FIlm #100: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

*The Fellowship of the Rings is the first part of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The list-compilers at TIME magazine consider them all “one film,” but I will review each one separately.

Director: Peter Jackson

Initial Release Country: United States

Times Previously Seen: at least eight

Rapid-Fire Summary (No spoilers)

Tiny, cheery little fellow ends up with the most powerful and evil trinket in the land. A few other tiny, cheery little fellows and a few larger fellows join up to help him bring the trinket to a raging volcano and destroy it. Some silliness and swordplay carry them through.

Extended Summary (Spoilers included. Fair Warning)

*As many of you know, a truly geeked-out Tolkien and/or LoTR film fan could write a 200-page summary of this film. I’m not, and I won’t. However, if you want something more detailed, you can check out this synopsis at imdb. And if you want something MUCH more detailed, just read the novels.

In the mythical world of Middle Earth, a variety of beings dwell. In a setting that resembles the Middle Ages of our world, humans share Middle Earth with other races, including elves, dwarfs, orcs, goblins, and many others. One of the more peaceful and communal races is that of the hobbits – smallish beings that resemble humans, though around half the size and bearing hairy feet and slightly pointed ears.

One evening, in Hobbiton, the elderly hobbit Bilbo Baggins pulls an incredible vanishing act in front of a full crowd on his 111^th birthday. To pull off this feat, he uses a ring of invisibility that he had obtained many decades prior in a game of riddles from a wretched creature that called itself Gollum. In addition to the other witnesses to Frodo’s disappearance are his nephew Frodo and their human wizard friend, Gandalf. What Gandalf knows that Frodo doesn’t is that Bilbo had planned this disappearance, in order to leave behind the daily headaches caused by his relatives in Hobbiton. Bilbo leaves behind the ring of invisibility, which Gandalf carefully passes along to Frodo. Gandalf, however, suspects something more sinister about the ring.

Bilbo and Gandalf share a smoke before Bilbo's grand vanishing act in the shire of Hobbiton.

After much travel and research, Gandalf returns to Hobbiton and tells Frodo that the ring is, in fact, the lost “One True Ring” of Sauron, “The Dark Lord” from ages past. The ring is a physical manifestation of Sauron’s evil soul and his will to dominate, and it corrupts all those who come into contact with it. Hobbits, though, seem to have a much stronger resistance to the ring’s corrupting powers than nearly all other races. Gandalf has also discovered that Sauron has been gradually reforming and building a massive army in the blasted lands of Mordor. The Dark Lord has also learned that his ring of power is in the hands of a hobbit called “Baggins.” Because of all of these things, Gandalf forces Frodo and his friend, Samwise (Sam), to leave the shire and get to the nearby town of Bree, where he will meet them after he consults with the head of his wizarding order, Saruman the White.

When he meets with Saruman, Gandalf soon discovers that his elder and superior has already been turned by the powerful will of Sauron. Saruman captures Gandalf for a time, but Gandalf eventually escapes. Meanwhile, Frodo and Sam, who have been joined on their journey by fellow hobbits Merry and Pippin, reach Bree, only to find that Gandalf is not yet there. After some trouble nearly erupts, the hobbits are befriended by a man called “Strider,” a ranger who seems to have their interests at heart. He saves them from the “ring wraiths,” powerful minions of Sauron whose only goal is to retrieve his ring of power.

The hobbits and Strider spend several days evading the ring wraiths, and they eventually reach the elven city Rivendell, where they reunite with Gandalf. After a counsel between representatives of the races of elves, dwarfs, and humans, it is decided that the ring must be taken to and destroyed in the only place where it is possible – Mount Doom in the middle of Mordor, where the ring was originally forged millenia earlier. Frodo elects to bear the ring, and eight others accompany him: his three fellow hobbits, Gandalf, Strider (whose real identity we learn is Aragorn – the heir to the throne of humans), the human nobleman Boromir, the dwarf Gimli, and the elf Legolas. The fellowship of the ring is formed.

The nine members of the fellowship of the ring in Rivendell, before they embark on their treacherous (and for some, fatal) journey to Mordor.

The fellowship fight through and past many dangers in an attempt to reach Mordor. They are harried by crows, pursued by orcs, and turned back by massive snowstorms created by Saruman. With no other options, they take Gimli’s suggestion to go under the mountains, through his cousin Bali’s cave city, The Mines of Moria. However, upon entering Moria, they find nothing but dwarf corpses. Moria has been overrun by goblins. The fellowship forges ahead, cautiously, but after a few days they are attacked. After fending off several dozen goblins and a cave troll, the must flee when a powerful fire demon appears. Gandalf stands against the creature, allowing his companions to escape; however, the kindly wizard is pulled down into a seemingly bottomless chasm with the beast.

Once free of Moria and after a brief respite in a wooded elvish city, the eight companions move on. Eventually, though, Frodo begins to realize that he will have to continue the journey alone, as the ring’s power threatens to overcome and twist each of his companions. To confirm his suspicions, Boromir attempts to take the ring from Frodo. Frodo flees him just as the fellowship is attacked by a band of orcs. The companions turn back the orcs, but not before Boromir is killed and Merry and Pippin are taken prisoner (Saruman has commanded his orcs to take any hobbits prisoner, so that he can find the ring of power).

The fellowship of the ring, once composed of nine companions with common purpose, is now broken. However, they are not defeated. Sam willfully joins Frodo on his quest to bring the ring to Mount Doom and destroy it. Now parted from the ring bearer and his closest friend, Aragorn rallies Gimli and Legolas, as they agree to stalk the orcs who have Merry and Pippin and free their little companions.

Aragorn, imploring Frodo to flee on his own and leave the fellowship behind. Aragorn then goes on to display his swordsmanship by mowing down waves of orcs.

My Take on the Film (Done after this most recent viewing)

To my slight sadness, the Fellowship of the Ring has lost a bit of its magic for me in the past few years. It’s still a great film, and I can’t see anyone ever attempting to adapt Tolkien’s seminal work onto the big screen again, so successful was Jackson. Still, this recent viewing didn’t hold my attention the way that it had before.

A little history: I LOVED these movies when they came out. When Fellowship hit the theaters, I saw it three times. When it was released on DVD, I watched it another two or three times. When they released the extended DVD version (which brought the film’s length to nearly three-and-a-half hours), I bought it right away and watched it three more times. About four years ago, my local theater did a marathon of the full trilogy, extended editions (nearly 11 hours of film in one day), and I went to it and enjoyed them all, immensely.

So why has my adoration for the movie faded? I can’t say that I’m completely sure. It could be that I just wasn’t in the right mood to watch it upon this recent viewing. I also suspect that, by viewing the 200-minute-long extended edition, I asked too much of myself at that particular time. However, I have other suspicions…

Upon this umpteenth viewing, I experienced some of the same dazed, stupefied disconnection as ol' Boromir here. Mainly, it was during the the sappier Frodo/Sam exchanges.

