Platform ("Stage" might be a better translation)shows us the lives of a troupe of actors as China went from Maoism to markets, from 1980 to the 1990s. The treatment is sardonic and distant; we rarely see anyone in a closeup, and the point of view is as critical of liberalization (embodied in bad rock and go-go dancing) as it is of the cult of Mao (performed in the hilarious socialist-patriotic opera at the beginning of the movie). As Fassbinder said of the movies of Douglas Sirk, material objects--a brick wall, a pile of boards, a marketful of cheap clothing, bowls of noodles, embroidered slipcovers, copies of bellbottom pants, a truck, etc.--are at the center of the mise en scene, appropriately so, since the story is indeed about material changes. In fact the movie bears a lot of resemblance to Fassbinder's Marriage of Maria Braun, as both trace growing prosperity, consumerism, and personal alienation through a sequence of rooms, houses, relationships, and home furnishings. Provincial China moves from dirt, scarcity, and collectivism to a modest supply of consumer goods and more individual freedom/insecurity. This historical movement is intertwined with the characters' aging from their teens to middle age. There is no appreciable increase in human joy and happiness, nor a marked decrease either. This cold, distant treatment will not please some viewers.
Add a Review
-
zetes4 September 2005I definitely liked this film much better than Jia's Unknown Pleasures, his follow-up, but I still wouldn't call it great. Platform is a very amorphous film. Perhaps it has more meaning to those who might know the referents better than I, the various places in China which are visited. But the fact remains that the loose, repetitive, episodic structure mixed with the total lack of character development hinder much of the possible enjoyment or involvement. I know it's not cool for a certain sector of Chinese art films to allow the audience to give a crap what's going on. But, surprisingly, I did enjoy it to a fair extent. You kind of feel like you're part of the performance troupe in the film, that you're being carted between these sections of nowhere around the vast country. There are many beautiful scenes. It's worthwhile. I suggest, given its 2.5 hour running length, to watch it in bits and pieces. It won't feel quite as repetitive.
-
Positives: A detailed look at what much of small town life in China looked and sounded like in the 1980's: government speakers constantly bombarding the citizens with announcements, party propaganda and tinny music, buildings made of grey mud-like brick--miles and miles of them, old bridges, and because of the season, few trees. It's grim, and so are the lives of the young people who want to do something with their lives other than wait for something to happen.
Negatives: Shots of landscapes and a few people who barely communicate go on for what seem like forever, and to someone used to the MTV school of constant image manipulation, these often gloomy meditations may make you wish to run screaming from the room; character relationships are poorly delineated (and that may be the filmmaker's point--in that atmosphere, they can't be!), and for my taste, there are not enough close-ups to bring the story home.
Platform is an honest, personal film about a time and place in China, and for many folks, that will make it worth watching. It would be a fascinating project if other talented film makers all over the world could spend some time in their own little favorite towns and come up with similar documents: Moabi, Gabon, for instance, or Amarante, Portugal, or La Mesa, California. -
jandesimpson19 July 2003"Zhantai" has so many of the features I have admired from recent Oriental masterworks such as " A Brighter Summer Day", "Eureka" and "City of Sadness" that I will have to find some justification for considering it ultimately so much less satisfying. Like these others it succeeds in creating a complete world of its own that, because it is so remote from Western experience, exerts a fascination that is hard to forget. We are in Fenyang a small town somewhere West of Beijing, where flat plains give way to craggy, uninviting mountains. The time is the early 1980s when strict Maoist ideology was about to give way to a period of consumer liberalisation. A group of young actor-singer- dancers employed by the state to remind provincial audiences of the principles of Mao through the medium of stage entertainment are about to see their world fall victim to the progress of private enterprise, when no longer needed for government propaganda. What was once a captive audience turns fickle, often rejecting outright the new form of pop culture they are offered. The irony is that progress in this context brings disillusionment resulting in a group of friends drifting away from their close initial camaraderie. By the time the film ends their future looks far from confident. Both thematically and atmospherically "Zhantai" has the potential for great cinema. Why then after two viewings in quick succession do I find its sense of communication so elusive and uninvolving? The answer must lie in the way the director seems to distant his characters from their audience. We never get closer to them than a middle shot. In a film where the close-up is as rigorously excluded from cinematic grammar as camera movement from the later work of Ozu, the characters' everyday lives seem to be presentad as an extension of their existance on stage to the extent that we are often left to guess at their feelings and emotions. I have written before of how fascinated I am to respond to the demands of directors such as Edward Yang and Hou Xiaoxian to connect with characters and situations when given the barest information. Director Jia Zhangke is obviously aiming at their oblique narrative style but somehow gives so little that by the end I felt I knew much more about the topography of Fenyang than of the characters that live there. For a film about the effect of historical change on individuals to be completely successful it needs to be the other way round.
