Cinema-Maniac: Brothers in Arms (2017) Crime Movie Review

As mentioned before, exploring the unexplored territory of film making, and any medium is a huge interest for me. Sometime you could be among the first to see great talent emerge from nowhere like I did when I first saw Gareth Evan’s Merantau (2009) before the release of The Raid: Redemption in 2011 which launched the writer/director into mainstream success. Here, it’s not the same discovering a hidden talent waiting to be recognized, but rather seeing if the filmmakers can hone their talent, and improve their crafts later on in their career.

Brothers in Arms follows four unemployed college graduates discontent with their lives turning to a life of crime. If the premise sounds interesting it’s made further unfortunate that it’s pedestrian in its understanding of crafting story, and characters. For starter, it starts with a flash forward of a bank heist in progress which only takes half an hour to get to that point. What happens before then offers very bluntly its characterization, and story. This could be forgiven, but as the film went on it became harder to forgive since it kept telling everything to the viewer leaving nothing to the imagination. There’s a scene a couple minutes before hitting the one hour mark where characters Michael (played by Nick Tag), and Ann (Katelyn Kenyon) in the most direct way possible talk about Michael flaws as a person. It’s this scene that encapsulate the amateur writing in a nutshell. From the beginning of the film Michael struggle to grow up, and as the film progresses there’s nothing else that fleshes out that conflict.

Dude, you sure we can pass off as college graduates?

The best chance the film had in rising above it limitation is with the character of Michael. He’s a young man who had a opportunity to make a better life for himself, and didn’t take it. Witnessing him live with that regret is a focal point for about 20 minutes before deciding to rob banks. Now, with a discontent character who bluntly (like this passage) who casually have its characters spell everything else to the viewer one would expect being a stagnant in life for a motivation to go into robbing banks. Sadly, the actual motivation becomes one of out a sheer boredom for Michael after bank robbery is just casually suggested as a possible activity to relieve boredom. Thankfully, this motivation changes later on in the film, and evolves into something else entirely in a positive manner. Although, it becomes a taste of the good life sort of deal that only brought up on a surface level. If a bit longer, the film likely would have expanded more on how the accumulating wealth changed them more than what it actually shows.

Another thing about the film is it’s pretty standard as a heist film. However, the acknowledgement of these flaws within don’t make them any less inferiority. For example, in preparation for their first bank heist the four unemployed college graduates decide to watch a bunch of heist movie, and nothing else. They don’t bother practicing performing heist, practice to be better marksman, practice to be better getaway drivers, or anything. These four guys take notes during the stakeouts, having the lookout watch for cops, a loose canon, someone who keeps track of time, and the calculating leader. Those familiar with heist films will find common ground plastered all over the film. Including the illogically classic scene that won’t die regardless of what year it is where you have a character who gets shot, and taken to a veterinarian to get treatment.

This is the most dramatic the movie get ever gets.

As someone who consumes media frequently on, and offline suspension of disbelief is assured to a product. Granted, it doesn’t excuse anything of poor quality. However, if something is engaging, or entertaining enough to make me forget about it shortcoming enough than any dumbfounding moment can be forgiven. This film has no many of them that could have been avoided, and half of them should be common sense. For example, if you’re planning to rob banks it’s best not to discuss the matter in a public bowling alley, or later on in the film talk about one last job in a restaurant. It’s also another thing to see people who never had training shooting with guns magically being better than trained police officers. The other characters sadly don’t get much scenes to themselves like you would rightfully expect in other heist films. It either focuses on Michael, or Detective Sinclair (played by John Welsh) attempting to solve the case. There groundwork is good here for a good story, and well defined characters, but the execution lacks the polish needed to pull it off.

When it comes to the acting it’s all around modest. Generally being okay, to acceptable, and the rare occasion of “are you even trying to act”. Nick Tag is the star the movie virtually hold a majority of the film on his shoulder. His character drives the story, Nick Tag is able to carry the film fine. Tag doesn’t delve too deeply into his character never having a single scene where he gets overly emotional, but shows restraint in scenes that he could have easily overacted in for dramatic tension. There’s Nick Tag costar Dexter Masland who plays John whom comes off as a college jock type of character. The portrayal is one sided, but is enthusiastic in playing the comedic relief at times despite the poor film humor. If given better material Masland could have gotten a laugh, or two out of me.

Zeph Foster plays Levi who suffers from a lack of range. Imagine Bill Paxton’s classic line “Game over, man. Game over!”from James Cameron’s Aliens taking physical form as a fictional character. Sure that sounds like cheesy fun, but Foster is unable to have any fun in his portrayal. He’s bland in his reaction, even in his more comedic moments he doesn’t come off as convincing. Granted, none of his other costars are technically convincing, but they are at least passable enough to not be distracting. There’s finally Cory (Not in the house) de Silva who plays Christian who is the most uptight among the characters. He has to displays the most resistant to his friends plans of committing heist. Being just the right amount of whining, and soft spoken to not come across as annoying. The only other noteworthy cast members are Katelyn Kenyon, and John Welsh who both can be best described as screen fodder. Kenyon is simply cornering while Welsh just has one facial expression for most of the film to get across he’s serious about catching these bank robbers.

Yes, that’s what actually said in the moment.

On a technical level I can give praise to director Caleb J. Phillips who manage to make a professional looking film on a obviously small budget. Demonstrating a clear understanding of making the most out of very limited resources. Asides from the prop guns in on scene, nothing screams cheaply made when viewing it. It’s looks nice thanks to cinematographer Laura Jansen, the sets while ordinary have a lot in them, and understands what not show in certain sequences to hide its shortcoming. I can also appreciate Trevor Doukakis earnest attempt in crafting a good story. However, the one technical area that will make, and have made a majority of viewers quit the film is the awful sound balancing in beginning of the movie. Since it starts with a flash forward of a bank heist the audio is loud, and obnoxious while playing the classical music “In the Hall of the Mountain King” by Kevin MacLeod. In fact, around half the music in the film can be found on incompetech which has tons of royalty free music. So that’s aspect is pretty cheap, but the loud bombardment of noises is enough to make some viewer stop seeing it. I would encourage them it gets better, but there’s no pay off for putting up with a rough start.

