My Blueberry Nights (Wong)

[DavidSeven]

I'm perplexed by the mixed reviews for Wong Kar-Wai's My Blueberry Nights. That's not to say it's a perfect or even great film. However, Wong has sustained over a decade of rave reviews before the mediocre consensus on his English language debut. My Blueberry Nights is cut from the exact same mold as all of the films he has made in Hong Kong since Days of Being Wild. Wong continues to do what he does well, and we see the same old flaws that have followed him around for years too.

Maybe there is something to be said for the claim that American viewers get caught up in the 'exoticism' of foreign cinema. How else can you explain the critical majority finally calling out Wong on the weaknesses that they've been giving him passes on for nearly 20 years now? Wong has never been a "weighty" filmmaker. He's never been terribly subtle either. We finally see his work with English dialogue, an American setting, and white actors, and all of a sudden, there's a problem.

Wong has built a career and a rather large following on fairly simplistic romantic-dramas that consistently cover the same thematic territory. However, he's always been worth looking at because of how much he conveys through the medium itself. My Blueberry Nights is no exception. Like everything else he's done, his English-language film has its share of unnecessary exposition, but the engrossing aesthetic is still there. There is thought and consideration within every single shot of this film. While the story is a bit of a retread for Wong, his vision still feels fresh, and the story is still an engaging one. I would challenge anyone to find an American romantic drama that looks or even feels quite like this one. Wong's films have always worked better as audio/visual experiences and engaging love stories than intellectual exercises, and this might be the film that proves that point to those that have followed him. He's done imperfect work for his entire career, but what he can present on screen has always been unlike what anyone else could. This is what makes Wong Kar-Wai an interesting filmmaker and why My Blueberry Nights really isn't a step down from what he's always been doing.

[***]

[balmakboor]

I'm sure that many American films that get mixed or negative reactions with American critics would get highly favorable reactions if they were set in Hong Kong and had subtitles.

[monolith94]

I think there is something to be said for exoticism, and I think it works in reverse, too. Familiarity breeds contempt, y'know? I mean, when I go to a film, I want to see something different, and setting a film in a place I'm not familiar with already starts it off on the right foot.

[Ezee E]

This comes out to Colorado next week.

[DavidSeven]

I'm sure that many American films that get mixed or negative reactions with American critics would get highly favorable reactions if they were set in Hong Kong and had subtitles.


I think there is something to be said for exoticism, and I think it works in reverse, too. Familiarity breeds contempt, y'know? I mean, when I go to a film, I want to see something different, and setting a film in a place I'm not familiar with already starts it off on the right foot.

I guess this where the whole "objectivity vs. subjectivity in criticism" question would come into play. I mean, there's no way Wong's, or anyone else's, films are objectively improved because they are set in Hong Kong and in a foreign language. You could definitely start to build an indictment of American film criticism based on the reactions to Wong's films.

[Duncan]

I guess this where the whole "objectivity vs. subjectivity in criticism" question would come into play. I mean, there's no way Wong's, or anyone else's, films are objectively improved because they are set in Hong Kong and in a foreign language. You could definitely start to build an indictment of American film criticism based on the reactions to Wong's films.

I think you could start to build an indictment of American film criticism from pretty much anywhere.

[DavidSeven]

I think you could start to build an indictment of American film criticism from pretty much anywhere.

For example?

[Duncan]

For example?

You could start with the slew of recent layoffs.

You could start by looking at such an esteemed magazine as The New Yorker, which has very good writers, but all of them are (very) old, white men.

You could start with the complete lack of interest in aesthetics. How else could one explain Apatow's success? It's the only art form I can think of where critics don't seem to care about how the art is made. I visited the Bienniel exhibition yesterday at the Whitney Museum. As far as I can tell, modern art in every other medium (sculpture, painting, photography, video, collage, sound, etc.) is concerned primarily with expression through the medium itself. Film is still hung up on stories. I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. I love a good story. And I certainly don't love everything at the Whitney. I'm just using it as a contrasting example. There's very little criticism on video art and avant-garde film because 1) not many people care and 2) not many people can write competently about either.

You could start with the fact that if you read five reviews of the same film the chances are that they'll cover the exact same points without eloquence or uniqueness. I read an interview with Manhola Dargis (whose writing I quite like and respect) and she was saying now that she works at the New York Times she has trouble keeping up with the regularity of the writing, and that she has to just spit out a review every now and then. I'm pretty sure this is what the vast majority of reviewers do on a regular basis. I see a consistent lack of thought or insight in reviews.

And on and on.

[DavidSeven]

You could start with the complete lack of interest in aesthetics. How else could one explain Apatow's success? It's the only art form I can think of where critics don't seem to care about how the art is made. I visited the Bienniel exhibition yesterday at the Whitney Museum. As far as I can tell, modern art in every other medium (sculpture, painting, photography, video, collage, sound, etc.) is concerned primarily with expression through the medium itself. Film is still hung up on stories. I don't think that's entirely a bad thing. I love a good story. And I certainly don't love everything at the Whitney. I'm just using it as a contrasting example. There's very little criticism on video art and avant-garde film because 1) not many people care and 2) not many people can write competently about either.

Even in the case of criticism for narrative filmmaking, you have something like My Blueberry Nights getting criticized for being weightless, but at least it is concerned about expressing itself through medium. Apatow gets a pass for work that's even more weightless and has absolutely no concern for the medium itself. I can't explain why he gets near universal acclaim either.

I'll just say "touche" to the rest of your post. I just wanted to see where you were going with that.