-
arcnile5 February 2007This is Jia's best film ever. I watched it twice. I was deeply touched twice by its poignant delineation of a bleak and still town in the 80's in Shanxi province, China. It seems nothing is changing in that nearly forgotten town. But with the collapse of Maoism and the influence of reforming in the country, the people there, especially those youngsters, are changing. They were like struggling in a very slow-moving turmoil, desires so much to change their lives but yet so helpless and knowing nothing about how to do it. They drifted away from there initial purposes, their friendship, and their love.
The cello appears 3 times during the whole film, which is almost heartbreaking. They were running towards the train, but the train just ran away. And gradually, you forgot what you've been chasing when you were young, you don't care about those inspiring songs like 'In the field of hopes' which is a symbol of those old days. Life always keeps moving on, like the brick of those ancient walls of Fenyang ever exists.
There are so many retrospective 'cultural reminders' in this film, e.g. those old songs, costumes, literal expressions, furniture and behaviors that bring you back to that time. I would say, if a western audience appreciate this film, he will appreciate double if he were Chinese, and even more.
Bravo, Jia Zhangke. The Chinese cinema is now filled with Hollywood-style huge investment martial art shitt and he is among the rare ones who are decent filmmakers. -
anonyimdb110 April 2007The essence of the story is simple, though with multi-layered implications.
For the essence, the dialogue says it all : "Where is outer-Mongolia (the name used by the Chinese for Mongolia)?" "North of inner-Mongolia (a province of China)." "Which country lies north to the outer-Mongolia?" "Russia." "Still north?" "The ocean." "What is beyond that?" "Fenyang, your home town." . The essence is "nowhereness".
The members of the state-owned vaudeville group were supposed to be the cultural elites of the town, with most of the peasants illiterate, intellectually bleak, and with no appreciation for art. They could perform ballet, opera, various instruments, and flamenco. But they were tied to the peasants, for they were the tools for the government to please and entertain the grassroots of its support. They had all the longing for a brave new life that would suit their values, ideologies, and aesthetics, but they did not know how to act. Though they were given the eye for a better life, they were deprived of the chance to live it. They still lived as the peasants, eking out a meager living. Both the inaction on their behalf and the innate determinant posed by the social reality for their inaction constitutes the "nowhereness" for the semi-intellectuals.
All they ever had was a moment of pleasure and inspiration by art and an everlasting bitterness and backbreaking excruciation imposed by the actual living that goes nowhere and has no end.
The life of the masses is another layer of the "nowhereness". It is no doubt that the change in China during the '80s were profound. The Big Brother abandoned the central planning economy along with the ideology that acted as the appurtenance. A new kind of exploitation took the place of the old one, and the peasants (the masses) were still nowhere to be the beneficiaries. The illusory glory of contributing to the nation in the totalitarian state made way for the cheap and coarse consumer products in the national capitalism. The difference between the masses and the elite is that the masses never knows and never has the urge to know the truth. They were already consumed and wasted by the effort to sustain their mere existence. Leisure and education are never on their side. In the new world, they gained the return of a minute scrap from the spoils of the exploitation of their own sweat and blood, and lost the meaning of life with the peace of mind. They no longer has a direction or a cause. It is an every-man-for-himself scenario let loose in a country with 1.3 billion people. "Nowhereness" seems to be a result very much acceptable.
The last layer of the "nowhereness" is the nowhereness of the nation as a whole. The story of the Fenyang Town goes the same for the Chinese nation. The Jeffersonian-like ideal of the ancient empire was but yesterday's dream. The current China, dated back to mid-19th century, through its search for power, independence, and its own identity, has got used to the nation-wide mobilization, and consequently, with a constant change of plan, accidentally and successfully obliterated its own culture and identity. What is left is but the dregs of old memory and folklore. The nation's elite today could only satiate their quest for meaning with the ideas of the Western world that their forefathers labelled as barbarism one century and a half ago. As a culture entity, China is already lost.
