Hi guys,
Can someone stop by to proof read my review of the film First Morning, and tell me what you think?
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Thanks.
Here''s my lastest review regarding this movie.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
Let me put things back in "perspective"/order again, if you would allow me, please.
1- Writing the review about First Morning, as a movie, with limited budget, being his first full-feature and all, I would have to say Victor had succeeded. First Morning was "one of the best Vietnamese film that I''ve seen."
2- However, with my high expectation, hoping we may finally be able to break into the mainstream "movies industry"... First Morning did not measure up to those standards/expectations. That''s my other assessment.
3- I guess as a businessperson, eventually, one would have to consider a market with 80 millions potential viewers in mainland Vietnam who has more time to spare to go watch your movies over a couple of millions Viet overseas who have less time to check out your films (not to mention they will have to choose between the Hollywood films and yours).
I speculated that Vietnamese film makers, like other entertainers (PD, EP, HL...) if they cannot break into Hollywood, will probably choose to cater their films to the audience in Vietnam instead. That''s why they have to "sacrifice" a little (artistry, facts) to get "permission" to do business in VN.
4- "Fahrenheit 911" did have an impact on the political arena of America. “Commander in Chief” is preparing us (to be more open-minded to the idea) for a future female president.
A movie, even a picture, does have an impact on society depends how widely it is viewed/accepted, how much people take it to heart--and last but not least, how “politicians” can use/spin it to their advantage.
I am not saying Victor Võ had any hidden political agenda in his movie. But the truth of the matter is: Others might be able, and they will spin the film to their liking/needs.
Ngô Tất Tố, the author of “Tức Nước Vỡ Bờ” probably wasn’t a communist. He probably didn’t write that novel as a tool to aid the “revolution”. But I was taught otherwise by the communist regime.
What about Trịnh Công Sơn, do you think all his songs were written to help the communists of North to win the war by undermining the will (to fight the war) of the Army of the South? A lot of people believe so. And that might be true--not that the author intended so, but that''s the effect of his "art".
What''s the difference about the media coverage of the Vietnam War and the War in Iraq? Why haven’t we seen any maimed bodies or even caskets shown on TV so far, regarding the War in Iraq? Because they learned their lesson.
That’s what we called “selective” reporting, selective omissions, spinning, or damage control. The P.R. people are best at this (deciding what to be shown/said and what to "avoid"—so does the propaganda machine in VN.
I did not say Victor Võ should not or cannot make movies about Vietnam. I’m just saying, with his limited understanding about the whole “thing” (the War and its consequences), choosing to address these issues will leave a lot of “holes” that can be exploited by others for their own agenda. He could have used better "advisors".
Major film companies usually will have to consult with experts regarding the fields (language, history, fashion…) they want to explore, before actually going into production, in their attempt to best portrait/showcase/represent the isssues/people/events as accurately as they can.
I think if it''s up to me, I’d present the film a bit differently--to be a little more historically correct—-but still be able to preserve the integrity of the artistry/plot/script of the film.
And that''s my other two cents.
Thanks for reading.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Please join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s our latest exchanges:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
Let''s revisit our "differences" and "agreements":
a- You wrote, "If you state that movie makers should do a research on history to have accurate facts then I would agree." Ditto! It takes me so long to try to make the same point.
b- You added, "However, First Morning just use that period of time as a backdrop of his story, which details we all knew were valid, just as he told in the interview his story was based on stories that he''d heard over the years by relatives."
I guess this is where we differed. My concern is that with selective representation or omission, facts can be misconstrued or distorted, unintentionally, subconsciously--or spinned to fit someone else’s agendas.
How would the Jewish people feel if the "concentration camps" were set in a beautiful resort, the "prisoners" all look neat and healthy, the guards look courteous and polite... What if I make a film about the Holocaust (about one of the victims, using the War as a backdrop/setting) but decide to just narrate briefly "we were put in camps, and later rescued..."
Eyes browses would have raised would they not--if I''m lucky.