Brothers in Arms (2017) is competent student filmmaking on a technical level, but everything else falls far below that. The writing feels genuine in crafting a good story, but is unaware how to do it being a constant misfire of comedy, drama, and basic common sense. The filmmakers here show they can possibly make a good movie, and care about what they’re doing in a cinematic language. Brother In Arms (2017) is not a film I enjoyed, or consider good in any long stretch, but there’s talent here, and witnessing it possibly turn into something good makes the experience worthwhile for me.

2/10

Cinema-Maniac: Extraordinary Mission (2017) Action Crime Movie Review

Extraordinary Mission follows undercover police officer Lin Kain (played by Xuan Huang) who attempts to take down a drug trafficking syndicate from the inside. The first half of Extraordinary Mission is standard undercover cop happenings; main character is in too deep in his current assignment, deal goes wrong escalating the undercover job, rising up the ranking earning the big boss trust, collusion in the police force, and other familiar territory. It’s these familiar traits while well executed thanks to pacing do make the viewer wonder for an hour if it’ll lead anywhere rewarding. Another drawback is the main character Lin Kain isn’t as compelling compare to the supporting characters. Lin Kain is simply the hero of the film with the position of an outsider put into a situation with characters whom all have a history with each other. Supporting characters are fleshed out, have clear motivations, and a rounded arc that is completed by the end of the film. These developments come in slowly, though do pay up in favor of the narrative. For example, the film’s main villain, Eagle (played by Yihong Duan), is surprisingly given more depth to him than initially introduced. Not only that, but his backstory makes him somewhat sympathetic in the story. Somewhat because you know he’s still in the drug selling business.

Lin Kain, as implied earlier, is the protagonist who has the least going for him out of the major characters. His backstory, and reason for becoming a cop is looked into, but not a whole lot to make him a fleshed out character. One flashback with just one tragic event doesn’t do enough to convey Lin Kain much as a character. He simply comes across as a nearly flawless hero with a strong sense of duty. An attempt to give him a flaw is made by making him addicted to drugs. However, it’s a plot thread is simply mentioned in passing in dialogue after a certain point. Seeing Lin attempting to overcome drug addiction is something that helps the viewer bridge a stronger connection with him, but it’s simply making something come across more significant than it actually is in practice.

Still from a good scene introducing to the film’s villain in the movie.

Regardless how good the film turned out in the end both fans of crime films, and action cinema will find the flick overall polarizing in its narrative. An action junkie will find it to have too little action spread out through the film with a lead whose underdeveloped, and crime film fans would find it familiarity meandering to sit through. What the script writing does accomplish with ease is blending action cinema, and crime drama into a singular vision. The sillier aspect of the action side of Extraordinary Mission, like a seemingly unkillable villain who can take multiple gunshots does not contrast strongly against the crime drama vision. Expertly using crime drama familiarity to as an excuse to eventually provide good characterization, and using action cinema setups to provided the entertaining set pieces. In tangent of that, it operates on action cinema logic hence no mention of the passage of time in the film, and the resiliency of the heroes bodies despite what they endure during the climax. While also using the crime drama aspects of it writing to keep the story moving forward at a good pace. In spite of its major writing issues, Extraordinary Mission is clearly written by a person who knows how to work well in different genres, and know how to best combine them to their strength.

Xuan Huang takes on the leading role of Lin Kain delivering a very good performance despite some of his characters limitation. Huang excels in humanizing Lin Kain more than the script does playing off the cool, and collected side of Kain with ease. Another positive is Huang has a plenty of range as an actor so not only is he convincing while performing his action sequences, but is versatile in portraying Lin Kain more vulnerable side convincingly. Huang does such a good job as a leading man it makes it that much easier accept the same character you see struggling not to take drug is also the same character easily killing dozen of henchman in the climax.

The standout performance of the film is Yihong Duan as the film’s villain Eagle. Much like Xuan Huang, Duan delivers a good performance making a great flick duo on screen. He’s on par with Huang in the acting department; however, is able to crafts a carefully balanced character. Never going into the melodramatic Duan provides the sympathy his character demands. His mannerism differs greatly from the rest of his co-star typically speaking in a calmly, collected gesture regardless of context. Another appreciated aspect of Duan performance is never entering into the over the top. Much like Huang who would have been for to solely play a tough hero, Duan also doesn’t take it easy solely coming across as evil in his portrayal.

Only other noteworthy supporting actor is Jiadong Xing who plays Li Jianguo who does a good job who brings thing around in terms of creating a good actor trio. Jiadong holds his own fine with the two leads sharing convincing chemistry with them. While the silent Yueting Lang gets a thankless role. She remains silent for virtually the entire film, and her character ends up going nowhere. Lastly, the actor Ding Yongdai whom plays Zhang Haitao is the only other noteworthy character. His role is small, but well acted. Though, not enough to believe he can shot a gun flawlessly for being imprisoned as long as he has.

The climax just make Xaun Huang look like a badass.

Action choreography is handled by Chung Chi Li whom over the top nature in action is kept in line thanks to director Alan Mak. The action in this film, for the most part, aims for realism while the physical feats of its performers have no limitations. Creativity is very high in the two action sequences in the beginning of the movie. Starting up with a single man drug bust before going into a car chase. There’s also a brief gunfight involving Xuan Huang meant to display his proficiency with a gun compare to the criminals. After this shootout, it pretty remain inactive on the action front until you get a flashback of a particular event in the story.

Finally, the film biggest selling point to casual viewers is the action climax which makes up around the last 25 minutes of the film. In this climatic actions sequence proficiency is made very clear between the heroes, and the villains. Despite their enemies larger numbers, our heroes use less bullets firing their weapons, and using cover constantly to avoid getting shot. The professionalism is obvious as the criminals are constantly moving around making up for their lack of skills for fire power. It’s a strange thing to compliment since many action movies do the same of proficient heroes vs sloppy evil henchman, but it’s rarely taken into account when it comes to choreography as much as it is here.