A nation has thus lost itself. -
dla_one16 September 2023I watched this because of its status as one of the most critically acclaimed works of the 21st century. I can now see that it's one of these situations where the criticism has taken on a life of its own or is for reasons quite divorced from the film itself. It's naturalistic in style, showing this generation in China that came of age right as they started loosening market controls and the changes that took place as a result. It's so naturalistic it can barely even be called a narrative feature film. If you have no knowledge, context, or interest in the subject you will probably have no idea what the point of the movie is. Some have interpreted it as showing some kind of suffering or desperation but there's absolutely nothing to suggest that. It's just some people living their lives. They have very limited opportunities but they live in a rural small town in China. Even in the US your opportunities would be extremely limited in a small town like this (look at Louis Malle's doc 'God's Country' if you don't believe me).
I wanted to add this review because there doesn't seem to be any on here that aren't one extreme or the other, when really I think it's a pretty middle of the road movie. It's very well made, especially considering the circumstances of its creation but it never really amounts to much more than a very dry observation of people living out their lives. Possibly of interest to fans of arthouse and world cinema, outside of that I would not recommend it and I think it's overrated. It should be about 6.5/10. -
I found this to be an extremely understated film style, so emotionally detached throughout, a very oblique presentation, with little or no narrative, this played like a documentary with very little embellishments.
The film is set in the decade of the 1980's, which opens needing Communist Party approval for all State sponsored art, so kids are seen bored stiff at lifeless cultural performances singing the praises of China only in the most affirmative manner, something akin to pre-school exhibitions here, glorified by an always shining sun and by beautiful bright colors, but in this film, no one is fooled by this. Initial images are shot in near darkness or with the bleakest of light and there's a kind of feint, glowing aura surrounding such diminished light.
Initially there is obviously no heat or electricity in this cold, barren, wintry landscape, so each image features frost on the breath and the cold, desolate interior brick rooms, occasionally, people gather around a stove for warmth, they really don't want to move at all, bricks dominate the exteriors as well, the obvious poverty in the images is similar to many Iranian films, as there is absolutely nothing to grab the interest of the graduating high school class, who have no expectations of a better life, yet they are constantly seen interacting, but largely avoiding one another, smoking, staring off into the barren landscape, saying little or nothing, unbelievably detached from the rest of the world, and each other.
The imagery was quite unique, as this small town is, in fact, a rural Communist collective work farm, complete with required Party meetings where all are asked to voice their opinions or stand up to the critical discussions led by the Communist group leader, again, the decade opens with a criticism of individual dissent, like the wearing of bell-bottom pants, establishing an absolute need for individualism, which drives a whirlwind of changes within the Party, leading to the introduction of electricity to the most outer rural regions, and to concepts like privatization, owning your own farm, and, why not, western style pop music, which gives rise to an opportunity for this little group of would be artists to form a band and hit the road through some of the most desolate and empty terrain on the planet, always they travel on the back of the truck searching for the world outside.
Two of the most powerful images in the film, both very much in the Kiarostami-style end shot, a long, drawn out shot that by itself, reveals the story of the film...
There is a long shot of a group of rolling hills with nothing growing on them, round and bare, and the infamous truck winds it's way along a wind-swept, dirt road around a myriad of curves until it is finally close to the camera, but then the truck mysteriously stops, and turns around in the most deliberate and laborious manner before heading back into those rolling hills, while this is seen, the audience hears the sound of the truck radio providing a weather report, powerful, changing winds are heading their way...
There is a long, distant shot of this same, infamous truck and it appears to be stuck in the middle of nowhere, far off, in the distance, the sound of the engine gunning is all that's heard, but no wheels are turning, they ar e going nowhere, so there is a cut to the blue door of the truck, one of the artists climbs into the front seat and turns on the radio which plays the title song, "Platform," "We are waiting, our whole hearts are waiting, waiting forever..." In this unique moment, the first time rock music is heard in the film, the audience is made aware that from this barren desolation there are now "possibilities."
However, as the decade comes to a close, this image is contrasted against a later scene where the actual band plays this song, "Platform," and one can only describe it as laughable, the audience is throwing things at them, the lead singer attempts to go out into the crowd and touch hands but he is nearly beaten up until he retreats to the safety of the stage, yet still under the barrage of the audience, certainly this reflects the end of possibilities...
