Waiting for my noodles to cook...
1 Nov 2005 12:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mayoraaseiWhich has nothing to do with what I'm going to say ==;
I think this rant will run out of steam halfway, because I'm starving.
Which has nothing to do with anything, really.
A few weeks ago, I read some Chinese critic's review of Star Wars Episode III. In it was some thing along the lines of this - "The Americans value the human body, and so war had been represented through the destruction of architectural structures instead of human life. This is compared to the realism of Chinese movies....The long history that China has has allowed us a more poetic appreciation of life. The sweeping beauty of the landscapes in Hero versus the flashy images of Star Wars. It is obvious which one is more meaningful, and this is because of our deeper culture."
It wasn't exactly like that, but the tone was similar. The whole "look at how crappy Star Wars was! Westerners dig that crap! We're so much better!"
My initial reaction was "W.T.F."
Sure, China does have a much longer history than western society - especially since the latter had forgotten much through the Dark Ages, and certainly, Chinese expression is far more poetic than western literature - especially traditional literature, since traditional literature was more or less, restricted to poetry (of various forms).
It just angered me that the reviewer made sweeping generalisations about western culture and its lack of appreciation of war based on one movie that even western critics scoff at and which, with consensus, had the general poetic-ness of a custard pie.
And it misreads the visual devices as facets of western culture. Instead of saying that "Americans value the human body, so they destroy buildings instead", why not realise the fact that Star Wars was aimed at an audience averagely aged 11 and anyone else stupid enough to think it was worth seeing (e.g. me, and probably the 90% of the people on this LJ =P). If the movie had shown human carnage as freely as, say, in The Gladiator (not that I've seen that one ==;) then the movie would be rated MA and lose 50% of its intended audience. It was about M.O.N.E.Y, dude, not human life.
Now, that is a better reflection of American motivation. But let's not dwell.
It just irks that they should take possibly one of the most brainless pointless eyecandy of popular cinema/theatre and claim that it represents all western philosophy. It's just as bad as crappy generalisations made by others, such as, "The Japanese produce lots of anime. Which is animation. Which in our culture equals childish crap because we can't manage any animation better than childish crap. Therefore the Japanese must all be childish."
It all came to bother me again when I watched a little bit of Lord of the Rings last Saturday. The battle at Helm's Deep. Sure, that's still highly idealised, but just a simple comparison with SW shows us how incredibly glossy and unrealistic SW had set out to be.
I think most cultures understand war just as well as any other. One only needs to be through one of those to know what it's like. We've had 2 world wars, we've had a plethora of small wars, we've had the Holocaust, and the terror that came with that remains with the westerners. We're in the middle of a war right now, and anyone directly connected with those in the frontline, or anyone who knew the victims of terrorist attacks would understand the tension and grief that accompanies war.
Star Wars wasn't intended to be a political statement or a realistic reflection. It was like fairy floss - light, fluffy entertainment that melts under heavy scrutiny. Taking it as a example to prove any sort of cultural superiority just convinces people you have no idea what you're talking about.
(And the article was a review. I was surprised by the Asian superiority complex, yet again.)
I think this rant will run out of steam halfway, because I'm starving.
Which has nothing to do with anything, really.
A few weeks ago, I read some Chinese critic's review of Star Wars Episode III. In it was some thing along the lines of this - "The Americans value the human body, and so war had been represented through the destruction of architectural structures instead of human life. This is compared to the realism of Chinese movies....The long history that China has has allowed us a more poetic appreciation of life. The sweeping beauty of the landscapes in Hero versus the flashy images of Star Wars. It is obvious which one is more meaningful, and this is because of our deeper culture."
It wasn't exactly like that, but the tone was similar. The whole "look at how crappy Star Wars was! Westerners dig that crap! We're so much better!"
My initial reaction was "W.T.F."
Sure, China does have a much longer history than western society - especially since the latter had forgotten much through the Dark Ages, and certainly, Chinese expression is far more poetic than western literature - especially traditional literature, since traditional literature was more or less, restricted to poetry (of various forms).
It just angered me that the reviewer made sweeping generalisations about western culture and its lack of appreciation of war based on one movie that even western critics scoff at and which, with consensus, had the general poetic-ness of a custard pie.
And it misreads the visual devices as facets of western culture. Instead of saying that "Americans value the human body, so they destroy buildings instead", why not realise the fact that Star Wars was aimed at an audience averagely aged 11 and anyone else stupid enough to think it was worth seeing (e.g. me, and probably the 90% of the people on this LJ =P). If the movie had shown human carnage as freely as, say, in The Gladiator (not that I've seen that one ==;) then the movie would be rated MA and lose 50% of its intended audience. It was about M.O.N.E.Y, dude, not human life.
Now, that is a better reflection of American motivation. But let's not dwell.
It just irks that they should take possibly one of the most brainless pointless eyecandy of popular cinema/theatre and claim that it represents all western philosophy. It's just as bad as crappy generalisations made by others, such as, "The Japanese produce lots of anime. Which is animation. Which in our culture equals childish crap because we can't manage any animation better than childish crap. Therefore the Japanese must all be childish."
It all came to bother me again when I watched a little bit of Lord of the Rings last Saturday. The battle at Helm's Deep. Sure, that's still highly idealised, but just a simple comparison with SW shows us how incredibly glossy and unrealistic SW had set out to be.
I think most cultures understand war just as well as any other. One only needs to be through one of those to know what it's like. We've had 2 world wars, we've had a plethora of small wars, we've had the Holocaust, and the terror that came with that remains with the westerners. We're in the middle of a war right now, and anyone directly connected with those in the frontline, or anyone who knew the victims of terrorist attacks would understand the tension and grief that accompanies war.
Star Wars wasn't intended to be a political statement or a realistic reflection. It was like fairy floss - light, fluffy entertainment that melts under heavy scrutiny. Taking it as a example to prove any sort of cultural superiority just convinces people you have no idea what you're talking about.
(And the article was a review. I was surprised by the Asian superiority complex, yet again.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 02:35 am (UTC)"Which in our culture equals childish crap because we can't manage any animation better than childish crap. "
*nod* that doesn't sound unfamiliar either *sigh* the other one is "a lot of japanese pornography is animated; therefore I'm not going to let my kids watch pokemon, because it has a character called misty in it who travels with two boys in the episodes"
"It was about M.O.N.E.Y, dude, not human life"
man, I've never heard you say dude, fenglet ;) enjoy your noodles ^^
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 02:39 am (UTC)Dude is used by Americans isn't it? >_>
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:18 am (UTC)What the fugly!! Omgosh why does that sound synonymous with cheap web trends, "I'll slap on some images sweeping beauty of landscapes which automatically grant my blog the deep and meaningful status"
Besides, the eyecandy in Hero isn't much better. It too is wholly exaggerated, who in their right mind did not scream "WTF!!!11" when the guy bounced off the water surface using a BLADE?? Using exaggerated, unrealistic fight scenes as a selling point for MONEY is no different from crashing unrealistic space crafts (that make sound in space) together, also for MONEY. Besides, who's to say the emperor really wanted to unify China for the good of the people? He's just as bad as the monkey who uses "freedom and liberty" to coverup his oil agendas.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:56 am (UTC)Well, personally I thought the mention of Hero was a bit odd. Most Chinese critics thought that was utter crap despite how much western reviewers gushed over it. >__>
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 06:16 am (UTC)But I agree with you. A film being made in one country does not make it any better than in another country.