The climax is constantly moving from one area to another not just on foot, but eventually on vehicle which offer some cool moments. Either be it a cool shot of Xuan Huang on a motorcycle with a explosion behind him, Xuan Huang on top of a vehicle dodging bullets while taking out some henchman, or one cool looking car crash. It doesn’t try to constantly up the antics during climax, but slowly escalate into cooler, and cooler moments making the final impression the film have you be a positive one. Only drawback is notable usage of CGI, but they are rare in their usage in this sequence. Lastly, Alan Mak direction is fantastic in the movie blending two genre together for a visually coherent film through, and through. There’s only one jarring moment in the film that happens in the film which involves drawings coming to life into, but aside from that one moment Mak direction work fine.

Extraordinary Mission tackles very familiar territory for half of it run, but eventually is able to turn it around to make it a far more interesting character driven story, and displaying some exciting action in a very lengthy climax to end things on a high note. Genre fans of both crime, and action cinema will find individual aspects polarizing. However, anyone who likes both genre equally will witness a film that does a fine job of combining the two.

8/10

CINEMA-MANIAC: ELIMINATORS (2016) ACTION MOVIE REVIEW

There was a time when going straight to home video was considered a death sentence for anyone working in the film industry. However, ever since the popularity of streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and many others the image of it has turned around. Now more than ever it’s more common to find a surprisingly profitable home video market, especially in the action genre as it’s more unlikely to be saturated with CGI action, or incompetent handling of action sequences which tend to be the common complaints from action fans about major action film productions. While most of these straight to video action movies are of bad quality. From my experience, you can come across some that are worthwhile as Ninja 2: Shadow of A Tear, and Close Range as brainless entertainment. As unlikely as it to come across the solid straight to home video movie the name Scott Adkin is one you can be assured to contain good action sequences, but quality films isn’t one thing he specializes in.

Eliminators plot is so bare bones, much like its characters, that any sort of attempted exploration, same with a simple synopsis, can be classified as a spoiler. A majority of the movie is basically Scott Adkin getting chased by Stuart Barrett (who is best known for his WWE in ring name Wade Barrett), and looking for his daughter. However, there is so little to the story that I struggle to write anything about it besides simply stating it’s thin, has flat characters, and can go for several minutes of nothing significant happening. For example, when Scott Adkin enters a child services building from the moment Wade Barrett begins to chase after Scott Adkin it stays on this single chase sequence for around 14 minutes of screen time. In this very prolong chase the only piece of information that is gathered is Scott Adkin obtain the location of his daughter right at the beginning of this chase sequence. After that, it’s simply playing a game of avoiding Bad News Barrett’s bullets. This sequence also contains a continuity error as it begins in day time when Scott Adkin enters the child services building, and then becomes night time when both Adkin, and Barrett leaves the building. Implying that yes, this whole portion in the child services building possibly lasted hours, even though only a couple of minutes just passes for the audiences.

I’ve got around 7 bullets of bad news to deliver to you.

The reason movies like Mad Max: Fury Road, and Ninja 2: Shadow of A Tear work in spite of their slim story is they know how to have the action scenes to drive further engagement. In Fury Road, it’s a constant ongoing spectacle with gorgeous visuals that is upping the antics, and Ninja 2: Shadow of A Tear crams as much well choreographed action scenes as possible while it briefly makes work of its very generic story. In these two films, while the writing were weak they attempted to fill the void by having events in the films play out so it wouldn’t be a chore to view when there isn’t action on screen. Eliminators takes the structure of these two bare bone story movies, and decides to have even less story, and prolong action sequences.

So now comes the question if the story, and characters are bare bones does the action sequences make up for them, and the answer is simply no. With little to invest in it became difficult to care about the action scenes the more frequently they came up. The first fight scene has Scott Adkins fighting against two hooded robber with bats attacking him. It’s a amusing short fight, and the subsequent fights aren’t quite as fun to watch since Adkins make quick work of everyone else. That is until Stu Bennett appears in the film, and participate in the best action sequences with Mr. Scott Adkins.

One of two highlight scenes from Eliminators

The two fight sequences between Scott Adkins, and Stu Bennett are actually pretty good. A surprise given one is an martial artist, and the other is a pro-wrestler. There’s also a large height difference as Stu Bennett simply towers over Adkins. However, with both actors being professional in choreographed fights, Tim Man (the film’s credited fight choreographer) takes both men backgrounds incorporating their fights. Stu Bennett is very commendable for keeping up with Scott Adkins during their fight sequences, and visibly takes enjoyment in no selling the many Scott Adkins kicks he takes. During their first encounter Adkins, and Bennett don’t do any complex reversals, or complex techniques it’s still a good fight both men pull off. Basically ending up just being a showcase how much of a beating both man can endure in long takes, yet still continues performing the more of the action sequence.

Thankfully, Adkins, and Stu Bennett fights are enjoyable because they are the only while action sequences in the film. Whatever action the rest of the film has to offer isn’t quite as exciting, nor impressive to see. In particular a very lazy gunfight between Adkins, Daniel Caltagirone (whose character is forgettable), and Bennett in a single place. All that occurs in this gunfight is both men firing, missing hitting each other, one takes cover while the other does more shooting, and repeat the process for the rest of the sequence. Gunfights in Eliminators usually lack urgency since you know the main participants in them won’t get hurt. Sure, that’s same criticism can be applied to other action movies, but in Eliminators when your two top stars have to participate in all the action sequences it’s more noticeable neither will get taken out. Editing in them are fine, but the lack of interesting cinematography choices. Especially the last gunfight in the film where Adkins despite having the disadvantage of carrying a shotgun, and fighting against two goons whom have AK-47 (appearance wise at least) makes quick work of them. It’s their stupidity that gets them axe. One of them definitely deserves if they unload an entire clip of bullets onto a scarecrow.

