topics
GreenCine Movie Talk
	In The Theaters I just saw it and boy does it...	311

Hero
	Topic by: IronS Posted: August 27, 2004 - 9:29 PM PDT Last Reply: December 8, 2004 - 10:01 AM PST

page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9      prev | next

author	topic: Hero
IronS	post #161  on September 13, 2004 - 11:51 PM PDT   Now I've got that song in my head. Oh well. At least it's fun.
woozy	post #162  on September 14, 2004 - 1:00 AM PDT   > On September 13, 2004 - 11:51 PM PDT IronS wrote: > --------------------------------- > Now I've got that song in my head. Oh well. At least it's fun. > --------------------------------- To my little sister's annoyance, I always liked the "young hoofer goes to broadway" scene where Gene Kelly is describing his vision of the opening of the movie and we say this long and intricate and complicated dance story and then we cut back to Gene Kelly talking to the producer who then says, "Well, I can't really visualize it." Cracks me up every time.
hamano	post #163  on September 14, 2004 - 5:56 PM PDT   > On September 13, 2004 - 5:10 PM PDT woozy wrote: > --------------------------------- > > What did you think of Bound by the same directors? > > --------------------------------- > > Better but not terrific. If the leading ladies hadn't been so gosh darn cute, it would have been an entertaining for the moment but mostly forgettable mobster movie. Hey, I was asking Bowwow! Actually I wasn't but I think her answer would be more fun. IronS, did you see Bound? Who liked it more, you or your BF?
IronS	post #164  on September 14, 2004 - 6:12 PM PDT   > IronS, did you see Bound? > We haven't seen it yet. It's on my list.
NLee	post #165  on December 7, 2004 - 5:52 AM PST   Okay, I'm late. Just saw HERO on dvd last weekend. My impression? Rushomon meets Crouching Tiger by the way of The MATRIX. As to the message of the movie: it depends on how much you understand Chinese culture. <*Spoiler warning*> The key plot-turning point depends on the two words Broken Sword told Nameless: "Tian Xia". "Tian" means sky or heaven, "Xia" means under or below. So the two words literally translates to "Under Heaven". Tradiationally, emperors in China call themselves "Tain Zi, which literally translates to "Son of Heaven". So in the context of this movie, the message of "Tain Xia" is "the world undr one ruler" The English version, however, has the two words translated to "Our Land". As in "This land is your land, this land is my land". What the hell? The message is completely distorted. So, HERO appears as an artistic visual poem to the Western audiance, and at the same time it serves as the Communitist China's propaganda to the Chinese audience. Just like "Graves of the Fireflies" is both a anti-war movie to the Western audience and a pro-war movie to the Japanese audience. There you have it. Proof positive that you can have your cake and eat it too.
hamano	post #166  on December 7, 2004 - 6:36 AM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 5:52 AM PST NLee wrote: > --------------------------------- > Just like "Graves of the Fireflies" is both a anti-war movie to the Western audience and a pro-war movie to the Japanese audience. Actually it's only "a pro-war movie to the Japanese audience" for Republican idiots! Proof that you can have your cake, eat it, and still gag on it.... ^_^
NLee	post #167  on December 7, 2004 - 6:39 AM PST   See, hamano jumped!
NLee	post #168  on December 7, 2004 - 7:18 AM PST   Today happens to be Pearl Harbor day. So it is particular fitting to point out that the message of HERO is exactly the same as that used by the Imperial Japanese Army during WW2. At that time, Japan was promoting the concept of "Greater East Asia Commonwealth Ring", in which China, Korea and all the tiny countries in South East Asia will be "under heaven" (that is, under the rule of the Emperor of Japan). Of cause their way to achieve this is by slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians, so that there can be long-lasting peace for the future generations. Yeah Right!
kohnfused1	post #169  on December 7, 2004 - 10:11 AM PST   I just saw this last night, politics aside, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie for all the reasons NLee stated a few postings ago. Curious, had this movie been set during the time of the Romans and Greeks would that have been considered Communist idealism back then? (Considering these are the forefathers of Democracy.) Is expansion any different from unification? How far apart is the idea from a Dictatorian rule? Just curious.
NLee	post #170  on December 7, 2004 - 12:40 PM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 10:11 AM PST kohnfused1 wrote: > --------------------------------- > Curious, had this movie been set during the time of the Romans and Greeks would that have been considered Communist idealism back then? (Considering these are the forefathers of Democracy.) > The message of HERO (that small nations should just submit to a stronger invader in the name of 'unification' for the greater good) is not unique to communiism. As I mentioned eariler, the same propaganda has been used by the Imperial Japan during WW2. Had Hitler not been defeated, he would also conquer all of Europe in the name of 'unification'. What makes HERO suspiciously like a communist propaganda is the fact that throughout the Chinese history, Emporer Qin has always been protraited as a cruel and ruthless leader. One commonly cited example is that he burned all the books and buried 500 scholars alivel, so that people will not have any dissentient ideas. This image only changed during the Communist rule, because Chairman Mao openly compared himself to Emporor Qin during the Cultural Revolution. Something to the effects of "Emporer Qin only burid 500 intellects. I buried 5000 of them!" >Is expansion any different from unification? How far apart is the idea from a Dictatorian rule? It only makes a difference when some other country is 'expanding' into your country in the name of unification.
markhl	post #171  on December 7, 2004 - 2:51 PM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 12:40 PM PST NLee wrote: > The message of HERO (that small nations should just submit to a stronger invader in the name of 'unification' for the greater good) is not unique to communiism. As I mentioned eariler, the same propaganda has been used by the Imperial Japan during WW2. Interesting point. I didn't want to go quite that far in my analysis of Hero but I can follow along with your reasoning. The potential counter-argument is that whereas western cultures, particularly the U.S., emphasize and celebrate individualism, the opposite is so in most asian countries. Non-communist countries like South Korea (since I know of it more than other countries) still de-emphasize individualism in its culture for the "greater good of the whole." I think I've seen this idea most often referred to as being Confucian but in today's society, it's been mutated by Buddhist and then Christian influences more recently. The core idea still remains though. So, the sociological concept could be distinct from the political and perhaps Hero wasn't delivering a political message. This may be the case if you toss into consideration his last movie, House of Flying Daggers, which didn't appear to hide any political messages at all. Whether communism developed from or manipulated the already confucian background of the chinese people (as in your example with Emperor Qin), I won't comment. There's just too much history that I'm not familiar with. > >Is expansion any different from unification? How far apart is the idea from a Dictatorian rule? > > It only makes a difference when some other country is 'expanding' into your country in the name of unification. Perhaps military action can be part of the criteria for differentiating the two. If there is resistance, chances are, they are not being unified? (for the greater good or not). The concept of a nation seem awefully fleeting in the broader perspective of history. The borders between countries are so arbitrary. Who knows? maybe the U.S. will de-expand into two different countries as the Red and blue states separate? The general level of political indifference in the country will probably prevent that though :)
Catullus	post #172  on December 7, 2004 - 5:20 PM PST   I dont know how anyone could think that Grave of the Fireflies makes the japanese people pro-war... that situation came about because of the japanese government being pro-war, so basically being pro-war after watching that movie would be the same attitude which caused that to happen in the first place, self fufilling prophecy.
kamapuaa	post #173  on December 7, 2004 - 5:50 PM PST   > So, HERO appears as an artistic visual poem to the Western audiance, and at the same time it serves as the Communitist China's propaganda to the Chinese audience. Everybody I know who saw "Hero" thought it was a big propoganda piece (in addition to an artistic visual poem, and a bunch of Chinese people kicking each other). The ending was some pretty serious flag waving. > Actually it's only "a pro-war movie to the Japanese audience" for Republican idiots! That's not very charitable in light of ancient discussions. Anyway, are you suggesting there's Republicans on Greencine? And do Republicans have separate Republican opinions on anime? > The message of HERO (that small nations should just submit to a stronger invader in the name of 'unification' for the greater good) is not unique to communiism. As I mentioned eariler, the same propaganda has been used by the Imperial Japan during WW2. Had Hitler not been defeated, he would also conquer all of Europe in the name of 'unification'. I suppose you could say the same thing about (say) Lincoln, but that wouldn't sound as sinister as Hitler or the Co-Prosperity Plan (or Il Duce while we're at it) - anyway none of them is a very close match. All these sub-nations were in lengthy massive wars, the Qin emperor's winning the wars (due to organizing itself along Communist-esque lines) did indeed result in slaughter and subjugation, but also in the end to the wars, and the re-unification of China. Anyway I'd put the message more as the indivisual's responsibility to submit to the will of the nation, rather than national submission to more powerful nations. Even if there was an army or two, "Hero" was a movie about indivisuals rather than militaries or politics or battle formations.
NLee	post #174  on December 7, 2004 - 8:18 PM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 5:50 PM PST kamapuaa wrote: > --------------------------------- > Everybody I know who saw "Hero" thought it was a big propoganda piece (in addition to an artistic visual poem, and a bunch of Chinese people kicking each other). The ending was some pretty serious flag waving. That's the biggest problem I have with HERO. The movie presented Emperor Qin as a kind and just leader. Supposingly, his goal of 'unification' is to end all war and suffering, he has the revelation that the greatest swordsman is one that doesn't need to kill, etc. The English subtitle even said he built the great wall to protect his people. Yeah Right! Hitler also built the Atlantic Wall to protect his people, and he almost 'unified' Eurpoe, too. In fact, Emperor Qin ruled his unified 'China' (which is actually a small fraction of today's China) with iron clad and terror. The people he wanted to 'protect' revolted right after his death, and the Qin dynasty was over in just 15 years. In contrast, the Han dynasty which follows enjoied prosperity for over 400 years.
markhl	post #175  on December 7, 2004 - 10:23 PM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 8:18 PM PST NLee wrote: > The English subtitle even said he built the great wall to protect his people. Yeah Right! Hmm.. was the subtitling particularly bad for Hero? How much info was lost? Perhaps it was just my own perception of how Qin was portrayed.. I didn't completely believe his altruistic goal in the movie even.. He definitely wasn't portrayed as a tyrant agreed but I came away with the impression that perhaps his initial intentions may have been more pure but possibly corrupted further and further with his rise in power. In terms of movies, a bit of a cliched complex villain? This is all how "I saw" the movie though with 0 historical background - which is how the american audience would see it I think. So the question of mine remains.. Why would Zhang Yimou make a propaganda-ridden movie? Have either of you run into any interviews with the director by any chance? It was released in China well ahead of the US no?
kamapuaa	post #176  on December 8, 2004 - 12:46 AM PST   > The English subtitle even said he built the great wall to protect his people. Yeah Right! Hitler also built the Atlantic Wall to protect his people, and he almost 'unified' Eurpoe, too. I just don't think the Hitler-Qin comparison fits. A comparison to Mao fits a little better, both in good points and bad. The Great Wall was to inconvenience invading barbarians. Also it wasn't all built over 15 years anyway, more like 1500 years or whatever. Zhang Yimou - I'd be interested to hear his views on it being propoganda. He denounced how "Not One Less" was supposedly interpreted as Communist propoganda in the West. Having seen the movie, I have no idea how it would be interpreted as Communist propoganda, anywhere. But I know that "Hero" was criticized as being propoganda, in Asia.
NLee	post #177  on December 8, 2004 - 10:01 AM PST   > On December 7, 2004 - 10:23 PM PST markhl wrote: > --------------------------------- > Hmm.. was the subtitling particularly bad for Hero? How much info was lost? I didn't pay too much attention to the subtitle. The most glaring error is in translating 'Tian Xia' into 'Our Land'. The ending message text in English (about how Emperor Qin became a kind and just leader, and that the Chineses people still call their country 'Our Land') was totally bogus. I suspect this part was just created to mislead Western audience and to please the communist government There are other subtle aspects that cannot be translated into English very well. One example is the so called 'Sha Chi', which is supposed to be energy field emitted from a killer. I forgot how it was translated, but it was just not quite right. (In the movie, the Sha Chi from Nameless was detected by the candles in front of Emperor Qin) Interesting side note: the concept of Sha Chi is comonly found in both Chinese and Japanese literatures. In fact, I saw a reference of it in this cute hentai comedy Koihime. > So the question of mine remains.. Why would Zhang Yimou make a propaganda-ridden movie? I guess it is beneficial for Zhang to be in good terms with the communist government, so that he can continue to get their cooperation in making more visualy stunning movies in China to impress Western audience. This way, he can continue to win international awards - as long the propaganda is not too obvious to people who are unfamilar with Chinese culture. Well, that's my cynical view of how everything works, anyway.

page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9      prev | next