2046 by Wong Kar-Wai

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I finally saw this yesterday. The main story was good, even though it had perhaps too many shots of women crying... The director's view was quite masculine, the female characters in the film were there basically just for the protagonist to love or not to love. I would've liked to see the same film from the women's point of view. Still, overall an enjoyable flick.

What I didn't get was the sci-fi elements; obviously, the sci-fi stories were parables of the real-life happenings (this was pretty much spelled out by the main character), but why include them in the first place? Couldn't the protagonist just as well have written something else? It seems as if Wong Kar-Wai was originally making a science fiction flick, then he scrapped that plan, but decided to use the material he'd shot anyway. I think this was even referred inside the film, when the protagonist mentions that people wondered why he was writing those stories set in 2046; to him 2046 was the hotel room number, but that seems more like a jokey, far-fetched justification for the use of the sci-fi stuff Kar-Wai had already shot.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 13:12 (twenty-one years ago)

2046 is
the year when Hong Kong goes back
under China's thumb.

― Haibun (Begs2Differ), Sunday, 26 December 2004 14:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Isn't that 2047? 1997 + 50 years; 2046 is the final year (according to China's promise) of the "one land, two systems" rule. Anyway, that China thing wasn't referred in any way in the film, even though it was obviously the original reference for its title.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 14:54 (twenty-one years ago)

"It seems as if Wong Kar-Wai was originally making a science fiction flick, then he scrapped that plan, but decided to use the material he'd shot anyway."

this is pretty much what did happen according to Sight and Sound this month. i have watched about half of this unsubtitled from the net. Obviosult i can't undertsand the story but it looks Poor by WKW's standards and the "future" stuff looks pretty naff to me. Maybe he got so close to the material he lost any sense of perspective? still looking forward to seeing it on the big screen in a couple of weeks.

― jed_ (jed), Sunday, 26 December 2004 14:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, the sci-fi scenes take maybe 15 minutes of the two hour plus film, so they don't ruin it in any way. Also, (most of) the scenes relate to the actual plot, so that's not the problem; what's wrong with them is that they feel out of place in a romantic story set in 1960s Hong Kong.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 15:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Still, it felt like Wong Kar-Wai had to stretch it a bit to explain why exactly do those scenes relate to the main story. I think the film wouldn't have suffered much if most of them had been cut.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 15:09 (twenty-one years ago)

does it actually work as a companion piece to "In The Mood For Love"?

The Sight and Sound Article goes into quite a bit of detail about the filming for ITMFL and 2046 - the fall outs with Chris Doyle, the moving of the unit from Hong Kong to Bankok after 2/3rds of the film had been completed. Wong then decided to start again from scratch (on the grounds that Bankok looked more like the Hong Kong of the 50's and 60's then Hong Kong itself did) and relations with Doyle broke down - as a result anly a few minutes of ITMFL were actually photographed by Doyle. When shooting began (for the first attempt) on 2046 Wong and Doyle made up to an extent and decided to give it a go again but that didn't last for long and all of that material was subsequently scrapped. Criterion are about to release a special edition of ITMFL with Doyles Hong Kong footage on a seperate disc - apparently a great deal of footage and a completely different film and concept from ITMFL as we know it now.

― jed_ (jed), Sunday, 26 December 2004 15:31 (twenty-one years ago)

that's very garbled, sorry.

― jed_ (jed), Sunday, 26 December 2004 15:32 (twenty-one years ago)

This is where I boast that I hung out with Chris Doyle in Hong Kong this September -- he actually came to my gig at the Fringe Club. Lovely man, but a bit partial to the old sauce.

― Momus (Momus), Sunday, 26 December 2004 15:33 (twenty-one years ago)

the fall outs with Chris Doyle

i read about this with great disappointment. they haven't worked together since the 'In the Mood' reshoots.

― nick.K (nick.K), Sunday, 26 December 2004 16:30 (twenty-one years ago)

why couldn't he have just made a scifi movie? sounds like he chickened out

― s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 26 December 2004 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

From a pretty ace review by Tim Rogers (here):

For me, the most amazing part of the film is a very short sequence regarding the science-fiction novel written by the hero in 1967, about the year 2046. In that novel, a Japanese man is on a train that will take him out of the year 2046 and toward a "new beginning." The only reason he went to the year 2046 anyway, the story explains vaguely, is to "find his lost memories." On the train, he meets a robot girl -- played by Faye Wong -- who he falls into an odd litle love with. He asks her, his words appearing for the second time in the movie, "Do you know what people used to do when they had a secret? They went deep into the mountains, found a tree, opened a hole in it, whispered the secret in, and sealed it with mud. That way, no one ever had to know the secret." He then asks her to come with him, to his new future. She doesn't answer. He thinks she doesn't want to go. Then, in a conversation (in Chinese I'm not . . . sure he understands) with a bartender, he's informed that the robots on the train out of 2046 take several hours to react. If they try to laugh, it might be five hours, or ten hours before the laugh comes out. In addition -- the train out of 2046 takes a different length of time for each passenger. For some people, it's only a few minutes. For the Japanese man (played by SMAP star Takuya Kimura, who also does the main character's voice in the new Hayao Miyazaki film opening next week), it takes several weeks. This is because his past is, of course, the same past as the past of the writer, played by hot-star Tony Leung. Everything in the sci-fi portion of the story has a counterpart in the 1960s Hong Kong portion of the story, though no two of the instances are really fun or clever to point out.

― Gravel Puzzleworth (Gregory Henry), Sunday, 26 December 2004 18:30 (twenty-one years ago)

I mean! That sounds incredible.

― Gravel Puzzleworth (Gregory Henry), Sunday, 26 December 2004 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

How is Takuya Kimura? And when does this movie come to NYC?

― Mary (Mary), Sunday, 26 December 2004 18:35 (twenty-one years ago)

sounds like some pretty shitty robots--ten hours to LAUGH?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 26 December 2004 21:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Takuya Kimura's role is somewhat small, there's nothing particularly impressive avbout it. I didn't think the scene Tim Rogers describes was *that* amazing; as I said, it felt like a remnant of a different film put inside another one (as it was), and then given some justification why it is there. The sci-fi scenes were actually quite pretty, sorta like a kitschy, romantic version of Blade Runner, but I would've liked to have seen a real sci-fi flick by the director, not just a couple of scenes inside another (admittedly good) film.

I haven't seen "In the Mood for Love", so I can't comment on their relation, but 2046 worked well on its own.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 21:38 (twenty-one years ago)

The funny thing about the scenes with Takuya Kimura was that he was speaking Japanese while the other characters spoke Chinese, but it seemed like they still understood each other.

So, I take it that 2046 hasn't been released yet in the US... What about the UK? Did I start this thread too early?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Sunday, 26 December 2004 21:44 (twenty-one years ago)

I've hired this twice, and both the mainland and HK VCD's are both unsubtitled. 20th Century Fox = rotten cunts.

― Mil (Mil), Sunday, 26 December 2004 22:32 (twenty-one years ago)

I wouldn't recommmend viewing it on DVD, it was so beautifully shot it needs to be seen in cinema.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Monday, 27 December 2004 09:58 (twenty-one years ago)

It comes out in the uk on the 14th (i think) of jan.

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 27 December 2004 16:06 (twenty-one years ago)

i dunno, i'm worried about this one.

boy "chungking express" really is amazing, isn't it? i just watched it again this week.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

"boy "chungking express" really is amazing, isn't it? i just watched it again this week."

Everything he's done (except for Tears Go By which is just okay and Days of Being Wild which is him still working up to Chungking Express and Happy Together) is amazing. Ashes of Time may be my favorite now though.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:44 (twenty-one years ago)

I can't find any news about when this opens in the U.S. If anyone knows anything, please write herein. (I did find that I can purchase both the Mandarin DVD and movie soundtrack in Chinatown.)

― Mary (Mary), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:50 (twenty-one years ago)

i haven't seen "tears go by." i thought "in the mood for love" was lacking in...something. i have an extreme fondness for "happy together," mess though it undoubtedly is.

mary it doesn't have a distributor yet so there's no news. :-(

but in the meantime you can buy the DVD from hong kong!

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:50 (twenty-one years ago)

oh duh just read your comment about the DVD. i'm told that the mainland DVD sucks and to get the new hong kong DVD from mei ah. in case you're doing some chinatown shopping. i miss NYC chinatown...

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:51 (twenty-one years ago)

"i have an extreme fondness for "happy together," mess though it undoubtedly is."

Well all of his movies are pretty messy. Happy Together manages (and not by accident) to perfectly capture something though within its mess (or perhaps because of it.) In The Mood For Love is maybe the weakest of the post-Days WKW flicks (tied with Fallen Angels perhaps) but even slightly off WKW is about a million times better than what most other director's churn out.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 20:56 (twenty-one years ago)

i love in the mood for love!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:02 (twenty-one years ago)

i saw it on a date!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Me too, but I like Chungking Express, Ashes of Time and Happy Together more so by definition it's slightly weaker than them.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:04 (twenty-one years ago)

it's the only wkw movie i've ever seen on a date.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Happy Together is not the best date movie. Although the end is upbeat enough, I guess.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:06 (twenty-one years ago)

ITMFL was totally perfect for the nature of the date i was on

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:09 (twenty-one years ago)

cinema's murakami.

― cºzen (Cozen), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Were your SO's sleeping with one another?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:11 (twenty-one years ago)

"cinema's murakami."