Once you’ve seen the films a few times, or maybe if you’re really familiar with the books, you may have less patience for the slower moments of the film. And Fellowship does have plenty of what could be called “slow moments.” This is not to be confused with “unnecessary scenes,” as all of the quieter moments do have their purposes: they add depth to certain characters, they reveal relationships or lore about the very rich world of Middle Earth, or they allow the viewer to take in the visual majesty that the film presents. Still, for some reason, these things weren’t enough to keep hold on my attention like they had in the past.

Lest I get too deeply into what I was not as enamored of, I need to spend time on the many positives of this movie. Now, one needs to be aware that this is the ultimate “fantasy” film, based on the “fantasy” story that basically birthed a massive genre of novels, films, cartoons, role-playing games, and so forth. If you haven’t seen these films and you have no interest in medieval-setting mythical tales, then don’t bother. I understand that some people find such things silly and pointless, and those people should stay well away from this film trilogy. I, on the other hand, love this kind of stuff, and Peter Jackson constructed what will probably remain the greatest fantasy film(s) for many, many decades.

Tackling J.R.R. Tolkien’s incredibly rich world of Middle Earth had been attempted before, but only in cartoons. For the many decades that followed the book’s release, there was simply no way that any movie could capture the imagination the way that the books always had. Finally, though, by the late 1990s, the financial and technological means existed for bringing Tolkien’s Middle Earth to live-action life. And right from the first scenes of this first installment, it was clear that Jackson was the man for the job. The prologue in Fellowship, which depicts the background tale of the Dark Lord Sauron’s One Ring of Power and his defeat at the hands of elves and humans, is packed with the visual magic and rousing action that define the film series.

The first, historic battle scene is relatively short, but conveys all of the grandeur and intensity that is intended. After this, though, it takes quite a while for the film to get back to these breathtaking, blood-pumping melees. 

The attention and respect that Jackson constantly pays to the source material is very impressive. Of course, hardcore Tolkien fanatics will nitpick at plenty of little things – “No, Boromir didn’t inherit that sword from that person…,” or “No, it wasn’t Pippin who stole the carrots, it was Merry...” and blah, blah, blah. Those who get caught up in such minor details completely miss the point – Jackson was brilliant at staying as true as he could to the novels while putting together a very entertaining film. The story conveys every bit of wonder and richness embedded within Middle Earth, and the tale of Frodo and the ring are given the epic treatment that they require.

The story itself is the classic, age-old story of a quest undertaken in order to prevent evil forces from dominating the lands. The fellowship formed by the four races certainly presents a compelling mix of mythical history, characters, and archetypes. The various races represent simplicity, power, honor, grace, courage, stodginess, and many other characteristics, in different turns. The ultimate presence of magic, represented by Gandalf and Saruman, adds the mystic and mysterious aspects of the story. To people like me, it can be truly enchanting.

Of course, all of the things explained in the previous paragraph were present in the books. What Jackson did was successfully translate them onto the big screen. Using his native country of New Zealand was a convenient and perfect choice. The small island country’s rolling, verdant hills; craggy, snow-capped peaks; and lush forests provide all of the scenery that Tolkien’s Middle Earth contained. Even someone who has no interest in the story of little hobbits, dwarfs, and elves can watch many of the sweeping shots over the landscape and marvel at it.

Jackson also put New Line Cinema’s massive budget to good work as well, with the end result being phenomenal costumes and visuals. The set pieces are great, and they build up the world all the more. Perhaps my favorite decision of his was to use human actors as much as possible. While there are clearly moments when CGI was used (particularly to create some of the especially enormous buildings, statues, or armies), Jackson opted to use make-up and creature effects as often as he could. Hence, you have many of the orcs, goblins, and other nefarious beings being played by human actors. The effects is that they all seem much more tangible and horrifying. I guess this latter adjective should come as no surprise, seeing as how Jackson got his cinematic start doing extremely graphic and effects-heavy horror films like Dead Alive.

Even when scenes involved dozens of individuals, Jackson didn't cop out with computer graphics - the use of real actors done over in top-notch make up and costumes was an invaluable asset to the film series.

The cast is excellent. From the impish and humble hobbits to the gruff and belligerent dwarves, all of the players nailed their parts right from the start in this first installment of the trilogy. The standouts to me are Ian McKellan as the kindly, paternal Gandalf the Grey and Viggo Mortensen as the mysterious, internally conflicted Strider/Aragorn. Some people might find the dialogue and deliveries to be overly theatrical and dramatic, but I’ve always felt that it fit the setting well. We’re dealing with imaginary myths here, so the speech and deliveries should be delivered with a polished and almost aristocratic air. It all fits perfectly well in this film series.

This does, however, bring me to something that I now find a bit tedious in Fellowship – the relationship between Frodo and Sam. I do understand perfectly well that this relationship is the true heart of the story. The fraternal bond between the two friends is the very type of goodness that is supposed to carry us through dark times, and it is this notion that creates the connection between us the viewers and these completely imaginary characters. Still, once you’ve seen the film a few times (or a half dozen times, like myself and other nerds), the moments that Sam and Frodo share start to drag. Granted, it isn’t a massive focus in Fellowship, but it’s already starting to wear on my attention. Instead of enjoying the moments between the two hobbit pals, I find myself anticipating other scenes. Namely, the action sequences.

Just a small, early sample of what will be many, many, MANY doe-eyed gazes between Sam and Frodo. It doesn't get terribly annoying until the third film, but it begins in the first film.

In Fellowship, we get several fantastic action sequences, and these serve as great hints of what is to come in the subsequent films. The opening prologue features a rousing depiction of the historic defeat of Sauron at the hands of Isildur. Other fight and battle scenes are equally entertaining, though they take a while to arrive at. The standouts are the trek through the Mines of Moria, including Gandalf’s facing off against the towering Balrog, and the battle in the woods between the fellowship and a patrol of orcs. For a man who had never directed extended action scenes in any of his previous major films (maybe you could include The Frighteners), Jackson proved himself quite astute at directing these scenes. Of course, he would continue to outdo himself in each of the sequels, with battles becoming grander and more spectacular.

*I will be reviewing the other two films in the Lord of the Rings trilogy in the next few weeks, after watching the few other films remaining on the TIME list.

That’s a wrap (sort of). 100 shows down; 5 to go.

Coming Soon: Talk to Her (2002):

My hunch is that this is a thoughtful, artful drama that has nothing to do with elves and dwarfs cracking wise and killing monsters. It should be an interesting change of pace.

Film #99: Kandahar (2001)

Original Farsi Language Title: Safar e Ghandehar

Director: Mohsen Makhmalbaf

Times Previously Seen: none

Rapid-Fire Summary (No spoilers)

Afghan refugee-turned-reporter returns to her country of origin to find and hopefully rescue her suicidal sister. Is helped and hindered by various locals.

Extended Summary (Including Spoilers. Fair warning)

In the year 2000, Nafas (Nelofer Pazira) is a reporter who, a decade prior, fled from Afghanistan to Canada with most of her family. Now, she is returning to find her sister, who was accidentally left behind when the family left the war-torn country. Nafas has received an alarming letter from her sister, stating that her sister will commit suicide on the evening of the final eclipse of the 21^st century, citing her overwhelming depression at her situation in a country falling more and more firmly into the grip of the ultra-conservative Taliban.