[Duncan]

Even in the case of criticism for narrative filmmaking, you have something like My Blueberry Nights getting criticized for being weightless, but at least it is concerned about expressing itself through medium. Apatow gets a pass for work that's even more weightless and has absolutely no concern for the medium itself. I can't explain why he gets near universal acclaim either. Yeah, good point.

[trotchky]

The characters in My Blueberry Nights aren't so much hip, moody Wong characters as they are people imitating hip moody Wong characters; similarly, Wong himself can be said to be appropriating his own iconic style: the scene where Jeremy adjusts the security camera and later tells Elizabeth that it has been broken for a few days is pretty clearly a reference to Wong's creative processes and anxieties as he adapts to working without Christopher Doyle, etc.

[monolith94]

I guess this where the whole "objectivity vs. subjectivity in criticism" question would come into play. I mean, there's no way Wong's, or anyone else's, films are objectively improved because they are set in Hong Kong and in a foreign language. You could definitely start to build an indictment of American film criticism based on the reactions to Wong's films.

I think it might be asking too much to have critics abandon their personalities at the door in order to critique a film, which is what we would have to ask if we wanted to take away this exoticism element.

[DavidSeven]

The characters in My Blueberry Nights aren't so much hip, moody Wong characters as they are people imitating hip moody Wong characters

I didn't get a sense of that. This goes along with what I've been saying though. Would they feel like imitators if it was Tony Leung and Faye Wong reading those lines in their native languages? I don't think we would see these criticisms if that were the case.


Wong himself can be said to be appropriating his own iconic style: the scene where Jeremy adjusts the security camera and later tells Elizabeth that it has been broken for a few days is pretty clearly a reference to Wong's creative processes and anxieties as he adapts to working without Christopher Doyle, etc.

That one went over my head. Cute reference though, I guess.

[Rowland]

This is encouraging for me just as Matt Zoller Seitz's review at THND was. It seems to me that many critics are holding this up to unfair double standards.

[Silencio]

I didn't like it. Everything it wants to say about love, relationships, isolation, trust, and memory is delivered by actors reciting tepid dialogue via voiceover. Relayed and fed to the audience rather than shown. It manages to be both frantically awkward and coldly calculated at the same time. All the little adventures are so neatly tied up that Kar-Wai leaves nothing for the viewer to really think about.

As a character study, which it proposes itself to be, it hardly works. Most of the supporting characters (and their respective actor performances) are more interesting than Norah Jones' Elizabeth. As a set of vignettes on aforementioned themes, it's too blatant, too easy, and ultimately shallow. As for the cinematography, it's certainly got that moody feel that accompanies many of Kar-Wai's films, but his signature shooting style really doesn't work in favour of this film; often too frantic with some very sloppy transitioning that only distracts from what little is already transpiring on screen.

[trotchky]

I didn't get a sense of that. This goes along with what I've been saying though. Would they feel like imitators if it was Tony Leung and Faye Wong reading those lines in their native languages? I don't think we would see these criticisms if that were the case.

I don't know. However, I didn't really believe any of the characters or their situations, particularly not Rachel Weisz's grief over her husband or the Natalie Portman bit, which lacked the appropriate weight, menace, or grit. A result of something lost (or gained?) in translation? Could be. I just know I didn't have the same reaction as I did to past Wong films.

By the way, this isn't necessarily a criticism.

[Raiders]

Matt Zoller Seitz's questions down in the comments on his blog:

This points up an issue that sort of loiters around the fringes of the "Blueberry Nights" discussion -- and the subject of Wong generally: To what extent do subtitles encourage non-Chinese viewers to give a movie the benefit of the doubt?

I've read complaints that the dialogue in "Blueberry Nights" is too simplistic or fortune cookie-aphoristic, and that the performances are not as deep as in other Wong films. But is this really the case? I adored "2046" but even so, there were times where the movie verged on (or tipped into) preciousness or incoherence, and times when one or more actors seemed as if they were fudging an emotion a bit because they either didn't know quite what was expected of them or the director wanted to keep his options open. In Chinese with subtitles, English-speaking viewers are (it seems to me) inclined to read this as complexity or mystery, or as evidence of some cultural aspect they couldn't understand unless they were from the filmmaker's country. But mightn't it be that "My Blueberry Nights" is not appreciable shallower than, say, about a third of Wong's output -- that "Nights" is, like all Wong's films, a movie in which the shots, the cuts, the music, the whole gestalt constitute about 90 percent of what's memorable about the film, and we the viewer supply a good deal of the coherence, the depth, by imprinting our own emotions onto it?

Put it another way: If some of the Wong films against which "Blueberry Nights" is being judged and found sorely lacking were transposed to the U.S. and made in English, preserving more or less the same situations and shots and cuts, would we read them as being as deep, complex and coherent as the Chinese originals?

I know this is an absurd hypothetical that is untestable and doesn't settle anything, but you see what I'm getting at, and I'm curious if anybody out there has wondered the same thing.

It's kind of the "Star Wars" argument in reverse -- that if Lucas' dialogue were delivered in Dutch or Japanese and read onscreen in subtitles, would at least some of the complaints about bad dialogue and wooden characterizations disappear?

[DavidSeven]

Yep, exactly what I was saying. It's like he's in my head. Skimmed his review, and it's on the mark as well. I might have to check out this fellow regularly.

[Raiders]

Yep, exactly what I was saying. It's like he's in my head. Skimmed his review, and it's on the mark as well. I might have to check out this fellow regularly.

He's my favorite online critic.