I can't tell if that's meant to be an insult or not.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:12 (twenty-one years ago)

"South of the Border, West of the Sun" is fairly like ITMFL i suppose. ITMFL is the best film of his i have seen i think, Id love to see Ashes of Time.

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:20 (twenty-one years ago)

It's available in Region I at the very least (I'm not sure about the quality though.)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Actually according to Amazon the readily available domestic version is a terrible transfer.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 21:26 (twenty-one years ago)

DVDBeaver says the two Asian releases (Mei Ah and mainland) are terrible, too.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 27 December 2004 22:12 (twenty-one years ago)

Here is the DVD Beaver comparison:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/2046.htm

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 27 December 2004 22:15 (twenty-one years ago)

HKFlix has the good two-disc 2046 for $25 or $16 for the one-disc. If I thought it was going to get American distribution I'd wait, but if it hasn't been picked up by now I guess it probably won't.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Monday, 27 December 2004 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)

ashes of time is pretty rocking.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 27 December 2004 22:22 (twenty-one years ago)

Hmmph. I wish Criterion would do all his flicks.

Milo it'll get picked up eventually. Most of his films have taken forever to get distribution, but they all get released eventually.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 27 December 2004 22:25 (twenty-one years ago)

2046 is the year when Hong Kong goes back under China's thumb.

not really. people have said that this is significant because somebody once said that HK would remain unchanged for half a century after the handover, and that WKW had had the 'profound' realization that nothing stays the same for fifty years. ho-hum. not exactly a bad film, but certainly an incoherent one.

― henry miller, Monday, 10 January 2005 12:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Fallen Angels on bbc4 tomorrow night btw

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/listings/programme.shtml?day=tuesday&filename=20050111/20050111_2300_4544_38184_95

BBC4 Tue 11 Jan, 23:00-00:35 95mins Stereo

"Five inhabitants of Hong Kong's seedy underworld come together in Wong Kar-Wai's stunningly filmed second feature film.

The central stories involve an anonymous assassin, a mysterious man who takes over closed stores and the gunman's enigmatic female assignment officer. [Wong Kar-Wai, 1995]"

― koogs (koogs), Monday, 10 January 2005 13:36 (twenty-one years ago)

A terrible film. It makes no sense in terms of plot or emotionally. It doesn't work on it's own and it doesn't work as a follow up to "In the Mood for Love" (and actually kinda ruined that film for me too). It's a huge mess and it is utterly boring.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:51 (twenty years ago)

I don't think there could be a greater recommendation than this!

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:55 (twenty years ago)

haha!

― cozen (Cozen), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:55 (twenty years ago)

FWIW: there are at least two edits of 2046 floating around [the "Cannes edit" and the "Director's Cut"]... and now supposedly there is a In The Mood For Love BOX SET due out on Criterion which will set the stage for 2046 much better!?!?!?!?!?!

― gygax! (gygax!), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:58 (twenty years ago)

Actually, I didn't really enjoy In The Mood For Love (pretty, but boring) so maybe I will like this one.

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:58 (twenty years ago)

mwahaha! wait til you hear the last line of the film, its hilarious. watching this was like being told the most boring dream ever by someone who is so caught up in themselves they don't realise your eyes have glazed over.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 20:59 (twenty years ago)

What?

When is CASSHERN US Edition released? Is region free?

― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 19 January 2005 21:00 (twenty years ago)

I got mine "the director's cut" on bootleg HK region 3 (china) dvd

― gygax! (gygax!), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 21:01 (twenty years ago)

watching this was like being told the most boring dream ever by someone who is so caught up in themselves they don't realise your eyes have glazed over.

Sounds like Million Dollar Baby.

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

I usually like watching good looking people smoke cigarettes.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 21:10 (twenty years ago)

I have no idea which cut I saw at the cinema, but it lasted a little over two hours.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:38 (twenty years ago)

This thread reminded me that the Guardian had a Chris Doyle article a couple weeks ago:

http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,6737,1384812,00.html

― gygax! (gygax!), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:51 (twenty years ago)

Actually, I didn't really enjoy In The Mood For Love (pretty, but boring)

your soul is a withered thing, your heart made of sponge

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:53 (twenty years ago)

Actually, I didn't really enjoy In The Mood For Love (pretty, but boring)

Have we already bonded over this, Adam?

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:54 (twenty years ago)

i hate you all

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:55 (twenty years ago)

Have we already bonded over this, Adam?

What haven't we bonded over? I almost feel like a part of you!

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:57 (twenty years ago)

Oh dear.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

Your blog comment was amusing.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

I mean, the one you left for me.

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:00 (twenty years ago)

I'm still trying for Bartlett's.

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:01 (twenty years ago)

"I'm still trying for Bartlett's."
ADAM, 2005

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:02 (twenty years ago)

http://store.digitalfaucet.com/gallery/pear.jpg

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:03 (twenty years ago)

I don't know what is funnier - that big white space or the thought of gygax reading The Guardian.

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:04 (twenty years ago)

Spooky! "Image properties" tells me that Kyle and I had the same idea!

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:05 (twenty years ago)

which idea was that?

― .ada.m. (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

you can't see that pear? goddamn internet

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

It looks great but is a bit boring. I thought the main character was a FULE for getting rid of that Bai Ling lady. She was HAWT, and kind of loveable with it. Still, I want to be as suave as the main character, and one day I will.

I did like the way the landlord reconciled himself to the daughter marrying the Japanese guy, he said spoilerishly.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

pears can just fuck right off

― jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:24 (twenty years ago)

a BIT boring!!?

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:26 (twenty years ago)

the looking nice and having loads of attractive women in it made it a bit less boring than it might have been otherwise.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:44 (twenty years ago)

i thought it was pretty great--almost a remake of days of being wild--and pretty emotionally wrenching to be honest.

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:54 (twenty years ago)

tho i should add i cry EVERY time i see In the Mood For Love

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:54 (twenty years ago)

it seems to treat his earlier films as memories within the movie--it's very strange. (For instance some music from Days of Being Wild appears.)

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 19 January 2005 23:58 (twenty years ago)

best good looking people staring into space while smoking cigarettes film ever, which, while not french, reminded me of one my favorite mark sinker quotes:

"many chiXoRz have cute butts: get over it, the entire history of french cinema"

― dan (dan), Thursday, 20 January 2005 00:16 (twenty years ago)

why didn't they end it where there was a clear, natural end? i mean when the cute android girl was staring off into space for 1000 hours and he was smoking on the terrace by himself and summing everything up. i really liked it up until that point. but then he had to KEEP GOING for another two stories, which didn't really matter at that point, and seemed totally unnecessary and boring. if anything, i thought he'd end up with the younger daughter, as a way to find a 'happy ending'...

but lots of pretty ladies, sure.

― colette (a2lette), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:17 (twenty years ago)

But is it better than Heartbeeps?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 20 January 2005 01:52 (twenty years ago)

chixors having cute butts is nothing to "get over"!

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Thursday, 20 January 2005 03:15 (twenty years ago)

yay! i'm glad people have called time on this one.

― Miles Finch, Friday, 21 January 2005 11:46 (twenty years ago)

two weeks pass...

i really liked the way it wa totally rambling and a mess, but i needed the toilet all the way thru which made me a bit impoatient towards the end. i think it could have ended where colette ws thinking, in fact it could have ended at a million different points

but it was still cool, i loved the sci-fi bits! they were so cool, futuristic trains are awesome!

and well, zhang ziyi............................!

― ambrose (ambrose), Monday, 7 February 2005 00:59 (twenty years ago)

three months pass...

it's out on DVD on monday in the UK.

― jed_ (jed), Friday, 20 May 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)

fuxx0Rs

― Ken L (Ken L), Friday, 20 May 2005 16:44 (twenty years ago)

did this even open in theaters in the US? so much anticipation for something that apparently just died

― kyle (akmonday), Friday, 20 May 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

It's coming out in US theaters sometime.. this fall.
"2046" will have its US premiere at the upcoming Tribeca Film Festival, with lead actor Tony Leung Chiu-wai in attendance, followed by a general release in the Fall.

There are a few articles around from people who saw it at Tribeca, but looks like everyone else is out of luck for a while. I've been holding off on watching my dvd again until the US release, but I think that's out of the question, now.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 20 May 2005 17:37 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...

I really liked 2046 but have not seen 'in the mood for love'. will do though as the nft are showing a christopher doyle season, practically an excuse to re-show most if not all of kar-wai's work.

S/D: Christopher Doyle

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 19 July 2005 09:36 (twenty years ago)

oops - http://www.bfi.org.uk/showing/nft/doyle/calendar/index.php

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 19 July 2005 09:38 (twenty years ago)

I bought this, Creep and Team America. I haven't watched this yet, but I'm hoping it's better than the other two.

― dog latin (dog latin), Monday, 25 July 2005 14:24 (twenty years ago)

you have to go and see it, Julio! I went yesterday and it's fantastic, so slow and lush and perfectly-drawn and Maggie Cheung's dresses are practically a character of their own they are so beautiful. That series basically is a big excuse for nft to behave like they didn't do a Wong Kar-Wai season a few months ago. Am seeing 2046 this evening, excitement.

― spontine (cis), Monday, 25 July 2005 15:14 (twenty years ago)

yes, will see 'in the mood...' sat afternoon.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Monday, 25 July 2005 15:50 (twenty years ago)

Maggie Cheung's dresses are practically a character of their own

OTM!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

as are Tony's suits... incredible wardrobe design.

― gygax! (gygax!), Monday, 25 July 2005 16:36 (twenty years ago)

I realized earlier today that I could order the DVD, never having had the opportunity to see it on screen. What went wrong, WKW?

