ROUGH CUT (2008), an excellent movie that needs to come to Hong Kong

I don't mean for this blog to become a tribute site dedicated to the contemporary Korean film director Kim Ki-duk, but this guy truly is a force of nature and the closest thing to a pure cinematic genius I've encountered in my life both among contemporary filmmakers and even among those past greats I've studied through the canon of world cinema. Indeed, I'll state for the record that even a mediocre Kim Ki-duk film is far more engaging and interesting than most other films that are being made on this planet right now.

Why the profuse praise?

I've just seen ROUGH CUT (literal Korean title is "A Movie Is a Movie"), a film released in South Korea in September of this year to resounding box-office success and which will have a very modest release on DVD in the U.S. this month. The film was scripted by Kim Ki-duk and directed by Jang Hoon, who had been an assistant director to Kim.

That Kim Ki-duk has the energy, time, and drive to write scripts in addition to making at least one feature film per year (he has written and directed all 16 of his films) is amazing enough. That he can script such an intense, compelling, and most notably, mainstream narrative film given his already well-known uniquely perverse sensibilities and tastes really blows me away.

This screenplay probably is the most mainstream of all Kim Ki-duk screenplays, and Director Jang Hoon has done a bang-up job of turning it into a substantive thought-provoking gangster picture that's also very entertaining.

The story is about a difficult young movie star who has a short fuse and a propensity to cause problems and scandals. Out of hubris that he really is as tough as the cool characters he plays in movies and due to some personal quandaries, he hires a real gangster to star opposite him in a gangster film. This set up sounds comical, but the film treats it with all seriousness and follows the premise all the way to its conclusion.

One of the film's two leads is the Korean actor (So Ji-sup). He plays the thug and gives a haunting performance. He was in the Korean weepy TV miniseries I'M SORRY I LOVE YOU (2004) and is returning to acting after doing his mandatory military service.

Aesthetically, the film is Director Jang's own and a completely different animal from a film directed by Kim Ki-duk. It features very realistic gloriously-choreographed fight sequences with fast cuts and breathtaking cinematography that's rare in your typical Kim Ki-duk film, which may feature seedy settings and delve at the underbelly of society but rarely shows violence that's entertaining. On the contrary, Kim Ki-duk's violence is brutal and grotesque.

ROUGH CUT, like most mainstream films, makes violence entertaining and cool. The stylized fight sequences are similar to ones in FIGHT CLUB and OLD BOY. So if that's not your thing, this film may not suit you.

But this stylistic difference aside, the story, its themes (one of which is about the very nature of filmmaking itself and which was explored in Kim's earlier experimental film REAL FICTION (2000)), and some moments of super-heightened intensity are clearly in the script and pure Kim Ki-duk flourishes.

For the uninitiated, this film may be a good introduction to a certain kind of gangster genre action film that has been nearly perfected in the past decade by South Korean filmmakers.

That said, given the propensity of Hollywood to buy up foreign box-office hits (these days most often from Asia) and re-make them, often shot for shot, with white American movie stars (eg. THE GRUDGE, THE DEPARTED, THE LAKE HOUSE), it is easy to picture this film being re-made and released a few years from now starring Leonardo DiCaprio and (I can't think of anyone who could play the role of the thug convincingly).

For that to happen though, the ending (rather dark) would have to be tweaked a bit. After all, it is much more acceptable for mainstream films in Korea to have pessimistic, or bittersweet endings than it is in the U.S. I'm not sure what this says, if anything, about the national characters of Koreans and Americans in general, if such a generality can even be made. I just hope that the remake isn't botched or inane as is too often the case.

I have nothing against remakes as long as the remake is inspired and is somehow a different animal (eg. SEVEN SAMURAI becoming THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN). But, an uninspired remake that is done solely to save the audience the "inconvenience" of having to read subtitles or look at foreign faces on screen (eg. INFERNAL AFFAIRS becoming THE DEPARTED) seems utterly stupid, senseless and unwarranted. Such a practice is also ultimately negative because Hollywood's release of a remake and the accompanying marketing campaign require the intentional burying of the original and prevents the original from ever being released theatrically in the U.S. and in much of the rest of the world.

I know that gauging whether a remake of a foreign film is inspired or warranted seems highly subjective. In fact, it is the most subjective. Still, it is my opinion that in order for such a remake to be warranted, the remake should, at the very least, be better than the original.

Many will disagree, but I feel this was the case with THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, but definitely not so with THE DEPARTED.

