film. Ang Lee has always made films about flawed people struggling against social convention (Sense and Sensibility, The Ice Storm), but here, his script is frequently weighed down by humorless discussions of Taoist philosophy and self-consciously swoony, tragic-romantic twists and turns. It's a big comedown from the top-flight fight sequences, and anyway, it's in their physicality that these thieves and warriors best express themselves. Whenever Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon resorts to flying fists or soaring sword battles, the Force is definitely with it. "

Vastly overpraised is definitely the first thing that springs to mind when I think of this movie... as well as the fight scenes which carry the film. All the more reason to screen Crouching Pencil, Hidden Stickfigure and save your seven bucks.

In fine Tom Chick fashion, I now have to beat others to the punch and refute my own argument: then again, this is the same reviewer who gave Sixth Sense a score of 6/100.

There. My work here is done.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Was it really necessary to create another forum topic just to wail on this movie again? I don't think anyone cares THAT much.

Then again, I guess you do.

"Was it really necessary to create another forum topic just to wail on this movie again? I don't think anyone cares THAT much."

I just want to point out that I'm not the only person who thinks this movie doesn't justify the swoony, exaggerated praise it's getting. I don't think it's bad-- just overrated.

And yeah, I have to admit I felt a little gypped after walking out of the theater. This could potentially win an oscar for best picture? I dunno. But there have been lots of weird choices for best picture over the years, so this would hardly be the first time. Chocolat anyone?

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I dont think Crouching Tiger is overrated. . . though the expecation for it is whats making ppl want the second coming, and getting less

Its a low key film in style and sound, its quiet, but it speaks boundarieS!!! okay so im sappy and i love the romance in the movie. . . that Yo Yo Ma practically made me cry to his soundtrack.

anyway, see it again. . .it was 10x better the 2nd time i saw it. . .lotsa good foreshadowing (a literary technique rarely used in movies anymore).

etc

btw Ebert is a hack. .. well he's okay, though i dont understand how he liked a movie like Amerika, and truly hated Blue Velvet. . .

Ebert is as biased as anyone. . . just wish he didn't spoil so many movies in his reviews.

and Chocolat is NOT comparable to CTHD. . . my god Chocolat is so arty farty pretentious, like Shakespeare in Love (what crap!). i only saw Chocolat becuase my friends gf wanted to !!!

etc

>>anyway, see it again. . .it was 10x better the 2nd time i saw it. . .lotsa good foreshadowing (a literary technique rarely used in movies anymore).

Yep, I agree. I saw it a second time last night (still sold out here in Vermont every showing).

And as I said in another thread, the romance is what got me.

And the cello is the saddest instrument...

"And as I said in another thread, the romance is what got me."

Steve, in that same vein, may I suggest the Lifetime channel? ;) The puddle of depth that Ang was able to wring out of such slight material is quite a feat.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"okay so im sappy and i love the romance in the movie. . . "

This seems to be a recurring theme. But I didn't notice any subtlety to the film in this regard; the first exchange between Yun-Fat and Yeoh makes it painfully obvious that there's unrequited love there... and let me guess, one of 'em is gonna die? And I've already commented on the "Hey! You stole my comb!" relationship between the princess and the bandit (groan). It's Grimm's fairy tale level stuff.

If you want subtle romance, I'd promote Dangerous Liasons as a much better example. Malkovich, Malkovich, Malkovich!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"the first exchange between Yun-Fat and Yeoh makes it painfully obvious that there's unrequited love there"

It isn't unrequited, it's unrealized. I don't understand why you're criticizing this scene; it's not as if it's supposed to be a secret. In fact, I'd say this was one of the film's strengths - they're talking about religious doubt and death, and yet that's not what you remember from the scene.

You dismiss it as a genre film, and you say the story is cliched. Again, I don't understand these criticisms. It's certainly not a new story, but it's told in an exciting, new way. By your argument, though, no star-crossed love stories have any worth after Romeo & Juliet. His Girl Friday? Cliche, cliche. We can't like One False Move or The Maltese Falcon because they're just genre films, and neither was the first. Your Friends & Neighbors is worthless after The Importance of Being Earnest, which itself is no good because it's preceded by The Country Wife.

The flying bit is common to historical Chinese action films. Sure, you know it's an effect - but you also knew Superman wasn't really flying. When I see Blade Runner, I'm not upset because I know that cars can't fly. Flying warriors is a genre convention; just as dancing and singing is a genre convention in musicals. The Legend of Fong Sai Yuk has some of the most ridiculous, and great, fight scenes ever filmed. And it also has a great story. The moment where Fong Sai Yuk begins taking his responsibility seriously is as emotional as when Hal turns his back on Falstaff in Henry IV part II, or when Peter Parker finds out who killed his uncle. No, I'm not kidding.

