Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon was a world-wide big screen success. It tells the story about two pairs of lovers with very different ideals and how these principles set forth their relationships and decisions in life. It presented opposing themes such as tradition and modernity, collectivism and individuality, and repression and liberation.
However, the film presents a big question of authenticity. The film effortlessly captivated the audience with its dynamic cinematography and martial art exhibition. In guise, it portrays the extricate details of Chinese culture and tradition but does it really capture the true essence of Chinese cultural identity?
The film was undoubtfully gear toward an American audience. The casting mash-up of variously stars from
The two lovers play out very different relationships in the story. Li Mu Bai and Yu Shu Lien shared a relationship based on a traditional idealism of collectivism, and repression. They have feelings for each other but chose to repress them due to the confinements of society and their duties. On the other hand, Jen and Luo shared a very modern relationship. They struggle to be together defy and rebelling against traditional boundaries. Their relationship represents a sense of individualism and liberation that can only be gain through their freedom from their obligations, particularly Jen. Although, the the film presented a very complex struggle between tradition and modernity, it fails to deliver a believable storyline or plot because of its language disparities and commercialization.
I don't know if I agree with your point about the language disparities getting in the way of delivering a believable plot. In fact, if the film were truly made with a Western audience in mind, the varying accents wouldn't matter at all; what would matter is these actors' skill and believability in delivering their characters. It's not like a non-Chinese audience would be able to tell that Chow Yun-Fat's accent is from Cantonese or Zhang Ziyi's from Beijing. This aspect really only affects those who know the language, which would be those living in Chinese countries and the respective diaspora. As such, the accents really have little effect on the plot line.
ReplyDeleteI do agree however about the question of authenticity. As mentioned above, it is obvious that some degree of Chinese cultural synthesis has occurred, as demonstrated by the use of actors from all different Chinese regions. Therefore, what is the "Chinese-ness" that is being displayed? It's not a purely PRC Chinese, nor is it a Taiwanese or Hong Kong Chinese. It is a "Chinese: that belongs, at once, to none and all because it is one that has been constructed by the filmmaker, who takes what he believes to be essential to the Chinese culture and delivers it to the big screen.
I think that the perception of authenticity of "Chineseness" is controversial. Since China is consisted of 56 different minorities with different languages, so even now there are many diversities almost like the US. I don't think that different dialects in the movie would fail to deliver a believable story line. China land has been ruled by different peoples and by different dynasties, so there are different people and different culture in China. However, I think that this diversity makes the uniqueness of "Chineseness" just like America.
ReplyDeleteLike both Jesslyn and Hwanny, I strongly disagree with the review's assertion that the actors' accents got in the way of the movie's credibility. This has already been well addressed by Jesslyn.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion about "Chinese-ness" is interesting. It does point to a more globalized making of the film, but I doubt there are any major post-open door reform films that only recruited actors from just one province or ethnicity. The opposite is, in fact, probably true -- Zhang Ziyi plays the female lead, and Michelle Yeoh a supporting character, in Memoirs of a Geisha. Both of their characters were not Chinese... but Japanese.
In the view from a Chinese perspective, I think that the accents take away the authenticity of the film but not the believability of the plot. I think that the Chinese audience would have wanted to see actors/actresses that have experienced the history of China rather than having foreign people play the roles of the Chinese. Chinese actors would be more relatable and transcend a more emotional appeal to the movie. I think that China's immense history and its effect on people cannot be ignored. Thus, I am not surprised about the controversy surrounding the way the director did his casting on the movie.
ReplyDeleteI feel that directors sell out of their own personal and intimate art, to please the audience. It seems like it's their only way to make it big--which is settle for the typical, regurgitated mainstream vibe that everyone else produces.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, I feel that originality is definitely not in this movie because all he does is please the audience(Americans).
I agree with Allan. All the director decided to do here was please an AMerican audience to gain recognition in the states and Hollywood and at the same time he can rake in a lot of money. Killing two birds with one stone here.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the other people commenting on this post about the notion of "Chinese-ness". I think that differences in the Mandarin accents critique the notion of what is considered "Chinese". The long history of China combined with it own cultural diversity leads me to question how someone can pigeonhole all of that into a term such as "Chinese". Furthermore, it raises that question as to who gets to determine what is "Chinese"?
ReplyDelete