Whatever the case, given the sad state of movies and film distribution in general, especially in Hong Kong, this film should hit theaters here in about January.... 2010.

Indeed, one of the saddest things about Hong Kong is that so many films never come here. Sure one can scrounge about and find the DVD, which is what I did and which can be very convenient, but that's never the same as seeing the film on a big screen.

Two Films That Are Way Way Out There

This comes in the wake of Barak Obama's victory in the U.S. presidential election yesterday.

I'm still feeling high from that victory. I've seen two films since. Both are films that I've been trying to see for quite a while now.

The first is Nagisa Oshima's DEATH BY HANGING(1968), which has been written up in so many books as epitomizing Japan's New Wave but is a really hard film to get to see. It's virtually impossible to find in the U.S., here in Hong Kong, and even in Japan. I looked for it at various video stores in Tokyo a few months ago to no avail.

I won't get into the logistics of how I finally got to see this film, which I first read about more than 10 years ago, but it was a treat. That said, I can't believe it was ever produced. It's one of the strangest most experimental films I've ever seen. It's divided into 7 sections. For me 2 were gripping and ridiculously intense. The others were too disjointed and anti-cinema for me. These sections were like watching Godard from the 80s and 90s where there's no effort whatsoever to accomodate the viewer.

The film is almost unclassifiable. It starts out like a documentary, then quickly turns into an absurd play. Overall, it is a treatise or interactive inspired dissertation on capital punishment and Japan's historical role and treatment of its underclass. I cannot imagine the film finding any sort of audience in Japan. I don't know the facts, but I'd be willing to bet that it made no money. It is just too intense a film, too experimental, too out-there. Indeed, it's an indictment on Japan and simultaneously a call for real soul-searching but made by a film genius.

It is definitely one of those super obscure intellectual films that you have to be a ridiculous film snob to have seen.

The second film was Kim Ki Duk's debut feature CROCODILE (1996), which was trademark Kim Ki Duk. It was bizarre but strangely compelling and original. Even though it was the first feature film the guy made, there were moments of complete originality. In fact, the film contained two things I've never seen before in my life. One, the main character dives into the river, and while underwater blows and inflates a balloon. I've never seen this before in real life or in a movie. Two, the main character picks up a turtle at the river's edge and paints its shell blue before releasing it back into the river. Again, original.

The film was clunky at times and had big gaps in narrative. Still, it had enough elements and signs of promise. The film was strong visually and told the story with pictures, which to me, is always a sign of a filmmaker using the medium. Most films are well-made and do indeed tell the story with the sound off. Try it sometimes. Park Chan Wook's OLD BOY is great to watch with the sound on mute.

Watching a movie with the sound off is also a good way to focus on the picture and see just how interesting or mundane a film truly is. I tried watching FAILURE TO LAUNCH with the sound off. The director truly took no risks in making that film. There isn't a single original or inspired shot in the picture. Instead, just the usual 'coverage' of conventional shots. They might as well have made that film on auto-pilot. Maybe they did. That film quickly dies without the sound.

The point is, CROCODILE was a treat despite its inadequacies and despite the fact that the copy I managed to get my hands on didn't have the best picture or sound quality. I can't believe anyone produced it. It was a truly bizarre film. It was clearly meant to be a low-budget quickie cheap entertainment, but Kim Ki Duk subverted it and turned it into a surreal and at-times visually stunning personal picture complete with his obsesssions and neuroses.

This guy is a true creative force. In his prolific output and sheer originality, the only person who even comes close in the history of cinema was Rainer Warner Fassbinder. And of course, both were complete originals. Not every film of both filmmakers was impressive. They each had some duds, but overall, they made more interesting and original films in a short period of manic productivity than some studios do in a lifetime.

By the way, tonight we will go see QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I can't say I'm a huge James Bond fan though I've seen my share of 007 films, but I thoroughly enjoyed the last one. So Jene loved that film. Hope this one is just as much fun.

OASIS by Lee, Chang Dong

I just read a book on the Korean director Lee, Chang Dong, which I got from the main branch of the HK public library over the weekend.

Lee, Chang Dong has made four feature films in the past 12 years. All four films were serious movies and well-received.

Prior, he was a novelist with two books and no ties whatsoever to the film industry. I have read none of his novels but have seen all four of his films. They are all pretty amazing.

That said, I learned from the book that the guy's father was a leftist intellectual who was blacklisted and persecuted in Korean society of the 1970s and 1980s. This left its mark on Lee, Chang Dong.

