The Bridge (2006)
Director: Eric Steel

The Bridge is a controversial documentary about the people committing suicide by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge.

The first thing I notice about the film is that it is so beautiful. Even though Golden Gate Bridge has been photographed countless times, it never appears as attractive as in this film. The architecture, the geometry, the nature environment, the beautiful dance of light and fog. People walking on beaches, surfing, or sightseeing on gorgeously sunny days. It is just perfect. Perhaps just a perfect place to end it all?

The subject of this film is its dark side. People was seen jumping off the bridge in this film. When the friends and families of the victims are interviewed, you realized there was a tormented person behind each incident. Whether it is mental illness, financial or relationship issue or any combination of above, life has became unbearable for them. Yet it was never an end it all action. Their death often leave the friends and families agonizing over the whole matter.

The film is controversial because it has witnessed the entire action on film. It brings us down a slippery slope of voyeurism. I think this can be in part justified by forcing people to come face to face with it. I have lived in San Francisco for 8 years. The Golden Gate Bridge suicides only come across to me as some sort legend. When you visit the bridge, it is so beautiful you never believe someone will actually do it. Maybe we have some incidences in the past but not today? But no, it is real. It happens regularly, in broad daylight in front of many tourists. You will also see there are real people behind who are suffering from it.

This really leads to the perpetual discussion of building taller fences on the bridge as a suicide barrier. I am convinced that it will be effective. And that we have a moral obligation to do so.

2007.09.16 [movie] - comments (0)

Digital media and gadgets has definitely revived my interest in music and movies. I have since dusted off my CD collection and ripped a good portion of them into iTunes. This time round I have joined the DVD rental by mail company GreenCine. I am very excited in its movie treasure trove.

At the peak days around my final years in college, I watch about 60 movies in theatre a year and many more from rental and from TV. Now I go to a cinema perhaps two times a year. There are many reasons for this decline. But enough to say movies has always been a part of my cultural life and I look back fondly to those days. What online rental give me is access to virtually any movies I'm interested, whether they are new releases or years old. I no longer have to wait for the chancy encounter when the programmer decided to put something on a local cinema on a certain day.

How does GreenCine stack against the better known, original DVD by mail company Netflix? I check against their inventory and find little differences. Bear in mind my interest is mostly in artsy, relative little known flicks. If anything is unavailable it is more likely because they are not release in DVD yet (or not released for North America, darn regional code). Perhaps it is best to look at GreenCine's top 250 movies list. Dominated by decades old movies, it is nothing like you average movie rental shop. I received my first DVD about 24 hours after I joined. So you can say I am fairly satisfied. But then I am living in San Francisco, where the company is located.

So bye bye my local rental shop. I still love you, but you don't have what I'm looking for. And I still wish to go to cinema more. The sound of curtain rolling and light projected on screen still mean something to me.

2006.08.08 [movie] - comments (3)

Yesterday I have watched the documentary Guns, Germs and Steel based on Jared Diamond's book of the same name. I have not read the book. But with Jared Diamond being the host himself this should be a good representation of his book.

He started off in Papua New Guinea. Stuck by the islanders' deprivation, he tried to explain why do the West prosper and why do other cultures remain impoverished. His theory is that geography (environment), guns, germs and steel (technology) are the major factors that set them apart. The documentary followed the development of civilization from hunter-gatherers to farmers. It brought us back to the fateful battle between Francisco Pizarro and the Inca Empire. Finally it looked at the challenges in Africa, the land where the human race is believed to be originated from.

His book has won a Pulitzer Prize and his theory is called ground breaking. Flattery comments notwithstanding everything he said has been studied in anthropology. While all of them have some degree of truth, there are many other important factors he simply ignored, like culture, politics, religion and non-military technology. Also his emphasis on the environmental factor just sound too deterministic. Interesting this exact critique has voiced in the documentary.