Yet another scene must be mentioned, one of their former girl friends who chose not to go on the road, but to stay at home, is seen alone in a bureaucratic office, again, dimly lit, she waters her plants in the corner, shuffles some papers around, but the music heard on the radio causes her to stir, she stops her routine, makes the briefest of moves as if she wants to dance, but stops herself, until this slowly evolves into one of the most beautiful traditional Chinese dances, alone, in the dark, dancing.
True to the peculiarity of this film, one character appears with the band, he has long black hair, and he's dressed all in black, the band manager tells him to get his lazy ass back to the group, as he's outside smoking a cigarette, one of the most prevalent images throughout the film is the constant smoking of cigarettes, but this guy never says a word to anybody, nor is he ever seen performing with the band, he just exists totally outside the universe of any known reality, later on, he is seen cutting his hair, this character is not seen in the entire film interacting with anyone, yet he is seen on the fringes definitely a unique character, but totally alone.
In many ways this is largely a wordless film, as the words are so meaningless, instead, eyes drift off into the distant landscape, and the sound of the film is filled with the noises of humans, street sounds, traffic, trucks, tractors, distant shouts or street chatter, radios, the noises of humans, this is really the theme of the film, the individuals are incidental, they come, they go, but the constant is the noise. -
berlinberlin200425 February 2007It is kind of sad to read these sad comments about being "bored" with this wonderful film, or "not understanding the characters".
This film is so full of atmosphere, and yes, emotion... but it is not shoved down your throat with typical Hollywood dramatic tricks... it is something you have to have the time and will to discover. That makes is so much closer and valuable.
Film IS about seeing, and the fact that there are hardly any close-ups in this film gives our eyes the freedom to discover things in the frame. It is also, I believe a much more respectful way to film actors generally.
This is a great film, I hope we see many more from this young director! -
janeblevins20 November 2011When I started watching this movie, my first thought was, "oh, documentary film maker moving into feature film and being kind of artsy and pretentious"...because the film is very gritty and realistic and you almost feel uncomfortably present in the intimate lives of people you don't know. That in itself shows how good the acting is in this film because you really, really think these people are locals and that is really and truly what they do, they are amateur theater performers. it's hard to see at the beginning just how you're going to spend 2 plus hours with folks who seem so opaque and indifferent to the spectator.
But then almost imperceptibly, the movie starts to draw you in. Each frame of the movie, each scene is a clue, a thread that connects to other scenes or begins its own story and you realize this guy is a master of movie narrative. He gets it.
And then it really takes off. This is one of the best movies I think I've ever seen, one I could probably watch several times because there's a lot going on in every single scene but none of it is overstated. And if you're not watching closely, some tragic moments go by and you miss them.
Hats off to the director and actors on this... -
apinag12 August 2002The excruciatingly slow pace of this film was probably the director's express intention, in order to convey what life was like growing up as a village teen in China. However, I found the combination of the glacially slow 'plot' and the general filming style so impersonal as to be totally alienating, particularly to a western audience. At times I actually had trouble telling some characters apart, as they were filmed from such a distance. Two hours in and I was totally past caring. As someone who is not only interested in music but is also very into the history and culture of China (and is by the way no stranger to Chinese cinema), I couldn't engage with a single character and found nothing to get my teeth into. It begs the question: If I disliked it, who on earth would like it? Give me Zhang Yimou, give me Chen Kaige. Give me the work of just about any other Chinese director I've ever seen. This sorry effort just doesn't measure up at all. I'd be sorry to see Chinese cinema judged against this benchmark.
-
It's an epical, relaxed, meandering, beautiful, rich, etc. laconic time portrayal of China's cultural history in the 80s, based on the fate of a theatre company. The protagonists are mostly "twen slackers" who wait for the artistic breakthrough, and director Jia follows their lives in mostly aloof, breathing tableaux. What in today's cinema Hou Hsiao-hsien achieves for space and Béla Tarr for time, is combined in here, without directly referring to both of them. Here, horrible tragedies (a divorce lacking any emotions) take place as well as not less horrible comedies (the mine workers contract: "Death and accident are acts of destiny. The firm will not take any responsibility."), but everything seems to be straightly taken from real life. The title 'Platform' alone already indicates the oddly depressing tone of the film. The desperate waiting, eternally postponed by short changes of perspective as a fundamental experience of a whole era. "We're standing on the platform and we're still waiting, waiting." Although, the film is set in the 80s, 'Platform' also brilliantly and perfectly captures the mood at the end of the 20th century: a rampant epos of never realised chances and daily travail. The film of the new millennium.