In terms of acting Stu Bennett (a former WWE Wrestler) comes away the best in the film. Despite being asked to hardly deliver any dialogue Stu Bennett did the best he could. Without much to bite into his character Bennett visually sold his role of Bishop well coming across as a viable threat to the almighty Scott Adkins. Remaining silent for most of the movie, and given what his purpose of the film he’s easily the best actor. Scott Adkins is again is a reliable man of action, and his performance in this is a nice departure from his usual tough guy shtick he sticks with. He’s in a slightly more vulnerable state constantly seeing him either partially retreat in a action sequence, or seeing Bennett giving him a good beating does wonder for an actor who seemingly appears invincible in his movies. The supporting cast, same with the music, are forgettable addition to the flick. It’s simply better to look up clips of Scott Adkins, and Stu Bennett fight scenes, and not put yourself through a bare bones movie just for those scenes.

Eliminators is a bare bone action film that is unable to sustain its momentum through its entire run time. Thin characters, and a very basic story without much substance can’t be save by action sequences alone, especially when one of its major actor has to be kept alive in order for their to be someone competent for the hero to fight. It provides the goods in terms of action, but even with your brain turned off there isn’t enough here that warrants your visit.

2/10

 

Cinema-Maniac: City Kids (Ren hai gu hong) (1989) Crime Drama Movie Review

One of the many joys, and misfortunes of seeking out lesser discussed anything is the experience of it. From witnessing a very cool action climax in The Dragon Family (1988) to finding a surprisingly great movie in Return Engagement (1990) make going through the slough of bad films worth the endeavor. City Kids (Ren hai gu hong) from director Michael Mak is one film that sadly is another name on the increasing list of forgotten films not worth digging up.

City Kids attempts to tell a story about delinquency in youth Third Lam/Chor-san (played by Max Mok) as a refugee from China fleeing to Hong Kong, and the tragedy of his life. The film’s story is done no favor by the editing, but before getting to that whole fiasco, in terms of writing the film does too much in to little time. It wants to cover a life, and a significant portion of it just comes across as a cliff notes version of events. For example, Third Lam doesn’t have a good relationship with his cousin, but only in one very brief scene do they ever exchange dialogue showcasing their trouble relationship. Another example would be the lack of a father figure in Third Lam’s life. In the story, the closest person to fitting that bill would be Big Skin Chuen (played by Shing Fui-On), but once Big Skin Chuen purpose in the story is served there’s no time spent reflecting on his influence on Third Lam’s life. Instead, the film immediately moves on to the next important event in Third Lam life. By not providing anything substantial there’s no one to relate to as a character. Third Lam is simply representing delinquency with a rough upbringing on a purely surface level, and just using that background to tell its viewer anyone can turn over a new leaf no matter how far you’ve fallen in life. A well intended message that likely won’t impact its viewers because of how shallow it characters feel.

I must have misremember The Karate Kid.

With Third Lam suffering from a cumbersome collection of undercook ideas this also works against the more stable emotional core of the story. Throughout the film, Third Lam best friend Sas (played by Andy Lau) is shown to have significantly impacted his life in the worse ways possible. However, the film never portrays Sas friendship as one of pure negativity, nor one of an over controlling figure. The writing perfectly balances Sas as being his own individual, and not placing blame solely on him for the course that Third Lam’s life took. Sas is simply an individual struggling through the same ordeals as Third Lam, but tackles delinquency in a different manner. Fulfilling his role as a contrast to Third Lam in its exploration of delinquency.

The purpose Sas serves in the story works well, what deteriorate Sas positive contribution is the melodramatic writing in the heavier scenes involving Sas, and Third Lam. In the middle of the film, Sas, and Third Lam are force to fight each other in prison to settle a gang dispute. Portraying the fight as a tragic moment being the only time these two ever harmed each other in their entire life. However, before this scene the film shows two times how Sas action inadvertently forced Third Lam to be in the situation he’s placed in. Making whatever beating Third Lam gives to Sas to be unintentionally justified. It works against the intention of the sceneas neither character harbor bad will towards each other after the fight. Rendering whatever dramatic weight it was meant to have mute.

In City Kids it’s not just the larger picture that fail to deliver any dramatic weight, but also what should make up the smaller human moments. For example, Third Lam romantic subplot is one that could have been delved deeper into, but after a while is unable to flesh it out further pass the halfway point. For as sloppy as the romantic subplot is handle it’s nowhere near as bad when regards to Third Lam family members, and his issues that surround them. At least with the romantic subplot there were efforts to develop it. Thanks to a large part of Sas acting differently towards women in contrast to Third Lam allowing enough material to come full circle making the sequence where both discuss about their love life work dramatically. Third Lam family issues, much like the rest of the film, is in its own inability to develop good material with its lead by himself. The largest offense is the plot twist revealing who’s Third Lam father is, and it happens fifteen minutes before the movie ends. Not only is the reveal pointless, but nothing poignant can be done with the little remaining time it does have.

Um, who are you again?

The only time the film had any good moments were when it slow down in the final ten minutes of the movie. I would like to discuss the final moments of the film, but they’re significant plot points, and that would spoil the only worthwhile moments in the film as a drama. In particular the final two minutes before the credits started rolling I found effective. Despite the rush nature to explore Third Lam life, finally seeing him think about his actions while possibly choosing to continue his downward spiral in his life I found engaging. There was conflict, there was reflection on it, and it wasn’t rushed which is why I was engaged. There wasn’t any sort of time allotted to other important events within the story that captured my attention, and sadly there’s no fixing them. It was simply rushed with too many undercooked story elements to be an effective crime/drama about delinquency.

When it comes to acting, same with the score by Richard Lo, it’s simply modest. There isn’t any performance in the film that stands out in any negative, or positive manner. The best bit of acting comes at the end of the film when Max Mok displays an eruption of several of pent up rage, and sorrow in the final moments. It’s also the only time I felt music, acting, and cinematography complemented each other wonderfully.

