Back to Shinjuku, Literally and Figuratively

For a movie I didn't much like, I seem to be devoting a lot of time to it...

Patrick and I have been discussing this film, and so I figured I would try to clarify my view of it.

The film is not, I confess, as explicitly anti-Japanese as it is implicitly so. It has to do with the way the film is structured.

For better or worse, this article that is in the AnD news section helps me make my point.

I will concede here that some of it is written by the journalist, but a lot of it is quotes.

Chan: "It was an agreement I had with the director (Derek Yee). I was not to give any opinion whatsoever; I could not change the script or the action choreography … it was very difficult [for me]."

Sean: Never believe what you read.

Chan: "To date, the public response [to Shinjuku Incident] has been good although there were some Japanese fans who stopped me in the street crying because [Jackie spoils the movie for anyone who hasn't seen it]."

Sean: The article contains a spoiler. Thanks, Jackie.

"The movie revolves around an honest tractor repairman from China called Steelhead (Chan), who steals into Japan’s Shinjuku district..."

Honest people don't steal. Period.

"There, he sees the Chinese illegal immigrants like him being shunned by mainstream society"

Should we welcome illegalimmigrants with open arms and smiles?

"and oppressed by both the Japanese Yakuza and Chinese gangs."

Criminals oppressing criminals. How awful.

"He decides to take a stand."

Against being treated too poorly by other criminals?

"He strikes an uneasy alliance with Eguchi, a Yakuza head, and is given control of Shinjuku’s night establishments."

He murders his way to power. Plain and simple. He shoots people in the face.

"But all he really wants is a simple life and starts his own tractor repair business, leaving the rest to his friends."

If all he wanted was a simple life he shouldn't have illegally immigrated into a country and then murdered two of its citizens. But hey, blood money buys a lotof tractors.

"But power corrupts and even his close friend from the same village, Jie (Daniel Wu), formerly a shy, simple-minded youth, is transformed into a demented druggie."

Illegal immigration, evading the authorities, grievous bodily harm, and murder (all of which occur before/during his rise to power) don't corrupt?

Either Jackie or Daniel says "Overall, Yee wanted to bring to light the Chinese people’s life as illegal immigrants and after watching this movie, people will realise that being an illegal immigrant is not a good thing. The message here is that ultimately, no country is better than your own."

So China is better than Japan (and everywhere else).

Do I even have to respond to that?

What frustrates me most about this film is how grossly simplistic it is. It glosses over logical and narrative inconsistencies too blithely. As Patrick notes, "one of the biggest issues I had was how easy it was for Jackie to go around and kill the triad heads so easily.  No facemask.  No one trying to get revenge on him later."

Exactly.

"Also thought it was weird that the triad head guy didn't go around with a bodyguard much.  Although maybe that explains why Jackie wasn't caught."

Never let logic get in the way of a movie narrative...

"If you imagined this movie as an Akira Kurosawa movie and Jackie as an old samurai trying to find peace in a new city .... then him going around to kill some triad heads but not wanting his friends to become drug dealers isn't that morally inconsistent.   And you could argue that in the world of the triads (or back in samurai days) that killing isn't that 'bad'.  especially since he was killing 'bad' people."

If this was halfof a Kurosawa film, it would be amazing.

What bugs me is the very skewed distribution of good/bad and/or responsibility. You can't steal your cake and eat it too. Nor can you murder it, smuggle drugs in it, or buy tractors with it.

Jackie wanted money, not peace. So he ought not be upset when he got money andwar. After all, he started it.

What makes a lot of films great (for me anyway) is the moral vacuum than many of them take place in; bad people doing bad things to other bad people for no good reason can be a fascinating way of provoking reflection on morality, on the definitions of goodand bad.

But cheap didacticism backed by spurious logic is simply annoying and hard to take and frustrating.

Unless its Super Typhoon. That movie rocks.**** The literal part of Back to Shinjukuis that I am headed to Tokyo tonight at 1:30 AM. I will indeed go back to Shinjuku and look at guitars again/still.

I will have dinner with Nana's manager. Not sure if she will join us. Keep your fingers crossed...

But before I go tonight, I will watch Torsoat the Cultural Center; my HKIFF hand is strong. Priorities, eh?

Sunday I caughtShinobu Yaguchi's(ハッピーエアポート)in Mong Kok.It was very cute and funny and I laughed a lot.

The man next to me was completelystupid; he would ask his girlfriend "What's that?" almost constantly. The worst was when they showed someone bake a cake, and when the flight attendants serve the cake in the next shot, he asks "What's that?"He's lucky I don't know how to say "It's the cake, you f@#$ing idiot..." in Cantonese.I don't know the word forcake.Yesterday I went to see Fast and the Furious 4at the Grand. First Van Damme, now Vin Diesel. I wish more women made action movies; I don't much care to have dudes make my butt shake. The film was pretty much by-the-numbers, but it was fun and loud and did its job.Last night I watched Rough Cut, the Korean film. A lot of fun, and I enjoyed it.

I'll see at least one movie in Japan, making my film festival truly international.I can't remember the last time I ate dinner at home...