― Mary (Mary), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:47 (twenty years ago)

US Wide Release (Sony Pictures) 8/5/2005 = it will be WKW's 3rd (THIRD) cut since Cannes. There are only 2 cuts available on DVD right now.

― gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:54 (twenty years ago)

does anyone like any of them so far?

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 00:59 (twenty years ago)

the writers in Film Comment (no less than three stars in the critic roundup, two love letter critical essays)

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 01:10 (twenty years ago)

Thanks for the gy. Here's Sony Pictures site:

http://www.sonyclassics.com/2046/

This looks so much more like ITMFL than I expected. I thought it was gonna be Kimutaku messing around with animals.

― Mary (Mary), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 01:36 (twenty years ago)

i heard Maggie Chung is only in it for a minute or so, though

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)

SPOILERS

I'll undoubtedly see this a few times in the theater once it actually hits American release time, but after watching the HK DVD I'm going to have to say I love it. It's like a possible version of what happens after ITMFL in that Tony Leung's character is where he left off, but instead of the clean break at the end of ITMFL he's still bitter. Nothing's really happened in his life, despite his fiction career taking off. The stunted relationships and integration of his fiction with his romances comes off as melancholy, in a way. Unless it's been dramatically recut again, the trailer is way misleading in its use of all the future footage.

― mike h. (mike h.), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:02 (twenty years ago)

I don't know why I haven't gotten around to seeing this yet, maybe I'll look for a copy of the hk dvd this weekend.

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 26 July 2005 02:14 (twenty years ago)

I'm kind of surprised and excited by all the positive American reviews. I wonder how different it is from the previous cuts and if the SFX have been redone etc. I still haven't seen it, but will finally next week!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 5 August 2005 16:49 (twenty years ago)

Wait, is it about out over here? Shows you what being away does for my perception of film release schedules.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 August 2005 16:58 (twenty years ago)

Yesterday!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

(LA/Manhattan)

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

Noted.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

spencer--you will love it.

― dan (dan), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:07 (twenty years ago)

I'm so pyched. I've been waiting for 5 years to see this. I even applied to be an extra!

My impossibly nerdy preparation this week is to watch my new import copy of Last Year at Marienbad (it's a stunning reissue). Then read The Invention of Morel, and then watch Days of Being Wild and In the Mood for Love. Only then will I be ready.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:12 (twenty years ago)

i'd suggest going into it expecting nothing more than eye candy, with anything else being a bonus. it's not "in the mood for love". you'll still love it.

― dan (dan), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:18 (twenty years ago)

Good plan. WKW = the most exquisite eye candy in modern film.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:21 (twenty years ago)

expecting nothing more than eye candy, with anything else being a bonus

This is almost but not like every band interview with Melody Maker circa 1990. (This is not a complaint.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 5 August 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

Still sprawling, though tightly cut. Ziyi Zhang has this whole Natalie Portman thing going where she can succeed mightily by being freakishly good looking -- but with better acting chops/choice of material. More enjoyable for me than ITMFL, for a bunch of reasons, though I want to say it's because 2046 is more 'active' than ITMFL, but that's a way short form answer. Faye Wong has a few closeups that betray her age in relation to her character tho.

― The Original Jimmy Mod: A Negro (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Saturday, 6 August 2005 07:01 (twenty years ago)

Faye Wong has a few closeups that betray her age in relation to her character tho.

you think? i think i was too insanely attracted to her throughout the movie to notice. i wonder how different this version is from my bootleg version. it will surely look better at any rate. when is this fucker coming to Texas?

― ryan (ryan), Saturday, 6 August 2005 07:48 (twenty years ago)

Alex in SF OTM.

The funny thing about the scenes with Takuya Kimura was that he was speaking Japanese while the other characters spoke Chinese, but it seemed like they still understood each other.
It seemed to me that Tony Leung was speaking Cantonese and some others were speaking Mandarin but they still seemed to understand him, but I'm not sure.

I liked it a lot although maybe you have to seen all the other movies -even if you, like me, forget half of what you saw- in order to like it? While watching it, I was worried it was going to end up feeling thin or cobbled together but Ziyi Zhang's intense, note-perfect performace made it all work. I also really liked the Japanese character, maybe because Japanese seems like a futuristic language.

― k/l (Ken L), Thursday, 11 August 2005 18:32 (twenty years ago)

i think Days of Being Wild seems to be as much a reference point for this movie as In the Mood for Love. (i may have said that upthread already but i'll be damned if im gonna scroll up to see.) but all of Wong's movies seem to refer to each other.

― ryan (ryan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 18:52 (twenty years ago)

xp:
Isn't Mandarin more common in Singapore than Cantonese? So those scenes might have had mismatched language-y stuff.

I think there's one scene where Kimutaku is speaking in Japanese and the old guy on the train (? i think it is) replies in Japanese, but with a really thick Cantonese accent. (When I went to see 2046 I'd forgotten he was in it, and therefore spent his first scene going 'but but but he's in SMAP! and does heartwarming tv dramas!' etc etc etc.)

― spontine (cis), Thursday, 11 August 2005 19:01 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, Japanese w/ Cantonese accent is what it sounded like to me. The reason I got a little preoccupied with this was, last week I heard some guy on the radio (Leonard Lopate?) interviewing Tony Leung and asking him was it difficult to be working in a Mandarin language movie when he only spoke Cantonese, which he asked more than once, and Tony finally said, no doubt to shut the guy up: "Yes, that is probably why WKW made my character a mute," butI was still amazed when he actually spoke for the first time.

― k/l (Ken L), Thursday, 11 August 2005 19:09 (twenty years ago)

And I think ryan otm about DOBW being a reference point- doesn't WKW refer to a trilogy?

― k/l (Ken L), Thursday, 11 August 2005 19:11 (twenty years ago)

spencer was slightly wrong:

ZZ = the most exquisite eye candy in modern film.

― ambrose (ambrose), Thursday, 11 August 2005 19:18 (twenty years ago)

At least one viewer was converted to this position last night.

― k/l (Ken L), Thursday, 11 August 2005 19:23 (twenty years ago)

"Yes, that is probably why WKW made my character a mute"

dude! aw man, I love Tony Leung. I wonder if the Singapore scenes in ITMFL were dual-language?

There's some Mandarin-only actors who work in HK film, aren't there? One of the guys in Infernal Affairs 2 (he plays SP Luk I think, can't remember actor's name) was dubbed all the way through, apparently because his Cantonese accent is vastly unconvincing as he doesn't actually speak it.

(o'course, Fulltime Killer is the king of Mandarin/Cantonese/Japanese/English language confusion craziness films.)

― spontine (cis), Thursday, 11 August 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)

There's a ZZ bonus feature on the Hong Kong DVD. I haven't watched the whole thing, but I think it's just footage of her on the set!

― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 11 August 2005 21:31 (twenty years ago)

WKW's movies are full of language shifts!

ITMFL has Shanghainese and Cantonese.
DOBW has Cantonese, Mandarin and Tagalog.
CKE has Cantonese, Mandarin, Japanese, English, and an Indian dialect.

Actually, Chungking Express was officially released with Cantonese and Mandarin audio tracks depending on the market. The US version is split between Mandarin and Cantonese narration (each narrator's native tongue).

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 11 August 2005 21:33 (twenty years ago)

...makes me think of bootleg vcds with Cantonese in one ear and Mandarin in the other.

― spontine (cis), Thursday, 11 August 2005 21:38 (twenty years ago)

I really loved it.

Anthology Film Archives is showing a few WKW films this weekend.

― C0L1N B... (C0L1N B...), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:26 (twenty years ago)

My god, he sure knows how to do ravishing and rapturous and all those other R words, romantic, rhapsodic. Maybe 20 mins. too long, the Black Spider flashback felt tacked-on, like he didn't want to lose it but wasn't sure where to stick it. But I'm not complaining. I could live in his movies.

And it's a lot more than eye candy, although teasing out exactly what and how would take way more words than I'm going to write at the moment. I heart Wong.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Saturday, 13 August 2005 00:25 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I felt the Black Spider thing was a little extraneous, but I think I'll keep it, if only for the "If you win, I'll tell you" bit.

― k/l (Ken L), Saturday, 13 August 2005 03:39 (twenty years ago)

The black spider thing was all important!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 20 August 2005 16:18 (twenty years ago)

I can't imagine a movie I would enjoy more being released anytime soon, but then again, a gorgeous yet bittersweet meditation on the circular and dynamic nature of memory, fantasy and loss is right up my alley. It's almost difficult to behold the beauty of the film - and especially Zhang Ziyi. I believe Mr. Chow was speaking Shanghainese to her Mandarin (although she toned down the high 'shure-shure' Beijing accent).

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Saturday, 20 August 2005 16:25 (twenty years ago)

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare/inthemoodforlove/1.31.37-cri-lastframe.jpg

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Sunday, 21 August 2005 18:40 (twenty years ago)

i really loved this movie and was really taken aback at all the negative reviews happening up-thread (and almost a year ago!) i'm going to guess the version that finally came out was radically different from the versions circulating back in december. i thought the sci-fi stuff was completely germane to the movie's theme, and didn't find it overdone or hokey at all. my favorite movie of the summer so far.

― PeopleFunnyBoy (PeopleFunnyBoy), Sunday, 21 August 2005 21:35 (twenty years ago)

more like Wanker Y

― lolololololololololololololololololol, Sunday, 21 August 2005 23:28 (twenty years ago)

i thought the sci-fi stuff was completely germane to the movie's theme

Yes! I actually wanted more sci-fi... and much more Chang Chen! Still, it's my favorite Wong Kar-Wai, and my favorite movie this year.

