Eros

Impressions before seeing it
For those who don't know, Eros is not a traditional movie, but three short films by three different directors. One of those directors was Wong Kar-Wai, hence my interest.

How was it?
Wong's short opened the film, but I have to admit I found it a little boring. I do respect what he was going for though, because while the three shorts are meant to be about sex, he takes a more subtle approach. There is no nudity or raunchy sex except for some implied off-camera stuff, and in classic Wong Kar-Wai style he focuses more on the romance aspect. I just wasn't able to muster up much interest or enthusiasm for his story about a tailor's relationship with a client. But I suppose it was good aside from that.

The second short came from Steven Soderbergh and had almost nothing to do with sex except for a lot of talking and some footage of a naked woman getting dressed. However I did find it to be the most entertaining of the three thanks to Robert Downey Jr. and Alan Arkin. Arkin plays a psychiatrist and Downey is his patient, but it's done with kind of a 40's/50's look and Arkin humoursly scrambles in the background to make contact with someone in an adjacent building while Downey is droning on about his thoughts. Unlike the other two, it was light and funny.

The third and final short is courtesy of Michelangelo Antonioni. I have seen Antonioni's Blow Up, so I'm not entirely unfamiliar with his work, but this one just went right over my head. I think it was one of those artsy films where the story isn't as important as all of the visual metaphors and read-between-the-lines dialogue, and it just left me confused. And I'm not sure if it was just the version I saw, but for some reason it looks like the actors spoke their lines in English, but then it was dubbed into Italian and subtitled back into English. I don't know if it was intentionally symbolic of something or if Antonioni just really wanted to use English speaking actors, but it looked really stupid. It was also the most sexually gratuitous of the three and had some really beautiful landscapes - I'm not sure if it was filmed in Italy or not, but I was impressed with that part at least.

Recommendation
To recap: Wong's is the most romantic, Soderbergh's is the funniest, and Antonioni's is the most pornographic. The first two are worth watching if you have any interest in them, but the third is not unless you really love beautiful landscapes... and softcore porn. As a whole, though, Eros is just kind of average and I was expecting better.

Days of Being Wild

Impressions before seeing it
I enjoy the work of Wong Kar-Wai, blah, blah, blah, you know the drill.

How was it?
I don't know what it is with Wong Kar-Wai and women. I thought his females were very likable in Chungking Express, In the Mood for Love, and 2046, but in Fallen Angels most of them were annoying and obsessive to a psychotic extent. Carina Lau's character in this movie is of the Fallen Angels variety. Maybe it is meant to be a reaction to Leslie Cheung's character because, let's be fair, he is kind of a douche as well when it comes to his treatment of women. So, having two unlikeable leads doesn't really bode well for this movie.

Now hold on a second, because Mr. Chow (Tony Leung) in 2046 was also cold to the ladies at times. Why did I like Mr. Chow and not York (Cheung)? I don't know, really. Mr. Chow was more of a ladies man I suppose. He had a suave charm that made it not so bad when he was being a dick. Or maybe I just like Tony Leung better as an actor. He does appear at the end of the movie, but in an odd fashion because people who aren't aware of Tony's later appearances as this character in two of Wong's other films will be confused as hell.

But that's not to say I didn't like Days of Being Wild. I couldn't help but like it because I just enjoy watching Wong Kar Wai's style. I think I even prefer it over Ashes of Time. But it's definitely not his best work.

Recommendation
Should be viewed as the first part in the trilogy that involves In the Mood for Love and 2046. Although I actually watched the trilogy in reverse order and it didn't ruin anything.

Fallen Angels

Impressions before seeing it
I had heard that this was originally meant to be the third part of Chungking Express, and that gave me an intellectual boner. Then I forgot that fact and remembered it again about halfway through the movie, when I subsequently got another boner... Intellectually, that is.

How was it?
As you may be able to tell by the poster, this movie uses the fish eye lens a lot and contains cuts to first-person speeding through tunnels and roads. At first glance it gives you that sense of "what a rush!", but I think it's meant to show you that these characters are always on the move, not literally but in the sense that change is frequent. Especially for the mute character who seems to take up a new job every night. And the fish eye lens slightly distorts most of the movie, but that's what point of view is, subjective distortion, and given all of the voiceover narration I'd say point of view plays a big part. So right off the bat it gives you that sense that you're seeing something from the viewpoints of dynamic characters.

Speaking of characters I have to say that the females were kind of annoying. Well, two of them anyway. One seemed excessively childish and the other was crazy and obsessive. I'm not sure if there was a reason for it or not. Michelle Reis's character was okay though.

But the best part is that it does have the same feel as Chungking Express (you know, interesting characters forming even more interesting relationships) and even some references that I was delighted to see, such as a line about expired pineapple, a Chinese woman in a blonde wig, and the appearance of the ever popular bistro where much of the other movie took place. Awesome.

Recommendation
If you liked Chungking Express, you'll like this one, and vice-versa. That is all.

Ashes of Time: Redux

Impressions before seeing it
I will say up front that I have not seen the original version of this movie. Nor had I seen any trailers or footage, but I was aware of its existence. A martial arts epic by my favourite Chinese director? SOLD!

How was it?
This is not a typical martial arts film. In fact it's not even a typical epic or a typical "redux" film: it's only about 90 minutes long, and shorter than the original at that. There are action scenes of course, but they are shot weirdly... It's almost as if Kar Wai was trying to use fast movement and editing in order to avoid showing the fight choreography in detail. But it's not really about the fighting. Being a Wong Kar Wai film, it's about love and relationships. And a lot of voiceovers with wise sayings and musings, which is what makes his movies charming.

I will say that the opening was badass. It was the kind of opening that makes you excited for the rest of the movie because it's just so damned cool. There were some other comparable sequences and a lot of nice visuals, but the rest of the movie didn't really live up to this initial hype. It wasn't bad by any means, but I did find it confusing at times. I think it was the characters; some of them were having identity crises, and there were a lot of phrases thrown around to describe unseen characters rather than actually use their names, so I found it difficult to keep track of who was being referred to and if they were supposed to have any significance to the plot. Maybe watching it again will help.

Recommendation
I don't know who this film's target audience would be. If you are a big martial arts fan, you will probably be disappointed. If you are a romance fan, you will probably also be disappointed (for a story about love I don't think the relationships were developed as well as Wong Kar Wai's other films). If you are a fan of the director, you might enjoy it because there are certainly recognizable elements of his style. But I would reccommend seeing his other films first so that you learn to appreciate him before moving on to this one.