Hero
I love heroes. A film with a good hero in it will always please me. And there are some good ones out there. Westley. Indiana Jones. Li Mu Bai. Luke Skywalker. Angel. The Doctor. These are the people that give the word ‘hero’ a good name. But there’s always folks out there ready to ruin it for the rest of them. I won’t bother listing these people, although generic hollywood action blockbusters are chock-full of them. Because of these sub-par heroes, the word has gained a corny, useless feel. Calling a movie Hero is therefore a bit dangerous. Right off the bat, the audience expects you to be rather cheesy. If you’re going to call a movie Hero, you’d better have a solid hero up your sleeve. Someone who’ll face adversity, who’ll make difficult decisions.
No. That’s not how it was. Well, it is a bit but it’s only part of the story. Here’s how it really happened.
I still remember seeing Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for the first time. It started off slowly, yet delicately. The characters were beautifully written and acted. Their sadness and longing had well and truly hooked you from the start. And then they started flying about and having awesome swordfights. I can hardly imagine a more perfect film. Having seen few Chinese films[ftn] before, I began to think — there’s a whole country of awesome films out there, waiting for me. And then I read about Hero in a design magazine. And a few months later, it turns up in cinemas. And all the time, people are mentioning Crouching Tiger. Some are even saying Hero is better.
No, no, I’ve forgotten something. The story actually goes like this. Forget those last two bits. Here’s the truth.
In The Age, Jim Schembri gave Hero a poor review. He complained about the boring Chinese history bits, and some other things.[ftn] “You’re an idiot, Jim,” I ranted. “You’re useless and irritating. How can Chinese history be boring? History is always fascinating! You didn’t like X2! You’re a fool!” Jim said nothing, largely because he wasn’t there. I never agree with Jim. He’s the most reliable reviewer I know of, after a fashion.
Yes, I think that is how it happened. We may now continue.
The hero in Hero (a.k.a. Ying Xiong) does one or two vaguely heroic things, but in such a painfully constructed situation that you won’t care.
This film isn’t a quarter of the film Crouching Tiger was. It’s not an eighth. It’s not a sixteenth. To rival it, well, it would need characters and a compelling story.
I agree with Jim Schembri for the first time since the dawn of humanity, and it sickens me.
It’s hard to pick exactly what the worst thing about Hero is, so let me pick the best thing. This film is gorgeous to watch. Really, very pretty. The use of colours, while not particularly subtle, looked really cool. I presume we have digital grading[ftn] to thank for this, and yet again I am thankful for it. Unfortunately, prettiness without substance can get a bit boring. And this movie does end up like the film equivalent of Enya. If I’d been able to do something else while I watched it would have been alright. But this movie doesn’t command the attention.
Jet Li plays Nameless, the eponymous ‘hero’, quite straight. I can’t fault him — it’s clearly how the part was written. Nameless is a dedicated, disciplined warrior. Or, really boring, depending on how you like to phrase things. The supporting cast aren’t much better — and due to an unfortunate narrative decision for the movie, you’re guaranteed to be absolutely sick of them before any interesting character traits are revealed. I’m against detailing the plot in a film review, but let me just say that if you see someone do the same marginally interesting thing three times running, you might get a little sick of it. Maggie Cheung and Tony Leung Chiu Wai are clearly good actors, but their roles are so melodramatic that I was sick of them by the end. In a terrible tragedy, we see more of Jet Li’s naked body than we do Zhang Ziyi’s, though she’s still cute as ever, and one of the more interesting people in the film. Sometimes.[ftn]
This film has gotten a bit of hype for its philosophy. There’s a bit of a “killing is bad” motto in there, you see. It hardly warrants a paragraph, but I thought I’d better put one in. I didn’t miss it, folks. But I’ve seen a lot of films with that moral. I’m not saying the film is stupid, but it’s not exactly brimming with thought and insight either.
There’s a lot of the ol’ Chinese action in this film too. Those who didn’t get acclimatised to all the floating in Crouching Tiger might have a hard time adjusting. In Ang Lee’s film, the economy and frequency of the fights were nicely managed. When a fight started, you were really hanging out for it — and they were so clever and complex that you were sated afterwards, and willing to wait a while for the next one. In Hero, all the fights are much the same, with a bit of flying, and beautiful backgrounds, but not much actual interaction with the scenery. Amusingly — or depressingly — the already repetitive fight scenes are on occasion actually repeated. It’s enough to make one reach for one’s own sword.