― Cherish, Monday, 22 August 2005 04:20 (twenty years ago)

saw this last night....I felt it went just a tad too long, at the end; and still haven't fully digested all of it; but it certainly is the best looking movie I've seen in many years. Obv. Doyle and Kar-Wai know how to film women.

It needs more thinking on, perhaps another viewing; why is Tony such a shit to Bai Ling? Is it simply just because he sees her as a prostitute? After seeing him be so kind of Faye Wong's character I was hoping for some kind maturation in him (actually I think it's the final scene with Bai Ling that made me feel the film was too long; perhaps I just didn't care for how it made Tony look).

I completely, utterly missed Maggie Cheung. Was that her in the final sequence with Su Li Zhen when he says "I knew another Su LI Zhen and I talked with her about her all the time" and there is a very, very blurry shot of a woman in a red and white dress?

― kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 28 August 2005 13:47 (twenty years ago)

Maggie Cheung is in several shots.

Also, Mr. Chow says to Bai Ling at the end that there's one thing he can't share and my friend was wondering if Ping had been her customer? I need to watch it again too.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Sunday, 28 August 2005 17:13 (twenty years ago)

Also, the motion of the beginning titles is amazing.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Sunday, 28 August 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

As I said, to many people, I think that Tony Leung and Zhang Ziyi are like the only real movie stars on the planet right now. She is just so staggeringly beautiful, it's ridiculous!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Sunday, 28 August 2005 18:01 (twenty years ago)

also the film was...quite good, really.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Sunday, 28 August 2005 18:01 (twenty years ago)

yes I like it more the more I think about it. this is the only non-disappointing movie I've seen all year.

― kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 28 August 2005 20:13 (twenty years ago)

while watching, there were moments where I had to take a breath. but afterwards the film unpacked itself completely, every single scene is crucial. been thinking about it all weekend, can't think of a single question that's been raised on this thread that isn't answered by the film itself.

when the film backs up to show you the black spider subplot, and finally shows you their kiss... that's the most out of control, passionate kiss in the whole film... his later affairs make more sense when you see who he fell for in Singapore.

it remains a huge tragedy the way he treats Bai Ling, it's supposed to be a tragedy, he's lost.

one thing I'm wondering... the subtitles show him calling himself a 'journalist' when he's clearly a pulp fiction writer and referred to as an 'artist' by other characters... is this a troubled translation or is there something specific going on that I'm not getting?

― milton parker (Jon L), Sunday, 28 August 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

Princess Raccoon"

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Sunday, 28 August 2005 20:47 (twenty years ago)

milton, I kindly assume that you have not seen Days Of Being Wild nor In The Mood For Love? (you need to if not!)

2046 wraps the Carina Lao subplot of DoBW three scenes in--Mr Chow insists to Carina Lau (Fung-Ying aka "MiMi"/"Lulu") that she was too in love with Leslie Cheung's character (Yuddy, referred to as the wealthy Chinese/Filipino) to remember their meeting... Mr. Chow references that Mimi refers to Yuddy as the bird with no legs destined to fly forever.

This is the 3rd movie to refer to Maggie's Su Lizhen character (DoBW and ITMFL were the first). milton, in ITMFL, Mr. Chow and Su Lizhen (aka Mrs. Chan) work on a serial together at night when he's not working as a news writer/typesetter (Mr. Ping is his editor, and IMO not a customer of Bai Ling's).

I think what Mr. Chow is trying to say in the line that Spencer mentions is that he can't give Bai Ling his heart because he had already given it away to someone else (the secret packed in mud in the temple in Phnom Phen).

― gygax! (gygax!), Sunday, 28 August 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

Mr. Chow >< Spencer in the above post, sorry Spencer.

― gygax! (gygax!), Sunday, 28 August 2005 21:09 (twenty years ago)

Is Mr Ping the bald guy? He is great!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Sunday, 28 August 2005 21:11 (twenty years ago)

xpost
Haha, Mr Gax Gy-Xor!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Sunday, 28 August 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)

the only other film I've seen of his is fallen angels, quite a few years ago -- it must have caught me on a bad night, I couldn't get into it. it's obviously time for me to catch up.

― milton parker (Jon L), Monday, 29 August 2005 02:56 (twenty years ago)

are the Kino editions of the earlier films good transfers?

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 29 August 2005 02:58 (twenty years ago)

Saw it, liked it a lot, and I was not at all a huge fan of In The Mood For Love. Zhang Ziyi would've been a much better (Capote-faithful) Holly Golightly than Audrey Hepburn.

The s.f. stuff seemed a mistake at first, but I felt less so at the end. People who find it boring deserve a Michael Bay film diet.

(btw m.p. I think Fallen Angels is his worst film)

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

I assume you mean his worst non-As Tears Go By film. I agree with that (even though I still think Fallen Angels is very good.)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:18 (twenty years ago)

In order:

1) Happy Together
2) Ashes of Time
3) Chungking Express
4) Days of Being Wild
5) In The Mood For Love
6) Fallen Angels
7) As Tears Go By

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:22 (twenty years ago)

where does 2046 fall in there for you?

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:25 (twenty years ago)

you forgot his amazing BMW film!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:25 (twenty years ago)

and the other short things he has contributed to various anthologies!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:26 (twenty years ago)

Otherwise I would almost agree with that last. I haven't seen Ashes Of Time.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:29 (twenty years ago)

Between 4 and 5. I thought it was really really good.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:33 (twenty years ago)

BTW even As Tears Go By is a very good film. It just totally pales compared to the other seven. I don't remember the BMW film. Unless it was the one with Skarsard wounded in the car told mostly in flashback which was very good, but probably not better than any of full lengths. I haven't seen his recent short in the "love" movie either actually.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:36 (twenty years ago)

I haven't seen "Tears" in ages, but I don't remember being actively annoyed by it as I was by FA.

Ashes of Time is OK but an anomaly in his oeuvre, and reminiscent of others in the genre done better.

Where did Dean Martin's "Sway" pop up in 2046? I saw it in the credits but don't recall hearing it.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:39 (twenty years ago)

Unless it was the one with Skarsard wounded in the car told mostly in flashback which was very good

Wasn't that by John Woo?

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

Dr M, it played at about 4 or 5 times througout the movie!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

I didn't dislike FA as much as Dr. Morbius, but it did seem a little phoned in, relatively speaking.

― k/l (Ken L), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

http://usa.bmwfilms.com/clap.asp?template=delivery&country=usa&film=follow

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:42 (twenty years ago)

Well I'm not that familiar with the Dean record, and scoring often stays way in the background with me if that's the case.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:43 (twenty years ago)

I like FA - it has some of my favorite scenes of any of his movies - but it's more a series of loosely connected improvised sketches than a proper movie. The moment when the son videos himself lying down next to his dad sleeping is one of the most powerful images from any film that I can remember though.

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:44 (twenty years ago)

I couldn't disagree more about Ashes of Time. It's quintescentially Wong Kar Wai (through the Swordsman films by way of Leone.) What sword opera movies (or westerns or samurai flicks) do you think are better cuz I think Ashes rivals Once Upon A Time in the West?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:47 (twenty years ago)

I don't even remember "Follow". Weren't they going to release these all on DVD or in the theater?

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:48 (twenty years ago)

neither. web promotion.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:48 (twenty years ago)

will Wong Kar-Wai ever go hollywood?

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:49 (twenty years ago)

He just did!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:50 (twenty years ago)

Read the thread title!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:50 (twenty years ago)

Actually, he went Hollywood with In The Mood For Love, but it's more obvious in 2046.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:50 (twenty years ago)

by that I meant "do a studio film as a hired director" ala Ang Lee doing the Hulk. I'd similarly be interested in seeing Atom Egoyan do a studio film. Every time interesting directors do this the results are terrible, but I'd still be interested in it, for reason.

I mean how good would AI have been if Wong Kar Wai had made it rather than Speilberg?

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:54 (twenty years ago)

Haha it would have been amazing and made 2 cents. I don't think anyone is going to give someone as notoriously flaky and marginally commercial Wong much creative control of a film they think'll make any money.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:57 (twenty years ago)

not as good!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:57 (twenty years ago)

I didn't know Wong Kar Wai was on Charlie Rose. I wish I'd seen this:

http://www.wongkarwai.net/stories.php?story=05/07/29/1004192

― o. nate (onate), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:57 (twenty years ago)

It's not Wong who is anti-commerical, it's his editor.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:58 (twenty years ago)

Now you'll tell me he edits his own films.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:58 (twenty years ago)

Although depending on what you think of Thin Red Line (Malick is kind of the American Wong isn't he) I could see him doing something very successful in that vein. But I don't think TRL made any money either.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 14:59 (twenty years ago)

I think I have a different idea of "Wong Kar-Wai" than you.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:00 (twenty years ago)

Anyway his movie stars Nicole Kidman so we'll get our chance. . .

