Floating Leaf (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
floatingleaf) wrote2010-10-25 12:30 am
floatingleaf) wrote2010-10-25 12:30 am
Entry tags:
because I am addicted to staying up too late on Sundays :|
OK... I'm going to attempt a review of that Chinese gay movie I mentioned before (the one I went to see on the last weekend of the festival). It might be difficult, since there are many things I love about this film, but also some things I hate. But that's precisely the reason I feel the need to write about it.
Perhaps using my nearly-forgotten review template will make it a little easier for me to contain the topic, so to speak, and include all the relevant info before I get carried away by reflections and interpretations.:) And spoilers - because without them, I wouldn't be able to explain much.
English Title: Amphetamine
Original Title: This is interesting. The director, who attended the screening, explained that the word "amphetamine", pronounced in Chinese, sounds very similar to the sentence: "Is that his fate?" So it's very deliberately symbolic.
Year: 2010
Country: Hong Kong
Genre: drama, romance
Director: Scud (born: Danny Cheng Wan Cheung)
Screenplay: Scud
Actors: Byron Pang (Kafka), Thomas Price (Daniel)
Rating (1-7): 4
What's it about: Two young guys fall in love. One, Kafka (the name has nothing to do with Franz Kafka, it's a reference to the novel Kafka on the Shore by Haruki Murakami) is a poor kid who grew up in a Hong Kong slum and is barely making a living. The other one, Daniel, is an up-and-coming filthy-rich businessman of partly Asian descent (he actually works for the Hong Kong division of AIG). They meet at the onset of the economic crisis of 2008. The economic situation is very much in the background, however - the main focus is on their relationship, or rather the impossibility of it. Despite living in two paralell universes, as it were, they really have a lot in common - and their feelings for each other run quite deep - but it is not enough. The bottomless gap between them cannot be breached. Kafka is a lost soul who will not be saved ("fallen angel" symbolism abounds throughout the film).
Best: There's plenty of beautiful, tender scenes between the guys, and both young actors are pretty impressive. Byron Pang, who plays Kafka, was actually Mister Hong Kong, and he does look stunning: a perfectly sculpted body (which we get to see nude from every angle, lol) and a sweet, boyish face. From a purely visual point of view, most of this film is a gay man's paradise.:D
Worst: Some plot twists really seem overdramatic and implausible. I mean, the story has immense potential for tragedy right from the start - the very "prince and pauper" aspect is quite enough. I think it would actually have a bigger impact if some "excess drama" was trimmed down. The most glaring example, and my biggest problem with the film, includes an almost casual mention of Kafka having raped Daniel's female best friend (!!!). Now, earlier in the film there is a pretty graphic rape scene where Kafka is the victim. I know this is a major spoiler, but honestly, I wish I had been warned about this before I saw the film - it almost made me walk out, just because it took me completely by surprise and I felt like I couldn't handle it. Anyway... it happens because Kafka sees a young woman being assaulted by four thugs, and jumps to her defense. He manages to distract them just long enough for the girl to make her escape - but then it's four against one, and the thugs are pissed off, and after kicking him around for a while they decide that the pretty boy will do instead. So yes, I can see how that might cause Kafka to feel a certain bitterness towards women - but, for heaven's sake, who in their right mind would attack a close friend of the guy they're involved with? Of course, he's not "in his right mind", he's high as a kite, he's a fricking drug addict... but still.:/ And the most incomprehensible part is the supposedly raped girl actually asking Daniel to "forgive him", because... "he's a good kid". Uhmmm.. what??? I just can't resist the snarky remark that this is a film by a gay male director, whose understanding of women doesn't go extremely far, to say the least. Even assuming it is at all possible to "forgive" someone who rapes you (after years of therapy, maybe) - I certainly can't imagine a victim saying something like this mere hours after it supposedly happened. And then - wait for it - she asks Daniel to have sex with her, because she used to have a crush on him when they went to school together, and she wishes she had done it with him first. So instead of punching Kafka in the face after hearing the news, Daniel goes on to have sex with his female friend (who has allegedly just been raped). It's just... I can't even. MAJOR FAIL doesn't even begin to cover it, imo. (By contrast, Daniel doesn't want to fuck Kafka even when he offers, because he's afraid the act might trigger bad memories for his lover.) It almost ruined the entire film for me. Almost, because I still think it has value - I just had to explain why I feel so conflicted about it.
As for Kafka being "a good kid" - he totally was. Up until that point. The moment he chose to take out his rage and pain on an innocent person, who never harmed him in any way, he stopped being one. Who knows, maybe those four thugs who raped him had also been "good kids" at some point in their lives. Maybe someone did horrifying things to them, too. Does that explain why they did what they did? Perhaps. Does it justify it? Hell no. And while I don't think this was conscious on the director's part, I can't help getting the message that if someone rapes a guy, it is a terrible thing indeed - but if someone rapes a woman, he can still be a "good kid", and needs to be forgiven. Just a little feminist perspective, for what it's worth.:/
A Memorable Line: There were a few, but right now my brain is hopelessly stuck on the one quoted above.:/
A Memorable Role: Kafka. The character itself is problematic, but the actor did his best with it. He's very young and hasn't had much acting experience, but I see potential. Not to mention the serious eye-candy factor.:D
Will I see it again? Hard to say. I might. Now that I know which scenes to skip, I can probably re-watch the good parts without getting too upset about the rest. Honestly, this could be an amazing film - after some editing and throwing about 25% of it into the trash. *nods*
Perhaps using my nearly-forgotten review template will make it a little easier for me to contain the topic, so to speak, and include all the relevant info before I get carried away by reflections and interpretations.:) And spoilers - because without them, I wouldn't be able to explain much.
