2004 kung-fu comedyRating: 16/20
Plot: Gang turf wars disrupt the slummy harmony of Pig Sty Alley. Meanwhile, Sing and his pal--a pair of halfwit secondhand crooks--pretend to be members of the notorious Axe Gang, a plan that doesn't go very well. A lot of people get kicked as the Axe Gang wages war on Pig Sty Alley and its hidden kung-fu talent. Then, a frog man.
What a fun and completely ridiculous movie! It's got a great look, too, although you can see right through the CGI with flailing characters looking all blubbery and splitting beams looking all glitchy. But it's just got this crisp look, and the dark but colorful 1930s world created in the opening scenes is really well done. Pig Sty Alley looks great, too, almost like a set Tati would have constructed for a movie. One great scene has the camera whisking through the town to show what its inhabitants are up to--they're swatting flies, engaging in a little domestic violence, playing checkers, apparently pooping. And the way the camera moves around the characters gives this a freshness that appeals to me. The irreverence gives this a manic edge, a wackiness that might make you wonder if insanity and/or drugs were involved, almost like the type of action movie a very clever four year old would make after he's devoured the pudding and Fruit Loops. But the martial arts action is legit. Star/writer/director Stephen Chow spends most of the movie as a wanna-be, but he shows off the skills when needed. His best moment is when he laughs after demonstrating how evil he is by stealing ice cream. The cool-looking Axe Gang--how could you not love a group of ax-wielding bunch of thugs wearing black top hats and showcasing some great dance moves while they do their axin'-- are mostly around to give major characters something to punch. I'm just a top hat, an ax, and a few bitchin' dance moves away from heading up my own Axe Gang, by the way. The trio of kung-fu masters in Pig Sty Alley are great with their individual fists, forearm rings, and staffs, and I loved the creative choreography in the "Why don't we spar a little before we leave?" scene, one of those great scenes that really has no reason to even be in a movie. Most of the characters--The Beast, the killer Guqin assassins, the landlady, and her husband--are aided by special effects, but it doesn't make the cartoonish fight scenes any less beautiful. The springy and boinging and whooshing sound effects don't hurt things either. Warner Brothers and kung-fu mashing-up isn't that much of a stretch anyway, is it? This is Road Runner kung-fu! The comedy works only some of the time, usually when it's more visually than humor. I'm not sure how well this is translated, but the humor doesn't always translate well and the dubbed voices are pretty ridiculous. The slapstick visual humor is great though even at its most obvious or goofiest. Chow sizing up the Alley to find a "worthwhile" opponent is a clever little scene. The whole movie has a made-up-as-we-go feel, and I don't mean that as a criticism at all. There's a looseness which makes this a great its big hits and even its occasional misses a lot of fun. The lesson here, I believe, is that if you're going to go ridiculous, go completely ridiculous because half-assed ridiculousness just won't suffice. The landlady's cigarette, a character inexplicably named Doughnut (I think) who steals lines from other movies, a freaking toad man, a kitty silhouette getting sliced in two, and a little kid being urinated upon. Really, what's not to love here? This is the definitive film for immature martial arts movie fans.
I'm assuming this will go as well as the other Oprah Movie Club discussions, and I can't wait to read your thoughts about Kung Fu Hustle.
My pick, and I am glad you liked it.
ReplyDeleteMy son also loves this movie. From the ages of 5 to 7, he watched this movie weekly. Even though the movie is somewhat violent, it is silly cartoon style violence. It uses the same wire-fu from the Matrix, but uses it in a completely over the top way I had not seen before.
It is also petty funny. The entire scene with the two losers trying to kill the landlady, with knives, snakes, and whatnot is very funny.
I think the 16 is spot on.
I thought this movie was absolutely fantastic. You should have watched the subtitled version, because the humor is sharper, and the voices not nearly as annoying. Its an 18 for me. It really entertains from beginning to end.
ReplyDeleteNow to think of my movie for August.
Hmmm.
I saw this several years ago and liked it. The over-the-top action was fun and the whole thing had great energy. A 15.
ReplyDeleteLots of fun. Apart from the cheesier CGI, it was quite beautiful to look at, too. It got compared to a Tarantino movie on the poster, but I thought it was even better because there was no attempt to prove the director's mastery or the cleverness of the writing. Everything was in the service of a good cartoon.
ReplyDeleteDo you really feel that way about Tarantino, Matt? I can certainly understand that argument, but to me, Tarantino just seems like a guy who is excited about things and makes movies that he would enjoy watching.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I kind of feel like there would be more dignity in what Tarantino does if he would just make a good action movie without trying to prove that he's a master and an auteur. The dialogue in the first half of Death Proof made me gag - it's supposed to be clever and snappy but those ordinary ladies sure do sound like Reservoir Dogs.
ReplyDeleteI liked the second part of that movie, but I hated Inglorious Basterds all the way through. There's that scene where a bunch of piggish Nazis are laughing hysterically at a propaganda film, while in the projection booth a woman gets shot several times in slow motion. I really don't think Tarantino's entitled to pass a comment on the negative side of cinematic violence, at least not in a movie that revels in it as a stylistic exercise for most of the runtime. That scene made me wonder whether he's really unreflective or just insincere. The movie wanted to carry some real Holocaust resonances (I'm thinking of the opening scene), and the dialogue in it is tense and well-written. But it presents itself as anti-intellectual at the same time, that's why Brad Pitt's hero is a hick and the villain is articulate and speaks several languages. I think the bottom line is Tarantino wants to make trash and be a top-tier director at the same time, so he puts a layer of fake sophistication over his work.
Not looking forward to seeing what he does with slavery in Django Unchained, but I'd go see Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter on cheap night at the theatre.
My review for Tarantino's little car movie is around here somewhere. I HATED it.
ReplyDeleteI see what you're saying about Tarantino. I loved 'Basterds' though. I don't exactly remember the woman-shot-in-projection-booth scene, but I never thought Tarantino was making a statement about violence in movies. More about the way movies rewrite history. I should watch it again. I've only seen it the one time.