Max Mok as Third Lam is serviceable as a leading man. He’s capable when it comes to the lighthearted scenes with natural charisma, but when it comes to the dramatic scenes he’s struggle to be convincing. Unable determine in part of a scene should he deliver an emotional response. For example, when Max Mok character finally meets his ex-lover in prison to learn about what happens to the baby. What Max Mok was attempting to get across in this brief scene is uncertain. His line delivery doesn’t suggest sadness, and his body language can be misread as confusion, or plain juvenile. Mok other dramatic scenes also suffer similar issues in terms of how Mok chooses to deliver the material, but improvements are visible the longer the film goes on.

My typical reaction when this movie attempted drama.

Max Mok co-star, Andy Lau who plays Sas, fairs a bit better overall, but both really shine with their onscreen chemistry. Given that a majority of the film they spent together both are able to make lackluster material believable. Unlike the screenplay, when both Mok, and Lau are on screen regardless of the scene tone both portrayal comes off as genuine. It’s the elements that surround their scenes that hold them back from.

In a crime/drama film about delinquency it would serve the story well if it completely disregarded the three short choreographed action sequences it has in the final act. The choreography in them are fine, but when the rest film attempts to be realistic without any over the top elements it stylistically conflicts with each other.

Finally, the biggest detriment to City Kids is hands down the editing by Hung Choi. Typically when it comes to movies regardless of quality a majority of the time I don’t even pay attention to the editing. The few times that I do it’s either because of its seamless flow enhancing the viewing experience (like Blade Runner 2049), or when masterful editing is absolutely integral to the film success (like Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk) does editing in film ever register with me. However, the same doesn’t apply to bad movies as it’s rare that I contribute an entire film problems to the way it was edit. As you know, I then suddenly saw this film which now I can use as a future example on how not to edit a movie.

The most obvious issue in the film editing is there are times in the film where a cut won’t simply just transition to a new scene in progress. On a few occasion Hung Choi (the film’s editor) for who knows what baffling reason would pause the current scene, slide in the new scene paused, and after a couple of seconds resume the new scene. It was jarring to see such an issue not get fixed, and yes, this editing mess up is even on the film’s own DVD release which I own a copy of. Another thing Hung Choi does too frequently is cut away from a scene too quickly. I mentioned a scene earlier with Max Mok, and how he is uncertain to act in a scene where he learns unsettling news about his child. A reason why the scene doesn’t work is because Hung Choi fades into another scene very quickly instead of lingering on Max Mok performance for a bit longer to let the scene properly finish. In return, it makes Max Mok clumsy performance of the scene more noticeable.

Not a good sign if there’s this many prisoners in the showers.

Another is that early on in the film Choi splices in too many significant sequences together making it story’s intention muddle to the viewer. Hung Choi lack of knowing when to begin, and when to end a scene is consistent throughout the film. For example, Choi decides that instead of letting a scene of two best friends force to fight each other just play out without any theatrics he feels cheesy music, slow down footage, and splicing in scenes from earlier in the movie would add dramatic weight to the film. Obviously it didn’t work out how he wanted. Finally, the biggest drawback to his editing is the inconsistency of scenes length in the film. Granted, what film is going to have every scene be the same length, but in City Kids it’s very noticeable seeing minutes be kept on characters picking up girls while only allocating seconds to dramatically significant scenes. Choi simply doesn’t understand in this film when his influence is required.

City Kids fails as a drama with a unclear direction on how to properly explore youth delinquency. A rush pacing prevents Third Lam from feeling like a fleshed out character while side characters in the story don’t offer much to the story beyond their introduction to the story. Another facet to its negative quality is the editing by Hung Choi really bringing it down despite the best efforts of Max Mok, and Andy Lau to bring out the best quality of a lackluster screenplay. As hard as Max Mok, and Andy Lau might try they can’t overcome rush pacing, and bad editing. Michael Mak’s City Kids gives the impression that it should have been more than what it ended up being.

3/10

Cinema-Maniac: The Dragon Family (1988) Chinese Movie Review

In 1986, in China that is, a little film known as A Better Tomorrow by John Woo was released. The influence the film had in its region film industry is an understatement, and often credited as setting the template for the heroic bloodshed genre. Due to its unpredescant success due to having virtually no advertisement at the time marking its influence on several films, and filmmakers at the same time to capture the same gold. Thus, today’s film in question is one of those films that is heavily influenced by A Better Tomorrow. Like many other films at the time, many try to capture the magic of the film that inspired them, but couldn’t duplicate the critical, or financial success. However, in spite of its heavy influence The Dragon Family (1988), unlike other films of a similar nature, is able to stand as a good film outside of A Better Tomorrow’s shadow.

So, this is how the movie got funded.

The Dragon Family follows the leader of a group of 4 triad families on their decision go straight and stop dealing in drugs, 3 of the 4 follow suit, but the 4th decides to continue with their illegal dealings, and frame the son of the boss to climb up the ranks. During my viewing of the film it became very evident that this film’s premise wasn’t going to live up to its full potential as I would have hoped it would. The groundwork is laid here for a gripping, and compelling crime epic with a few action scenes thrown in for a good measure of thrills. However, due to its run time of 90 minutes everything from characters, story, and themes come off as cookie cutter. For example, you get the usual blood brothers (A Better Tomorrow), followed by a betrayal by someone high ranking in the triad (Flaming Brothers), death of a loved one orchestrated by traitor triad (Tragic Hero), and an explosive finale involving the traitor (A Better Tomorrow again). This outline is simple to follow, and its formula is predictable for those familiar with these kind of Hong Kong action films post the release of A Better Tomorrow. 

Same thing applies for the characters as you have the wise old veteran whom everyone looks up to as a father, the young hot headed trouble maker who can’t go straight, the youngest member who has bright future ahead of him coming back into the criminal fold, the loving collected mother, and so forth. Sadly, almost all of the characters don’t have much to them beyond these descriptions. Only a few characters whom survived past the sixty minute mark receive any added characterization, but even then it leaves much to be desired.

Cameraman: “You’re joking right? This ain’t your entire family?”