[Silencio]

That is ridiculous. My Blueberry Nights isn't marred by some loss in translation or double-standard. It's a poorly written script, poorly executed. The "depth" of character and themes wouldn't suddenly appear if the film were in Chinese with subtitles. The problems are with the script, not with how the viewer perceives the film. And it really isn't that similar to Wong's previous efforts beyond shallow stylistic comparisons; the characters, story, and themes are simply and sorely lacking development, something not evident in the likes of In the Mood for Love, Chungking Express, and Happy Together, for example.

[DavidSeven]

I didn't like it. Everything it wants to say about love, relationships, isolation, trust, and memory is delivered by actors reciting tepid dialogue via voiceover. Relayed and fed to the audience rather than shown. It manages to be both frantically awkward and coldly calculated at the same time. All the little adventures are so neatly tied up that Kar-Wai leaves nothing for the viewer to really think about.

As a character study, which it proposes itself to be, it hardly works. Most of the supporting characters (and their respective actor performances) are more interesting than Norah Jones' Elizabeth. As a set of vignettes on aforementioned themes, it's too blatant, too easy, and ultimately shallow. As for the cinematography, it's certainly got that moody feel that accompanies many of Kar-Wai's films, but his signature shooting style really doesn't work in favour of this film; often too frantic with some very sloppy transitioning that only distracts from what little is already transpiring on screen.

I certainly understand these criticisms, but I guess the question I would pose to you (following the theme of this thread) is whether or not you would apply these same criticisms to all of Wong's work (say Chunking Express, in particular)?

I like this comment from MZS that Raiders just posted:


But mightn't it be that "My Blueberry Nights" is not appreciable shallower than, say, about a third of Wong's output -- that "Nights" is, like all Wong's films, a movie in which the shots, the cuts, the music, the whole gestalt constitute about 90 percent of what's memorable about the film, and we the viewer supply a good deal of the coherence, the depth, by imprinting our own emotions onto it?

That statement pretty much captures what I like about Wong's good films, and why I don't think My Blueberry Nights is a much lesser film than Chungking Express. Personally, I prefer it by substantial margin to Fallen Angels and Happy Together.

[DavidSeven]

That is ridiculous. My Blueberry Nights isn't marred by some loss in translation or double-standard. It's a poorly written script, poorly executed. The "depth" of character and themes wouldn't suddenly appear if the film were in Chinese with subtitles. The problems are with the script, not with how the viewer perceives the film. And it really isn't that similar to Wong's previous efforts beyond shallow stylistic comparisons; the characters, story, and themes are simply and sorely lacking development, something not evident in the likes of In the Mood for Love, Chungking Express, and Happy Together, for example.

How much development could exist in Wong's Hong Kong scripts when he's notoriously written all of his scenes on the day they were to be shot? Detractors of Wong have said his voice overs and dialogue were shallow and transparent for years now. I honestly don't see notable differences between something like this and Chungking Express, and I refuse to believe this film would be judged the same if Tony Leung and a younger Faye Wong were playing the main roles in My Blueberry Nights.

I think Days of Being Wild is his only film that really won me over at a narrative and character level. I've liked his other films because of the way he uses the medium. He generally tells an engaging story or two, but those aspects are generally afterthoughts when focusing on what he does best.

[Silencio]

I certainly understand these criticisms, but I guess the question I would pose to you (following the theme of this thread) is whether or not you would apply these same criticisms to all of Wong's work (say Chunking Express, in particular)?

I like this comment from MZS that Raiders just posted:



That statement pretty much captures what I like about Wong's good films, and why I don't think My Blueberry Nights is a much lesser film than Chungking Express. Personally, I prefer it by substantial margin to Fallen Angels and Happy Together.I would and do. That comment is a little hollow in that it applies to most films. Emotional resonance is something we the viewer apply to a film because everything that the film is made up of evokes that kind of response. Does the filmmaker have any control over that? Not really. So, it's kind of unfair to group all of Wong's films together like that and judge them on similar basis. Yes, the shots, cuts, and music in Wong's films are often impressive, but it's how he correlates characters and relationships at the center of his approach that makes the films memorable. Something I felt was missing My Blueberry Nights, where the style was always conflicting with the characters, plot, and themes; never creating a smooth momentum.

[DavidSeven]

I would and do. That comment is a little hollow in that it applies to most films. Emotional resonance is something we the viewer apply to a film because everything that the film is made up of evokes that kind of response. Does the filmmaker have any control over that? Not really. So, it's kind of unfair to group all of Wong's films together like that and judge them on similar basis. Yes, the shots, cuts, and music in Wong's films are often impressive, but it's how he correlates characters and relationships at the center of his approach that makes the films memorable. Something I felt was missing My Blueberry Nights, where the style was always conflicting with the characters, plot, and themes; never creating a smooth momentum.

Fair enough. Anyway, I'm not going to argue that this film isn't unlikable. I can apply the criticisms that this film has received to Fallen Angels and Happy Together (two films that I don't like). Maybe it's the case that Wong's Hong Kong filmography is just overrated due to a forgiving foreign audience. It just surprises me that many Wong fanboys feel this film is some sort of outlier for him when it really feels like a natural piece of his catalog to me.

[Benny Profane]

I haven't seen this movie but I have long felt that people are more forgiving of foreign films for the sole reason that they are foreign, and conversely, more harsh on American films because they are American. I have long kept this opinion to myself because I felt that it would be shot down immediately.

I also feel that people are more forgiving of older films, but that's for another discussion.

This movie sounds like it has a lot of the same flaws that I found with ITMFL and Chungking Express, both of which I found very underwhelming and boring.

[Raiders]

It just surprises me that many Wong fanboys feel this film is some sort of outlier for him when it really feels like a natural piece of his catalog to me.

Let's not generalize. I believe both number8 and myself are fans of this film.