I'm certainly not advocating that you should change your mind and like the film. I dislike any number of films that other people thought were high-water marks of cinema (American Beauty, Fight Club, to name but two). But your dismissal of the film simply because the characters fly is akin to someone saying that Singing in the Rain is a bad film because people dance. You may not like the convention, but at times we must admit that craft and artistry exist beyond our own subjective reactions.

And as I read your posts in the Hannibal thread, I realize that you've already stated that you didn't dislike the film, and that you just don't feel like it transcended its genre conventions. Fair enough, but I'd be interested to read about films you thought did transcend their genre, and why CTHD fails to do so.

As a counter-point to your laughing audience anecdote, I'd like to share my own. When I first saw the film, the audience was giggling during the first action sequence - with Michelle Yeoh chasing the thief across the rooftops. At the end of the fight, though, people were actually applauding. It was unbelievable; I've never heard spontaneous applause in a movie theater before.

Audience reaction is not a great barometer of quality. People laugh at everything now - it's our hyper-ironic way of being above anything emotional or exciting. I saw the restored Giant a few years ago, and people were laughing everytime they'd show Rock Hudson or James Dean. Yeah, yeah, they were gay. Get over it.

A good friend of mine welcomed the turn of the century, declaring ironic detachment a dead, 90s trend. Hopefully, he'll be right.

"When I first saw the film, the audience was giggling during the first action sequence - with Michelle Yeoh chasing the thief across the rooftops. At the end of the fight, though, people were actually applauding."

Ditto here. The audience started with a few titters that subsided into a hushed breathlessness. And when it ended, the audience absolutely erupted into applause and cheers. That set the tone for the rest of the movie.

-Tom

"Ditto here. The audience started with a few titters that subsided into a hushed breathlessness. And when it ended, the audience absolutely erupted into applause and cheers. That set the tone for the rest of the movie."

My wife just informed me that local television broadcasting was interrupted with the news that Dale Earnheardt died. Does it play in Peoria, Tom?

I know, I know, we can trade apocryphal stories all day long. And don't think for a minute I don't enjoy every ever-lovin' second of it.

But the whole reason I brought up the IMDB and amazon user reviews was to point out a couple dozen other people _complaining_ about people laughing during the movie. Precisely what I was talking about. I know, I'm a kooky nutbiscuit who likes to bring up supporting evidence for my arguments. If that means I don't fit in here, so be it. Better to just talk about my feelings, right?

Because I enjoy baiting Tom Chick, I'm going to post a little excerpt of another user review from Mr. Showbiz:

"I saw this film with a moronic audience that could not stand reading or paying attention. They missed a very good movie. They also missed much of the humor, drama and perfection. The action they did not miss and walking out many people were talking about how incredible it was.. too bad they could not see past their racism and see the great acting and culturism within CTHD."

Pity the poor, unwashed masses and their misunderstanding of such a seminal film! My heart bleeds for them, those lousy morons! This is friggin' art here!

"But your dismissal of the film simply because the characters fly is akin to someone saying that Singing in the Rain is a bad film because people dance."

Au contraire. I am not complaining _because_ they fly, but because the _manner in which_ they fly is so patently ridiculous. Let's look at the Matrix for an example of really breathtaking "combat flight" scenes. In this regard, CTHD fails miserably, even comically.

If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. That is why I think the movie would have been a lot better had that stuff been left out. Okay, they have superhuman abilities, I get it. Just leave the rubber-suit Godzilla effects on the cutting room floor where they belong. If I am allowed to complain about bad acting, why can't I complain about bad special effects? Bad is bad.

"You dismiss it as a genre film, and you say the story is cliched. Again, I don't understand these criticisms. It's certainly not a new story, but it's told in an exciting, new way."

At its heart, CTHD is a good movie. I recognize that. But in terms of emotional development and plot, it's a sentimental bubblegum comic book of a movie-- and I attribute this directly to the genre conventions. If you're fond of the genre, I'm sure this is the best, deepest thing to happen to it in years. But as a standalone movie.. I can't agree that it's all that and a bag of chips.

I think my biggest problem with the this movie is that it's so wildly overpraised. Yes, it's good. I never said it wasn't! But in the same way Tom Chick objects to my praise of counter-strike as groundbreaking or GOTY 2k, I object to this movie being placed on a pedestal.

After all, CTHD is merely a mod for the chinese martial arts genre, not a standalone movie.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Fair enough, but I'd be interested to read about films you thought did transcend their genre, and why CTHD fails to do so."

Silence of the Lambs comes immediately to mind in the Horror genre.