What I''m trying to say is that movie is about "representation", bringing the experience/event/emotion to the audience, putting them in those circumstances/situations to "experience" it themselves. A film should not be just a “reminder”, or short “narration” (kind of cheating, if you ask me).
For those who had actually been through the "wars", the Holocaust, or the “Exodus”, just the mere mentioning of those events would bring back tears, the whole experience. But it''s unfair to expect others to relate to their stories or understand what they''d been through if we do not accurately and adequately "tell" the "whole story".
Just the name of our loved ones appearing on the email list would bring joyce to some. I have no doubt you didn''t need much elaboration to empathize or understand what the girl in First Morning went through and what her state of mind may be like (to "enjoy"/appreciate the film).
However, my "criticism" was about the inadequacy of the film in its attempt to engage/explain to the audience (non-Viet, younger Viet) whose knowledge about the escapes, crossing of the ocean, the deaths along the way, the encounters with pirates, tortures, enslaver, and massacres… were—I have no doubt—very limited. And those “void”, left out details, could be filled variously depends on who do the spinning.
c- You wrote, “Like I already stated the film is not perfect, there are many faults, but for a debut picture, I am willing to overlook them.” Again, I’m with you on this.
d- You wrote. “Well, although the market of 80 millions of Vietnamese sounds so attractive, but in reality the majority of Vietnamese audience doesn''t go to the theater. It''s not like in the States (and every else in the world), Vietnamese at home don''t care about the sounds effect, how well the scenery is shot ...etc, they just want to watch the movie, and they are happy with a DVD copy, and watch it at home.”
However, looking further into the future, I still believe the audience in Vietnam will far more outnumber those living abroad. Let’s say there’s only one theater in each major city in VN, there would still be hundreds of them comparing to a few that we have (refer to your listing of scheduled showing for FM). Even if the ticket price is only a dollar each, I can safely “forecast” that, one day, the “box office" record for films in Vietnam can reach a million dollars, easily (comparing to several hundred millions for Hollywood, right now).
e- You wrote, “But the point here is that, I think Victor Vu or any director wants to break into the film industry, to cater to the majority of the audience, not necessary Vietnamese alone, abroad or at home. If your movie is good, it will reach the audience. Hey, good Chinese movies are doing very well now. Memoir of a Geisha is directed by Rob Marshall and is financed by Steven Spielberg. Once people recognize there''s a good story, there''s a talent, then they will do the finance.
Have you watched Better Luck tomorrow, it''s a very good movie, and Justin Lin, the director has received a lot of offers afterwards. In fact he has three movies in his hands right now. I hope young Vietnamese directors have luck as the same (and they can choose stories, make movies the way they please).”
This will only reenforce my “belief”. I think the recent acceptance and “rise to fame” of a wave of Chinese directors and actors were not the result of the “change of taste” or sudden realization of Hollywood that Chinese (Hong Kong) can make movies, too. In contrary, just as Bollywood is finally recognized, I think that Hollywood had finally realized the potential 1.5 billion in China and 1 billion viewers in India (who finally can afford to go see the movies now).
Financing a movie showcasing Chow Yuan Fat, for instance, in the worst case scenario, even if it doesn’t make money in the U.S., will eventually turn profit after you showed it to the whole population of Asia (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam, India, Singapore, Thailand and Japan). Does that make any sense?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Please stop by to join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s my comparison between First Morning and Saving Face:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
The striking similarity about First Morning and Saving Face is that they were written/produced by either second genertion American or "Whiies", about the gaps/"struggle" of immigrants, between generations; the cast were all ethnic minorities/immigrants (Vietnamese or Chinese); the dialogues in the films were mostly non-English (Vietnamese or Chinese). There were some issues (ethnic, minority, generation gap) the directors/writers wanted to address; there were twists in the plots...
Isn''t Ang Lee the director of Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger? I also said, a long time ago, he''s Chinese Vietnamese--just as Lữ Luơng Vỹ and Chung Sở Hồng. I think he''s in the league of directors the like of Martin Scorsese, if not Steven Spielberg.