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:01 (twenty years ago)

Of course, he edits his own films Adam (even if he's not called the "editor" he's completely responsible for the way his films are put together.)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:09 (twenty years ago)

oh, alex.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:09 (twenty years ago)

I really don't find him that anti-commercial. He might be an "art" filmmaker and his films might be kind of internal and have "complex rhythms" (read "messy"), but his conceits really aren't so far from the mainstream. Plus he definitely has some kind of popular appeal, which is no bad thing.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

The editor (and production designer!) of 2046 was William Chang, who has worked on most of Wong's other movies.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:12 (twenty years ago)

Also Malick vs. Wong, thematically both place a huge emphasis on love, loss and longing. They both extensively use voiceover. Neither is afraid of held shots and slow pacing. And both have absolutely gorgeous cinematography (even if Malick has never made a truly urban film and Wong only occassionally ventures out of the city.)

Oh I see, you were disagreeing with me saying he was uncommercial.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:13 (twenty years ago)

I was debating it, yes.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:14 (twenty years ago)

It all depends if you think filmmakers (or at least those who deserve our attention) should aspire to some kind of nebulous middle ground between art and commerce. I don't actually mind being confused (but not condescended to) by a film as long as I feel it has some kind of conviction.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:18 (twenty years ago)

Yeah I don't think he's totally uncommercial (I said he's marginally commercial.) I just don't think he's got obvious mainstream commercial appeal and I think he's best qualities are poorly suited for big Hollywood productions.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:19 (twenty years ago)

...although I guess that's equally nebulous.

What is that thing about The Whole Equation again?

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:20 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, I'm sort of wandering off. Ignore me. Need coffee.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:21 (twenty years ago)

Ashes is a goodie, but I just like dozens of those films more, Alex (going solely by what I last saw, Kobayashi's Samurai Rebellion for one).

Back to the dead horse, "A.I." WAS amazing (and like 2046, was accused of too much plot / too many endings by nonfans... actually, even I might make a case for cutting one or two of Wong's).

>Every time interesting directors do [studio films] the results are terrible<

Hmmmm... The Portrait of a Lady, a number of Alan Rudolph films I can think of, David O Russell post-Spanking the Monkey, Scorsese post-Mean Streets... Anyway, I also can't see a contemporary studio head greenlighting a Wong film. But I'd see it.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:23 (twenty years ago)

Yay, you like AI!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:31 (twenty years ago)

You're the last to find out, Adam! ;)

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:33 (twenty years ago)

I don't count Scorsese because most of his best stuff was made in the 70s when all sorts of crazy stuff got greenlighted. And I can't stand any of the other stuff you mention (Alan Rudolph ick.)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:38 (twenty years ago)

But Three Kings had Ice Cube in it!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:39 (twenty years ago)

The quintessential "Alex" actor!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

Every time interesting directors do [studio films] the results are terrible

I want to say Richard Linklater, but I'm not really a fan.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:44 (twenty years ago)

Three Kings was 1/4 good movie, 1/2 bad movie, and 1/4 REALLY INFURIATINGLY STUPID WORSE THAN BAD.

Haha and I don't like Ice Cube that much.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:44 (twenty years ago)

That should be I don't like Ice Cube THAT much.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:45 (twenty years ago)

I'm not even sure what's a "studio film" anymore, given this roster:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0212712/companycredits

Surely you've heard of "Sony/Columbia"? I know their stake isn't quite equal to Deuce Bigalow, but still...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2005 15:49 (twenty years ago)

In reply to this subthread upthread:

The funny thing about the scenes with Takuya Kimura was that he was speaking Japanese while the other characters spoke Chinese, but it seemed like they still understood each other.
It seemed to me that Tony Leung was speaking Cantonese and some others were speaking Mandarin but they still seemed to understand him, but I'm not sure.

-- k/l (lauter...), August 11th, 2005 12:32 PM. (Ken L)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't Mandarin more common in Singapore than Cantonese? So those scenes might have had mismatched language-y stuff.
I think there's one scene where Kimutaku is speaking in Japanese and the old guy on the train (? i think it is) replies in Japanese, but with a really thick Cantonese accent. (When I went to see 2046 I'd forgotten he was in it, and therefore spent his first scene going 'but but but he's in SMAP! and does heartwarming tv dramas!' etc etc etc.)

-- spontine (cispontin...), August 11th, 2005 1:01 PM. (cis)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Each character speaks their native language (except for Faye Wong when she's practicing japanese) in this film. The language dynamic with all characters understanding each other regardless of what language is being spoken was pretty fantastic and daring in that regard. The language spontine thought sounded like Japanese with a think Cantonese accent is actualy Shanghainese (and sounds nothing like Japanese with a Cantonese accent!).

― gygax! (gygax!), Monday, 29 August 2005 16:17 (twenty years ago)

Well, when you don't know what it is or what it is supposed to sound like and are grasping at straws, you hear a few syllables here and there and you jump to conclusions!

― k/l (Ken L), Monday, 29 August 2005 17:04 (twenty years ago)

wkw is a big ol' fraud. none of what people are calling its merits stand out for me as admirable things. i hope he takes another four years over his next film.

― M1les F1nch, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 07:40 (twenty years ago)

thank you for your input!

― kyle (akmonday), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 16:22 (twenty years ago)

Yes, very insightful stuff! A young Kael in the making...

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 16:24 (twenty years ago)

What do we think of Manohla Dargis' statement "Like Hitchcock, Mr. Wong is at once a voyeur and fetishist par excellence"? There's Ziyi's thighs swishing repeatedly in slo-mo, smoking of course, and what MD calls "the film's most mysterious image: a large cavity that looks at once like the amplifying horn of a Victrola and a sexual orifice of unknown provenance..."

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 17:23 (twenty years ago)

I wholeheartedly concur.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

I agree with Dargis, but certainly not as an indictment. The large cavity obviously references the 'secret' hole at Angkor Wat (from the end of In the Mood for Love, which itself can look like a sexual orifice of unknown provenance (see image upthread).

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

Are you sure sure sure, Gygax? I'd need to see that scene again to check, but I was pretty sure that while the old man usually speaks a Chinese language - Shanghainese, you said? I wish I knew more about this - there is a point where the words are Japanese but the accent is not. Like, he suddenly says a sentence in Japanese.

― spontine (cis), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:02 (twenty years ago)

hitchcock made films ABOUT voyeurism. wong trades in beautiful images but none of his films convince me he has either the depth (oh no! dirty word) or entertainment smarts of hitch.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:08 (twenty years ago)

I just asked a lady from Shanghai about the Shanghai dialect and she said, unprompted, "oh yeah, it sounds a lot like Japanese" but maybe she doesn't have gygax's command of the various Asian tongues.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:10 (twenty years ago)

I don't think anybody does.

― Yes, I have heard of pizza (nordicskilla), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:11 (twenty years ago)

Hopefully he is available to translate at screenings of The Flowers Of Shanghai.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:34 (twenty years ago)

none of his films convince me he has either the depth (oh no! dirty word) or entertainment smarts of hitch.

Are you kidding?

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:57 (twenty years ago)

One would certainly hope so.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 18:58 (twenty years ago)

Most if not all of the elders in this trilogy (DoBW, ITMFL and 2046) speak in Shanghainese. If this is news to you, then I understand why you think I'm being snarky.

― gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:22 (twenty years ago)

I like WKW plenty, but is he in Hitchcock's league? Let me know when he gets to his 50th film. I wouldn't hold anybody to that standard.

AJH made arty experimental films wrapped in entertainment, whereas no one is confusing WKW with a mass-appeal filmmaker (at least not in America). That makes them two entirely different animals, unless we're talking about voyeurism and other tropes.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:27 (twenty years ago)

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare11/2046/kor_3.jpg

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:40 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, that's it, the voyeurism angle, the camera-stares-lovingly-and-longingly-at-the-dressed-up-pretty-woman thing.

Most if not all of the elders in this trilogy (DoBW, ITMFL and 2046) speak in Shanghainese. If this is news to you, then I understand why you think I'm being snarky
You were snarky, my friend, when you said Shanghai dialect sounds nothing like Japanese. Maybe that is not discussed in the production notes you have read, but in addition to cispontine's observation (and mine) and the testimony of the Shanghaiese speaker I spoke to today, you could google it up.

Although you will probably say "I didn't say it didn't sound like Japanese, I said it didn't sound like Japanese with a Cantonese accent!"

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:43 (twenty years ago)

Shanghainese sounds nothing like Japanese.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:46 (twenty years ago)

Although... I could see how someone might say that.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:51 (twenty years ago)

You're speaking of the tonal system, Spencer?
(xpost)

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:53 (twenty years ago)

No, I was just listening online to some phrases in Shanghainese and while I automatically focus on the sounds that are most like Mandarin, I realized that some of the common phrases coul have something of a Japanese flavor to them. Also, I'm no expert.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 19:58 (twenty years ago)

I guess the relevant term is "pitch accent."

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:05 (twenty years ago)

Hey Ken, I think when you wrote:

Maybe that is not discussed in the production notes you have read

you should have added "or if that's not the case, watching the third movie in a trilogy where it is already clearly established that various languages are being spoken that are arguably distinguishable from one another and being able to recognize that the pattern is continued..." because I think that's more apt in this case.

― gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:08 (twenty years ago)

and no, the dialogue in 2046 that you refer did not sound anything like Japanese (or Japanese with any Chinese-dialect accent) to me.

― gygax! (gygax!), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:11 (twenty years ago)

Why "arguably distinguishable," my pattern-matching friend?

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:13 (twenty years ago)

"Yeah, that's it, the voyeurism angle, the camera-stares-lovingly-and-longingly-at-the-dressed-up-pretty-woman thing."

hahahaha!!!! right, what incredible insight into the human condition our man has! by doing nice long takes of pretty ladies, wong has a hitchockian feel for voyeurism. what's on offer here, ideas-wise? maybe wong is in the same league as de palma, but again, his films since the mid-nineties have been very boring. fuck, i'd sooner he just did m:i 3 than another languid art-direction movie.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:15 (twenty years ago)

Well, that's one way to look at himl I suppose.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:18 (twenty years ago)

What'd'ya want from the guy, Enrique, Tarkovsky?