The film has a bit to say about Chinese history. I said earlier that history was always fascinating. I stand by this. Hero presents us with kindergarten-level history. Once upon a time there was one Emperor-King-guy who wanted all of China — which wasn’t called China back then, you know — to be united, and he did this by an awful lot of conquering. In this case, children, the ends justified the means. That sometimes happens. Watch out for it. Give me strength. Having one historical figure, a ‘hero’, three assassins and a cartoonish army as the only characters really doesn’t help add the necessary verismilitude to the story, anyhow.
Let me finally talk about the narrative. People have compared the story to Rashomon. That’s an interesting comparison. I won’t harp on, but let me just say that the reason Rashomon and similar stories work so well is because the characters believe that what they’re saying is true. Then you learn things about the characters, and everything you see seems relevant. If people are just lying, or guessing, then — well, it’s not quite as interesting, sorry. Especially if all the stories are really similar. I’m not saying it couldn’t work, I’m just saying, you’d need something else.
Hero only has pretty colours to fall back on. If you enjoy colours, and felt ripped off by the Three Colours Trilogy because they turned out to be about France, then this is your film.
Footnotes
- Well, two now.
- Let no one say Grapefruit articles aren’t well researched. Look, I couldn’t find the paper, alright? I think Mum threw it out.
- Ew! Sorry about that. Try this link instead.
- Having taken the piss out of silly names like Iron Arm and Big Wang in Crouching Tiger, Zhang now recants, and gets to be called ‘Moon’. Jet Li cleverly dodges the whole business.
Andy
November 12th, 2004 at 2:38 am
I don’t think anyone in Crouching Tiger was called Big Wang.
Tom
November 12th, 2004 at 4:07 am
Allow me a little embellishment.
Shannon
November 12th, 2004 at 7:11 am
For a second there I though you were referencing both Wesley AND Angel as your heroes. But then I saw the ‘t’. Can I presume you have marvelous taste are are referring to Buttercup’s Westley? Mmm.. aaaasss yoooouu wiiiissshhh…
Sleepy lots, got none. Comments tonight make sense much. Umph.
Tom
November 12th, 2004 at 7:23 am
Yes, Westley from The Princess Bride. People of discerning taste such as ourselves will spot the ‘t’.
Jack
November 12th, 2004 at 2:25 pm
People with eyes will also spot it. Which is everyone. Of course, I guess blind people still have eyes, and they can’t see. Which I give you is probably the point of being blind. I’ve never thought about it before. But why would they wear those glasses then?
Look! See? I can be FUNNY! I bet I could write funny reviews too. Much funnier than stinky stinky Andy. Except I’m lazy. No that’s not it. I feel intimidated by all you funny people. I hope you all buy that.
Or I could write really good ones. Awesome review Tom. Anyway movie spoiler’s ahead. So stop reading.
SPOILERS**As if anyone would care about spoiler’s anyway. Anyway I just love how they removed all the moral amibiguity from his plan by making so that he could stab people without killing them. It might have been interesting if they WERE in fact prepared to give their lives, but it turns out Jet Li’s character was just a goodie goodie beyond reproach. Lame. I actually have some points about this film I’d like to make but I’m going to miss my train. Later.
James
December 12th, 2004 at 8:01 pm
I liked the film alot so i guess i dont agree with you on alot of the points. I last saw this about a year ago so hopefully my memory serves me well.
You should not walk into Hero expecting Crouching Tiger. Firstly, Ang Lee the director of CT is americanised, all his films in the last 10 years have been american. Therefore you can probably relate to him better. The script writer of CT is also american. Zhang Yimou is a chinese director, very different. If you were to watch a bollywood movie it would probably be very different too.
The title Hero actually refers to all the characters as Heroes. The film defines a hero as someone who fights for what they believe in. You can clearly see this spelled out in the calligraphy school scene where the Qin army attacks them with bow and arrow.
While some of the fights are nothing special (maggie cheung and jet li is one) the memorable ones stay in your mind. (donnie yen and jet li and another is jet li and maggie cheung on top of the school batting away at the arrows.)
The colours are beautiful yet they are there to further flesh out the story. The reds at the start of the movie enforce that there is lying and deceit. The blue means sadness, the green means conclusion, i dont know about the rest.
I watched the movie before i read any reviews so i did not know it was told from different perspectives. I think that might have changed your opinion of the movie. As Richard Hatch would say “i was bamboozled!.
James
December 12th, 2004 at 8:02 pm
By the way nice review. nice and long – gives me something to read at lunch.