Nafas, having re-donned the burka (face covering up, at the moment) in order to traverse the ultra-conservative regions of her home country.

With two days remaining before the coming eclipse, Nafas must first don the full-body covering burka and pose as a wife of a local man who, with his family, is attempting to return to their home village in Afghanistan by crossing from the Iran border. She and the family only get so far into the country before they are robbed and left stranded by their driver. In the nearest village, she finds Khak (Sadou Teimouri), a young boy who has just been expelled from a Koranic school. Khak agrees to help Nafas get to Kandahar for cash payment.

After some arduous travel on foot over the desert landscape, Nafas becomes ill from drinking water from a local well. In the next village, she meets a doctor, Tabib (Hassan Tantai) who she soon learns is actually an African-American man who is helping the locals with their various ailments. The exact path that Tabib took to get where he is remains a mystery, but he has a genuine desire to help the people in Afghanistan in whatever ways that he can. Nafas leaves Khak behind, and Tabib takes her in his carriage back into the desert.

A little farther along, Tabib and Nafas arrive in a Red Cross camp, where international nurses are assisting local people in getting prosthetic legs to replace those that so many of them have lost to landmines scattered throughout the country. Among these men is a shifty, one-armed man named Hayat, who has pestered the nurses into giving him a set of legs. Nafas now must use Hayat as her guide, as Tabib must turn back from the strictly-Taliban controlled Kandahar region, which is now within reach. Nafas and Hayat both don burkas and join an all-female wedding party, hoping to slip past any Taliban sentries that they might meet along the way.

Black-clad females working with the Taliban search the wedding party for paraphernalia that goes against their strict Koranic beliefs. 

Upon nearing Kandahar, the wedding party is met by several Taliban guards. After searching the entire party for any contraband that they deem defies strict Islamic law, the guards pull several members of the party aside, including Hayat, whom they have uncovered as a man. Hayat joins the other separated members, and we are left to wonder what punishments face them.

Nafas gets past the guards and rejoins the wedding party. Now, with the sun setting on the final day before the eclipse, Nafas can see Kandahar in the distance.

My Take on the Film (Done before any further research)

Kandahar is certainly a hard-hitting film, and one that is still just as relevant as it was upon its release over a decade ago. While I can quibble over the technical merits of it as a film, the subject matter will force anyone, especially anyone in the United States, to take notice, considering how our country is still embroiled in a seemingly never-ending war in Afghanistan.

The only real demerits that can count deal with the acting and an occasional lack of clarity. The acting, I assume out of necessity, is not of the highest quality. It seems that the filmmaker opted to use authentic, amateur actors, in order to convey authenticity. The actors, I assume, are all Afghans. I also assume that, in such a war-torn area, the talent pool for actors is quite shallow. As such, the deliveries of lines are not always very natural.

The lack of clarity only emerges from viewers possibly not knowing much about strict Islamic laws and cultural patterns. I, myself, know just enough about the harsh rules imposed upon women in this part of the world, especially in the Taliban-controlled areas such as Kandahar, so I understood why the doctor Tabib needed a sheet between himself and the women he was treating. There are many other cultural norms that might seem puzzling to a viewer unfamiliar with them, and there are not really expositions given to explain them. Of course, this also solidifies just how these things are norms for these people, so explicit explanation would likely come off as being unnatural.

The highly memorable and perplexing moment when Tabib meets and "examines" Nafas. The sheet is meant to prevent a Muslim man from laying eyes on any woman who is not his wife.

Aside from these two areas, the movie is incredibly effective. The world that Nafas must negotiate in order to reach her sister is truly saddening and terrifying. They are all the more-so because they were and are still the reality for many people in this part of the world. There are more than a few scenes that, once you see them, you’re unlikely to ever forget. The scenes in which the young boy Khak is expelled from the Koranic school are just a few examples. Seeing rows and rows of young boys being fully brainwashed to alternately recite the Koran and give descriptions of the various weapons that they are holding (including sabers and machine guns) is harrowing. Scenes like this give some explanation as to why this country has never been conquered in history – a strictly-enforced, unwavering inculcation into religious zealotry and warfare.

Other scenes are equally heart-breaking. The Afghan men with one or both legs lost to landmines. The widowed women sitting in the middle of a dusty graveyard, nothing more to do but keep themselves under their burkas and bemoan their lost family members. The large troop of women moving along the desert, fully covered with their strikingly vibrant burkas. The images are so arresting that one would be tempted to think that they are completely contrived and staged. However, I never felt this way. The sad truth is that I have little doubt that all of these scenes depict the brutal realities of the lives of these people.

One of the many unforgettably heart-breaking scenes in the film - when men missing legs from landmines rush across the desert plain to chase prosthetic limbs being air-dropped from planes flying overhead.

Kandahar is the kind of movie that every person should see at least once. It’s bound to not only raise one’s awareness of how much some people in the world struggle for mere survival, but it can also make one appreciate just how many liberties most of us have. The purpose of the filmmakers was clearly to show the rest of us just how many of the things that we take for granted have been reduced to unrealistic dreams for people in this particular part of the world. It’s not an enjoyable message to receive, but one that we should receive nonetheless.

Upon Further Review (Done after a little more research)

This film has a few incredible facts behind it, one of which is the single most shocking thing that I’ve read in relation to any of the nearly 100 films that I’ve reviewed for this site.

I watched a 20-minutes documentary on the film and learned a few extremely fascinating, and ever more upsetting, things about the film. But this did not contain the shocker.

The primary one is that the film’s star, Nelofer Pazira, is actually playing a very close version of herself. The story of Nafas is a very close approximation of her own life as an Afghan refugee who risked the highly dangerous return to her home country to try and find a friend who she was worried might kill herself out of despair. After receiving her journalism degree in Canada, Pazira, who was only in her late twenties at the time, went through and witnessed many of the situations depicted in the film. Amazing, but this was still not the major shocker.

Nelofer Pazira, in the middle of one of the countless speaking engagements she has done since the movie was released. She has since been a tireless spokeswoman for civil right in the home country from which she and her family fled.

Another point of interest is how the film vaulted to world consciousness. It was initially released in May and August of 2001 at a few film festivals, where it received solid critical acclaim. Then, of course, September 11^th of that year happened. All of a sudden, interest in the Taliban skyrocketed for obvious reasons. At this point, the film and Nelofer Pazira were launched into global awareness, and Pazira began a tireless series of public speaking engagements through which she informed people about the brutal realities in which she grew up and from which she and her family had escaped. It all puts a very real face, one that can be seen prominently, in the movie. This is all extremely important, but it is still not the major shock.