Wait a minute, cispontine, wasn't there a scene where the old man is in the future talking to the Japanese guy? Is that the scene you're thinking of? Because that's what I'm thinking of.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:22 (twenty years ago)

i'm not massive on tarkovsky, but i suppose his films have a weightiness i can appreciate. post-chungking, i can admire wkw's image-making, but i don't think he has much to offer me about loss, memory and all those other things -- maybe because he's cute, maybe because it's always memory of very beautiful women and not, you know, other things. i mean, *do watch* some resnais, who can do pretty ladies *and* 'serious themes' at the same time and not awkwardly and with some insight. in wkw you get the odd allusion to something important like 1966, or hk's "independence", but it never feels integral.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:31 (twenty years ago)

Ha! Resnais was what I originally was gonna say, so you could have your long legs and your deep thoughts at the same time.

― k/l (Ken L), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:37 (twenty years ago)

I watch much Resnais.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

ok, i now feel able to go and watch '2046' agane (it's been about a year) and see if i've been wrong. also, it might be a whole nother film by now.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:45 (twenty years ago)

I mean, are you looking for some kind of explicit political or social statements? An indictment of the bourgesoise? What?

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:46 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, that sounded snarky, but I'm really surprised that someone with the open mind and patience for Resnais would really find nothing of value in WKW films!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:56 (twenty years ago)

i can admire wkw's image-making, but i don't think he has much to offer me about loss, memory and all those other things

even his first film - as tears go by (which i think is underrated on this thread - it's an hk action movie with depth and feeling!) - spoke a lot to me about loss, memory, and perhaps some other things too.

― hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:57 (twenty years ago)

spencer -- no, not that, exactly, but resnais' films (up to the early 80s) are all political as hell. i'm not after ken loach, but wkw's films are too far in the other direction for me. the memory is of occupation, or the denial of memory is political, or whatever. emotional life doesn't operate in a vacuum, in his films (or those of his friend and collaborator marker -- or even demy!! duder is conscripted to algeria in 'umbrellas'). the stuff about 2046 being 50 years on from handover doesn't, for me add up to the same level of interest in the world. maybe i think wkw exists basically in the film-world bubble, touring festivals and shit.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Tuesday, 30 August 2005 20:59 (twenty years ago)

i don't think he has much to offer me about loss, memory and all those other things

I guess we must see the world very differently then. When Chow speaks into the hole at the end of ITMFL, I was devastated. I'm actually getting choked up now just thinking about it.

Also, I don't think the depth and orchestration of the beauty in his films can be merely explained away as just pretty window dressing.

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Tuesday, 30 August 2005 21:13 (twenty years ago)

Have you seen Resnais' 'time-travel' film, 'Je t'aime, Je t'aime'?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 31 August 2005 14:20 (twenty years ago)

if WKW's films were explicitly political they wouldn't mean nearly as much to me.

― kyle (akmonday), Wednesday, 31 August 2005 14:27 (twenty years ago)

i wdn't want them to be explicitly political -- implicitly would do fine. 'je t'aime, je t'aime' is a bit dull.

― N_RQ, Wednesday, 31 August 2005 14:29 (twenty years ago)

Hi hstenciL!

― The last honest gentleman (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 31 August 2005 14:30 (twenty years ago)

wong has a hitchockian feel for voyeurism. what's on offer here, ideas-wise? maybe wong is in the same league as de palma...

Nah, Hitchcock almost isn't in the same league as De Palma. (Take that as you will.)

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 31 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

Oh man, this film totally lost me. I didn't understand what was going on and kept getting confused about who was who. Nice soundtrack though.

― dog latin (dog latin), Sunday, 4 September 2005 00:30 (twenty years ago)

have you seen in the mood for love? because if you haven't I don't know that this would make a lot of sense.

― kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 4 September 2005 01:57 (twenty years ago)

no i hadn't. and it made no sense.

― dog latin (dog latin), Sunday, 4 September 2005 08:14 (twenty years ago)

yyou should see it and then see this again because it is worth it

― kyle (akmonday), Sunday, 4 September 2005 08:20 (twenty years ago)

i don't know if that would help all that much. ITMFL isn't exactly a complex, 'bourne identity' type story that explains the action in 2046. it's a streamlined 'brief encounter' story.

― N_RQ, Monday, 5 September 2005 07:32 (twenty years ago)

Opening night in the DC area--and there were three people in the audience. I loved it, so beautiful and so sad. Not a fan of the SF stuff--thought it looked really un-futuristic. Something like Tetsuo seemed to have a much more SF feeling.

I would have liked to see a greater role fleshed out for Takuya Kimura--I thought his and Fong Waye's story could have been more fleshed out. He only had a couple of lines, which he was forced to repeat. Apparently he was improvising on the set with WKW for a long time, all of that material must have been cut.

The way the film began, in Japanese, with TK's voice, and the framing of the film with the continual telling of the story of the secret and the mountain in Japanese, until Tony Leung narrated it, gave the whole movie a type of wistful, sacharineness particular to Japanese light pop movies and serial dramas.

I wasn't prepared for Tony Leung to be such a cruel character, but he wasn't even cruel, he was just indifferent, then I thought at the end he was going to make up and everything would get better, but I took the one thing that he couldn't share line to mean himself, that he can't share himself because of his past, etc.

I loved the Black Spider part. I thought the two had a great repetoire and I liked how the movie highlighted the fact that this was someone who helped him, who came into his life purely by chance and helped him, for no reason really. I thought he acted in a similar vein in the end with the lending of the money.

Tony Leung looked a lot like Clark Gable in this, but maybe it was just the mustache.

― Mary (Mary), Saturday, 10 September 2005 03:28 (twenty years ago)

I loved this movie.The train tunnels to 2046 reminded me of the tunnel Rem Koolhaas built for the el on the IIT campus.http://www.gl.iit.edu/resources/MTCC/Luxe_files/02chicago-span.jpg

― Annabelle Lennox (Arachne), Saturday, 10 September 2005 13:57 (twenty years ago)

Mary, I'm just back from the later showing at Gallery, and there were about 20 people there. So that's an improvement, I guess.

xpost

― Stephen X (Stephen X), Sunday, 11 September 2005 04:59 (twenty years ago)

I was disappointed in this. I didn't really like In the Mood for Love, either, but everyone I know who loved it said, "oh, but you have to see Wong Kar-Wai on the big screen!" So I had my chance this time around, and ... I dunno. Zhang Ziyi is gorgeous, of course. And there were lots of pretty framing shots. But it seemed like a big mess. I agree with Tuomas about the sci-fi elements seeming out of place and also with Colette about the last couple of stories seeming tacked on.

But mostly I am disappointed with Adam for liking it so much.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 12 September 2005 16:21 (twenty years ago)

In the Mood for Love works on a 13" set! You were watching a color TV, right?

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 12 September 2005 16:43 (twenty years ago)

Ooooh Jay you are bucking for getting removed from Adam's Netlfix friend list!

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 12 September 2005 16:46 (twenty years ago)

I too was slightly surprised by Adam's endorsement!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 12 September 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

Why? It's not like Adam's ever consistent. ;)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 12 September 2005 17:09 (twenty years ago)

Haha.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 12 September 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

Adam doesn't like In the Mood For Love either

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 12 September 2005 17:15 (twenty years ago)

I know! That's why I was disappointed that he liked 2046!

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 12 September 2005 17:42 (twenty years ago)

I watched In the Mood for Love the other week and I remember thinking that nothing else has appealed to me so directly since My Bloody Valentine!

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 12 September 2005 18:53 (twenty years ago)

I'm actually obsessed with it (own 2 DVD editions, the french import double CD soundtrack, the ruinously priced Japanese poster - framed, I'm going to order the ltd edition book etc) and can't imagine anything more perfect. Loved 2046, but maybe not as much (need to see it more).

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 12 September 2005 19:00 (twenty years ago)

Mary + Stephen X, where did you guys go to see this? IMDB currently has only Bethesda, Shirlington and the Fairfax Cinema Arts theater showing it.

We should have gone on the 10th with you, Mary! Boo, sad.

― TOMBOT, Monday, 12 September 2005 19:00 (twenty years ago)

Mary: Did you see it at the Regal Gallery Place theater? I'd have gone with you if I'd known in time.

― j.lu (j.lu), Monday, 12 September 2005 19:03 (twenty years ago)

How much was that poster?

― kyle (akmonday), Monday, 12 September 2005 19:13 (twenty years ago)

It's at Gallery; weird, huh? Maybe they mistook it for a Vin-Diesel-robot-explosions movie. Which I also would've seen.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/showtimes/2046.html

xpost to DCians

― Stephen X (Stephen X), Monday, 12 September 2005 19:18 (twenty years ago)

How much was that poster?

The full size version goes for many hundreds of dollars, I picked up a still very rare slightly smaller version.

Here's a discussion about the larger one:
http://www.wongkarwai.net/stories.php?story=04/10/09/5589451

― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 12 September 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)

I enjoyed it immensley.