[DavidSeven]

Let's not generalize. I believe both number8 and myself are fans of this film.

Yeah, sorry. I didn't mean to make a blanket statement. Just reacting to the respective tomatometers for all of his films. Clearly, there are many people who have generally liked his work who were turned off by this one.

Are you going to post up some thoughts?

[Silencio]

How much development could exist in Wong's Hong Kong scripts when he's notoriously written all of his scenes on the day they were to be shot? Detractors of Wong have said his voice overs and dialogue were shallow and transparent for years now. I honestly don't see notable differences between something like this and Chungking Express, and I refuse to believe this film would be judged the same if Tony Leung and a younger Faye Wong were playing the main roles in My Blueberry Nights.Well, I assure you I'd judge it the same way. These are my general thoughts on the film, not influenced by my appreciation for the other Wong films I've seen. I honestly didn't even care to compare until people were bringing it up. I'm not some fanboy who's blatantly pissed off that Wong suddenly decided to go English, and generally feel that this is what's wrong with the film and that these criticisms are in no way a result of language and cultural changes. Nor do I discount that some people are indeed judging this film unfairly.

[number8]

Let's not generalize. I believe both number8 and myself are fans of this film.

Word. And in my case, I was pleasantly surprised at how wonderful the movie is because I was being led to expect less. Now I'm left wondering what the fuck are the other WKW fans finding it so inferior to his previous works.

Redundant themes? These people are crazy.

[Ezee E]

No idea what to expect. My WKW admiration isn't as high as most of Match Cut, but he's a director that I intend on seeing whenever possible.

I'll have to make it happen this weekend.

[MacGuffin]

Waaaaaaait a second. Did I hear someone say Natalie Portman? *scratches My Blueberry Nights off of list of things to see.*

[origami_mustache]

I honestly don't see this as being much different from some of WKW's past films, however the style seems dated and over abundant in my opinion. I mean geeeez, I can only take so many slow shutter speed shots...enough already.

[number8]

My interview with WKW (http://www.justpressplay.net/viewarticle/in-the-mood-for-new-things-a-chat-with-wong-kar-wai/)

[Ezee E]

My interview with WKW (http://www.justpressplay.net/viewarticle/in-the-mood-for-new-things-a-chat-with-wong-kar-wai/)
I'm surprised you could remain composed during the interview.

::still needs to read it::

[Kurosawa Fan]

My interview with WKW (http://www.justpressplay.net/viewarticle/in-the-mood-for-new-things-a-chat-with-wong-kar-wai/)

Nicely done 8. That was a solid read.

[Qrazy]

That statement pretty much captures what I like about Wong's good films, and why I don't think My Blueberry Nights is a much lesser film than Chungking Express. Personally, I prefer it by substantial margin to Fallen Angels and Happy Together.

That's a pity, those are two of his best.

[lovejuice]

rather off topic, but i once saw a play based also on edward hopper's nighthawks. not only is the play terrible by itself, but it also totally "reads" hopper the wrong way. if anything, wkw seems like the right man to interpret the painting.

[Watashi]

Wait... people dislike this film?

How is that possible? WKW has written metaphor-filled dialogue in all of his films prior to this one, so that's nothing new.

I'm surprised no one has mention Straithern's performance. That guy is on a pedestal above other actors.

Amazing film.

[Silencio]

Yes, many signature Kar-Wai touches are present in the film, but it's how they're utilized that I found to be a problem. It all came off as empty, vapid, and pseudo-"deep". It's almost as if WKW is imitating himself here. Whatever he wanted me to feel in this film never worked as well as it did with his previous efforts, and it ain't the language or actors' faults.

[eternity]

Wait... people dislike this film?

How is that possible? WKW has written metaphor-filled dialogue in all of his films prior to this one, so that's nothing new.

I'm surprised no one has mention Straithern's performance. That guy is on a pedestal above other actors.

Amazing film.

Now I'm at least fully obligated to see this if it comes to my arthouse theater.

[Ezee E]

Now I'm at least fully obligated to see this if it comes to my arthouse theater.
It seems like a movie you'd gush over. And I haven't even seen it yet.

[eternity]

It seems like a movie you'd gush over. And I haven't even seen it yet.I've liked, not loved, In the Mood for Love and 2046. Chungking Express is way too hazy in my mind, should probably rewatch it.

I really don't like Norah Jones though. But if I gush over it, well, that's never a bad thing.

[baby doll]

I adored it. (Read More! (http://chuck-a-luck.blogspot.com/))

[Ezee E]

seeing this tonight.

[Ezee E]

Good stuff.

And Wong Kar-Wai sure can dress up a girl. Wow.

Darius Khondji's been busy lately.

I'll give some more thoughts tomorrow.

[Sycophant]

While I was watching it, I had some slight issues with the film that bothered me, particularly in the performance of Norah Jones, which kind of pains me, as much as I like her. However, I don't feel that she herself was quite capable of carrying the picture. Fortunately, she's surrounded by a lot of much stronger actors (including Natalie Portman in one of my favorite of her performances), even though the segment in Memphis with Strathairn and Weisz struck me as a little weak.

But as the night's worn on, my memories of the film are becoming increasingly fonder, like it was some beautiful dream.

It was good. It may have been really good. I'd like to watch it again. At any rate, it certainly felt like a Wong Kar-Wai movie, and I have confidence in Mr. Wong's ability to use America as a canvas very nearly as well as he has used Hong Kong before.

[lovejuice]

even though the segment in Memphis with Strathairn and Weisz struck me as a little weak...At any rate, it certainly felt like a Wong Kar-Wai movie.

just watched it. agree with your first statement which is a shame considered the section constitutes the more important part of jones's journey. i rather disagree on your second. it felts like a extremely well-made film by a wkw wannabe. i catch so many moments i don't expect to see in his work. for example, the movie is not as ambiguous as what i normally expect from a wkw's.