The major shock relates to the man billed as Hassan Tantai, who plays the doctor who assists Nafas. When you see the film, it is easy to note that the man has a pitch-perfect North American English accent. I couldn’t help wonder how a man from the U.S. ended up in an all-Afghan film. Here’s how: Hassan Tantai is a stage name for Dawud Salahuddin – one of the most notorious assassins in United States lore. His given name was David Belfield, and he was born in North Carolina to a southern Baptist family. He converted to Islam in the 1970s, adopted extremely conservative Muslim values, and earned the trust of the Republic of Iran’s secret service. In 1980, on U.S. soil, he assassinated a former Iranian diplomat who the Iranian secret service had said defamed the Ayatollah Khomeini. Salahuddin fled the U.S., his relationship with the U.S. has been murky ever since, though is still listed as “wanted” by the F.B.I.

Dawud Salahuddin, from U.S. citizen to Iranian assassin to actor. His is a strange life that begs the question why he was cast in the film. The director's words (below) help shed some light on the decision.

With all of this in mind, it was very interesting to see a quote from the film’s director, Mohsen Makhmalbaf. He said that Salahuddin, “…is also a victim – a victim of the ideal that he believed in. His humanity, when he opened fire against his ideological enemy, was martyred by his idealism.” Very profound and controversial ideas, indeed.

Knowing all of this, I can only hope that people take some valuable lessons from the film and Pazira’s story. Though it is technically a fictional drama, the reality that inspired it can only spur one to think far beyond what is seen in the 85 minutes of the film.

That’s a wrap. 99 shows down; 6 to go.

Coming Soon: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

 

On a much brighter and more frivolous note, I next get to revisit Middle Earth, as Peter Jackson so wonderfully brought it to screens. 

Please be sure to pick up all empties on the way out.

Film #98: Ulysses' Gaze (1995)

Original Greek Title: To vlemma tou Odyssea

Director: Theo Angelopoulos

Initial Release Country: Greece

Times Previously Seen: none

Rapid-Fire Summary (no spoilers)

Successful, mixed-heritage film director takes a bizarre, dream-like journey through eastern Europe to track down reels of film. Looks awfully confused or pensive throughout.

Extended Summary (Spoilers included)

An American film director, unnamed in the film but credited as “A” (Harvey Keitel), goes to Greece to begin a search for three lost reels of film that were produced by the Manakis brothers in their earliest years as Yugoslavian filmmakers.

The first shot of the film, and the first of many sweeping shots that make effective use of negative space. On the left, "A" looks out over the sea at the beginning of his odyssey.

“A”s journey takes him from Greece to Albania, Macedonia, then Bulgaria, Romania, Belgrade, and finally Sarajevo. Along the way, various couriers’ and companions’ identities meld with “A”’s recollections of his own past in these areas, some of which he had spent time and emigrated from as a child. Relatives and lovers from his past emerge from his memory to interact with him once again. Within these dream-like moments, “A” relives past joys and sorrows, but never gives up his quest for the three Manakis brothers reels.

At the end of his journey, in a war-torn Sarajevo, “A” finds the man who has the reels – a film archivist who has nearly perfected the long-lost chemical formula that will allow him to properly develop the film. Shortly after he does this, though, he and his family are shot and killed in the middle of a firefight on the city streets. “A” sadly returns to the blasted movie theater to watch the films, only to find that they are blank, offering only vacuous white screens.

My Take on the Film (Done before any further research)

More than once while watching this one, the words “inaccessible” came to my mind. Not that I was completely baffled by Ulysses’ Gaze, but there was clearly much more going on than I was able to grasp on this single, first viewing. There are clearly many themes and elements of great depth presented in the movie, and there is a hypnotic quality to its presentation that is compelling enough for me to make the effort for its full three hours. On the whole, though, I’m not sure that I would watch it again, and I certainly cannot recommend it to any but the most patient and avid fans of film.

The story of “A”s quest for the reels of film is interesting enough, as it sets up the traditional “quest” plot device. The film’s title is the first clear indication that Homer’s grand epic, The Odyssey, is a major inspiration. Of course, “A” is not traversing the Aegean Sea and besting monsters or other mythological hazards to return home. “A”s journey is a metaphorical search for his psychological and artistic roots, and he has to move past very real dangers in the highly treacherous Balkan regions in the middle of war-ravaged 1990s. This grand theme is fairly interesting, as it is only revealed in bits and pieces as the film moves along.

"A" rows his "Circe" along the river. His interaction with her is one of the more bizarre among the several time- and person-warping interactions that he has along the way.

The pace and tone of the film are what will tax many a viewer’s patience. In a style that I can best compare to the films I’ve seen of Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky, Angelopoulos uses many slow, measured, and meditative shots to draw in the viewer. I found these quite effective, as it gave me time to ponder the ultimate meaning of “A”s actions and purposes, as well as mull over the stunning compositions placed within the camera’s frames. Like the Tarkovsky films Andrei Rublev, Stalker, and others, Ulysses’ Gaze demands that the viewer embrace the quieter, slower moments in order to allow a certain moody gravity to overcome him or her. Most of the time, it works very well. However, there were a few times when it seemed slightly pretentious or contrived to me. I have to admit to occasionally suspecting being hoodwinked by the notion that just because the filmmaker isn’t spelling it all out for you, you must be missing something. I’ve found that, in my case, this is actually true at times. Sometimes, I am missing something, and maybe that was true when I was watching this film. Whether for this reason or simple impatience on my part, I found myself trying to urge the film forward at times.

From what I could tell, the visuals are fairly amazing. However, there is a caveat here. This film is, oddly enough for the 21^st century, extremely difficult to get a hold of. It has not been in print for several years, and there really has not been a well-produced restoration done to my knowledge, which does not allow the film to be seen in all of its majesty. From the mediocre-quality DVD that I was able to procure, it is clearly a film that would be best served by being seen on the big screen. The sweeping shots of the blasted landscapes, meandering rivers, and foggy streets of the Balkan regions convey a bleakness that seems part and parcel of the mental distress that “A” is battling through. Had I been able to watch a higher-quality copy, I might have even more praise for this aspect of the movie.

The acting is rather strange. I love Harvey Keitel, and he often shows a decent amount of range. However, I’m not sure if he was the best choice for this role. Whether through his own interpretation or at the behest of the director, he shows odd shifts in demeanor, posture, and emotion as the story moves on. At many times, it is clear that these shifts represent “A” psychologically shuffling between his present quest and his past memories as son, lover, and brother. During most of the “modern” scenes, though, he delivers his lines as if he were in a trance. I realize that this is probably what the story calls for, as an urge far greater than himself is pulling him towards the Manakis brothers’ film reels, but I found that it almost dehumanized him. This was especially the case when the other modern character around him were acting much more naturally. Added to this is that Keitel, in his many roles in U.S. films, is one of the greatest “naturalistic” actors of the past several decades. A final puzzling thing to me about Keitel’s casting is my question of “Why him?” For much of the film, he’s delivering lines in English or short phrases in Greek, while almost everyone else is speaking the local languages. I suppose that this is likely another layer of the story that I failed to grasp, but it was a bit disorienting.