It would be understandable if “our” younger directors started out having Ang Lee as their “role model”/goal, just as all basketball players my age wanted to “be like Mike”, and younger players now wish they could play like Kobe.
I would be happy and content if my children know how to dribble the ball, make proper jump shots, pick and roll, shake and “bake”, drive in, post a better-than-70% free-throw record, around 30% three-pointers… That means they can play ball (at high school varsity level). Later on, if they can “slam dunk”, or do the “a le hoop”, that’s even sweeter yet: They may be good enough to play at college level or more.
What I am trying to say is that, there’s “dream”, ambition; and there’s realistic “expectation”. I wasn''t disappointed because Victor Võ was not as good as Ang Lee (in his first attempt), or First Morning didn’t measure up to Eat Drink Man Woman. But I was disappointed, nevertheless—rightly so, I believe.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You can join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s more:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Someone asked me why I felt the need to mention First Morning, after watching Saving Face?
I think the title of the Chinese movie spoke volume. It clearly told me the main issue being addressed: Pride--to be exact, delusional self-serving "gratification", the kind of pride only “that” person cares about, while ruining the lives of others, or causing others a lot of pain and agony, trying to preserve such “pride”.
Both of the films, First Morning and Saving Face, decided to “overcome”, discard, and revolt against these “traditional thinking, belief, values or ways of life”, handed down to us from the “older” generations. Hence, the title First Morning: meaning there’s a new beginning.
That’s the common factor between the two films. Both are about our struggle to assimilate into the new society while trying to keep our own identity and heritage—be it the pressure from our elderly or just self consciousness.
Making it “more real”, Saving Face engaged me more, and convinced me to be more involved with the issues they brought up in the film.
As the result, I think they’d achieved their goal: Entertained the audience while engaging as well as educating the viewers about those sensitive issues that were delicately, and cleverly, presented in Saving Face.
Did you feel their “passions”? Do you agree or sympathize with their resolutions?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For more posts regarding this topic, please visit:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?p=9433
[sign][/sign]
Can someone stop by to proof read my review of the film First Morning, and tell me what you think?
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Thanks.
Here''s my lastest review regarding this movie.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
Let me put things back in "perspective"/order again, if you would allow me, please.
1- Writing the review about First Morning, as a movie, with limited budget, being his first full-feature and all, I would have to say Victor had succeeded. First Morning was "one of the best Vietnamese film that I''ve seen."
2- However, with my high expectation, hoping we may finally be able to break into the mainstream "movies industry"... First Morning did not measure up to those standards/expectations. That''s my other assessment.
3- I guess as a businessperson, eventually, one would have to consider a market with 80 millions potential viewers in mainland Vietnam who has more time to spare to go watch your movies over a couple of millions Viet overseas who have less time to check out your films (not to mention they will have to choose between the Hollywood films and yours).
I speculated that Vietnamese film makers, like other entertainers (PD, EP, HL...) if they cannot break into Hollywood, will probably choose to cater their films to the audience in Vietnam instead. That''s why they have to "sacrifice" a little (artistry, facts) to get "permission" to do business in VN.
4- "Fahrenheit 911" did have an impact on the political arena of America. “Commander in Chief” is preparing us (to be more open-minded to the idea) for a future female president.
A movie, even a picture, does have an impact on society depends how widely it is viewed/accepted, how much people take it to heart--and last but not least, how “politicians” can use/spin it to their advantage.
I am not saying Victor Võ had any hidden political agenda in his movie. But the truth of the matter is: Others might be able, and they will spin the film to their liking/needs.
Ngô Tất Tố, the author of “Tức Nước Vỡ Bờ” probably wasn’t a communist. He probably didn’t write that novel as a tool to aid the “revolution”. But I was taught otherwise by the communist regime.
What about Trịnh Công Sơn, do you think all his songs were written to help the communists of North to win the war by undermining the will (to fight the war) of the Army of the South? A lot of people believe so. And that might be true--not that the author intended so, but that''s the effect of his "art".
What''s the difference about the media coverage of the Vietnam War and the War in Iraq? Why haven’t we seen any maimed bodies or even caskets shown on TV so far, regarding the War in Iraq? Because they learned their lesson.