― Jeff-PTTL (Jeff), Saturday, 17 September 2005 16:29 (twenty years ago)

I saw it at Shirlington. Told Ally I was going to see it at Bethesda, where I also wanted to visit some Tako restaurant, but then found it was playing at Shirlington, where I went, but then found it was playing at Fairfax City Arts, which would have been even easier for me to get to from my job. Also, I read there is a Jewish deli in Silver Spring, has anyone been? I could probably see this again if any of the DC people want to give it a go. I'm confused about the poster, why is it so $? Today I am probably going to see Elevator to the Gallows in DC, and I think I will go to the MLK library book sale and also maybe Urban Outfitters and H&M. Let's plan to get together, DC people. No one wants to see Death Cab for Cutie, do they? I'm not sure I even want to.

― Mary (Mary), Saturday, 17 September 2005 16:58 (twenty years ago)

two months pass...

this was awful!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:00 (twenty years ago)

i only have the dvd i bought in chinatown...is the american cut any better?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:00 (twenty years ago)

it felt really stitched together, like WKW needed a movie for cannes at the last moment! and i didn't even like the use of music! let alone the pasted-on scifi scenes! it felt like self-parody... and that terrible voice-over narration!

like WKW presents the red shoe diaries!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:02 (twenty years ago)

yeah even i have to admit this probably isnt very good.

― ryan (ryan), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:08 (twenty years ago)

fascinating and beautiful at times yes, but has a shockingly low return on repeat viewings.

― ryan (ryan), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:09 (twenty years ago)

why couldn't he have just made a scifi movie? sounds like he chickened out

-- s1ocki (slytus...), December 26th, 2004 1:08 PM. (slutsky)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:10 (twenty years ago)

why was it so boring?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 03:11 (twenty years ago)

I share your crestfallen reaction. Mos def the most conspicuous disappointment of the year.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 12 December 2005 04:06 (twenty years ago)

There were bigger disappointments, but this was rather numbing.

What struck me is that WKW didn't seem to have anything to say. He wanted long, languorous, impeccably-designed shots to stand in for emotion and relevance.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Monday, 12 December 2005 04:15 (twenty years ago)

why couldn't he have just made a scifi movie?

Because the sci-fi movie that he started out making sucked, judging from the segment of it that we see in the film. Whatever. I liked it, but it seemed like the last possible go-around for the "WKW" film.

― Chris F. (servoret), Monday, 12 December 2005 05:23 (twenty years ago)

i bet it still would've been more fun to watch!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 05:35 (twenty years ago)

There were flashes of something I don't know what in the sci-fi sections... something fashionable.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 12 December 2005 06:32 (twenty years ago)

al last! i was baffled my people dismissing my (very) negative reaction to the film, i felt like i'd seen a completely different movie from everyone else on this thread. i think that people hold ITMFL so dear that they are unable to admit how utterly boring 2046 is.

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 12 December 2005 14:18 (twenty years ago)

I will have to see this, and find out if it is as bad as I must expect it is.

― the bellefox, Monday, 12 December 2005 14:19 (twenty years ago)

I didn't find much "emotion" in In the Mood for Love. I liked the whistles and bells in this movie more, and preferred its view of "love" -- more meanness and random kindness / cruelty.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 12 December 2005 14:23 (twenty years ago)

save time, the pinefox.

― Theorry Henry (Enrique), Monday, 12 December 2005 14:31 (twenty years ago)

i really love in the mood for love. and this was like a really bad spoof of it.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 12 December 2005 17:14 (twenty years ago)

I did enjoy 2046, but was also a bit bored by it and don't really remember the story, even though I saw it in a theater pretty recently. My favorite part by far was when the theme from Days of Being Wild played, heh.

I just want to gush about how gorgeous In the Mood For Love is, which I just finished watching again.

― sleep (sleep), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 03:22 (twenty years ago)

I really like the boring of 2046 - you have to be in a mood (hahar) for a movie that's like a blanket, which is a rather boring thing, but warm and wraps around you well and maybe is made by someone who doesn't make perfect blankets but it's got some good colour choices and the wool is really nice. That's how it makes me feel, warm and on the verge of sleep but liking the feeling too much to actually drift off.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Tuesday, 13 December 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...

wkw to pull head out of own ass?

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Friday, 3 February 2006 12:11 (nineteen years ago)

this could go so, so wrong.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 3 February 2006 16:53 (nineteen years ago)

haha indeed it could. "wong makes rapturous play with the the most surreal of images, transfiguring workaday reality -- the play of light on water, on an inundated freeway, for example, is particularly exquisite..."

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Friday, 3 February 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

"...Brody will not commit to the project until he has read the script, which Wong has still to complete."
Yeah, I'm not too worried about this actually happening...
(I do love WKW, but s1ocki otm.)

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Friday, 3 February 2006 17:24 (nineteen years ago)

Well, for WKW (as well as so many of my 'faves') its not the story but how you tell it.

And to add to what rrrobyn said I'd imagine that if it does take off it'll prob take a long while, w/many traumas along the way...

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

Does this not make perfect sense?

― adamrl (nordicskilla), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:13 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I'm not too worried about this actually happening...

You mean completing a script? I just wonder how/exactly where he would shoot it, and for how long.

Even if botched I suspect it wouldn't be worse than Fallen Angels.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:19 (nineteen years ago)

When has WKW completed a script, really?

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:34 (nineteen years ago)

I would actually like to see the film I've thinking of as the ideal, but my worry is that, yeah, it will become, because of the inherent politics of the topic, a big studio deal that'll get pushed and not only the script, but the shooting too won't get the time it "needs" and the film will end up being something, er, not ideal. I think it could be an amazing film if given the right time/energy.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:41 (nineteen years ago)

god, but what I'm imagining makes me want it to happen. Even with Adrian Brody - I can even see the similarities btwn him and Tony Leung.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Friday, 3 February 2006 21:45 (nineteen years ago)

oh my god; this is such a terrible idea.

― dave k, Friday, 3 February 2006 21:54 (nineteen years ago)

Curiouser and curiouser: "Oddly, Wong's project would be shot in New York City, because his scouts felt that the damage in New Orleans was 'too severe' to shoot there."

http://www.cinematical.com/2006/02/03/wong-kar-wai-does-katrina-in-nyc/

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:27 (nineteen years ago)

ABORT ABORT

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:29 (nineteen years ago)

Haha this is so not happening.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:29 (nineteen years ago)

someone's going to make a movie about it eventually; rather him than CBS

― kyle (akmonday), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:43 (nineteen years ago)

Oh I'd rather it be him, too, but actually filming this is going to require an ability way way way more organized than Wong is capable of being haha.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:44 (nineteen years ago)

okay, I could see it being done 2046 style, with New Orleans stuff being done on a sound stage and in cgi. And there being some other story (or stories) taking place in NY, which frame the NO parts. But yeah, COMPLEX.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Friday, 3 February 2006 22:58 (nineteen years ago)

and AWFUL.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 3 February 2006 23:01 (nineteen years ago)

Let me have my dream.

― rrrobyn (rrrobyn), Friday, 3 February 2006 23:06 (nineteen years ago)

fallen angels is awesome, you're nuts as usual morbs

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:03 (nineteen years ago)

gear otm. and here i was feeling simpatico with morbius about haneke. couldn't last.

anyway, this katrina movie would be no more about new orleans than happy together was about argentina.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:08 (nineteen years ago)

exactly

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

Um then the answer is a great deal, right? Cuz Argentina seems absolutely central to Happy Together (geographically and economically and, at least in terms of Wong's inability to obtain equipment due to the simultaneous filming of a Brad Pitt flick, cinematically) to me.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:14 (nineteen years ago)

Fallen Angels gave me a headache; I could be wrong. I'll try it again someday.

So how many different DVDs of 2046 have been officially released in the US? Just one?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:24 (nineteen years ago)

well what i mean is that argentina is important to happy together, but it's not what the movie's about. his films have socio-political backdrops that interact with and influence the stories, but it'd be hard to say that those things are really his subject.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:45 (nineteen years ago)

and dr. m, i dunno, i loved fallen angels. for one thing it's his funniest movie, apart from maybe chungking express.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 21:47 (nineteen years ago)

Well, for WKW (as well as so many of my 'faves') its not the story but how you tell it.

that's why this is such a bad idea.

'fallen angels' was his last good film.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Wednesday, 8 February 2006 09:46 (nineteen years ago)

Sure it might play out badly, its just i dunno.. not something I'd expect him to move on too, so much of what he does is so private it wd be interesting to see him going the other way. But really i've no idea how it wd play out AT ALL.

Then again are you into WKW doing anything whatsoever?!

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Wednesday, 8 February 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

"'fallen angels' was his last good film."

That's insane. Happy Together is probably his BEST film.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 8 February 2006 23:53 (nineteen years ago)

lololololol

wkw introduced a great dop to the world; at the point, though, i can't think of anything else to say in his favour.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 9 February 2006 09:36 (nineteen years ago)

― cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 9 February 2006 10:53 (nineteen years ago)

chris doyle needs to make good his "promise" to work w. chris petit and ian penman's on their essex drug dealer script.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 9 February 2006 10:56 (nineteen years ago)

More weirdness:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4708708.stm

― C0L1N B... (C0L1N B...), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 18:39 (nineteen years ago)

I predict none of these projects will happen.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 18:44 (nineteen years ago)

Me too. They'll end up as interludes and flashbacks and codas in other films, at best.

― Redd Harvest (Ken L), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 18:48 (nineteen years ago)

this movie is really quite good

― gear (gear), Friday, 24 February 2006 00:53 (nineteen years ago)

agreed

― Lingbertt, Friday, 24 February 2006 04:04 (nineteen years ago)

five months pass...