This is often how Keitel looks in this film - staring off into the distance, while others try to interact with him in more natural, organic ways. It fits the tone of the movie at times, but during some moments, it simply baffled me.

I have to say that, if nothing else, Ulysses' Gaze is a novel film that suggests great depth. I have no doubt that there were more than a few elements and strata that were simply over my head, which led to a bit of frustration and impatience as I viewed it. Still, I enjoyed the process of attempting to piece together the different visual, narrative, and thematic elements in the movie. I certainly was not completely successful, so that I currently have a disjointed impression of the film. I hope that the next section of this review will remedy this…

Upon Further Review (Done after some further research on the film):

I did this portion of the review after reading this very thorough and insightful synopsis at the Internet Movie Database.

Well, it’s quite clear that I missed several key elements that the director implemented. In short, if you plan to watch this movie, there are two things that will help: (1) a general knowledge of Homer’s Odyssey, and (2) patience. When one keeps these in mind, it becomes easier to see why the list-creators at TIME decided to include this film on their “All-TIME Great Films” list.

While I was watching it, I was able to pick up several of the plot points and interactions that mirrored Odysseus’s epic journey to Ithaca. There are many characters who represent the long-archetypal roles of Penelope, Calypso, Telemachus, and many others from the Greek classic tale. However, there are even more that I did not pick up on. One such is how “A”s journey into Sarajevo represents Odysseus’s descent into Hades. Obvious really, when it’s pointed out to you. If a viewer has a rich knowledge and love of the source material, then watching this film would provide a very deep experience.

Another thing that the author of the review points out is some of Angeloupolos’ film style. Beyond just giving a mere synopsis, the writer explains some of the deeper meaning of the long periods of silence in the film, confirming my suspicion that these are meant for the viewer to contemplate far beyond the mere screen action. We are constantly reminded that the region of the Balkans has a rich and often sad history. The long, slow shots give ample time for the mood and weight to settle into our minds. These realizations also give “A”s journey more meaning, as he remains steadfast, despite every sign that tells him to turn back.

A scene from Sarajevo - the "Hades" of "A"s Odyssey. These scenes are obviously and carefully staged, which will put off some viewers. For those who look beyond the unnatural setup and focus on what things represent, the film becomes much more engaging.

As profound as this film is, I still cannot say that I would rush to watch it again. Knowing now much more about the symbolism throughout, I would consider it. However, I would only do so if it were restored to a very high quality. The settings are already dreary enough, without having to watch them on a low-quality print. This one would be a prohibitive recommendation.

That’s a wrap. 98 shows down, 7 to go.

Coming Soon: Kandahar (2001)

Another film that I know almost nothing about. I know it involves Afghanistan and the Taliban, two hot-button topics even today, over a decade after this film was made. We’ll see how it stacks up.

Please be sure to pick up all empties on the way out.

Film #97: Chungking Express (1995)

Original (Cantonese) Title: Chung Hing sam lam

Director: Wong Kar-Wai

Initial Release Country: Hong Kong (China)

Times Previously Seen: none

Semi-Rapid-Fire Summary

In 1990s Hong Kong, young police officer #223, He Qiwu, is battling loneliness in the wake of a lost love. His girlfriend has broken up with him just a few weeks prior, and he tries to deal with it by leaving voice messages for her on a daily basis. He has also given himself a deadline of 30 days, which he counts using expiration dates on can of pineapples, within which to hear from her. He tells himself that if he does not hear from her, he will abandon his hope of a reconciliation.

When the 30 days is up, Qiwu devours all of the cans of pineapples and heads to a bar to drown his sorrows. After several drinks, he spots and comes on to a beautiful woman in a blond wig. Unbeknownst to Qiwu, the icy woman is embroiled in a drug smuggling double-cross and is in the bar for some quietude. Still, she eventually succumbs to Qiwu’s persistent overtures and brings him up to her hotel room. Any amorous hopes that Qiwu may have are dashed, though, as the woman promptly falls sound asleep, leaving him to eat room service food and watch movies on the hotel television.

Qiwu tries to move past his former love with booze and some pick-up moves.

The day after, Qiwu has left the woman in the hotel room, and he seems on the verge of mentally moving past his ex-girlfriend. However, he receives a birthday message from her, perhaps giving him some shred of hope.

At a short-order restaurant frequented by Qiwu, another police officer, #663, is battling his own romantic breakup. Between getting coffee and food at the restaurant, he reminisces over a romance with a beautiful flight attendant. He copes by simply doing his duty as a cop and making humorous observations to the inanimate objects in his apartment, many of which belonged to his ex.

Taking notice of 663 is Faye – a somewhat flighty young woman who works the counter at the restaurant. Very secretively, Faye’s interest in 663 grows. In a turn of events, she ends up with a letter and apartment key from 663’s ex. Rather than passing them along to the dejected officer, Faye keeps the letter and uses the key to explore his tiny apartment while he is away at work. At first, she simply looks around, but eventually she begins to clean and care for the dwelling. This seems to be the only way that the socially awkward young woman can try to connect with the object of her infatuation.

Cop #663, lost in his own thoughts as the love-struck Faye gazes on.

After a few weeks of her clandestine care-taking, Faye is caught in the apartment by 663. Though shocked, the man is not critical. In fact, he allows Faye to stay a while and the two fall asleep on his couch. The following day, 663 and Faye plan to have an actual “date” at a nearby restaurant and bar. However, Faye stands up 663, leaves her job at the restaurant, and actually departs Hong Kong altogether. In a perhaps not-coincidental turn, she becomes a flight attendant in order to see the world. One year later, Faye returns to find that 663 has bought and is renovating the restaurant. The two talk a while, though we cannot be sure whether they will have any kind of future together.

My Take on the Film:

Chungking Express is a good movie that certainly shows a lot of skill from a then-young director. It’s quirky, thoughtful, and stylish in places. I can’t say that I was blown away, though.

In telling the story of the two lonely police officers, we get some very heartfelt slices of life in the hyperactive East Asian metropolis of Hong Kong. The stories of He Qiwu and Cop 663 are ones that come across as very authentic, and you can’t help but feel for both men. They seem to represent two of presumably countless other people in the vast city that can’t seem to find the romantic connections that they crave. The ways that they deal with their loneliness are quite different from one another, but show them both to be very sympathetic in their humorous attempts to cope with their dilemmas. It all has a feel rather reminiscent of the French New Wave films of Godard and Truffaut from the 1960s. In particular, Band ofOutsiders has the same genuine playfulness mixed with a tragedy that, admittedly, is more palpable.

Only being loosely connected to one another, the movie comes off as really two shorter films, stitched together only by the short-order food stand that they both frequent. The first story, that of Qiwu, I found to be the more engaging of the two. Qiwu is love-struck and pines away over his ex-girlfriend by marking off the days after their breakup by buying cans of pineapples, all of which will expire 30 days after his April Fool’s Day dumping. He tells himself that he will give his ex until May 1^st to allow him back into her life. It’s a funny little system that reflects the little ways that we lie to ourselves in order to cling to past happiness. In Qiwu’s case, though, it clearly doesn’t work very well, as he falls in love with the mysterious woman in the blonde wig. The evening of unsatisfied amore in the hotel room is another slightly comical yet sad moment in his life. You end up feeling for him, though in a very realistic rather than classically romantic way.