That’s what we called “selective” reporting, selective omissions, spinning, or damage control. The P.R. people are best at this (deciding what to be shown/said and what to "avoid"—so does the propaganda machine in VN.
I did not say Victor Võ should not or cannot make movies about Vietnam. I’m just saying, with his limited understanding about the whole “thing” (the War and its consequences), choosing to address these issues will leave a lot of “holes” that can be exploited by others for their own agenda. He could have used better "advisors".
Major film companies usually will have to consult with experts regarding the fields (language, history, fashion…) they want to explore, before actually going into production, in their attempt to best portrait/showcase/represent the isssues/people/events as accurately as they can.
I think if it''s up to me, I’d present the film a bit differently--to be a little more historically correct—-but still be able to preserve the integrity of the artistry/plot/script of the film.
And that''s my other two cents.
Thanks for reading.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Please join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s our latest exchanges:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
Let''s revisit our "differences" and "agreements":
a- You wrote, "If you state that movie makers should do a research on history to have accurate facts then I would agree." Ditto! It takes me so long to try to make the same point.
b- You added, "However, First Morning just use that period of time as a backdrop of his story, which details we all knew were valid, just as he told in the interview his story was based on stories that he''d heard over the years by relatives."
I guess this is where we differed. My concern is that with selective representation or omission, facts can be misconstrued or distorted, unintentionally, subconsciously--or spinned to fit someone else’s agendas.
How would the Jewish people feel if the "concentration camps" were set in a beautiful resort, the "prisoners" all look neat and healthy, the guards look courteous and polite... What if I make a film about the Holocaust (about one of the victims, using the War as a backdrop/setting) but decide to just narrate briefly "we were put in camps, and later rescued..."
Eyes browses would have raised would they not--if I''m lucky.
What I''m trying to say is that movie is about "representation", bringing the experience/event/emotion to the audience, putting them in those circumstances/situations to "experience" it themselves. A film should not be just a “reminder”, or short “narration” (kind of cheating, if you ask me).
For those who had actually been through the "wars", the Holocaust, or the “Exodus”, just the mere mentioning of those events would bring back tears, the whole experience. But it''s unfair to expect others to relate to their stories or understand what they''d been through if we do not accurately and adequately "tell" the "whole story".
Just the name of our loved ones appearing on the email list would bring joyce to some. I have no doubt you didn''t need much elaboration to empathize or understand what the girl in First Morning went through and what her state of mind may be like (to "enjoy"/appreciate the film).
However, my "criticism" was about the inadequacy of the film in its attempt to engage/explain to the audience (non-Viet, younger Viet) whose knowledge about the escapes, crossing of the ocean, the deaths along the way, the encounters with pirates, tortures, enslaver, and massacres… were—I have no doubt—very limited. And those “void”, left out details, could be filled variously depends on who do the spinning.
c- You wrote, “Like I already stated the film is not perfect, there are many faults, but for a debut picture, I am willing to overlook them.” Again, I’m with you on this.
d- You wrote. “Well, although the market of 80 millions of Vietnamese sounds so attractive, but in reality the majority of Vietnamese audience doesn''t go to the theater. It''s not like in the States (and every else in the world), Vietnamese at home don''t care about the sounds effect, how well the scenery is shot ...etc, they just want to watch the movie, and they are happy with a DVD copy, and watch it at home.”
However, looking further into the future, I still believe the audience in Vietnam will far more outnumber those living abroad. Let’s say there’s only one theater in each major city in VN, there would still be hundreds of them comparing to a few that we have (refer to your listing of scheduled showing for FM). Even if the ticket price is only a dollar each, I can safely “forecast” that, one day, the “box office" record for films in Vietnam can reach a million dollars, easily (comparing to several hundred millions for Hollywood, right now).
e- You wrote, “But the point here is that, I think Victor Vu or any director wants to break into the film industry, to cater to the majority of the audience, not necessary Vietnamese alone, abroad or at home. If your movie is good, it will reach the audience. Hey, good Chinese movies are doing very well now. Memoir of a Geisha is directed by Rob Marshall and is financed by Steven Spielberg. Once people recognize there''s a good story, there''s a talent, then they will do the finance.