English Title: Amphetamine
Original Title: This is interesting. The director, who attended the screening, explained that the word "amphetamine", pronounced in Chinese, sounds very similar to the sentence: "Is that his fate?" So it's very deliberately symbolic.
Year: 2010
Country: Hong Kong
Genre: drama, romance
Director: Scud (born: Danny Cheng Wan Cheung)
Screenplay: Scud
Actors: Byron Pang (Kafka), Thomas Price (Daniel)
Rating (1-7): 4
What's it about: Two young guys fall in love. One, Kafka (the name has nothing to do with Franz Kafka, it's a reference to the novel Kafka on the Shore by Haruki Murakami) is a poor kid who grew up in a Hong Kong slum and is barely making a living. The other one, Daniel, is an up-and-coming filthy-rich businessman of partly Asian descent (he actually works for the Hong Kong division of AIG). They meet at the onset of the economic crisis of 2008. The economic situation is very much in the background, however - the main focus is on their relationship, or rather the impossibility of it. Despite living in two paralell universes, as it were, they really have a lot in common - and their feelings for each other run quite deep - but it is not enough. The bottomless gap between them cannot be breached. Kafka is a lost soul who will not be saved ("fallen angel" symbolism abounds throughout the film).
Best: There's plenty of beautiful, tender scenes between the guys, and both young actors are pretty impressive. Byron Pang, who plays Kafka, was actually Mister Hong Kong, and he does look stunning: a perfectly sculpted body (which we get to see nude from every angle, lol) and a sweet, boyish face. From a purely visual point of view, most of this film is a gay man's paradise.:D
Worst: Some plot twists really seem overdramatic and implausible. I mean, the story has immense potential for tragedy right from the start - the very "prince and pauper" aspect is quite enough. I think it would actually have a bigger impact if some "excess drama" was trimmed down. The most glaring example, and my biggest problem with the film, includes an almost casual mention of Kafka having raped Daniel's female best friend (!!!). Now, earlier in the film there is a pretty graphic rape scene where Kafka is the victim. I know this is a major spoiler, but honestly, I wish I had been warned about this before I saw the film - it almost made me walk out, just because it took me completely by surprise and I felt like I couldn't handle it. Anyway... it happens because Kafka sees a young woman being assaulted by four thugs, and jumps to her defense. He manages to distract them just long enough for the girl to make her escape - but then it's four against one, and the thugs are pissed off, and after kicking him around for a while they decide that the pretty boy will do instead. So yes, I can see how that might cause Kafka to feel a certain bitterness towards women - but, for heaven's sake, who in their right mind would attack a close friend of the guy they're involved with? Of course, he's not "in his right mind", he's high as a kite, he's a fricking drug addict... but still.:/ And the most incomprehensible part is the supposedly raped girl actually asking Daniel to "forgive him", because... "he's a good kid". Uhmmm.. what??? I just can't resist the snarky remark that this is a film by a gay male director, whose understanding of women doesn't go extremely far, to say the least. Even assuming it is at all possible to "forgive" someone who rapes you (after years of therapy, maybe) - I certainly can't imagine a victim saying something like this mere hours after it supposedly happened. And then - wait for it - she asks Daniel to have sex with her, because she used to have a crush on him when they went to school together, and she wishes she had done it with him first. So instead of punching Kafka in the face after hearing the news, Daniel goes on to have sex with his female friend (who has allegedly just been raped). It's just... I can't even. MAJOR FAIL doesn't even begin to cover it, imo. (By contrast, Daniel doesn't want to fuck Kafka even when he offers, because he's afraid the act might trigger bad memories for his lover.) It almost ruined the entire film for me. Almost, because I still think it has value - I just had to explain why I feel so conflicted about it.
As for Kafka being "a good kid" - he totally was. Up until that point. The moment he chose to take out his rage and pain on an innocent person, who never harmed him in any way, he stopped being one. Who knows, maybe those four thugs who raped him had also been "good kids" at some point in their lives. Maybe someone did horrifying things to them, too. Does that explain why they did what they did? Perhaps. Does it justify it? Hell no. And while I don't think this was conscious on the director's part, I can't help getting the message that if someone rapes a guy, it is a terrible thing indeed - but if someone rapes a woman, he can still be a "good kid", and needs to be forgiven. Just a little feminist perspective, for what it's worth.:/
A Memorable Line: There were a few, but right now my brain is hopelessly stuck on the one quoted above.:/
A Memorable Role: Kafka. The character itself is problematic, but the actor did his best with it. He's very young and hasn't had much acting experience, but I see potential. Not to mention the serious eye-candy factor.:D
Will I see it again? Hard to say. I might. Now that I know which scenes to skip, I can probably re-watch the good parts without getting too upset about the rest. Honestly, this could be an amazing film - after some editing and throwing about 25% of it into the trash. *nods*