[Pop Trash]

I'm bumping this because I saw it last night at my local ghetto ass second run theater. I honestly am suprised they played it at all considering they mostly play stuff like 10,000 B.C. or Jumper or whatever. Despite the fat families that noisily left the theater after 15 minutes to surely watch something louder and more stupid, I actually liked watching it at the ghetto theater. It was like seeing a flower burst through the cracks of an ugly sidewalk.

Anyways, I think David Seven nailed it in his assetment that the movie is really not much different from other WKW movies, in particular Chungking Express which is one of his most beloved films. Most of the criticisms lobbed against My Blueberry Nights could easily be put up against his other films. I do think critics are more forgiving of the blatent romanticism of his films when they are in Manderin (or is it Cantoneese?) with Asian actors. When it's in English with Hollywood actors suddenly everything is "trite" or "shallow." I will admit some of the acting is a little off. I actually liked Norah Jones' non-acting but Rachel Wiez and Natalie Portman aren't too beliveable sluming it up as southern floozies. They do look pretty hot. David Straitharn blows everyone else away and continues to be one of the more underrated working actors around. Also, the ending is a bit predictable, but still likeable. I would have preferred a more bittersweet ending ala In the Mood for Love or Lost in Translation. Come to think of it, LiT might be a better American Wong movie than the actual American Wong movie.

To be honest it took me awhile to get in to Wong's stuff. I saw Chungking Express and In the Mood for Love a few years ago and didn't think much of either of them, but then watched them both again more recently and loved them. I think his style takes a bit to get used to. His films aren't plot oriented and that can throw you off. They are about mood, memories, atmosphere, moments caught in time. It's a bit like a puree of Alain Resnais, 60s era Godard, and Terrence Malick.

Anyways, along with Wall-E, my favorite film of the year so far. They both are also the most unabashadly romantic movies I've seen this year. Guess I'm a romantic? *shrug*

[Izzy Black]

I just discovered this thread via the bump above. I wrote an essay on this film for my RT journal if any of you are interested, bored, and have nothing better to do. I will recopy it below - or you can read it directly form my journal here (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view.php?journalid=223 391&entryid=515041&view=public).

[Izzy Black]

Capturing the Moment: Wong Kar Wai's My Blueberry Nights

http://i31.tinypic.com/2u76aag.jpg

Wong Kar Wai's latest film My Blueberry Nights finds the director moving further into the postmodern territory already marked earlier in his career by the erratic and chic Chungking Express. It is interesting, and perhaps, rather telling that Kar Wai has chosen his American English-language debut as the film to eschew narrative convention more than any of his previous films. With In The Mood for Love, it had seemed the director was becoming more reliant on narrative rather than less - while, conversely, the unofficial sequel, 2046, adopted the former's aesthetics, but did away with the emphasis on narrative. The curious shift left many critics bemused over his intentions. As a result, many felt it safe to say that the latter was an unfocused, but interesting failure. Yet, the director's decision to continue the trend of 2046 with My Blueberry Nights, rather than invoking the success of his unanimous masterpiece In The Mood for Love - suggests the filmmaker is interested in moving into new terrain.

My Blueberry Nights centers on a relationship that is sparked by the late-night diner encounters of two love-sick New York tweenty-somethings. The film loosely follows the development of their relationship - though while showing no reluctance to diverge into tangential subplots such as the unrequited love between a melancholic, drunk cop and his impetuous wife. Of course, such inconsequential narrative deviations serve less to form a cohesive sequence of events than to represent the daily encounters of Elizabeth's foray into the heartland of Americana, where she frequently finds herself engaging with those who share her sense of disillusionment over love and relationships. Norah Jones is excellent here, but her character is an enigmatic and elusive one, leaving the burden of her performance to rely heavily on nuance and subtlety. Despite the film's defocused narrative-structure, she handles her character with a compelling confidence, wielding a naive, but passionate determination and wistful yearning with every glance.

Wong Kar Wai is a decidedly romantic filmmaker. He views modern alienation and loneliness through the lens of ephemeral relationships and emotional longing - where meaningful connections with others are perceived as fleeting, expirable, and most of all, intangible, and yet, nonetheless, perpetually needed. This sense of disconcerted awareness puts the characters in such a position that they are hesitant to get too close to others, allowing love to exist only at arms-length, while they simultaneously long to be closer.

http://i28.tinypic.com/dfgc3p.jpg

More than anyone else, Wong Kar Wai frequently reminds of Michelangelo Antonioni. It seems the two filmmakers share much of the same aesthetic ideas. Where the two filmmakers diverge begins with Antonioni's ubiquitous political subtext. Kar Wai's cinema is not directly political, but there is something to be said about his presentation of being with others in a modern world. In this respect, Kar Wai is similar to Hsiao-Hsien Hou in terms of observing the trends and changes of a modern world. The difference from this style of filmmaking from Antonioni's modernism, however, is the lack of any real normative or critical rigor. Kar Wai's cinema is more subdued than that, even reticent, and instead favors little more than a descriptive observation of a current social sentiment. There is no suggestion or implication of societal error. This can be seen even with In The Mood for Love. We are presented with historical social codes of etiquette and identity, images of sociopolitical events, and protagonists stricken with romantic angst, but a critique of society never quite arises - instead, what is offered is something more along the lines of a meditative pondering into the nature of society, and the way individuals are defined, understood, and confined within their time, setting, and political milieu. This, perhaps, represents most plainly the move from the more politically conscious modernist aesthetic of the 60s to a new, postmodern aesthetic.