From reading the book, I got the impression that this director is one serious person and a real intellectual. Most film directors are not. It is a hands-on medium after all.

Still, the guy's strength as a writer is evident in all four of his films: GREEN FISH, PEPPERMINT CANDY, OASIS, and SECRET SUNSHINE. He wrote the screenplays for all four films. All are complete original works except for SECRET SUNSHINE, which is based on another author's short story. All have tight storytelling structure and form and content are excellently-crafted.

Today, I saw OASIS again. The acting is superb, but the screenplay is even better. Lee, Chang Dong is the master of the subtle exposing of hypocrisy. The film slams middle class aspirations that most people in Korean society have by focusing on two outsiders, a fuck-up ex-convict and a woman suffering from cerebal palsy. This description doesn't do the movie justice. The film is no RAIN MAN or MY LEFT FOOT. It doesn't look for redemption in some vindication of the human-spirit type of story. It's far more desperate and disturbing than that.

My favorite contemporary filmmaker is Kim, Ki Duk. But this guy, Lee, Chang Dong, is intense like Kim, Ki Duk, but only much more cerebral and cautious. The film plays like there was nothing at all left to chance. Every frame seems to have been crafted. This guy must be such a perfectionist.

I was also impressed that in the book, which contained interviews, Lee, Chang Dong repeatedly mentioned Kim, Ki Duk as a terrific filmmaker from Korea. Kudos to the guy for giving credit where credit is due.

These films aren't for everyone, especially if you haven't seen many films. It's like reading, the more you read the better a reader you become. Same thing with films, the more you watch films, the better you become at appreciating them. Of course, this is only relevant to people who have a serious respect for movies. For most people, movies are just a time filler.

Regardless, OASIS is definitely a winner. A haunting film like no other that will stay with you for a long time. The closest European equivalent is FASSBINDER, but Lee, Chang Dong's films are more carefully crafted with less theatrical cavalier quality.

Kim Ki Duk's DREAM at Hong Kong Asian Film Festival

Like I wrote on my last post, last night So Jene and I schlepped out to Kowloon Tong AMC in Festival Walk mall to see Kim Ki Duk's DREAM, which was being screened (one-screening only) as part of the Hong Kong Asian Film Festival.

We, especially I, had very high expectations since the guy's been remarkably consistent in making truly unique films. I love COAST GUARD, BIRD CAGE, and BAD GUY. I also believe that this guy is the most-talented, most-original, filmmaker of my generation. (That is correct: He is the best most-original living filmmaker I have seen in the 30+ years that I've been watching films.)

But, it turns out the guy is only human, and this movie was less than stellar.

Here are some tidbits: The main character speaks only Japanese, but all the other Korean characters can miraculously understand him. He talks to them in Japanese. They answer back in Korean. And nothing, not even one piece of dialog, is used to explain or address this.

But this is just a minor quibble in the overall plausibility benchmark.

Granted that Kim Ki Duk movies aren't usually known for being very plausible and we knew going in not to expect a mainstream narrative, but this movie was just too much. Too much so that it prevented the development of real empathy.

So Jene termed it aptly by saying she couldn't empathize at all with the characters because the things they were doing were outright stupid.

Stupid in what way?

For instance, the main character is put in a situation where he must not sleep. So what does he do? Normal people would drink coffee. This guy starts to stab himself in the head and pound his foot with a hammer.

I actually don't think Kim Ki Duk is one of those gratuitous gore-type directors like Miike, who do gore for fore's sake.

Kim Ki Duk's 14 other movies are magnificent, equally disturbing and sublime, and even more impressive because he wrote and directed every single one of them.

I know the next Kim Ki Duk film will be amazing.

On the whole, a rather disppointing night. Still, while watching the film--the audience was mostly HK Chinese (I'd been wondering what sort of fanbase the guy has here in HK; in South Korea, his movies don't play at all)--there were scenes that really inspired me. I started thinking, I could do this. I've shot scenes like this. All it takes is two actors and a 35mm camera.

Cut to the chase, I began thinking I could make a 35mm feature film. All I need to do is write a script that has very little dialogue. That way it can be shot with novice actors with a 35mm cameral.

Sure it'll cost some money (I figure it can be done for 50-60 thousand dollars), but what the hell am I waiting for? Even a bad movie can get some light of day, and can lead to the next film.

You have to have something to show for yourself.