-
kmethi7 October 2013This is one of my all-time favorite films for all the reasons identified by other reviewers. Until recently, I had only seen the 154 minute version, which was released in theaters and on DVD. I just saw the original, uncut version, which is 193 minutes long, and it is markedly superior. Not only does it fill in many of the gaps that make the shorter version seem somewhat disjointed, it has several brilliant scenes that had me shaking my head wondering why they were cut from the theatrical/DVD release. I understand that Jia Zhangke is working on a director's cut of the film, which will hopefully do some necessary trimming, but also restore these scenes.
-
umang99m11 April 2021Platform by Jia Zhangke is a movie set in the 1980s which follows a group of performers who grew up in a period of cultural, social and economic changes in a small town China. Though it follows a loose plot, it contains a lot of episodes which portray the changes that took place during the time. These changes were not specific to performers, but the general public as well.
I found the movie really instrumental in gaining more insight into the lives of Chinese people during the period. The changes in clothing, hairstyles, music, and pop culture can clearly be seen in the movie. In fact, there are a lot of scenes which felt were explicitly added to focus on these things. A few examples include the scene where a man scolds Mingliang for wearing Bellbottoms, and one where Mingliang's friend who left the town comes back with a radio, introducing the people to the new pop music.
The change hugely affected the performers, who went from performing Maoist drama to "The All-Stars Rock 'n' Breakdance band". The film reveals the inhuman contract that the workers had to sign to get work, which disregarded the value of human life. The film also showed how seriously the people took the One Child Policy.
The style of the film is a mix of soothing in some parts and a little gloomy in others. The film is contemplative in nature, and I found it a little slow and less engaging in some parts, like spanning the camera across the city, and showing a man smoking a cigarette for about 20 seconds before cutting the scene. However, most of the other long shots actually gave the brain just enough time to think more about the preceding scene without losing attention, which includes most of the points I am writing. A few prolonged shots, especially ones with music, worked as a pleasant stimulus for the viewers emotional connect with the film, like one where Chang Jung does contemporary dance while a song plays on the radio. This style has the ability to invoke nostalgia in the audience, which is what makes it powerful.
A lot of economic changes in the lives of the people reminded me of stories I've heard from my parents. The arrival of electricity and later television, people going out more to restaurants, and increasing construction work. These changes were common to India as well. In fact, a crowd gathering in a room to watch TV reminds me of stories my mother tells me of her family owning the only TV in her village.
I believe that the film can serve as a nice time capsule for the period it is based on. Zhangke has given the audience an excellent piece of history to preserve. -
seamouse28 December 200180's is a unforgotten age of chinese,compare with "xiao wu"(director's last movie),i prefer Zhantai.It is all about 80's,its music,its live,and of courses,the people who live in that age.those 10 years,is a period of great change happened in China.With reform&open,many things changed,the life changed eventually,and something we lost also.Being a chinese,i am lucky for living through that decent.and had seen the great improvement in China,but at the same time,we lost sth.that worth to miss. And i doubt why it is a french movie,though i know it is the fund from france.but it is totally chinese,totally made by chinese,and all about our history and our individual in the age. All above,it is excellent.
-
It is hard to express in words the sheer joy i take whenever i view this Contemporary masterpiece!! Truly a pleasure to behold and the most special cinematic journey I've had in years!!
-
gavin-williamson215 December 2006I have seen many, many films from China - and Hong Kong. This is the worst. No, the worst one was 'Unknown Pleasures'. I watched 'Platform' yesterday evening and thought that Jia Zhang Ke's other two films must be better. This evening I was disappointed again. I will not be watching 'Xiao Wu' tomorrow evening because I have just placed all three films in the bin! Whoever gave this film, 'Platform' ten out of ten, needs to watch more cinema! The photography was very poor: it was very difficult to differentiate between some of the characters because of the lack of close-up work. The storyline was so disjointed that I fast-forwarded it towards the end out of pure frustration. I would not recommend this film to anyone. Give me Zhang Yimou or Chen Kage any day. These are true masters of Chinese cinema, not pretentious con men!
-
howard.schumann16 December 2002Platform, a film by Jia ZhangKe, is about political, economic, and social change in China during the 1980s and the effect it has on four young performers in a provincial performance troupe. Set in Fenyang, a small town west of Beijing, Platform begins after the Chinese Cultural Revolution has run its course with the dramatization of Maoist orthodoxy by the Peasant Cultural Group. As the 80s progress, Jia shows the changes that led China away from Mao-inspired collectivism to the influence of Western ideas under Deng Xiaoping. Color TVs replace black and white and popular music videos appear on TV.