Fortunately, everything else that is streamlined is in favor of the film, and the viewing experience. Much like the vein of a similar movie I recently reviewed, City War (Yi dan hong chun), it starts out like crime drama at first for around fifty minutes of its runtime. However, the difference is plain as day; the pacing is brisk, and scenes are to the point not prolonging any obvious plot points. Spending the first half entirely setting up events, and characters before its goes in the realm of a action revenge flick. Cookie cutter characters are sympathetic in their cause as well as not reaching higher than it knows it can actually achieve in its length. Something that’s quite baffling since Eddie Chan Shu-Chi, and Yuen are credited for the screenplay, and the story are credited to Lau Kar-wing, Clarence Yip, and Wong Jing making the total of five writers who worked on this. In its modesty, you’ll also find a film that actually tries to add some depth to the topic of vengeance. It doesn’t end up going anywhere meaningful, but the characters history in the field of crime, and some of them attempting to achieve a better life gives it some worth.

The cast listing for the film is ridiculously long, and they include Alan Tam, Andy Lau, Max Mok Siu Chung, Ken Tong Chun Yip, Norman Chu Siu Keung, Michael Miu Kiu Wai, William Ho Ka Kui, Lisa Chiao Chiao, Stanley Fung, Kent Cheng, Ku Feng, Lau Kar Wing, Shing Fui On, Philip Ko Fei, Wayne Archer, Charlie Cho Cha Lei, Kara Hui Ying Hung, Blacky Ko Sau Leung, Nick Masters, O Chun Hung, Pak Man Biu, and Sin Ho Ying. Yeah, that’s quite the cast, and especially attention grabbing for anyone who explores Hong Kong action cinema. In spite of the large cast it’s surprisingly easy to summarize the quality of acting within the film. The older the actor is the better the performances turn out. Granted someone like Shing Fui-On whose villain like appearance lend itself to Fui-On smooth portray a criminal wouldn’t find it difficult to disappear into his small role. Same with O Chun-Hung who portrays a father like figure to the younger generation could easily sell viewer on his portrayal thanks to his appearance as well. However, with the two examples given you wouldn’t be far off in thinking the older cast members make good out of general onenote roles.

Younger actors like Andy Lau, Max Mok/Mok Siu-Chung, and Alan Tam completely take the lead once the film gets over the halfway mark. Before then, these three actors are still in the film, but the film attempts to give equal screen time for other actors to get in their stuff in a good move that, especially if you go in blind, will make you wonder the outcome of characters throughout the film once the action hits. Out of Andy Lau, Max Mok, and Alan Tam the best performance is easily given by Alan Tam. Unlike a majority of his co-stars, he’s given more range to portray a more dynamic character who can at least allow him to come off as responsible, caring, and eventually brave. Andy Lau, and Max Mok portrayals follow largely the same trajectory. However, all three actors can equally share praise in performing their action scenes, along with some of their other cast members. Lau especially whom puts his body through quite the endeavor for the audience amusement. What saves this film from others A Better Tomorrow wannabe is Lau Kar-wing fine direction as never once throughout the film is he, or any of his crew ever confused on what type of film they are making, and when in the story they are making such a film.

The action choreography is handled by Chia-Liang Liu who won an Golden Horse (Taiwan/China equivalent to the Academy Awards) for Jackie Chan’s The Legend of Drunken Master (1994) renowned for its famous final fight sequence. It’s a factoid that will go largely ignored for the average movie viewer, but won’t be ignored is Chia-Liang Lui craftsmanship of action sequences. Lui first action sequence, which doesn’t appear until the second act, ensures to reward the audience, in particular action junkies, patience with a good shoot out. In this sequence, in a small room dozen of people are simply massacre heighten by tension thanks careful craftsmanship of seeing attempt after attempt of people trying to escape, or survive fail one after another. This first set piece does an excellent job displaying how harsh the criminal world can be.

The second action sequence, in vein of the first one, is also centered around survival/escaping from setting where the sequence takes place. Taking place at night, the choreography, and cinematography keeps the action at a distance, but also capturing the helplessness of the situation as the characters you follow struggle to stay alive. Showing in true desperation using household objects around them to fight off goons. Unlike the first action sequence, this one is more reliant on fight choreography, though is one sided for this sequence.

Yep, don’t like criminals at all.

Without a doubt, the standout sequence in this entire movie is easily the finale of the film. Combining gunplay, and several uniquely choreographed fight scenes together all in one sequence. Unlike the previous two sequence, the climatic action sequence is a all, or nothing setup. The gunfight it starts off with isn’t just cover, and shoot, but constantly moving around. Despite the constant movement of the gunfight the cinematography never loses sight of the action, and editing makes it all flow seamlessly. It’s quite an exciting sight seeing a gunfight that while quick has a lot going on in it besides ducking, and shooting. Once the guns are finally scrapped the fight sequences take over, and this time fights are even. Requiring the actors to take some serious painful falls, and throws through some rough objects to demonstrate the rough confrontation. Succeeding in truly ending the film on a high note.

The Dragon Family is the kind of film that makes you wish it was more fleshed out in its writing on all fronts, but in the end turns out to be a fine way to spend 90 minutes on. The few action sequences it offers are the true standout of the film while everything else does enough to not drag down the experience. Those familiar with Hong Kong action cinema post A Better Tomorrow will find familiarity in the material it threads on, but also find an enjoyable action flick. It won’t ever surpass the film that inspired it, but unlike many other imitators, The Dragon Family won’t remain the shadow of its inspiration.

Final Rating: 7/10

Random Factoid

I didn’t know where to place this random factoid, but if you look up posters for The Dragon Family (1988) you’ll notice Andy Lau headlines the movie. No surprise since even now Andy Lau is still a big name. However, what you likely didn’t know is that within the year 1988 Andy Lau headline 10 movies! The reason I didn’t put this random fact into the review itself is because I felt it ruined the flow of the review, and distracted from it.