[Izzy Black]

This notion of an apolitical, observational gaze can be found most immediately just in the manner of Kar Wai's camera operations. His camera is sufficiently curious, but removed, often peering through cluttered windows, perforated structures, cracks between walls, or other inanimate objects that seem to block any clear line of sight to the characters. This implies the sense of a third-person spectator, or cinematic voyeurism, where we are watching from a distance. Yet, his technique here is not purely static and objective, as he filters these angles through a burnished long lens, capturing rich, lavish textures with smothering close-ups. In Antonioni's Il Deserto rosso, Monica Vitti's character is suffering from an ontological crisis as she is trapped in a mechanized wasteland populated by profligate individuals. It was Antonioni's first film in color, and the first time he used a telephoto lens. What is most significant about this film is his technical shift away from the more distant observer of the previous films in his alienation trilogy, and his use of the camera to emphasize the environment in a new way.

http://i31.tinypic.com/29x6xpd.jpg

He used the perspective distortion of the telephoto lens to frame Vitti's character in flattened, cluttered space, and used the lens' soft focus and shallow depth to capture a blur around her, depicting a sense of anxious isolation and malaise. The result is something of a dissonant cinematic tone poem. Kar Wai appropriates a similar technique so as to emphasize character isolation, using long lenses in this film rather than his typical preference for wide-angle lenses, and staying true to his own style, he uses impressionistic and romantic visuals to underscore the emotional longing of his characters. Indeed - much like Antonioni, Wong Kar Wai seems to be making the indictment that "Eros is sick" for a modern world.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/7829/43769333jj4.jpg

It is perhaps of no coincidence that the most capacious setting in Nights is the arid desert landscape seen on Elizabeth's and Leslie's liberating ride to Vegas. Kar Wai's cinema is notorious for closed spaces, cluttered mise-en-scene, distorted perspective, and shallow depth of field, but such a treatment is not afforded to the vast desert of Nevada. The visual here is consistent with the thematic content of the narrative's development. Elizabeth and Leslie ride together in a moment of liberating freedom, without any present adherence to obligations or the pains of romantic longing and loneliness. Yet, this freedom is only fleeting and momentary - just as the lack of stability in their lives. It seems in Kar Wai's cinema characters are always moving and traveling, constantly in the shuffle of temporal moments, always in the midst of transition, and endlessly in search of changing their present places. His characters are restless, and enamored with the dream or idea of greener pastures and self-renewal. The distraction of traveling offers a temporary sense of solace and progression, but the pretense is soon revealed for what it is, and the comfort is found to be tenuous. Yet, in the midst of all the traveling in Kar Wai's films, there always seems to be a character that wrestles with the stationary. In Chungking Express, a cop has a fling with a flight attendant as she comes and goes in and out of his life, while a restaurant clerk who loves the cop, but is discontent with her life, has dreams of moving to California as the song California Dreamin' by the Mamas & The Papas is played pervasively throughout the film. Similarly, in My Blueberry Nights, Jude Law's character lets the woman he loves flee from his life, twice, and awaits her return. He collects keys left to him by partners on the way out of their relationships, which are symbols of stationary ideas. He aestheticizes (1) them, and fears leaving his diner. He was told a story once that one has a better chance at encountering a lost one by remaining in the same place. His fixation on stasis is a self-delusion, however. He is, in truth, infatuated with the moment, the moment of love that he shared with others, and is fearful of change, transition, and progress, as he has never accepted the reality of the moment lost. Ergo, his grasp on the moment is as fleeting as Elizabeth's, who quickly moved from NY in search of self-renewal out west.

http://i29.tinypic.com/33c2lqa.jpg

Wong Kar Wai's cinema also brings to mind the widely noted influence of Jean-Luc Godard. Kar Wai's use of editing is often essential to his aesthetic. In Nights, he uses a delayed shutter speed, often as doors are opening and closing, where individuals are coming and going, or at other times just to capture the moment. The effect seems to add a blurred, poetic rhythm to the film, where the moment is cherished and accentuated, as it is the moment that is ever-so precious to these characters, and, indeed, to this particular auteur. In critic Ed Gonzalez's largely negative review of the film for Slant Magazine, he writes: "Every shot is painstakingly thought out, but less emphasis is placed on the human face than on the surfaces that reflect it and the objects that obscure it." (2) Gonzalez is onto something as he observes, in what I believe to be, Kar Wai's canvas of individuals blurred by distorted time, cluttered camera angles, impressionistic visuals, and temporal staccato jumps - a cinema that swallows, mixes, and releases them - representing a visually symbolic loneliness and longing, and ultimately fleshing out a cinema of an ornamented pictorialism.

Endnotes:
1. Yes - I made this word up.
2. Ed Gonzalez, "My Blueberry Nights", Slant Magazine, 2008. Here

[Pop Trash]

Did you see Wall-E yet Israfel? You might actually like it (but who knows with you?) Believe it or not, it has many of the same themes as WKW or even Antonioni in so far as technology and the basic tenents of the modern world (larger buildings, faster travel, etc.) march forward with time, basic human (or robots subbing for humans in this case) connection is lost and there often remains an unfulfilled longing among humanity to really feel something.

[Izzy Black]

Did you see Wall-E yet Israfel? You might actually like it (but who knows with you?) Believe it or not, it has many of the same themes as WKW or even Antonioni in so far as technology and the basic tenents of the modern world (larger buildings, faster travel, etc.) march forward with time, basic human (or robots subbing for humans in this case) connection is lost and there often remains an unfulfilled longing among humanity to really feel something.