By the end of the decade, the performance troupe has reconfigured themselves as the All-Stars Rock 'n' Breakdance Electronic Band, offering Western-oriented pop music. They perform in the same towns but now use electric guitars and the girls wear sparkly outfits. The performers -- accordion player Cui Mingliang (Wang Hongwei), his girl friend, singer Yin Ruijuan (Zhao Tao), her best friend, Zhong Ping (Yang Tianyi), and Zhong's boyfriend Zhang Jun (Liang Jingdong) all adopt new fashions. The boys wear bell-bottom trousers, the girls get perms, and the band delivers the latest pop disco music. The boys are sullen, however, and their romances with Zhong and Ruijuan seem lethargic. Zhong Pin becomes pregnant by Jun and has an abortion after Jun is arrested for having sex out of wedlock.
They smoke cigarettes, go to the movies, and become enmeshed in petty squabbles -- all seemingly to no end, as their personal happiness remains elusive. In one scene that underscores their loneliness, the female dancers of the band stand alone looking desolate as they perform on the back of a truck while uninterested motorists drive past without noticing. Their lives that started out so promising seem to deliver very little. Toward the end, the All-Star Band returns to Fenyang, and Cui Mingliang is reunited with Ruijuan, who has become a tax collector.
Platform takes its title from a popular 1980s Chinese pop song that includes the line "We are waiting, our whole hearts are waiting forever". As in the film "Unknown Pleasures" by Jia, the youngsters find themselves doing a lot of waiting. Jia captures this desultory mood but after two and half-hours the grim tone becomes oppressive. Platform is an "important" film and a realistic depiction of a turning point in Chinese history, yet I found the characters to be poorly defined and the film did not come alive as an experience. -
kchen17 January 2007Another master piece of Director Jia Zhang Ke, this movie takes us through the changes that impact everyone who experience the 1980s in China.
If Wang Hong Wei's performance in Xiao Wu is not compelling for some people, his acting in this movie definitely solidify himself as one of the great actors in China.
For many, Jia's directing style is distinctive because he tends to do low-budget movie and uses a lot of amateur actors. To me, what I appreciate most in him is that not likely other famous movie directors in China that focus more on movie's visual effect or box office, Jia's work always depicts life of ordinary Chinese people in a very (almost to the extent of extreme) realistic and candid manner. -
senjingbing15 December 2001This movie is truly boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but simply because the movie is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love movies from Chen Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am disappointed such a poor movie could come out of China. It totally seems to ignore the audience and the director seems to have made the movie for himself. The shots of a person standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The cinematography and video quality are unbelievably bad. I looked this film up on the Net and it seems like people actually like this film. The only explanation i have for this is that some film buffs think that if a film is not in English it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would like this. this is not an art film it's of waste of celluloid.(That's if they actually shot it on film , which they didn't)
-
YNOT_at_the_Movies11 October 2005It took me almost three hours, finally I finished another film by Jia Zhang Ke's called "Platform." Now I have seen all three of his so called "hometown trilogy": "Xiao Wu," "Platform," and "Unknown Pleasures."
"Platform" tells stories of a group of young people in a small town in Shanxi Province in the 80s. China was emerging from the damage due to the 10 years long Cultural Revolution, and these young people rode the waves of the changes in the Chinese society searching for their positions in the new social structure.
Like Jia's other films, this film does a good job on capturing the details of the lives of the ordinary people, especially those on the very bottom of the society. But it's like a broken container trying to hold its ingredient together. You see those cooking materials are scattered around all over the place but they are never put together to make a delicious dish. It doesn't have a focus.
I am not sure if the film maker did it intentionally or because he was using those "non-professional" actors, the camera always stays far away from its object and it almost never gets a close up on these characters. It makes me a bystander to watch what happens to these characters standing in distance. It's very frustrating not to be able to get closer and get connected to those characters.
By the way, I have no idea why the director Jia Zhang Ke is so obsessed with this guy Wang Hong Wei. Wang is the lead actor in every one of Jia's film. I start to think that Wang is the mafia boss and has total control of Jia. Otherwise, how can I explain this phenomenon after I see most of Jia's films? This is an interesting film to check out, especially if you have the patience and time, but not a great film.