I find two big faults in his thesis. First he like to insert simple answers for big questions. Why do our civilization developed in such way? Answer: geography, guns, germs and steel. But in fact he has only downplayed many other important factors. On the other hand there are plenty of counter examples for everything he has said. For example, which success factor did Mongolian possess when their conquered much of Europe and Asia? What geography advantages does England has that led them to become a global empire? Why does Arab and Chinese, with civilization in the similar stage with European, did not set off to conquer the world? His answer is really a weak answer at best.

Secondly he has a dichotomy view on cultures as winners and losers. Lots of focus are put on warfare and military technologies (i.e. guns, germs and steel) Other world shaping forces such as trading are entirely ignored. I doubt such winner and loser view can explain the complexity of civilization. For example, throughout its history China repeatedly fell to the nomadic invaders from the North. Jared's theory would have concluded the nomads the winner and possess some advantage over the Chinese loser (though non of his 4 factors can really count here). The interesting thing is over time many invaders adopted chinese culture and assimilated into the host country. Winner and loser cannot really describe what has happened.

Just curious. Jared is certainly not the first anthropologist to pose a big theory. What makes his work so popular?

2006.05.25 [movie] - comments (0)

My favorite actress director Sylvia Chang's new film "20 30 40" is a story about 3 women. Xiao Jie (Angelica Lee) of 20 ran off to Taipei by herself to pursuit her dream career in entertainment. Xiang Xiang (Rene Liu) is an air stewardess having affair with several lovers. Sylvia herself plays the 40 something Lily, who found herself divorced one day but were starting to find a new life. Together they echoed her previous film, the endearing "Tempting Heart", which traversed the life of a woman from teenager to into middle age.

Like "Tempting Heart", the portrait of the youth is the most beautiful and romantic. Xiao Jie came to the big city fresh and innocent. She quickly found a girlfriend who helped her to navigate the new world. The singing career did not go where she wanted. But even when it has came to part, it was no doubt she has lived.

The story of Xiang Xiang was lot less glamourous. Despite dancing around multiple lovers, she life is marked by emptiness. Nice apartment, full wardrobe and all alone. Young no more, she only hope that one day she would find the right one.

Lily's story deliver lots of comic moments. Rather than feeling old and bitter for the divorce, she has gone back to the dating scene and was having much fun. Dancing, drinking, sports, you are just never too old to enjoy life if you stay positive.

There are also some excellent male roles. Anthony Wong plays Shi Ge, a rocker/manager who has tried hard but are mostly a failure. Richie Ren plays tennis coach, whose energy prove to be too much for a middle-aged woman.

In face of life's many unfulfilled longings, the movie has maintained an upbeat attitude.

(Taiwan, 2004)

2004.10.12 [movie] - comments (0)

Got to see two excellent movies in a row this week. I am excited to have written some reviews for Tagegukgi and 20-30-40. The front page is also getting crowded. It is also about time to reorganize it.

2004.10.12 [movie] - comments (0)

The epic war film opened in the happy days in 1950. Jin-tae and Jin-seok were close brothers. Jin-seok was a bright student and the hope of the family. Jin-tae worked hard so that his younger brother could go to school. Life is not easy, but with the family and his fiancee around, they could not be more contented. [more...]

2004.10.09 [movie] - comments (0)

Finally I have come up with my first movie review. I am delighted by Fong Yuk Ping's acclaimed 1983 movie "Ah Ying". I will probably put only good reviews here since good movies motivate me to write.

2003.11.29 [movie] - comments (0)

Hong Kong, 1983

首次看方育平的《半邊人》非常歡喜。電影由一群非專業演員演出，女主角許素瑩演替父母魚檔賣魚的女兒，跟眾兄弟姊妹共住一斗室。與男友曾有一段熱戀卻無疾而終，後因好奇參加了戲劇班。老師張松柏以探索和實集的方法啟發一群學生，一心為自己的電影編劇卻又遇到因難重重。他和阿瑩二人份外投契，但不知對大家的關係能有怎麼期望。[more...]

2003.11.27 [movie] - comments (0)