I have not seen the film Wall-E. It is not a genre I am particularly interested in, but I will add it to my see list based on your recommendation here. I will post my thoughts when I have seen it.

[Lucky]

Wong Kar Wai has never let me down, although I was a little worried about this one. Even at the beginning Norah Jones' performance bothered me a little bit and I completely agree with the person above who said it's obvious she's surrounded by more talented actors. But in the end I think that really worked out. I adjusted to her passive nature pretty quickly and she became a presence I enjoyed having onscreen. On a completely unrelated sidenote, I thought it was interesting how in one scene she can look very plain and the next you can't take your eyes off her. I really loved the hell out of this movie, though, and I think this will be WKW's most rewatchable film for me. Not quite his best, but I didn't see it as a step down in the slightest.

[Pop Trash]

Wong Kar Wai has never let me down, although I was a little worried about this one. Even at the beginning Norah Jones' performance bothered me a little bit and I completely agree with the person above who said it's obvious she's surrounded by more talented actors. But in the end I think that really worked out. I adjusted to her passive nature pretty quickly and she became a presence I enjoyed having onscreen. On a completely unrelated sidenote, I thought it was interesting how in one scene she can look very plain and the next you can't take your eyes off her. I really loved the hell out of this movie, though, and I think this will be WKW's most rewatchable film for me. Not quite his best, but I didn't see it as a step down in the slightest.

Rep for this and for not hating Southland Tales. :cool:

[Kurosawa Fan]

I just realized that this is playing at a local theater of mine. I'm probably going to go check it out tonight.

[Grouchy]

Well, count me as another one who thinks this is a coherent and worthy effort from WKW. No more, no less. If anything, I think it's more focused than his previous films, and objectively a lot shorter. It also wraps up all the loose ends on the story unlike his latest 2046. Beautiful, romantic, stuff, of course. About the performances - Norah Jones and Cat Power don't stand out, but they don't embarass themselves either. Jones does something of a non-performance which works quite well, and she looks tasty. David Strathairn is a God among actors. And I give full power to a movie capable of making me empathize with a character played by Natalie Portman of all people. The shot of her crying with the cowboy hat moved me to the point of wetting my cheeks a little.

[Izzy Black]

I can always count on Match-Cut. The Nights thread over on Rotten Tomatoes forum is crucifying this film royally.

[number8]

I can always count on Match-Cut. The Nights thread over on Rotten Tomatoes forum is crucifying this film royally.

They tend to side with the critical consensus.

[Izzy Black]

They tend to side with the critical consensus.

Yes. I think it is genuine though. I think they genuinely experience the film differently than those on these forums.

[DavidSeven]

This is definitely an instance where Match-Cut beats the critical consensus. Probably because people are agreeing with me.

[Boner M]

He aestheticizes (1)

1. Yes - I made this word up.
Hmm, I'm pretty sure it's a real word. Or at least I've seen it used dozens of times before. I used it in a recent essay, so here's to hoping it is.

Also, Michael Atkinson praised this over at his blog (http://zeroforconduct.com/):

Catching up with this critical hot potato – nobody seemed capable of dismissing or faintly praising it fast enough – I was entranced. In a few years, after all the gotchas and one-ups have been forgotten, it’ll reappear as classic Wong.

[Izzy Black]

Hmm, I'm pretty sure it's a real word. Or at least I've seen it used dozens of times before. I used it in a recent essay, so here's to hoping it is.


Oh, goodie. All the better. I typed it - second guessed myself - ran a dictionary search - couldn't find anything - then added the addendum and went on.


Also, Michael Atkinson praised this over at his blog (http://zeroforconduct.com/):

Catching up with this critical hot potato – nobody seemed capable of dismissing or faintly praising it fast enough – I was entranced. In a few years, after all the gotchas and one-ups have been forgotten, it’ll reappear as classic Wong.

I hope he's right.

[Epistemophobia]

It's warm in here. Natalie Portman's character was just wonderful.

[Grouchy]

Today I had this discussion (about why someone thinks this movie is lamer than Chinese Wong Kar Wai) live with a fellow student at film school. I gotta say, we talked for a while but I still couldn't see his points.

He whined about the whole love at first sight thing between Jones and Law. While I admit that Law's character is a bit of a blank, I can't see how his story is any less cute than the Tony Leung segment in Chungking Express.

[Lucky]

He whined about the whole love at first sight thing between Jones and Law. While I admit that Law's character is a bit of a blank, I can't see how his story is any less cute than the Tony Leung segment in Chungking Express.

I thought it was similar to the segment between Maggie and Leslie Cheung that opened up Days of Being Wild. Granted it ended quite differently.

[thefourthwall]

This notion of an apolitical, observational gaze can be found most immediately just in the manner of Kar Wai's camera operations. His camera is sufficiently curious, but removed, often peering through cluttered windows, perforated structures, cracks between walls, or other inanimate objects that seem to block any clear line of sight to the characters. This implies the sense of a third-person spectator, or cinematic voyeurism, where we are watching from a distance.

While I noted the extreme lurking of the camera, I wondered if it is indicative of WKW making a movie around a culture in which he is a foreigner. Much like Law's character Jeremey, who is a foreigner compelled to try and track down Jonses's Elizabeth, WKW is trying to grasp and/or articulate something about American culture. (Though as many have pointed out, many of his themes seem to be universal, not culture specific, as they are dealt with similarly in his other films.)

Regardless of the story's complexity, which I think was more than sufficient to carry the film, the visuals were gorgeous. I don't even like blueberries all that well, but seeing the extreme close-up of ice cream melting on blueberry pie gave me some cravings!