Cinema-Maniac: City War (Yi dan hong chun) (1988) Chinese Heroic Bloodshed Movie Review

City War (Yi dan hong chun) follows two buddy cops; the calm, and collected Dick Lee (played by Chow Yun-Fat), and the hot-headed Ken Chow (played by Ti Lung) in their everyday life when drug lord Ted Yiu (played by Norman Chu) is released from prison seeking vengeance. Despite the classification on numerous film sites calling City War (Yi dan hong chun in Chinese) an action film it doesn’t offer much in terms of action. It’s two-third crime drama sprinkled with comedy with the final act switching gear to an action driven resolution. To a certain degree, anyone familiar with Korean action cinema will feel familiar this type of structure for an action film. However, in this is an instance where the film stumbles in being a drama having no pay off for your patience. It knows what it wants to be, and what it needs to do to pull off its own story, but not how to get there. Having a jarring jump between Dick Lee more comedic centric scenes to contrast Ken Chow more dramatic scenes. There’s nothing like the smooth transition of seeing Chow Yun Fat going on a date to smoothly transition into Ti Lung arresting a criminal with grim music playing. Unfortunately, for the film the dramatic scenes usually incorporate one detrimental flaw each differently preventing these scenes from having the full effects they should.

The officer is just as confused as I am with Ti Lung clothing.

For example, half of the motivation for Ted Yiu (the film’s villain) vengeance is that his balls were shot off. I would like to be joking, but since the film is subtitled there’s no mistaking what I (and other viewers) have read. The serious delivery of this revelation comes off as unintentionally silly since balls being shot off is held to the same significance as someone important in Ted Yiu’s life getting killed. This plot point could have been taken seriously if there was more added to it. Only once does the film do anything with this plot point, and it ain’t much. Ted Yiu, while having sex, with his girlfriend suddenly reminds him of that incident, and that’s it. Something like Ted Yiu possibly wanting kids in the future would have made this silly motivation easier to embraced. This whole “shot off my balls” motive undercuts the other half of Ted Yiu motive for vengeance which is enough to maintain the serious tone of the story. You can also probably make an accurate guess on what Ted Yiu other motivation is if you’re familiar with Hong Kong action flicks when it comes to cops vs. crooks.

A major hindrance in the film is the lack restraint on the film’s listed three writers. Portions of City War will have scenes that feel like they go on far longer than they actually should. For example, a scene where Dick Lee goes on a blind date, and shows him joyously interact with his blind date. The intention of the awkwardly comedic scene is clear, but lingers what feels like minutes of Dick Lee interacting with a character who doesn’t make another appearance in the film. For a while, it forgets it’s mostly a crime drama becoming a romantic comedy in the second act before returning to crime drama without ease. Given the film had three writers it certainly comes across that the film didn’t have a unifying vision, nor cohesion in combining several ideas together.

Hm, I wonder if these are the bad guys?

There’s also the in your face subtlety of some its dialogue that attempt to provide some sort of commentary about law enforcement. There are three instances where the film characters would simply say something along the line of (paraphrasing) “More regulations are making it harder for good police officers to capture criminals”. Now imagine that, but put even more bluntly because the film will sprinkle these odd dialogue at random moments. When this happens, the film comes to a complete halt just to make sure you, the audience, like this sentence, get the point of what is being said to you. It would have been less damaging if the film actually bothered showing the consequences of going against these regulations instead of just ending abruptly like it did. Another reason this commentary does not work is everything within the story goes of it way to justify going against these regulations. Without a balance depiction the commentary comes off tacked on. Yes, it also contains a strictly follow the rules, promotion seeking lieutenant as a bonus whose only purpose is shove the film’s point about laws preventing cops from capturing criminals.

City War final act is where the action finally comes into place, but lacking the emotional resonant intended. A major reason for this is Ken Chow is hardly shown doing anything else besides police work. Ken Chow is meant to serve as the film emotional center given the events that transpired; however, Ken Chow is hardly shown interacting with anyone else besides Dick Lee when it’s not job related so the importance of anyone else in his life does not come into fruition. Ken Chow lost is meant to be sad just because it’s meant to be sad. Ringing a hollow feeling when he decides to take justice into his own hands. Another issue is regarding his attitude towards anyone giving him any kind of opposition. Certainly doesn’t help him, along with everyone else, naturally act impulsively stupid in order to force itself to tell the story it wants.

A rare still of unscripted laughter of both Chow Yun-Fat (left), and Ti Lung (right) when reading about the film’s commentary on police regulations.

The ending is something that just happens abruptly. Granted the main conflict is resolved, but it makes the instances of characters bluntly talking about how difficult it is for police officers to do their job seem pointless. Another downside to the abrupt ending is the absence of weight. Due to the final act being action driven from scenes of tragic loss; character reflection would have been acceptable to linger on are glossed over. Making two acts worth of character building go to an immediate waste in favor of showing people getting blasted with bullets.

Chow Yun-Fat, and Ti Lung performances are easily the best part of an otherwise misguided film. These two actors, whom worked together in John Woo’s A Better Tomorrow (1986) basically play the reversal of their characters from that film. Yun-Fat plays the calm, and collected Dick Lee while Ti Lung plays the hot headed Ken Chow. Ti Lung is given the heavy lifting duty of carrying the film drama almost entirely himself. Being able to make a character that lacks depth sympathetic through his performance. He never over states, or over deliver in any of his scenes. Chow Yun Fat is varied in his performance, but is given some bad comedy to work with. He’s able to make some of the jokes passable while at other times you just want him to shut up. Despite the stupidity of Chow Yun Fat, and Ti Lung characters both actors are able to prevent them from becoming hateable. When on screen together both Chow Yun Fat, and Ti Lung raises the quality of the film, even if it is briefly.

Coming soon…no wait this man has no balls.

 

Norman Chau whom plays the villain Ted Yiu plays his part with a straight face. Only once in the film is he allowed to humanize his character, and it’s when he’s outside of prison for the first time in ten years. After that point, he’s just straight evil leaving his performance on auto pilot. His mannerisms, facial expression, and dialogue delivery remains the same throughout its entire runtime.