Qiwu's loneliness is cast in a rather humorous light, through his pineapple can counting system.

The tale of Cop 663 is one of a different sort. It has its own feel, but it has some of the same lighthearted wistfulness of Qiwu’s story. 663 is a slightly older man who seems more controlled and world-weary than Qiwu. Tony Leung, who is phenomenal in this as well as Kar-Wai’s later film In the Mood for Love, has the amusing quirks of consoling his household goods while seeming oblivious to some of the most obvious things. Faye’s initial quiet interest in 663 is charming at first, but for me it lapses into disturbing stalker behavior – something akin to a more eerie version of the title character’s antics in the playful French film Amelie. I don’t know that this was Kar-Wai’s intent, but it is the impression I came away with. Nevertheless, the story certainly held my attention, even if I wasn’t left completely satisfied at the end.

Aesthetically, the film is rock-solid. Thanks to excellent camerawork, the film conveys Hong Kong as a vibrant, ever-churning mass of bodies, buildings, and colors. Some of the scenes in Qiwu’s story use an impressionistic, herky-jerky style of editing that I’m not a fan of, but it didn’t distract. A lot of the movie is simply enjoyable to look at, something that is also further honed in In the Mood for Love.

663's observations of and to the various inanimate objects in his apartment add a really warm, amusing layer to his seemingly passive demeanor.

One little nuisance has stuck with me since I watched this movie several days ago. In 663’s story, Faye is obsessed with the song California Dreamin’ by the Mamas and the Papas. The song is played no less than four times within a forty-five minute span, and it wore me out. Ever since I watched it, I can’t get the song out of my head, it was so firmly jack-hammered into me by the movie. I don’t care how appropriate a song is in a film story or even how good a song it is, no tune should be played this many times in any movie. It just wears thin.

Will I watch this movie again? I doubt it. I would, however, recommend it as a good one.

That’s a wrap. 97 shows down. 8 to go.

Coming Soon: Ulysses’ Gaze (1997)

I’ve had a hell of a time even trying to find a copy of this one. I have to be skeptical of a “masterpiece” that’s not even in print, in this day and age when everything you could imagine is at your fingertips. Maybe I’ll be surprised…

Please be sure to pick up all empties on the way out.

FIlm #96: Pulp Fiction (1994)

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Initial Release Country: United States

Times Previously Seen: around nine or ten, at least (last seen about five years ago)

(Relatively) Rapid-Fire Plot Synopsis

*For those who haven’t seen it, Pulp Fiction is told in non-linear style, making summation a rather odd task. I will present it in the only way that I can manage to keep it reasonably concise. However, I am aware that events play out in the film in a different order. Bear with me…

Los Angeles, the early- to mid-1990s. Jules Winfield (Samuel L. Jackson) and Vincent Vega (John Travolta) are low-rent hit men for local crime kingpin, Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames). The two appear at the apartment of a few younger guys who have a briefcase belonging to Marsellus. Jules and Vincent spend some time intimidating the young men before killing them and taking the case. After they kill two of the young men, a hidden third man nearly kills them, though all six of his shots freakishly miss their targets, from virtually point-blank range. Jules and Vincent kill their assailant, but Jules feels that God had a hand in saving him from death.

Jules and Vincent complete their executions of the unfortunate rubes who tried to rip off Marsellus Wallace, the kingpin of Los Angeles.

Shortly after, in their car with their inside informant, Marvin, Jules and Vincent debate whether their escape from certain death was an act of the Almighty. In the midst of the discussion, Vincent accidentally shoots and kills Marvin – the result of careless handling of his pistol. Jules and Vincent then hurriedly get their car to a friend’s house, where they spend the next hour or so in a race against he clock to clean their car and dispose of the body. With the help of a professional “cleaner,” Winston Wolf (Harvey Keitel) the men are able to dispatch the car and body, though not without a fair amount of tension.

After the ordeal, Jules and Vincent have some breakfast at a diner. They continue their discussion of their avoidance of death earlier, and Jules decides that he is going to give up his life as a hit man and become a wanderer who rights wrongs. Vincent is highly skeptical and all but mocks his colleague. While Vincent is in the restroom, a pair of boyfriend/girlfriend thieves rob the diner. When the man attempts to rob Jules of Marsellus Wallace’s briefcase, Jules turns the tables and pulls his gun on the robber. After several minutes of tense discussion, Jules explains that he has given up killing people, pays off the robber, and lets him and his girlfriend go, all of this to the great chagrin of Vincent.

A day or two after, Vincent has an assignment to be a guard and companion to Marsellus Wallace’s wife, Mia (Uma Thurman). Vincent takes Mia to a retro restaurant, where the two engage in stimulating discussion and even win a dance contest.

The unlikely dancing duo of hit man Vincent and mob wife Mia. This joyous routine will soon be followed by a harrowing drug overdose that puts a serious damper on the evening.

Back at the Wallace residence, as Vincent struggles in the bathroom over his growing attraction to Mia, she discovers a bag of heroin in Vincent’s discarded coat pocket. Thinking it to be cocaine, she snorts it, goes into immediate shock and collapses. Vincent discovers her and rushes her to the house of his drug dealer, Lance (Eric Stoltz). Vince and Lance get through their extreme panic and manage to revive Mia with an adrenaline shot directly to her heart. After these harrowing events, Mia and Vincent amicably agree to keep the entire affair a secret from Marsellus, and they go their separate ways for the evening.

Several days later, a major boxing match takes place. Aging but capable boxer Butch Coolidge (Bruce Willis) shocks Marsellus Wallace by actually winning a fight that the crime boss has bribed him to lose. Butch, in a supremely risky double-cross, took the cash from Wallace, wagered all of it on himself, and won big. The only thing that he needs to do is quietly flee from the country the next morning. This simple plan is foiled, however, when Butch learns that his girlfriend, Fabian, has left his most prized possession - an heirloom watch that his forebears took unspeakable pains to pass down to him. Butch must risk returning to his apartment to retrieve the watch.

Butch carefully returns to his apartment, which at first seems to be empty. He grabs the watch, and then notices a silenced machine gun sitting on the kitchen counter. In an odd turn of luck for Butch, the hit man sent to stake out his apartment is in the bathroom at the exact moment Butch has arrived. When the assassin emerges, it turns out to be Vincent Vega, whom Butch quickly kills with his own weapon.

Butch prepared to take out Vincent, the man who would have killed him had the careless hit man not left his gun outside of the bathroom.

Upon fleeing his apartment in his car, Butch unfortunately runs across Marsellus Wallace himself. Wallace chases Butch into a pawn shop run by a redneck, Maynard. Maynard pulls a shotgun on them both, knocks them out, and brings them to the basement where he and his perverted companion, Zed, make clear that they will take sexual advantage of both men and kill them. While Maynard and Zed have their way with Wallace, Butch quietly manages to free himself. Rather than escaping and leaving his adversary Wallace to a horrible fate, however, Butch decides to save him. After the rescue, Wallace grants Butch a sort of amnesty, telling him to leave L.A. for good. Butch readily accepts, returns to pick up his girlfriend, and leaves.

