Co-directed by John Woo, starring Michelle Yeoh. That got my attention right away as a recipe for a potentially good action film.
There is a rumor that the mummified remains of the Indian monk who brought the Buddhadharma to China 800 years prior has special powers that would allow whoever possessed them to perfect his or her martial arts skills and rule the martial arts world.
A secret society of assassins called Dark Stone is set on obtaining the remains, which have since been cut in two and separated. During a raid on a minister's home, where one part of the remains is said to be located, the minister is killed and his son seriously wounded, but then one of the assassins betrays the Dark Stone and she steals the remains and disappears.
She runs into a would-be monk/swordmaster and ends up hanging out with him for 3 months and afterwards has a change of heart and tries to turn her life around, leave the martial arts world and become an anonymous citizen in the capital city. Hilarity ensues.
The plot is pretty sophisticated and ambitious with some trademark John Woo twists and surprises. Although I'm not sure I'm correctly attributing credit to him since he was the secondary director. Unfortunately, the presentation of such a complicated plot is very difficult and it does get muddled in places. Although the overall plot arc is pretty clear, I had to watch this twice to connect all the little dots. Actually I enjoyed the film more upon the second viewing, already knowing the twists and surprises.
The action is pretty good, but not spectacular. There's quite a bit of CG in the swordplay and the fighting didn't feel as kinetic as great fight scenes should feel. They didn't grab me, but they were by no means sub-par. It also kinda looked like camera angles and editing were a large part of the fight scenes, rather than martial arts skill and training.
The major problem I had with the film was the lack of character development and no background to give insight into the characters and what their motivations are. The characters are just there and are who they are and we're just supposed to go along with it. The main character's "transformation" to turn her life around and the would-be monk/swordmaster who catalyzes it is brow-furrowingly inexplicable. It's a shallow device.
But as I mentioned in my last comments on a John Woo film, Red Cliff, where he did try to do character development and failed miserably by my estimation, you don't watch a John Woo film for the characters, you watch it for shit blowing up and guns that never have to be re-loaded. Or in this case, flaming swords, wounded people crawling home for one last bite of homemade noodles before dramatically croaking and a hot wench assassin who likes getting naked and having sex.
I still recommend this film for fans of martial arts movies. Fresh 7 out of 10 tomatoes.
This film is about a 9-year old girl who unexpectedly gets left by her father at a Catholic orphanage in South Korea in the early months of 1975. At 92 minutes short, the film at first blush seems to be a simple and straight-forward arrow shot of a story, which in both narrative and filmmaking is unremarkable.
However, upon second viewing, I found all sorts of depth and complexity curled up in it like the extra dimensions in String Theory. It's deceptively simple and I got the feeling that there was more to the film to dig up. The filmmaker was getting at something intentional that the viewer had to find.
Of course, having studied religion, and having a film syllabus in one of my religion classes, I did put this film under that kind of scrutiny, which is frustrated by being set at a Catholic orphanage, and so being is already replete with Christian imagery.
But there were some other things the director managed to slip in that weren't part of the overt Christian context of the film. The feet washing scene might be noted by people looking for such symbolism, as well as the death/resurrection scene, but it's not like the film was littered with these references.
On further inquiry about this film, there seems to be autobiographical references of the director in this film. It's set in 1975, and the director was 9-years old in 1975, and she had also been left at a Catholic orphanage for adoption. So I wonder maybe it's the director's personal experience that might be infusing the film and begging the audience to look beyond the story, and look at the characters, look at the histories, the contexts, none of which is covered in the film, but behind it all are real people; is a real person.
Perhaps an irony in coupling the comments to this film with Reign of Assassins is that I complained about the failure of giving background and motivations to the characters in that film. But in this film, it may be what is not included that is so compelling.
While the main character is at the orphanage, the camera never looks beyond the short dirt road that leads to the locked gates of the orphanage. We don't know why the father leaves her there, they didn't seem to have financial problems, nor did there seem to be any overt social upheaval to protect her from. We never even get a good look at him until he gives her one last look.
The workers at the orphanage are impassive automatons for most part. They neither mistreat nor coddle the girls. Their solution to the main character's stubbornness or disobedience is to leave her alone and ignore her, thus leaving her feeling the sting of her own abandonment and helplessness. But then we get a hint that they, too, are hiding and repressing their feelings. Maybe they have to.
Also not included in this film is a music soundtrack. I think whenever a film excludes a music soundtrack, it's an intentional decision that is as important as what's written in the script or where to place the cameras. And it's anybody's interpretation why that decision is made. I merely observe that music often serves to enhance scenes or to transition from one scene to another or indicate what the viewer is supposed to be feeling. This film needs none of that. It's part of the complexity in the simplicity. The something there in what's left out.
Many aspects of the film are heartbreaking. It's heartbreaking to see this happening to a once smiling and happy-go-lucky little girl. Betrayed by her own father in whom she misplaced unconditional love. Ultimately, though, I think the director meant to express hope in the ending. And in the title. After all, she turned out fine. I also have a Korean American ex-coworker who was adopted by a white American family and she turned out fine.
It's sad to be turned away by your own parents, it's heartbreaking, and I don't know what the context was for so many Koreans putting their children up for adoption in the 70s, but it doesn't mean their lives are ruined or victims of some horrible personal disaster. It's a story deserving to be told, but not one begging for sympathy or pity.
After an initial nominal 6 out of 10 tomato fresh rating, I bump it up to a robust 8.5 tomatoes. It's a great little film that requires a bit of viewer patience and inquiry.