In terms of action for what little there is the choreography is fine. The first action sequence at Ti Lung character’s house has a goon tearing up Lung’s house with a barrage of bullets before it eventually becomes a somewhat grounded fight scene. Hand to hand combat is mostly one sided with Lung character barely being able to hold his own. There’s no complex fighting of any kind done in this scuffle as the most elaborate it gets is Ti Lung kicking the villain goon, and while he’s falling the goon shoots some glass. Despite the small apartment the stunt work is commendable as the two actors bodies aren’t afraid to get tossed around. As typical of 80s, and 90s action flicks glass anything is not spared from destruction.

Can’t blame these two for not liking the turns of events.

Finally, the climax where the remainder of the violence finally unfolds is somewhat interesting. Chow Yun Fat goes to interrupt a deal at a bus terminal starting off with Chow Yun Fat being a one man army against an entire gang. In fashion of other movies of this era, Chow Yun Fat can run into a barrage of bullets without getting hit, nearly always hitting the goons trying to kill him, and just barely dodging bullets when the action choreography is going into a new part of its staging. Unlike in nearly all of John Woo films, when Chow Yun Fat actually gets shot in this film working it way into the action choreography without adding much to it. Instead of intensifying the climax seeing Chow Yun Fat in a wounded state fight for his life. Chow Yun Fat just limps for a couple of seconds, and that’s all. Same thing also applies to actor Ti Lung who in spite of receiving a direct hit with an axe to his body moments later is able to swing that same axe with ease to kill a person seconds later. A couple of more seconds later, does a some very brief fighting making the axe wound pointless. When it comes to the final confrontation it feels empty overall due to the lack of rising action. Also, the lack of applying injury to the action choreography certainly adds to that problem too. Finally, the score of the movie works just fine when it’s needed. Nothing that’ll stick with you (especially for me) once the film has ended.

City War (1988) is unable to fashion a compelling crime drama for two-thirds of its total time to columinate into an explosion of bullets filled emotions in its final act like intended. The pacing is an hindrance either lingering on scenes longer than it should have, or rushing moments that should have been significant. The action sequences that are packed at the end of the film start off well before making whatever action it does have feel hollow no matter how much the film wants to emphasize the emotion that you should be feeling. It’s a sloppily made film that had the potential to draw in crime film, and action fans. Instead, it’s a film that is unable to function cohesively enough for either type of viewer to like.

Rating: 4/10

Post Review Note:

Also, if you do plan on seeing City War regardless of my negative review I strongly recommend you avoid looking up any trailers since it spoils the biggest turning point in the film, and sets up unrealistic expectation it’s going to be an action heavy film instead of the drama it is for the majority of its run.

Belated New Years Post

What’s sup, and yes I am still alive despite being inactive for over a year. First of all, happy belated new years. Second, my job really killed my motivation to write last year. Going month after month working seven days a week, and at most getting two days off made relaxing more alluring than writing anything. There were also days on rare occasion I simply knocked out as soon as I laid down on my bed. Yep, offline job didn’t make it any easy for me to sustain my creativity, or energy to do anything. Finally, it was a busy year in general. Even without the whole job working me to the bones I still had offline drama to deal with, and I frankly had enough of it.

2018 started off well for me, but then, yep, something happened yesterday, and I’m trying to resolve it. Oh boy, 2018 is off to a good start, and I’m not going to bore you with the rest of my life’s detail cause it’ll take three more paragraphs to do so.

So why do I keep coming back? Simple, I just can’t let it go. Despite spending over a year of not posting anything I just simply can’t stop thinking things I watched, nor stop discussing them among my offline friends. There was also the bonus of 2017, and the many, many films that I was completely enthralled in viewing. I kid you not, there were so many films in 2017 I could gush about to the point that for a week I could write about films that I would award perfect ratings too. Some of them, if you still remember what I wrote back in my more active days comes as no surprise movies like Baby Driver, Logan, War for the Planet of the Apes, and The Lego Batman I would give perfect marks too. As well as some surprises like Blade Runner: 2049, and Dunkirk especially receiving a perfect rating from me even though war movies in general don’t impress. Plus, as an action junkie, 2017 was easily the best year for action movie since 1992 with the likes of Wolf Warrior 2, SPL: Paradox, Baby Driver, Extraordinary Mission, The Villainess, as well as others not as great action films (looking at you John Wick: Chapter 2) made it quite stellar time for action cinema enthusiasts.

Needless to say I love 2017 in terms of what I saw. Granted it helped I wasn’t writing for a blog, or site so I didn’t see any atrocious pieces of cinema like I usually would. Same with anime, I rewatched the original Fullmetal Alchemist anime for the first time in years, and it got me back into watching anime. I got reminded why the original Fullmetal Alchemist is my second favorite anime series of all time, and a little bit of help from the first two Selector Wixoss seasons, and both seasons of Noragami didn’t hurt either. However, the biggest surprise for me in terms of anime watching was none other than watching Cardcaptor Sakura for the first time, and man what a magical experience it was. I ended up liking Cardcaptor Sakura a lot more than I thought I would, and is now a personal favorite of mine. It simply put a smile my face, and the characters are so endearing to me.

With that brief summarization of events out of the way the reason I wanted to write this blog post is because I didn’t want the first piece of the new year to be negative. Yes, the first movie review I write in who knows how many months, and it’s a negative review for a Chow Yun Fat movie you likely never heard off, and even less likely seen. At the moment, I’m working on the details on juggling my personal time with this blog/site. I already set myself a quota of how many reviews I want to post this month, as well as made specific selections between must complete, and optional written reviews. For example, a review I must/want to complete this month is for Return Engagement (1990), and a optional one is The Long Good Friday (1980). The optional movies I’ve chosen ahead of time are simply there for extras if I want to exceed my intended quota. I can’t say I’m back for certain, but we’ll see, and I implore you to wait on welcoming me back (assuming you intended too, you did right) until March where I’m currently debating dedicating the month mostly reviewing art house cinema. Why, so I can finally work out my thoughts on art house cinema besides saying Takeshi Kitano is the biggest enjoyment I’ll ever get from art house films.

Until the end of the month, take of care yourself, and (hopefully) see you around if my job don’t kill me first. Happy 2018!