My Reaction to the Film (Done after this most recent viewing)

I think I could go another 50 years before watching this film again, and I still could not see it with fresh eyes. That is how much of an impact it had on me when I first saw it, and that’s how much impact it’s had on countless films since its release.

Back in 1994, I was 19 years old when I saw Pulp Fiction for the first time. I had no idea who the director was, but the movie blew me away. I had never seen a film so funny, engaging, tense, entertaining, novel, and just plain fun. There were so many different things to soak up that I went back to the theater to watch it three more times, over the course of the next few weeks. Any time I found a friend who hadn’t seen it, I would bring them immediately. It quickly became a mainstay of the pop culture landscape, and references to nearly everything in the film have abounded ever since.

Now that nearly 20 years have passed and Quentin Tarantino has released several other movies, it’s become rather easy to deconstruct his work and view it as overdone and perhaps a bit too heavy on style at times. Still, this doesn’t take away from just how novel a blend it all was back in 1994, and it still shows his style as a brilliant one that is, as the saying goes, “often imitated, never duplicated.”

Of course, the dialogue is the most engaging part of watching Pulp Fiction the first, third, or even tenth time you see it. Basically every line shows a certain amount of wit or unexpected humor. Tarantino’s hallmark of seasoning the dialogue with pop culture references was put on full display in Pulp Fiction. He had done it to a degree in his previous film, Reservoir Dogs, but not to this extreme. In the same way that details and references make a good stand-up comedian funny, the running spoken interplay between characters in Pulp Fiction is as entertaining as it gets. Virtually every line from the film is quotable, and I was just like millions of others in going back to the theater repeatedly in order to soak it all up and commit it to memory.

Vincent and Jules in the diner. Arguably the best of the many great conversations in the film. Samuel L. Jackson's take on Jules's introspection earned him a well-deserved Oscar.

When describing a Tarantino film (especially the earlier ones), fans will never have the word “cool” very far from their vocabulary. The characters themselves are all great archetypes of “cool.” The stony-eyed hit men, the mythically-powerful mob boss, the aging boxer with one last shot to hit it big – these major characters were all drawn from countless noir and pulp stories from the previous several decades. Tarantino cast them into modern settings masterfully and made them fun to watch. Even all of the minor characters – Pumpkin and Honeybunny, Lance the drug dealer, Maynard and Zed the perverted rednecks, Winston Wolf, and all of the others have become almost iconic, based on amazingly composed vignettes. Tarantino is obviously a lover of what he terms “badasses,” and Pulp Fiction probably has the highest badass factor of all of his movies.

Yet another element to the Tarantino film is the music. Never before had I taken in a movie in which the music enhanced the atmosphere so effectively. From the moment that Miserlou relentlessly kicks in during the opening credits, the soundtrack deepens the mood with every song. Once again, the word “cool” finds its way to the forefront.

Though I’ve seen this movie at least ten times, and I know it basically by heart, one thing was more noticeable to me this time around. I had never really taken in just how obviously “cinematic” it all is. Sure, there is a certain amount of realism to some of the settings, and the actors’ deliveries of the dialogue are astoundingly naturalistic. Still, when you focus on the costumes, the set designs, and the composition of the other elements, it’s abundantly clear that the world of Pulp Fiction is just that – fiction. From the eye-popping colors of Jack Rabbit Slims to the minimal yet memorable suits of Jules and Vincent, and even the obviously phony backdrop in the cab that Butch takes from the boxing arena, there are plenty of moments that remind you that you are, indeed, watching a movie. Sure, there are really tense and violent moments (something for which Tarantino has been recognized and criticized for two decades now), but it is quite clear that these are, in many ways, comic book characters. In film, this makes for pure cinema through a concoction that very few directors can manage.

Butch peruses which weapon he will use to kill a couple of deranged hillbillies. This visceral scene is one of several almost cartoonish ones that show off Tarantino's skill with the nearly-lost art of visual storytelling.

I don’t know if Pulp Fiction will be as enjoyable thirty, twenty, or even ten years from now, when the pop culture references lose their sparkle and meaning and more and more filmmakers try to ape its magic. But no critic can ever diminish the effect it had on the cinematic landscape. It’s still a really fun movie to watch, and may be the quintessential “1990s American” movie.

Some Final Thoughts on Tarantino:

As stated, I became a tremendous fan of Quentin Tarantino after Pulp Fiction, and I still go to see every movie that he either directs or for which he writes the screenplay. Here are my quick thoughts on each of his major motion pictures:

Reservoir Dogs (1992): Outstanding crime flick, featuring everything that a Tarantino fan could love. The sharp dialogue, intensity, and non-linear storytelling are all tight, and the acting is absolutely top-notch.

True Romance (1993): Director Tony Scott took Tarantino’s script and fashioned another great movie. It has one of my all-time favorite movie scenes – in which Dennis Hopper and Christopher Walken stare each other down and engage in a captivating exchange.

Natural Born Killers (1994): Director Oliver Stone took Tarantino’s basic story and some of his script and created an uneven mess. Stone can never help himself from making grandiose statements, and he went way over the top in this one, often drowning out the strengths of the Tarantino-penned script.

From Dusk ‘Till Dawn (1996): Directed by Robert Rodriquez, a great vampire movie that combines Tarantino’s strengths with crime writing and vampire lore. Over-the-top fun that I still occasionally watch and enjoy.

Jackie Brown (1997): The sleeper Tarantino movie. It’s actually my second favorite, behind Pulp Fiction. Adapting an Elmore Leonard novel, Tarantino put together his most accessible movie, for those who are put off by the graphic violence in most of his movies. I always recommend this one to people who haven’t seen it.

Tarantino's most underrated film, in my view. Great direction and acting bring a cracking Elmore Leonard tale to life. If you dig crime movies, check it out.

Kill Bill, volumes 1 and 2 (2003, 2004): Tarantino’s homage to kung-fu and spaghetti western movies. They work very well in some places, and they’re quite a bit of fun; however, they became a bit tiresome by the end of the second part. The movie gore hits new heights in these ones.

Grindhouse/Deathproof (2007): This is where my patience with Tarantino started to wear thin. This is his most self-indulgent, tiresome film. There is some great acting and decent verbal exchanges, but Tarantino was clearly in love with his own dialogue just as much as the B-movie exploitation horror films that he was channeling. Not a bad movie, but I’ll never watch it again.

Inglorious Basterds (2009): Still overly enamored of his own dialogue, Tarantino nonetheless made a solid World War II flick. It’s a preposterous re-imagining of history, but still an entertaining watch. Could have been edited down a bit, but I enjoy it. Christoph Waltz and Brad Pitt help with excellent performances.