While My Blueberry Nights might not be doing too much new for WKW, maybe it'll reach a new audience for him?

[Izzy Black]

While I noted the extreme lurking of the camera, I wondered if it is indicative of WKW making a movie around a culture in which he is a foreigner. Much like Law's character Jeremey, who is a foreigner compelled to try and track down Jonses's Elizabeth, WKW is trying to grasp and/or articulate something about American culture. (Though as many have pointed out, many of his themes seem to be universal, not culture specific, as they are dealt with similarly in his other films.)

Interesting! Yes, that is a point to consider. It is true his camera is as such in all of his films, however. But, I would argue with the switch to the telephoto lens, and the more object-blocking in this film than in his others, we might give credence to the interpretation that he is trying to communicate something more with respect to the new region he is filming in.


Regardless of the story's complexity, which I think was more than sufficient to carry the film, the visuals were gorgeous. I don't even like blueberries all that well, but seeing the extreme close-up of ice cream melting on blueberry pie gave me some cravings!

Indeed.


While My Blueberry Nights might not be doing too much new for WKW, maybe it'll reach a new audience for him?

Possibly. It might help to go in with no prior experience with his films, but then again, it might also help to have prior experience with this films. It is tough to say. I sure hope he picks up some new fans though.

[ledfloyd]

i watched this tonight. i don't think i liked it. there were shots that would look beautiful as screencaps, but i didn't think it was up to his usual standards. the editing was especially awful. and it seems even the people that liked it in this thread are willing to admit the story was thin. i did, however, like the stuff with portman and straithairn. i liked jude law too. in fact i liked most of the acting, aside from rachel weisz, her scenes after the accident were painful to watch. not in the way they should have been, but because they were poorly acted.

i dunno, this just didn't feel right to me. the editing was off, and the story wasn't as open ended as his stuff usually is, so it didn't leave me thinking about it afterwards much at all.

[Grouchy]

in fact i liked most of the acting, aside from rachel weisz, her scenes after the accident were painful to watch. not in the way they should have been, but because they were poorly acted.
Wow, I disagree completely. Actually, the movie made me realize that Rachel Weisz is a really solid and versatile actress.

Natalie Portman is a bad actress, but she was good here, maybe because the character was written right up her alley.

[Izzy Black]

How was Portman in Closer Grouchy?

[Grouchy]

How was Portman in Closer Grouchy?
Well... I guess she was good there too. Overacted, but so was everyone on that one. She's pretty darn bad in Heat and Cold Mountain - her screentime in those movies irks me shitless.

[Izzy Black]

Well... I guess she was good there too. Overacted, but so was everyone on that one. She's pretty darn bad in Heat and Cold Mountain - her screentime in those movies irks me shitless.

I agree she is not always on point, but I am not sure I could so easily call her an outright terrible actress. Sophie Marceau has starred in some awful, awful films, but she is also quite capable, more than capable, even. I think her role selection is sometimes off, and also, we have to consider the opportunities for women parts in films, what roles are generally offered to them, and under what conditions. I think the first 5 minutes of Free Zone - the long take with her crying - is particularly fine, as is the rest of her performance, although the film is not particularly good. She is near brilliant, I think, in Léon, Closer, and Beautiful Girls - enough so to qualify her as a good actresses with occasional missteps.

[Grouchy]

I agree she is not always on point, but I am not sure I could so easily call her an outright terrible actress. Sophie Marceau has starred in some awful, awful films, but she is also quite capable, more than capable, even. I think her role selection is sometimes off, and also, we have to consider the opportunities for women parts in films, what roles are generally offered to them, and under what conditions. I think the first 5 minutes of Free Zone - the long take with her crying - is particularly fine, as is the rest of her performance, although the film is not particularly good. She is near brilliant, I think, in Léon, Closer, and Beautiful Girls - enough so to qualify her as a good actresses with occasional missteps.
But Heat and Cold Mountain are good movies and good roles... well, at least according to me they are.

[Izzy Black]

But Heat and Cold Mountain are good movies and good roles... well, at least according to me they are.

I consider Cold Mountain bad, and I did not mind her in Heat. Yet, still, I am not sure a bad performance qualifies her as a terrible actress. At least, not in my book.

[Izzy Black]

Did you see Wall-E yet Israfel? You might actually like it (but who knows with you?) Believe it or not, it has many of the same themes as WKW or even Antonioni in so far as technology and the basic tenents of the modern world (larger buildings, faster travel, etc.) march forward with time, basic human (or robots subbing for humans in this case) connection is lost and there often remains an unfulfilled longing among humanity to really feel something.

Just following up on this.

I did finally see the film Wall-E. The first half of the film is exquisite. The visual photography here with the photorealism of the environs, zoom lens replication, horizontal pans, imaginative lighting and capacious framing gives rise to a visual aesthetic quite unlike any other Pixar or animated film of this caliber. The advantage was of course bringing on board the visionary Roger Deakins to consult as the principle D.P. in capturing the cinematic look of the film. (To which I believe his contribution is uncredited.) It all complements the film's themes of urban loneliness, the socialization of memories, the critique of consumerism, and the aestheticization of human ingenuity. Unfortunately, the film loses its steam in the second half once we get to Axiom. Where the film was brilliant before in balancing art and entertainment, it is clumsy here in its overt caricaturing of human gluttony and complacency. The remarkable visual technique of the first half of the film is gone, and Wall-E is nearly lost in all the plotting. The film is admirable in its attempt to hit something meaningful home to the children amidst all the subtlety and nuance prior, but it loses the meticulous steady balance of keeping both children and adults successfully rewarded as done in the first half.