Friday, October 29, 2004

"Who Killed Bambi?"

Qui a tué Bambi?



Cast: Sophie Quinton, Laurent Lucas, Catherine Jacob, Yasmine Belmadi, Michèle Moretti, Valérie Donzelli, Jean-Claude Jay, Aladin Reibel, Thierry Bosc, Lucia Sanchez, Fily Keita and Sophie Medina
Directed by: Gilles Marchand
Screenplay by:
Vincent Dietschy and Gilles Marchand

A French thriller where, unlike your mass-produced Chinese schtick, no one has any convenient supernatural powers. The action is in the dialogue.

Isabelle (Sophie Quinton) is a nursing student at a prestigious hospital whose curriculum includes advice on how to tell families their loved ones have croaked (“gone” and “left us” isn’t quite straight to the point). It’s there that she meets the sexy but sinister Dr. Philippe (Laurent Lucas), who starts calling her "Bambi" because she has problems keeping her balance (due to a malformation in her right ear, for which an operation is performed). Isabelle comes to believe that he may be drugging and molesting female patients while they sleep and watering down the hospital’s Pentothal supply and letting nurses take the rap when patients wake up during surgery.

Beautiful direction from a scenarist or a botched first attempt?
Botched First Attempt
Is Marchand's first attempt to direct in a feature film debut is all too obviously amateurist? The 126 minutes' worth of fainting scenes, dream sequences, and face-offs between heroine-villain could smack of wet-behind-the-ears directorial effort. Perhaps Marchand has
failed to infuse the proceedings with a depth or originality. The arrogant Dr. Philippe is such an obvious bad guy from the start that little suspense is generated. Even more damagingly, his villainy, as personified by Lucas' one-dimensional performance, is tedious. The other characters are even less interesting. Too often Marchand, clearly eager to impress and with a Dummies' Guide to Thriller Films firmly in hand, tries to ratchet up the suspense with the usual tricks of sudden noises or appearances, to little avail. Its only suspense lying in the gradually revealed nastiness of the director himself in his peculiar violations of genre logic. Ultimately, the most original aspect of "Who Killed Bambi?" is its provocative title.

Beautiful direction from a scenarist
Alternatively, the film, which debuted at least year’s Festival de Cannes, can be a strong examination of the minimalist practice of filmmaking, adeptly applying less as more. (Less pretense, less ego, less razzle-dazzle, less clutter, but more suspense, more straight-faced and surefootedness.) Pristine visuals (the superb widescreen cinematography is by Pierre Milon), and slick in its presentation, a sterile, antiseptic atmosphere (lots of white on white), appropriate to the hospital environment, Marchand manipulates with great effect the path mystery is to take. Marchand's tactic is to make the film so barren in its minimalism as to remove all signs of suspense. The direction of his own material is rewarding in that as slowly as the expectancy in events are to rise, his use of flirting and seducing certain elements only to temporarily pause their impetus, have a greater effect later when the motion has been reactivated. Bambi’s heroine is Isabelle, naïve but plucky; anesthesia she administers has been tampered with, diluted. The doctor who is secretly siphoning the liquid drug is using it to induce sleep on patients and molest them post-operatively. His motives, not his identity, are the mystery, or the cause for suspense, initially. And once Isabelle, whom he dubs Bambi (after all, Quinton is doe-eyed and deer-like), is given probable cause for suspicion, despite the meager steely warmth the doctor emits to her, when he begins to investigate an ear ailment she has just begun to suffer from, it warrants both hers and our skepticism in his sincerity.
By having Philippe commit his transgressions off screen, however, Marchand in essence questions the reality of the man’s culpability and everyone’s emotional connection to those crimes. Yet for all the soft-footing and awareness in dealing with the tension, Marchand still capably gets the pulse-rate to accelerate through the doubt of conviction in the story’s rejection to be certain of its actions at each and every moment. But our doubt may be solidified insofar as we have witnessed the doctor’s drug-lifting and patient molestation. Yet, the protagonist must get to that level herself. One of the advantages, or unexpected positions Marchand takes, is not to employ Isabelle as a full-fledged sleuth. Only once the implication is without a doubt in her mind does she try to take things into her own hands; the film isn’t as interested by the search for the truth, it’s interested in her journey into confusion — confusion of her condition, reservations about her profession, discomfort and betrayal of an expected honorable figure. And at all times, Marchand is cool-headed and relaxant in his control of the film as a production, with its anesthetic lull — a preferable restraint at which to watch this unfold — as well as his control of generating tension that seeps under your skin. The grounded performance of Quinton makes her someone to keep an eye on, and Lucas’ villainy is always kept to a realistic size, rejecting the notion to blow it up to movie monster size, which is no less appreciated.