Of course it's a matter of opinion whether CTHD did or didn't transcend its genre, but in every CTHD review I've read, without fail, the reviewer will talk about the genre-- and whether this film is good enough to appeal to people who aren't fans of it. I don't recall similar arguments being made about Silence.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Silence of the Lambs comes immediately to mind in the Horror genre."

But why? In the end, Silence of the Lambs is not much more than a well-made horror film that follows most of its genre conventions to the letter.

"Let's look at the Matrix for an example of really breathtaking "combat flight" scenes."

The only difference between The Matrix and and any good historical Chinese action film is that, in The Matrix, the superhuman elements were placed in a context that's palatable to western audiences. The flying "made sense" because Lawrence Fishburne got to prattle on and on with that 8th-grade philosophy for 20 minutes. And, though I'm sure you know this, Woo-ping Yuen was the fight choreographer on both films.

I loved The Matrix, by the way. I could have done without "the desert of the real" speech, but the action sequences were great.

"but in every CTHD review I've read, without fail, the reviewer will talk about the genre... I don't recall similar arguments being made about Silence."

Perhaps that's because the genre is so intrinsically foreign, and has a bad reputation in the west because of cornier films like Five Deadly Venoms and Master of the Flying Guillotine.

Similar points didn't need to be made for Silence of the Lambs because the genre is part of our culture. Western audiences don't need to know that all horror films and/or thrillers aren't Evilspeak or Virtuosity (apologies to Crowe fanatics), and that there have been great examples like Rosemary's Baby or Halloween.

"But why? In the end, Silence of the Lambs is not much more than a well-made horror film that follows most of its genre conventions to the letter."

First let's see how many academy awards CTHD racks up, then we'll talk. That was the primary evidence of Silence's breakthrough from horror flick to mainstream movie phenomenon.

"I loved The Matrix, by the way. I could have done without "the desert of the real" speech, but the action sequences were great."

Ditto on Matrix-- the last action movie since Terminator 2 where I've gone in with high expectations and had those expectations exceeded. What a rush.

Speaking of Lawrence Fishburne, have you guys ever seen "Deep Cover", with him and Jeff Goldblum? That was his first lead role. Kind of a B movie, but it was damn good all out of proportion to its scale.

"The only difference between The Matrix and and any good historical Chinese action film is that, in The Matrix, the superhuman elements were placed in a context that's palatable to western audiences."

When I brought up The Matrix, I was only talking about the quality of the special effects. In CTHD, they were so poor that people can't help but laugh. Not so in The Matrix. If it looks real, it could be real; I don't need a lot of historical hogwash (of either variety) to get into it. This is the movies, after all. If we're laughing at it because it looks unintentionally ridiculous, the director has failed the first, and most important rule of cinema. Make it look good, even if it's crap.

"Perhaps that's because the genre is so intrinsically foreign, and has a bad reputation in the west because of cornier films like Five Deadly Venoms and Master of the Flying Guillotine."

What's so intrinsically foreign about it? It's two guys (or gals) fighting. Isn't kicking ass the universal language, right there under screwing? Martial arts flicks are no strangers to American shores, with 1973's Enter The Dragon being nearly as old as I am. But not nearly as annoying.

The reason reviewers bring up the genre is because of the formulaic plot elements that are used in the movie. The themes of unrequited (unrealized if you like) love, honor, female empowerment, etc are saddled with this weirdo bubblegum superhero storytelling-- which we inherit from the genre.

Who knows, maybe the X-Men will sweep the Chinese oscars in a weird twist of synchronicity. And perhaps there is some cranky oriental on a Chinese webboard somewhere raving about how bad the special effects in X-Men were, and how overrated it was.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"First let's see how many academy awards CTHD racks up, then we'll talk. That was the primary evidence of Silence's breakthrough from horror flick to mainstream movie phenomenon."

But horror movies ARE mainstream movies, they just happen to be mainstream movies that rarely get critical praise. I'm not criticizing Silence of the Lambs for being a horror film. It's a very well-crafted one. But I still don't see how it transcends its genre - and it's cumulative Academy Award tally doesn't change a thing. Halloween is another very well-made horror film, and it's no less great because it didn't win any Academy Awards. The quality of Crouching Tiger won't be diminished or bolstered by how many awards it wins or doesn't.

"In CTHD, they were so poor that people can't help but laugh."

I disagree with you on this central point. You saw it with people laughing, I saw it with people cheering. The wire effects (save for one shot in the forest) looked great to me, and without "bullet-timeTM!!!!", no less.

"The reason reviewers bring up the genre is because of the formulaic plot elements that are used in the movie."

What elements are these? I've never seen another Chinese action film with an even remotely similar plot. So the story elements don't make the genre, the fighting style does. And the fighting style in this case is VERY specific to a certain type of Chinese martial arts film, of which there have been dozens before it. Enter the Dragon and Crouching Tiger are very different kinds of martial arts films.

Crouching Tiger is without a doubt the first film of its kind to have mass appeal with western audiences, though there have been cult favorites like Once Upon a Time in China and Storm Riders before it.

>>First let's see how many academy awards CTHD racks up, then we'll talk. That was the primary evidence of Silence's breakthrough from horror flick to mainstream movie phenomenon.

Since when are the Academy Awards a measure of anything other than the whims of its members? (And I'd say the same thing about ANY award, including those our magazine gives out every year.)

Are we to say that Star Wars didn't make a breakthrough into the mainstream from its roots as a standard adolescent action sci-fi film solely because it lost "Best Picture" to Annie Hall? Is Chinatown a lesser movie in cinematic history because it lost Best Picture to The Godfather Part II (yow, talk about a tough vote... I'd go with Polanski's film myself). And how about that Jaws? No mainstream impact there because it lost the Best Picture Oscar to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest? That's loopy.

Crouching Tiger IS a mainstream movie phenomenon because it's in Chinese, subtitled, and has grossed over $71 million in the US thus far with almost no marketing, and may eventually go up over $100 million, which is unprecedented. Life is Beautiful made about $58 million as the previous highest grossing foreign language film in the US. And each week its box office is INCREASING, not decreasing. That's also kind of rare, which means word-of-mouth is incredibly strong. And we're discussing it, which says something as well... we're not sitting here discussing "The Bride With White Hair," are we?

>>In CTHD, they were so poor that people can't help but laugh.

Who cares? Since when are the quality of special effects the sole determination of a film's quality? If that's the only way to enjoy a movie, through its special effects, it must be a bitch not to be able to enjoy any movie that more than a couple of years old.

"we're not sitting here discussing "The Bride With White Hair," are we?"

Or Bride of Chucky, which was made by the same director.

Although if anyone wants to discuss either of those, I'd be glad to.

>>Or Bride of Chucky, which was made by the same director.

Good point, and of course Ang Lee's next movie is supposedly "The Incredible Hulk" (he turned down Terminator 3) which officially puts both of them in the "weird project we didn't see coming" file.

And Bride of Chucky was truly inspired weirdness. Jennifer Tilly is my hero.

"The quality of Crouching Tiger won't be diminished or bolstered by how many awards it wins or doesn't."

I couldn't agree more, but it is one of the few semi-objective metrics we can measure. Certainly in terms of mainstream influence, one of the better metrics.

"Crouching Tiger is without a doubt the first film of its kind to have mass appeal with western audiences, though there have been cult favorites like Once Upon a Time in China and Storm Riders before it. "

True, and I think CTHD justifiably deserves credit for this and a few other things.

"What elements are these? I've never seen another Chinese action film with an even remotely similar plot."

The cliches, okay.

- The princess falls in love with the bandit, and like a bad sixth-grade romance flashback, keeps hitting her captor to show her infatuation until she finally caves in. She might as well have been hitting me, because I was feeling definite physical pain during these scenes from being hit over the head with the obvious. Ow. Ow.
- The incredibly talented but tempestuously hot-headed young martial arts star-- can she master her power before it masters her?
- The hidden thief that is painfully obvious to everyone in the theater, but nobody in the movie.
- The simmering unrealized love (hey-- did I just hear someone say HIDDEN DRAGON?) between two equals. And one dies before it can be consummated. Oh, the sheer heartbreak.
- A mystical sword of great power!!!@11!

In the interests of equal time, I did like the female empowerment, screw the arranged marriages and let us be ourselves theme. That I did not find cliched. But it's hardly original.. maybe in China, I suppose.

Eh, I dunno. I could go on, but I lack the heart. I'm not saying some of this stuff wasn't done well, because it was.. but when you start with the obvious, you have nowhere to go but up.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Who cares? Since when are the quality of special effects the sole determination of a film's quality? If that's the only way to enjoy a movie, through its special effects, it must be a bitch not to be able to enjoy any movie that more than a couple of years old."

Bad is bad. Would you also defend bad acting? bad special effects goes directly to suspension of disbelief, which is one of the primary goals of any movie.

And in this day and age, yes, I think that's sloppy. But what do I know, since Roger Ebert was positively stupefied by their daredevil antics!

On a deeper level, I don't think the movie *needed* these elements to succeed-- the fighting is its own reward, and I don't need to see all-singing, all-dancing flying scenes to appreciate good physical combat. Again, where the movie gives in to its comic book genre sensibilities and the end product suffers, IMO.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"And Bride of Chucky was truly inspired weirdness. Jennifer Tilly is my hero. "

I was really tempted to rent this. I always thought the Chucky movies were a cut above (apologizes in advance) most cheesy slash horror flicks. You think it's worth it?