Django Unchained (2012): Very much like the previous movie, only set in the 1850s old West. Again, Tarantino falls back on his passion for spaghetti Westerns, but does it with his own panache. Also a bit long, but still a solid movie. Like “Basterds,” it’s worth watching just for Christoph Waltz.

As of now, I still consider myself a fan, but I now qualify it a bit more. At this point, I would really like to see Tarantino get away from the same wells that he’s drawn from for years now – exploitation, kung-fu, and spaghetti western films. I understand that these are his strengths and passions, but I think he’s a capable enough filmmaker to try something a bit different. Although, with word coming out that there is a “Kill Bill, part 3” in the works, I probably shouldn’t hold out much hope.

That’s a wrap. 96 shows down. 9 to go.

Coming Soon: Chunking Express (1994)

 I know a few of director Wong Kar-wai’s movies, and I’ve liked them. I’ll see how this early work of his stacks up.

Please be sure to pick up all empties on the way out.

Film #95: Legend of Drunken Master (1994)

Original Chinese Title: Jui kuen II

Directors: Chia-Liang Liu, Jackie Chan

Original Release Country: Hong Kong (China)

Times Previously Seen: once (about 14 years ago)

Kung-fu Quick Summary:

China, approximately the 1930s or 1940s. Young man Wong Fei-hung (Jackie Chan) is returning by train with his father from a business trip. His father is a respected herbalist, and they have been on a buying expedition. The impetuous Fei-hung gets caught up in trying to smuggle some ginseng onto the train, to avoid paying a tax, and his plant gets swapped with an antique stone. After a few fights and further confusion, Fei-hung, his father, and their assistant arrive home safely.

After arriving back at his father’s shop, Fei-hung and his clownish step-mother cover up their father’s missing ginseng through various tricks. Amidst all of this, Fei-hung gets caught up in a street fight in which he utilizes his “drunken boxing” style – a form of kung-fu that is virtually unbeatable but requires the practitioner to consume ever-increasing amounts of alcohol. For this reason, Fei-hung’s father forbids it.

Fei-hung, getting loaded in the middle of just one of many ass-whippings that he delivers in the movie. Sure, the idea of alcohol-fueled martial arts invincibility is ridiculous. But it's fun.

Fei-hung and his family are eventually visited by Master Fu Wen-Chi, China’s top counter-intelligence officer, and a man whom Fei-hung had fought during the train ride that set all of his trouble in motion. Wen-Chi explains that the antique stone that Fei-hung had found is one of an entire hoard of Chinese historical treasures that are being stolen and smuggled out of China by a corrupt British diplomat and his regional Chinese cronies.

With the help of miners abused by the diplomat’s henchman and Master Fu Wen-Chi, Fei-hung leads an assault on the thieves headquarters – the mines from which they are excavating and stealing the national treasures. Fei-hung fights his way through a gauntlet of ever-more skilled adversaries and, by embracing his drunken boxing skills, defeats them all. The treasures are returned to their rightful owners, the Chinese people, and the fiendish British diplomat is banished.

My Gut Reaction to the Film (Done after this most recent re-viewing)

I assume that this film was put on the “All-TIME 100 list” because it is considered the absolute pinnacle of what kung-fu movies can offer.

If this is the case, then I can now say that kung-fu is simply not a genre that holds my attention.

In an odd way, my feelings towards the kung-fu genre are similar to the way I feel about the musical or even dance film genres. I can appreciate the planning, skills, and execution that they all require, and I can even marvel at these things for a while. Eventually, though, I’m always left wanting more narrative and emotional substance. Legend of Drunken Master is no exception.

Whether you're a fan of martial arts flicks or not, you have to marvel, even if only for a few moments, at the physical skill exhibited throughout the movie.

Story-wise, you have a nationalistic tale that is threadbare and so simple that it almost insults your intelligence. While the thievery of Chinese treasures of antiquity has been and is a real problem, this film’s treatment of it makes it clear that it is only meant to imbue the goofy Fei-hung with some sort of heroic purpose. I guess even Hong Kong kung-fu movies need their McGuffin.

In reality, the nefarious thievery acts more like whatever throw-away premise would get used in a W.C. Fields movie – it’s simply something that serves as an excuse for the star to do what he is best known for. In Fields’ case, it was begin a drunken, wise-cracking buffoon. In Jackie Chan’s case, it is being a lightning-quick contortionist/martial artist who dispatches hordes of enemies. The reason is completely inconsequential, so long as the star gets to do his thing. This keeps things rather simple, which can be both good and bad.

Interestingly, this film’s connections to the movies of long ago do not lie in its simplistic plot alone. One can easily see a very heavy dose of silent-film era shenanigans in Legend of Drunken Master. Between Chan and his step-mother, played by Anita Mui, the goofy slapstick is never very far. Chan himself often channels the great Buster Keaton, as far as pulling off effortless acrobatic and gymnastic moves, even when doing what would otherwise be routine movements. At times, I was also reminded of a quote I once heard about Fred Astaire – that he was “always dancing,” even during non-dancing scenes. Chan doesn’t “always” dance through his scenes, but when he does, it is to excellent effect. However, I must say that the slapstick eventually became more sophomoric than amusing to me.

The thing that makes this movie stand out is, of course, the action sequences. Jackie Chan and co-director Chia-Liang Liu (also a long-time stuntman in Hong Kong martial arts flicks) concocted and executed some phenomenal sequences in this movie. The speed and precision of the movements create a ballet of violence that will mesmerize any viewer. At least, for a little while. This was my problem. Like the slapstick elements of the movie, what begins as magnetic eventually became tiresome to me. The latter half of the film, with Chan facing down dozens and dozens of generic thugs and henchman, had lost its luster. I realize that not everyone feels this way. There are plenty of kung-fu movie fans who live for this stuff, and those fans would surely love every minute of every fight scene in this movie. I, however, grew weary of them.

One other gripe I have regarding the action sequences is their authenticity. One legitimate claim to fame that Chan has always had is that he and everyone in his movies perform all of their own stunts. However, in Legend of Drunken Master, it is quite clear that suspension wires are used during several of the fights and stunts. This is a bit disappointing since part of the intrigue of these movies is seeing just how far the stuntmen and women can push the limits of the human body, in terms of agility, flexibility, and coordination. Some of this wonder is diminished, though, when I can tell that they are “cheating” somewhat by using tools that any old “action” star could use. It would be like seeing Swan Lake when you know that the ballerina is using support wires. Not nearly as impressive.

One of the most obvious of several scenes that used wires to hold the actors up, allowing them to preform stunts and moves that seemingly defied gravity. Rather cheap, in my view. 

So I’m pretty much done with kung-fu movies. Perhaps there are still some out there that show the depth and development that I’ve always found lacking in them. Unless I hear of an unusually thoughtful or meditative film like the previously reviewed classic, A Touch of Zen, or the much more recent Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, I’ll be staying away from this brand of film.

That’s a wrap. 95 shows down, 10 to go.

Coming Soon: Pulp Fiction (1994)

“Bring out the gimp.”

Please be sure to pick up all empties on the way out.