It’s obvious from the start that Marchand is using the death of Bambi’s mother as a point of departure for a study on postmodern violence in cinema. But while Marchand seems to have studied Disney’s Bambi, incorporating notions of responsibility, submission, and loneliness associated with the death of the deer’s mother into Philippe’s agenda against Isabelle and women in general, in the end his film feels like an abstract dissertation with no real discernable point, perhaps because Dr. Phil—not unlike the gunman who shoots Bambi’s mom—remains a cipher throughout.

Labels:

Sunday, October 24, 2004

"Old Boy"




Director: Chan-wook Park
Writing credits: Jo-yun Hwang & Chun-hyeong Lim (screenplay) & Garon Tsuchiya (story)
Cast:
Min-sik Choi .... Dae-su Oh

Ji-tae Yu .... Woo-jin Lee
Hye-jeong Kang .... Mi-do


A man is brutally kidnapped in the street by a stranger. The kidnapper assassinates the hero's wife and plants the clues that incriminate the man and ensure that he will never be able to live freely back in society. Then, after 15 years of false imprisonment, the kidnapper releases his prisoner. The prisoner has no one left but the young daughter he left behind. But his one and only life-consuming goal is to find the reason he was locked up.

This is the second part of a trilogy (starting in 2002 with "Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance"), devoted to the topic of revenge. The original manga is the basis for the film's shooting script. The tension in the film snowballs faster and faster until it climaxes at the final development: the discovery of an unbearable truth, one of those secrets that condemn you to madness or suicide.

Old Boy abounds in visual innovations, supported by the remarkable photography of Park Hyun-Won, a key player of Korean cinema. The light, dark and majestic, as well as the music (a plethoric mixture of waltz, tango and techno) confer on the film "the esthetics of excess". "Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance" was characterized by Park Chan-Wook with a dry and cold atmosphere, whereas "Old Boy" is characterized by a hot and humid atmosphere.

Park Chan-Wook enjoys abusing the traditional Korean principles of the prohibition of private revenge and respect for one's elders.

As the film unrolls, we follow the prisoner's search for reason and revenge and realise in turn the sadistic refinement of the kidnapper's own revenge-a very intellectual source of jubilation to him.
This cinema of cruelty is accompanied by existentialist thought. Once revenge is enjoyed, what remains to be achieved? The kidnapper professes a true obsession for his prisoner, whom he knows closely, to the point of forgetting his own loneliness. Once the prisoner, the object of his ambiguous passion who is subordinate to his orders, is subjugated and wiped out, he must face the vacuum of his existence.

No one is left the victor in this destructive face-to-face. Not even the finale, a kind of happy ending where a beautiful hypnotist intervenes, the mistress of the memory, manages to tone down the feeling of fear that spreads in the audience. What remains is a bitter taste in the mouth and the growing fear that even the passions of lust and revenge are nothing in the end. And our lives are meaningless.


"Laugh and everyone will laugh. Cry and you will be all alone" the main character repeats, a beautiful proverb that brilliantly summarizes this remarkable film.

If only they knew about God and the value they have in Him. If only...

Labels:

Friday, October 22, 2004

The Hill Bistro

Ended a very long week of tough overnight negotiations with a lovely dinner at The Hill Bistro on Mount Faber. The juicy lamb rack and steaming mash disappeared down the throat which had seen only a forgettable mish-mash of dry biscuits, bad coffee and cold pizza this week. When the distant city lights were made misty in the sudden downpour and a cold wind started to blow, we ordered fresh hot creme brulee.

Thank God for the animals and plants he's proved for food and the skills of those who help to prepare the food. It's great to be able to see things from the perspective of one saved and to know that even these ordinary everyday things were created by God for our enjoyment. It's great to be able to enjoy God's creation. Thank God.

Monday, October 18, 2004

New Job

Started my new job today.

The decision to take up this job offer was reached only after long and painful discussions with fellow brothers and sisters and prayer.

The main considerations in deciding to take up any job are:


1. to realise the place of work in the life of the Christian:
  • we have a God who works (Genesis 2:2) and is working even to this day (John 5:16)
  • work is not an evil in itself. It was part of God's good creation right from the beginning when he put Adam in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it (Genesis 2:15). It was a consequence of the Fall that everything fell with Adam so that work became painful toil (Genesis 3:17-19)
  • work is the legitimate way to sustain us physically. "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." (2 Thess 3:10). People are to earn the bread they eat (2 Thess 3:12)
  • work keeps people from being idlers and busybodies (2 Thess 3:11). Idleness seems to encourage ungodly behaviour (1 Tim 5:13)
  • working for one's keep legitimises one's ministry in the way that the people to whom you are ministering know that you have no ulterior motive for ministering to them. You want nothing from them (not money, not a good hot meal, or a place to sleep)
  • but we work just to eat. The real food is the food of eternal life. Jesus warns us, "Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you." (John 6:27).
2. to ensure that the work you are required to do in this particular job per se is not ungodly or won't stumble you in any way (eg. prostitution, gambling, even sales and marketing (where you may be pressured to lie to earn your living)(where you may be pressured to lie to earn your living).