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

I still don't see how these are cliches of the genre. My questions:

"The incredibly talented but tempestuously hot-headed young martial arts star-- can she master her power before it masters her?"

Ok, sure. It's not a cliche, though, it's the basis of every myth - the Hero with a Thousand Faces and all that. The Odyssey. Fong Sai Yuk. Star Wars. The Matrix. The Karate Kid. The Next Karate Kid. All the greats.

"The hidden thief that is painfully obvious to everyone in the theater, but nobody in the movie."

SPOILER: That's because nobody in the movie has seen her. They think it's Jade Fox, who remains out of sight. So I won't give you this one.

"The simmering unrealized love (hey-- did I just hear someone say HIDDEN DRAGON?) between two equals."

Name another Chinese action film with this story.

"A mystical sword of great power!!!@11!"

and

"The princess falls in love with the bandit, and like a bad sixth-grade romance flashback, keeps hitting her captor to show her infatuation until she finally caves in"

Again, I've never seen another supernatural martial arts film with either of these stories. OK, the first one is sort of similar to the Swordsman series. But don't criticize the film's story just because you can reduce it to plot points from Final Fantasy games.

You're saying these are cliches of the genre, which they aren't. They are elements of all myths, so that specific criticism doesn't - ahem - fly.

I'm going to grant you "looked dumb," though, as your one point with which I can't make a counter-argument apart from "did not."

"as your one point with which I can't make a counter-argument apart from "did not." "

Did too!

"I still don't see how these are cliches of the genre. My questions: "

Perhaps I was being over broad (me? no!). I meant cliched in general. I've found that most subtitled martial arts flicks are incredibly cliched-- and I did not find CTHD to be an exception to this rule.

I grant you that CTHD is a definite cut above the vast majority of martial arts films, but the issue here is "transcending genre"; stuff like what I listed, plus the cheesy wire effects (did I mention that yet?), conspired to drag this movie way down on my radar.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"I meant cliched in general."

You're looking for ideas without antecedents. It's a fool's errand, because you won't find them.

-Tom

"I was really tempted to rent this. I always thought the Chucky movies were a cut above"

If you're honestly asking: I didn't really think much of it, although it does have a sort of weird, Meet the Feebles, ugly-puppet quality to it. But then again, I didn't really like The Bride with White Hair, either.

But how about that Leprechaun in the Hood? I almost rent it every time...

>>Bad is bad. Would you also defend bad acting? bad special effects goes directly to suspension of disbelief, which is one of the primary goals of any movie.

So in other words you're saying that you're incapable of losing yourself in a movie with poor special effects? So in other words, every movie made before, well, maybe 1998 is bad? Star Wars... bad special effects (man, can you believe they used MODELS for some of those scenes?).

That, my friend, is the sign of someone that goes to movies looking for technical merits above things like story and acting and writing and stuff like that. Is The Matrix an inherently better movie then, I dunno, Metropolis, solely because its special effects are better? Yeesh.

You'd probably like Alice better then Counter-strike, then, because it has a better 3D engine and better texturing.

>>And in this day and age, yes, I think that's sloppy.

Um, it was a $17 million budgeted movie in Chinese, not a $100 million movie in English like The Matrix. Considering that budget, I'd have to say it's one of the best looking movies, per dollar, ever made.

>>But what do I know, since Roger Ebert was positively stupefied by their daredevil antics!

Well so was I, but not because I thought the motion was particularly realistic. It was because it was beautiful to watch, and not like every other movie in existence. The scene in the trees isn't realistic, it's just... beautiful.

>>Again, where the movie gives in to its comic book genre sensibilities and the end product suffers, IMO.

But you don't get it. These aren't "comic book" sensibilities. They were in The Matrix (where he literally becomes a superhero at the end... sorry to both of you that haven't seen the movie). These wuxia movies are from Chinese mythology. Should their mythology be rewritten solely to suit your/our American/Western tastes?

Ever see any of those Ray Harryhausen mythology movies (Clash of the Titans was the last one)? Should they have redone Greek mythology so it would be less cartoon-y? Should Perseus not fight the Kraken at the end because we know that didn't exist, or should Zeus not be sitting up in the heavens looking down on Perseus? Lord knows the special effects weren't photorealistic... but those were great movies (at least when you were 12 or so, when I saw Clash of the Titans... it is, in fact, a really stupid movie).

"These wuxia movies are from Chinese mythology"

Well, here's a radical concept. Maybe they were exaggerating? Treating it as a literal fact reduces it to banality-- when the myth says "they can fly", perhaps a more thoughtful interpretation would be that their movements were so fluid and graceful they gave the impression of flying.

Which, based on the fight scenes on the ground, I'd agree with. Great fight sequences. But no, we can't leave it at that. We have to get repeatedly smacked across the face with these giant hairy mackerels of goofy wire stunts. So yes, it bothered me. I realize I'm in the minority here, so by all means, flame away.

But why be so boring and literal (and poorly done to boot)? Because the genre says we have to have it?

"So in other words you're saying that you're incapable of losing yourself in a movie with poor special effects? So in other words, every movie made before, well, maybe 1998 is bad?"

This insistence on including low budget flying scenes (aka bad special effects) is absolutely counter to the thoughtful tone of the rest of the movie. IMO of course.

The movie was rolling along nicely until then. Monk warrior, check. Magic sword, check. Simmering unrealized love, check. GOOFY LOOKING FLYING! Umm.. dude, where's my car?

"Should their mythology be rewritten solely to suit your/our American/Western tastes?"

I've been reading a lot of CTHD reviews and according to many people this is exactly what happened, oddly enough. The first draft was in.. gasp.. English!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

Tom sez:
"You're looking for ideas without antecedents. It's a fool's errand, because you won't find them."

Ron sez:
"But don't criticize the film's story just because you can reduce it to plot points from Final Fantasy games."

If they truly were ideas without antecedents, they wouldn't have appeared in Final Fantasy games, Tom. Here's an idea without an antecedent: a black, overweight samurai in New York City.

Some of the wildly exuberant praise for this movie is starting to scare me a little. It's like being at a Trekkie convention with the opinion that Star Trek was just another television show. Here's a nice, representative review:

http://www.gamerspress.com/reviews/crouching_tiger_review/

Most so-called critics are a bit more reserved about the movie, but it does appear to inspire a lot of people (especially teens and young adults) to a frightening level of zealousness. Carl Douglas would be proud.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"If they truly were ideas without antecedents"

You're misquoting Mr. Chick. He's saying there are no ideas without antecendaents.

"Here's an idea without an antecedent: a black, overweight samurai in New York City."

Here's one with an antecendent: A hitman follows the code of the samurai and seeks revenge when betrayed by those who hire him.

It's called Le Samourai, and it was released in 1967.

"Some of the wildly exuberant praise for this movie is starting to scare me a little."

AND

"...but it does appear to inspire a lot of people (especially teens and young adults) to a frightening level of zealousness."

I suppose you spook easily. A great movie comes out, lots of people love it in spite of numerous obstacles, it's makes scads of money, and it earns heaps of praise. And wumpus gets scared? Relax. You're just wildly out of touch. It'll subside.

-Tom

"Here's an idea without an antecedent: a black, overweight samurai in New York City."

You are thinking too narrowly. That is merely a fish-out-of-water story, with a couple of "funny hat" characterizations thrown in on top. How about an overweight Chinese blackbelt in Los Angeles? For another twist on the same idea, let's make him a cop. Perhaps we can really strain our neurons and make the show title a bad pun, like Martial Law. Hilarity ensues!

The hitman part I don't expect to be original. The delight in Ghost Dog, for me, was the obvious irony in a pudgy, ice-cream loving middle-aged black guy who has reinvented himself as a samurai. He's nuts, living on the roof with his pigeons. Granted I haven't seen every movie on the planet, but I don't think I've seen that before.

But magic swords, warrior monks, princesses, bandits, shaolin powers, etc.. yes, I've seen all that before. Worse, confirming my fears, virtually everything in the movie happened as I expected it to. The sole plot point I found surprising (spoilers from this point forward, for those of you with delicate sensibilities) was Jade Fox as the governess.

Everything else was a trudge. Waiting for everyone to figure out the princess is the thief (duh). Waiting for the princess and bandit to realize they're in love-- this entire sequence was excruciating. Waiting for the tempestous, narcissistic disciple to determine whose side she is on (hint: when you tell someone point blank how much they suck, they are probably not your pal any more). Waiting for one of the unrequited love duo to get killed-- which is, in case you didn't notice, is sort of an occupational hazard for a mythical martial arts hero.

That's a whole lot of waiting, and very little suspense. But again, this was my beef with the movie: not the acting, directing, soundtrack, or cinematography, but the plot.. and the distracting, unnecessary wire effects.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

"Relax. You're just wildly out of touch. It'll subside."

Yeah, you say that now. But you're going to be a featured speaker at CTHDcon 2002. Personally, I'm gonna come dressed as Li Mu Bai! We can have a roundtable discussion of what we thought the ending meant. Deodorant optional.

"Perhaps we can really strain our neurons and make the show title a bad pun, like Martial Law. Hilarity ensues!"

Good one. I enjoyed that. But Forest Whitaker being not only overweight but black, and crazy, pushes it a bit further in my mind.

Not that the two movies are comparable, of course, just a point of contrast to people in familiar characters acting.. um.. familiarly.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>>"These wuxia movies are from Chinese mythology"

Well, here's a radical concept. Maybe they were exaggerating? Treating it as a literal fact reduces it to banality-- when the myth says "they can fly", perhaps a more thoughtful interpretation would be that their movements were so fluid and graceful they gave the impression of flying.<<

Nope, Chinese mythology speaks of manipulating one's chi in order to achieve flight. They're literally flying. No figurative exaggeration here.

If you thought that was exaggeration that borders on banality, you haven't seen stuff like "Asia The Invincible" or the stories of the Monkey King.


-Thierry

"If you thought that was exaggeration that borders on banality, you haven't seen stuff like "Asia The Invincible" or the stories of the Monkey King."

Only in the sense that the rest of the movie is so thoughtful and introspective in every other way-- this element is out of place here.

If it's a total cheesefest, sure, sign me up!

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>>Only in the sense that the rest of the movie is so thoughtful and introspective in every other way-- this element is out of place here.<<

In reading a certain tale about the brutality of war and the side-effects of pride on the battlefield, do you immediately discount it because it features a character who can only be killed if you shot a certain part of his body?

Is it cheesy when, in reading a follow-up tale about faith, returning home, and the indomitability of the human spirit, that people get turned into pigs, and the lead character speaks to the dead?

Take a thoughtful, and introspective tale about a man, going around telling others to bear faith, tolerance, and respect towards others. An inspiring message about good will towards all. But hey, the guy happens to walk on water, and can raise the dead.

Yet, because the stories of Achilles, Odysseus, and Jesus Christ help form the cornerstones of Western thought and myth, we don't cry foul when reading of these extraordinary tales. We don't stop reading these works, and cite these fantastical elements as "out of place" because they are a part of the cultural mindset that helps define them as mythical.

If you can accept those elements, why are you still thinking that the flying is out of place and overly fantastical? Why does the flying seem so jarring? Just as you accept the fact that a bearded guy walked around turning wine into water, so have the Chinese accepted the fact that people were of such sound mind and body, that they mastered flight.

Then again, I don't know anything about your beliefs regarding myth. Maybe you do scrutinize these classical Greek/Judeo-Christian myths with the same eye as you do in picking apart CTHD.

-Thierry

"Then again, I don't know anything about your beliefs regarding myth. Maybe you do scrutinize these classical Greek/Judeo-Christian myths with the same eye as you do in picking apart CTHD. "

Let's go back to the well here. I don't object to the flying per se, but the fact that the flying looked patently ridiculous. If you can't make it look good, DON'T DO IT. See The Matrix for how it should be done.

If we reenacted Jesus walking across water with giant inflatable rubber ducks duct-taped to his feet, I would have similar concerns. It hurts the movie.

But please, don't take my word for it. Just read the imdb reviews and listen to all the panting, breathless zealots complaining about the "stupid" audiences laughing during these scenes.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

>>If we reenacted Jesus walking across water with giant inflatable rubber ducks duct-taped to his feet, I would have similar concerns. It hurts the movie.>But please, don't take my word for it. Just read the imdb reviews and listen to all the panting, breathless zealots complaining about the "stupid" audiences laughing during these scenes.<<

Again, it's a culture thing. I've only heard of people who know absolutely nothing about the way the Chinese do things, and weren't expecting it, laughing.

-Thierry

"Again, it's a culture thing. I've only heard of people who know absolutely nothing about the way the Chinese do things, and weren't expecting it, laughing."

I'm sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that. Putting people on wires is *NOT* a culture thing. That's a movie special effects thing. Are you really arguing that the only way to show people flying is via bad wire effects?

The culture argument is just a thinly veiled way of calling people "stupid". They don't get it, so naturally their opinions can't be trusted. Never mind that I've seen hundreds of foreign films from dozens of countries and never found any of them unintentionally funny as I did with CTHD.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. No, my beef is not just the lame wire effects. Read back further if you haven't.

""Again, it's a culture thing. I've only heard of people who know absolutely nothing about the way the Chinese do things, and weren't expecting it, laughing."

I'm sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that. Putting people on wires is *NOT* a culture thing. That's a movie special effects thing. Are you really arguing that the only way to show people flying is via bad wire effects?"