Have you watched Better Luck tomorrow, it''s a very good movie, and Justin Lin, the director has received a lot of offers afterwards. In fact he has three movies in his hands right now. I hope young Vietnamese directors have luck as the same (and they can choose stories, make movies the way they please).”
This will only reenforce my “belief”. I think the recent acceptance and “rise to fame” of a wave of Chinese directors and actors were not the result of the “change of taste” or sudden realization of Hollywood that Chinese (Hong Kong) can make movies, too. In contrary, just as Bollywood is finally recognized, I think that Hollywood had finally realized the potential 1.5 billion in China and 1 billion viewers in India (who finally can afford to go see the movies now).
Financing a movie showcasing Chow Yuan Fat, for instance, in the worst case scenario, even if it doesn’t make money in the U.S., will eventually turn profit after you showed it to the whole population of Asia (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam, India, Singapore, Thailand and Japan). Does that make any sense?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Please stop by to join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s my comparison between First Morning and Saving Face:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
...
The striking similarity about First Morning and Saving Face is that they were written/produced by either second genertion American or "Whiies", about the gaps/"struggle" of immigrants, between generations; the cast were all ethnic minorities/immigrants (Vietnamese or Chinese); the dialogues in the films were mostly non-English (Vietnamese or Chinese). There were some issues (ethnic, minority, generation gap) the directors/writers wanted to address; there were twists in the plots...
Isn''t Ang Lee the director of Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger? I also said, a long time ago, he''s Chinese Vietnamese--just as Lữ Luơng Vỹ and Chung Sở Hồng. I think he''s in the league of directors the like of Martin Scorsese, if not Steven Spielberg.
It would be understandable if “our” younger directors started out having Ang Lee as their “role model”/goal, just as all basketball players my age wanted to “be like Mike”, and younger players now wish they could play like Kobe.
I would be happy and content if my children know how to dribble the ball, make proper jump shots, pick and roll, shake and “bake”, drive in, post a better-than-70% free-throw record, around 30% three-pointers… That means they can play ball (at high school varsity level). Later on, if they can “slam dunk”, or do the “a le hoop”, that’s even sweeter yet: They may be good enough to play at college level or more.
What I am trying to say is that, there’s “dream”, ambition; and there’s realistic “expectation”. I wasn''t disappointed because Victor Võ was not as good as Ang Lee (in his first attempt), or First Morning didn’t measure up to Eat Drink Man Woman. But I was disappointed, nevertheless—rightly so, I believe.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You can join our discussion at:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=1890
Here''s more:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Someone asked me why I felt the need to mention First Morning, after watching Saving Face?
I think the title of the Chinese movie spoke volume. It clearly told me the main issue being addressed: Pride--to be exact, delusional self-serving "gratification", the kind of pride only “that” person cares about, while ruining the lives of others, or causing others a lot of pain and agony, trying to preserve such “pride”.
Both of the films, First Morning and Saving Face, decided to “overcome”, discard, and revolt against these “traditional thinking, belief, values or ways of life”, handed down to us from the “older” generations. Hence, the title First Morning: meaning there’s a new beginning.
That’s the common factor between the two films. Both are about our struggle to assimilate into the new society while trying to keep our own identity and heritage—be it the pressure from our elderly or just self consciousness.
Making it “more real”, Saving Face engaged me more, and convinced me to be more involved with the issues they brought up in the film.
As the result, I think they’d achieved their goal: Entertained the audience while engaging as well as educating the viewers about those sensitive issues that were delicately, and cleverly, presented in Saving Face.
Did you feel their “passions”? Do you agree or sympathize with their resolutions?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For more posts regarding this topic, please visit:
http://vietyouth.net/Forums/viewtopic.php?p=9433
[sign][/sign]
![[:-]](/images/smiley/s12.gif)
![[:D]](/images/smiley/s2.gif)