Tom
December 13th, 2004 at 3:40 am
Thanks for the kind words, James! Writing such a negative review of Hero made me expect some retorts — I’m glad they finally came. I suppose I’ll respond to your points in order… There’s a spoiler for The Usual Suspects below, too.
Walking in expecting something in the vein of Crouching Tiger was a mistake, but hard to avoid when everything I’d read about it mentioned that film, and the posters hyped the (Producer) connection as well. I think. It’s quite possible I suppose that more Chinese films are harder for me to ‘get’. Still, I’d be surprised if it’s a cultural trend to favour cardboard, cartoonish characters and spend more time crying and emoting than even Return of the King managed! But yes, probably some cultural separation is likely.
That’s a reasonable definition of hero. I suppose that’s much closer to my definition of ‘warrior’. I feel my personal definition of ‘hero’ is somewhat more special than just fighting for what you believe in. It involves effects on others, and sacrifice, and being better than the people you fight against, to think of a few. So I was underwhelmed by labelling the assassins in Hero as such. The most heroic to my mind was perhaps … I forget his name, Tony Leung’s character.
None of the fights have stayed in my mind much. The most memorable for me were the ones with the swirling leaves and the ones with the water. But the fact that I remember them more for the scenery and filming style than the characters involved reflects poorly on them, I feel. Style over substance again.
I take your point about the colours relating to the story. I just… don’t find that as clever as some people do, it seems. The idea of a film acting as a mood ring doesn’t thrill me.
Part of it — as is almost always the case with disappointment with a film — was about incorrect expectations. But even if I didn’t know Nameless was lying at the start, it’s clear when it comes to the King’s version of events that he’s guessing. If The Usual Suspects had continued after the end, with the detective guessing with no evidence as to what really occurred, I don’t think I’d have liked that film either. And I’d certainly be alienated once it came time to actually tell the truth.
Ultimately, if you reveal the first half of a film is a lie, then surely the audience will then think — “So, I don’t actually know any characters yet. For all I know, that Zhang Ziyi girl didn’t even exist.” And yet after sitting through a lie from someone who did know them, and a guess from someone who knew one of them (a bit), I was expected to care for the characters.
I say I was expected to care, because I had to sit through Maggie and Tony stabbing each other and crying for ages, while I sat there not giving a damn.
Jeez, this is almost as long as my review. Ah well! I’m glad you, Quentin, and most of the rest of the world enjoyed it though! I think it hits a few of my pet hates in storytelling style.
James
December 14th, 2004 at 6:35 am
i would really like to here your thoughts on zhang yimou’s next movie House of Flying Daggers which will be released in the new year.
Of course i have it on DVD already :) (i can lend it to you when i next see you). As you were so disappointed with Hero, you could actually end up liking HOFD…. having said that if you put your reviewer’s hat on you will hate it just as much. (btw, do you always have your reviewer’s hat on?)
My consensus is that it is not a bad film, but has a few problems. The movie feels like Hero all over, but the characters are very different to Hero and clash with the tone of the film. Anyways still a thumbs up.
Tom
December 14th, 2004 at 9:46 am
I have no reviewer’s hat — I try to just write what I feel after the movie, with some reflection. And I came out of Hero very, very bored. Very much like I’d wasted 2 hours of my life. This review was… restrained compared to how I felt then! I didn’t hate Hero in the end, I just… thought it was really dull. It reminded me a bit of certain parts of The Return of the King.
I do fully intend to see House of Flying Daggers. The trailer looked excellent and the review I read of it suggested the characters were a shade better than those in Hero (not that the reviewer didn’t like Hero, but he had similar reservations to me). But we’ll see. The dancing and hitting drums looked better than most of the set pieces in Hero, to me.
andy
January 3rd, 2007 at 8:13 pm
I like the new history. It makes a lot more sense. The premise of the series put me off watching the first season initially.
I liked this episode and Tigh, except for the explanation given at the ending. I know the Cylons like plans and aren’t too bright but releasing a prisoner on the basis that when he gets back he’ll murder Adama is far-fetched.
Tom
January 3rd, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Is it possible that the Cylons conditioned Bulldog a bit psychologically to encourage him to kill Adama? It was one of their more convoluted plans.
The idea that both sides in a war had respected a treaty arrangement was enough to put you off watching a series? Where’s your optimism?
Jack
January 4th, 2007 at 12:24 am
Surely merely unleashing him would cause instability amongst the humans, and perhaps undermine Adama as a hero figure. I figured that was the plan, whatever Tigh was speculating.