No, I'm saying that Chinese people are so used to that style of wire-work, that it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb the way it does for you. Name a Western film that does that style of wire-work. Matrix doesn't count, because it was blue/green-screened.

Westerners generally aren't immersed in it, hence it sticks out when a Chinese person just looks at it, and shrugs.

"The culture argument is just a thinly veiled way of calling people "stupid". They don't get it, so naturally their opinions can't be trusted."

There's a significant difference between saying someone doesn't understand something due to cultural and saying someone is stupid. When a friend of mine asked me about the wire-work, I didn't go "Stupid Yankee, you no understand chinese wire genius,", I said, "It's a Chinese movie thing."


"Never mind that I've seen hundreds of foreign films from dozens of countries and never found any of them unintentionally funny as I did with CTHD."

Never meant this as some sort of foreign-film viewing resume. I still think that if you saw a ton of these flicks (ranging from the pure pop thrill "The Blade" to the more introspective "Ashes Of Time"), the effects don't quite stand out the way they do to you currently.

-Thierry

"When a friend of mine asked me about the wire-work, I didn't go "Stupid Yankee, you no understand chinese wire genius,", I said, "It's a Chinese movie thing." "

But it would be SO much funnier if you had. ;) ROFL. I am enjoying that one. Can I get a .wav file of that?

"Name a Western film that does that style of wire-work. Matrix doesn't count, because it was blue/green-screened."

Maybe we don't see it in western films because.. it's primitive and ineffective? I have to go back to my Jesus - water - inflatable rubber ducks - duct tape analogy here.

If they're limited to wire effects because of budget, that's fine. But to argue that bad special effects are a part of the Chinese cultural zeitgeist.. well, that scares me a little. God knows I pray we've advanced beyond the level of the 60s Godzilla films-- instead of celebrating guys in rubber suits as "a cultural choice."

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

to a point (not playing devils advocate) i would agree with wumpus about SOME of the action scenes in CTHD. i think the only time i guffawed and chuckled was the very first time you see the high wire flying around. . . after that i took the premise, it really didn't detract from the movie for me. but i can see some ppl being detracted from it, and then dismissing the rest of the movie. might be superficial to some, but it can affect some ppl. i have friends who were distracted by Die Hard becuase it was highly "unrealistic" . . .or another one of my friends saying Schindlers List wasn't violent enough! sheesh you can't please everybody. . .

IMO wumpus, purely on action sequences alone, i cant see why you would think the restaurant fight with Jen or the showdown fight between the lead two females was "bad" action sequences. i think they were the best ones ive seen in a LONG time. if they went the video game route ala The Matrix with rotating cameras i think ppl would find it not to fit the movies tone.

and even if ppl DIDN't like the action sequences there is alot more to like in the movie. The same ppl i heard chuckling throughout the whole movie, were some of the same ppl balling at the end of the movie.

But in any case everybody has an opinion. . . you just didn't like the movie. understandable

Sometimes overhype of a movie (some ppl may have expected ALOT from word of mouth of this movie) can deter a movie. . . and in CTHD's case i think it came as a letdown. . . the ppl saying "its gotta be great!! the guy choreographed Charlies Angels and the Matrix!!! the actions gonna ROCK!" are in for a letdown. the action seuences in CTHD are light years away from those other movies in tone and style. and the movies really is a tragic romance at its center.

Like ET. . . i took my nieces to see that movie when it was rereleased a few years ago, they thought it was GAY. (and they were arnd 8-10 yrs old at the time). they couldn't take the flying bycycle scenes... sheesh! oh well. ..

etc

"Let's go back to the well here. I don't object to the flying per se, but the fact that the flying looked patently ridiculous. If you can't make it look good, DON'T DO IT. See The Matrix for how it should be done. "

about the Matrix . . . after all wumpus complaints about CTHD, you know, i thought the matrix cool the first few times i saw it. But now that its played ad nauseam on EVERY cable movie channel EVERY day. . . I'm beginning to HATE IT. The dodging bullet scenes are getting to be laughable to me and NEO GEO turning into SUPERMAN at the end is even worse. . .

actually, i still think its a kind of a cool movie, but im really sick of the ultra slick slo motion John Woo rip-off action sequences. and i hope they keep the lanky uncoordinated Keanu Reaves from doing anymore martial arts in the sequels (i actually laughed in the theater when he dueled with Fishburn) . . . they will severely detract from the magic called the Matrix for me.

based on what i've heard from ppl in asia (just a general personal consensus), they didn't actually like The Matrix as much as we "westerneres" did. who knows, some might have said it was ridiculous.

Actually a few of my friends (who also didn't like CTHD) actually likened The Matrix to Spawn (meaning they hated it, though i wouldn't say Matrix was THAT BAD!)

etc