Liars.

― milo z (mlp), Friday, 4 August 2006 19:58 (nineteen years ago)

wkw's scraps

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 4 August 2006 20:01 (nineteen years ago)

2541
Big windows to let in the sun

― Ruud Haarvest (Ken L), Friday, 4 August 2006 20:04 (nineteen years ago)

I liked some bits of it. A lot of the ideas & people I was interested in didn't seem to be the bits that WKW was interested in?

― Gravel Puzzleworth (Gregory Henry), Saturday, 5 August 2006 00:03 (nineteen years ago)

three months pass...

Not many movies make me feel stupid, even ones that really try. But this, and to a lesser extent In The Mood..., did. Am I stupid?

What is the consensus on this?

― richardk (Richard K), Monday, 6 November 2006 00:59 (nineteen years ago)

what, you being stupid?

― gbx (skowly), Monday, 6 November 2006 01:04 (nineteen years ago)

2046 (and ITMFL to a lesser extent) made me feel like Wong was desperately signifying longing/regret/love, but failing miserably and just communicating that Ziyi Zhang is damned hot.

― milo z (mlp), Monday, 6 November 2006 01:12 (nineteen years ago)

and Tony Leung.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Monday, 6 November 2006 01:18 (nineteen years ago)

2046, although absolutly beautiful, didn't hit me emotionally like ITMFL did. I guess, as a guy, i can't relate to rejecting ZZ no way no how.

― Leonard Hatred (Who wants penis cake?), Monday, 6 November 2006 01:26 (nineteen years ago)

what, you being stupid?
-- gbx (polarbea...) (webmail), Today 2:04 AM. (skowly) (later) (link)

hah yes, i did that phrase that poorly.

I guess I feel like I just need some kind of Cliff's notes with the two WKW movies I've seen which I rarely feel about even the artiest movies. Unless his films really are to be taken simply at face value as "omg asian chixxors are hot esp when smoking cigs in green light" exercises.

― richardk (Richard K), Monday, 6 November 2006 12:12 (nineteen years ago)

that's all there is. you're not missing anything.

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 6 November 2006 12:28 (nineteen years ago)

I totally didn't get 2046 when I saw it - I believe any English speaker would have a hard time if watching in subtitles. That said, it was fun to watch and the score is awesome!

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Monday, 6 November 2006 12:33 (nineteen years ago)

one year passes...

Anyone seen 'ashes of time'.

― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 20 September 2008 12:54 (seventeen years ago)

yes.

― s1ocki, Saturday, 20 September 2008 13:16 (seventeen years ago)

and? :-)

― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 20 September 2008 13:29 (seventeen years ago)

It's great.

― Alex in SF, Saturday, 20 September 2008 20:30 (seventeen years ago)

now reduxed!

― s1ocki, Saturday, 20 September 2008 22:33 (seventeen years ago)

what dyou think of it s1ocki?

― spanish girls, they like to call me pancho (special guest stars mark bronson), Saturday, 20 September 2008 23:17 (seventeen years ago)

not a huge fan of ashes, i like it, it's really pretty but a little on the boring side i find. reduxed version looks nice.

― s1ocki, Sunday, 21 September 2008 00:27 (seventeen years ago)

the one where they play California Dreaming 500 times is pretty sweet, can't remember what it's called.

― sonderangerbot, Sunday, 21 September 2008 02:18 (seventeen years ago)

Chungking Express

― Alex in SF, Sunday, 21 September 2008 03:04 (seventeen years ago)

Happy Together's still my favorite.

― Alex in SF, Sunday, 21 September 2008 03:05 (seventeen years ago)

the one where they play California Dreaming 500 times is pretty sweet, can't remember what it's called.

i hated that movie because of that.

― My dumb name is still (rockapads), Sunday, 21 September 2008 03:47 (seventeen years ago)

i like ashes a lot. probably his most experimental movie? wuxia impressionism.

― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 21 September 2008 15:03 (seventeen years ago)

one month passes...

Finally watching 2046. I now know it is 129 minutes long. Uh-oh.

― the pinefox, Friday, 31 October 2008 22:37 (seventeen years ago)

This might be my favourite movie of all time.

― I know, right?, Saturday, 1 November 2008 01:49 (seventeen years ago)

it keeps ending. again and again. then it ends.

― schlump, Saturday, 1 November 2008 02:23 (seventeen years ago)

I was so disappointed when it ended.

― I know, right?, Sunday, 2 November 2008 12:46 (seventeen years ago)

(that it was over)

― I know, right?, Sunday, 2 November 2008 12:46 (seventeen years ago)

I remember leaving the cinema and wanting to buy a black suit and loads of Nat King Cole records. It passed (mercifully) but the movie is amazing.

― I know, right?, Sunday, 2 November 2008 12:47 (seventeen years ago)

i still love this movie. sure it could be shorter but why? it's never going to have a 'succinct' narrative. I like it as the big sprawling pretty mess it is.

― akm, Sunday, 2 November 2008 14:00 (seventeen years ago)

I made it less than 25% of the way through so far.

I will report back if I make any more progress.

― the pinefox, Sunday, 2 November 2008 15:06 (seventeen years ago)

I'm sorry, you should send your soul back because it is faulty.

― I know, right?, Monday, 3 November 2008 12:44 (seventeen years ago)

I wasn't sure how bad this film was. Then I watched the 2003 Promo, with material from the film and material that didn't make it - an utter farrago that makes the whole work seem like the vanity project of an embarrassing, shallow, half-educated popinjay.

... but the film itself isn't as bad as that. I'm still not sure how bad it is. The SF element gives it another level, though a superfluous, arbitrary one. On the whole, though, I guess it's pretentious, aimless, vacuous and possibly the best WKW film I've seen.

― the pinefox, Wednesday, 5 November 2008 22:05 (seventeen years ago)

Wow, faulty was the wrong word.

― I know, right?, Wednesday, 5 November 2008 23:51 (seventeen years ago)

A terrible film. It makes no sense in terms of plot or emotionally. It doesn't work on its own and it doesn't work as a follow up to "In the Mood for Love" (and actually kinda ruined that film for me too). It's a huge mess and it is utterly boring.
― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 19 January 2005

― the pinefox, Thursday, 6 November 2008 00:26 (seventeen years ago)

Yeah its just massive incoherent mess but it has so many beautiful textures and its so elegantly poised on the edge of numbness and oh god everybody is so beautiful and the clothes and the music. Its immersive.

― I know, right?, Thursday, 6 November 2008 00:28 (seventeen years ago)

one month passes...

I forgot how good Fallen Angels is

― gabbneb, Monday, 8 December 2008 04:12 (seventeen years ago)

yeah. it's one of those films i've forgotten everything about. i've reduced it to the massage scene on the market stall in my head. isn't there some new dvd out?

― schlump, Monday, 8 December 2008 04:19 (seventeen years ago)

wtf was pinefox on about this movie is incredible.

― vampire baseball (call all destroyer), Monday, 8 December 2008 04:22 (seventeen years ago)

this might be my favourite movie ever

― Tá a fhios agam, nach bhfuil? (I know, right?), Monday, 8 December 2008 04:27 (seventeen years ago)

Really love the imagery and vibe of 2046, but it felt like a huge letdown to me after In the Mood for Love, which was so beautiful and charged. Basically what I got out of it was that the director likes pointing the camera at beautiful people, especially women, especially when they are having the feeling of acting sad. As a cinematic reverie, it's pleasant enough, but frustratingly arbitrary and insubstantial. By far my least favorite WKW movie, though I haven't seen Ashes of Time or My Blueberry Nights (films a lot of folks seem to hate).

― Suggest Ban Permalink (contenderizer), Monday, 8 December 2008 17:51 (seventeen years ago)

People hate Ashes of Time? Those people are dumb. My Blueberry Nights OTOH is godawful.

― Alex in SF, Monday, 8 December 2008 17:55 (seventeen years ago)

The negative criticism of Ashes of Time mostly seems centered on its supposed incoherence. Been meaning to see it for years, just somehow never quite got around to it (though I've somehow managed to make time for irredeemable shit like Raiders 4). Have you seen the recent AoT remix? Figure I'll skip that at least until I see the original.

― Suggest Ban Permalink (contenderizer), Monday, 8 December 2008 18:06 (seventeen years ago)

That's a weird criticism. AoT is no more incoherent than Days of Being Wild or Fallen Angels or whatever.

― Alex in SF, Monday, 8 December 2008 18:14 (seventeen years ago)

Have not seen the remix though.

― Alex in SF, Monday, 8 December 2008 18:14 (seventeen years ago)

the remix is very, very similar, only cleaned-up. just see it

― s1ocki, Monday, 8 December 2008 18:52 (seventeen years ago)

It's on my list.

― Alex in SF, Monday, 8 December 2008 19:06 (seventeen years ago)

ten years pass...

Wong Kar-wai announced his new film BLOSSOMS as a part of trilogy with In The Mood For Love and 2046. He said he has prepared the script for last 4 years and he’s ready to shoot in the end of this year or beginning of next year #WKWisback pic.twitter.com/d73Cueo39a
— Hang Lu (@hanglutvd) March 19, 2019

― Simon H., Tuesday, 19 March 2019 13:11 (six years ago)

six years pass...

https://thefilmstage.com/wong-kar-wais-blossoms-shanghai-finally-gets-distribution-outside-chinawong-kar-wais-iblossoms-shanghai-i-finally-gets-distribution-outside-china/

― calstars, Friday, 9 May 2025 19:46 (eight months ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.