3. to ensure that the job allows you time for God because there is no inherent merit in work or working hard.

4. to ensure that the job is in a place/country where there is a good bible-teaching church so that you can be encouraged weekly by faithful teaching and preaching from God's word and where you can have accountable fellowship with brothers and sisters who are travelling in the same direction and won't lead you down the wide and popular road of ungodliness or heretical teaching.

In my case, there were other more lucrative opportunities with well-known organisations abroad with monthly salaries starting at S$10,000. Ego-boosting opportunities with great pay, good hours, in a place with biblical churches and which would look impressive on my CV. Oppotunities which would not, on the surface, affect my godliness adversely.

Why did I take this low-paying local job with little prospects then? For the following reasons:
  1. my responsibilities to my bible study group-not to up and leave without warning and without finding a bible-centred successor whom I'm confident can lead the group in godliness. Even when I find one, it will take time for relationships to form and for people to feel confident enough to be accountable and share with this person.
  2. my responsibilities to the people I'm reading one-to-one with.
  3. my responsibilities to the people I'm counselling.
There was still much discussion about God's sovereignty and human responsibility. The Bible tells us that God is sovereign and whatever humans do, God's will prevails in the end. In Ruth, we see how God works out his great salvation plan in the minute details of human history in the life of one family (Elimelech's) and in the lives of 3 people (Naomi, Ruth and Boaz). Yet, the Bible also tells us that we cannot live our lives fatalistically by sitting back and not doing anything. We will also be held accountable and responsible for our decisions and actions. So while I know that I'm not indispensible in God's plan to save his elect, yet, I must fulfil my responsibilities to them.

Many people shrieked at the wasted opportunity to pursue these other opportunities. Making this decision made me realise again what it means to trust in God. It means to live my life as if all that He has said in the Bible is real. And in light of that reality (that the things of this world are passing away and only the things of God are permanent), to make my decisions and to live for Him alone.

Labels:

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Colbar


Had a great dinner at the new Colbar at 9A Whitchurch Road, off Portsdown Road (it moved here from its old location at Jalan Hang Jebat. Read all about the ensuing hoo-ha here). The steak, chips and mushy peas were better than the usual plastic stuff found in most "Western" stalls in food courts but did not reach to-die-for standards. We chilled-out in the cool night air with magnolia milkshakes, chatting and listening to the quiet chirps of crickets. Very laid-back retro.

Sunday, October 03, 2004

"Sepet"

Watched "Sepet" by Yasmin Ahmad (here is her blog) today. A multi-lingual, inter-racial, heart-warming story about teenage love between a Chinese pirated VCD-seller ("Sepet" means "chinese eyes") and a upper-class cultured Malay scholar. The story was engaging as an unlikely love story between teenagers from two very disparate worlds in the same town and the acting was on-the-whole endearing from these first time actors and actresses. The audience was left with fond memories of Ah Loong, Orked and Orked's parents. However, the actor playing Keong was a bit stilted and scenes with him seemed to slow the momentum of the show.

In an interview with Sun2Surf, Yasmin explained that her first feature film was about love because nothing interests her more than people who are in love. If you put her in a beautiful landscape and she sees a couple smooching, she will be totally captivated by them. Yasmin thinks that people in love are the real hope of the world.

First love has always fascinated her because it happens to you at a time when you have not yet learned to lie to yourself. With first love, within five minutes, you accept the other person for everything he/she is. She believes that first love is the truest love of all.

"Sepet" was inspired by big pieces of Yasmin's life. Her ex-husband is an Indian while her current one is Chinese.

She wanted to write a movie showing that it is possible to love someone without understanding him/her first.


I cried through the movie because it reminded me of a time, a long time ago, when I too was looking for someone-someone to share my life and my hopes and dreams with. Someone to whom I could say, like Ah Loong,"I loved you before I knew you and I've been waiting all my life for you." I realised that that all around the world, for generations and generations, people have had this intense longing. And the person we have all been yearning for is one and the same: Jesus the Christ, the Son of God, who fulfils every longing and need.

Labels:

Friday, October 01, 2004

"Les Choristes"

Labels: