This is not one film but five, each a self-contained depiction of Hong Kong in the year 2025. While #3-#5 are well worth your time, you are advised to skip the first two.
Below is a rundown of the five films.
#1. Beijing wants to stage a political assassination to stir fear in Hong Kong. Now, if manufacturing fear is your goal, would you rather the incident take place at a rally in Victoria Park attended by thousands of people, or at a holiday celebration in a school auditorium with a few dozen senior citizens? The screenwriter prefers the auditorium. Then about 2/3 of the film is spent discussing which of the two possible targets should be shot in order to maximize the terror-inducing effect, and the conclusion reached at long last is that -- why didn't we think of that? -- BOTH should be shot. The plan is carried out, ending in what's supposedly a twist of fate for the assassins, but by that time if you're still watching, you will hardly care.
#2. Probably not the most pretentious film you'll ever see, nor the most unintentionally funny. But you get a bit of both. Man and woman have a job no real people have, talk like no real people do, and come up with an idea no real people (I hope) ever tried. At one point, the man ingests coagulant (that's THE IDEA), and somehow starts to feel like taking a walk, but finds his room locked. In a fit of anger he punches and shoves a cupboard so very gently that nothing breaks and a 1.5-meter-long ax sitting precariously on top of the cupboard does not fall. Then, still angry, he grabs the ax and judiciously chops away a tiny patch of wall between the cupboard and a full-length mirror, hitting neither the cupboard nor the mirror in the process. "Why is everything like this?" he protests. Indeed, why is everything in this film like this?
#3. We finally get to the better part. There is not a lot of story here -- just a cab driver's struggle with Putonghua -- but what there is, is quite realistic, and told in a natural, restrained tone without unnecessary fanfare. There is a poignant moment when another cabbie observes that Cantonese has never been the privileged language -- before Putonghua it was English. That's today's Hong Kong writ small: the absence of that which has never been, is now more acutely felt than ever.
#4. Arguably the best of the bunch, or at least one of the best, on a par with #3, but with a major flaw. The format (mockumentary) is prefect for the subject matter (a growing movement that calls for Hong Kong's independence). The premise -- after an activist died in a hunger strike, someone burnt him/herself in front of the British Consulate -- while bold, is not far-fetched. The voice of the majority of Hong Kong people (majority in real life now, and still majority in the film) who either oppose independence or do not really care -- this, however, is conspicuously missing. The only representative of such people is a racist store keeper who expresses himself primarily by throwing eggs.
#5. Not what I'd call a credible story (boy scouts turning into Red Guards?), but if you take it as a big metaphor for something untold in the film itself, it can be rather revealing. And no doubt it manages to capture the fear of many Hong Kong people. But to those who do not share the same fear, it may come across as contrived and paranoid.
Overall:
Worth watching, though more for the political perspective than for the aesthetic pleasure. And only for the last 53 minutes (thus just 6 stars for the whole thing) -- as is sometimes said in times of turbulence and uncertainty, it has to get worse before it gets better.
Below is a rundown of the five films.
#1. Beijing wants to stage a political assassination to stir fear in Hong Kong. Now, if manufacturing fear is your goal, would you rather the incident take place at a rally in Victoria Park attended by thousands of people, or at a holiday celebration in a school auditorium with a few dozen senior citizens? The screenwriter prefers the auditorium. Then about 2/3 of the film is spent discussing which of the two possible targets should be shot in order to maximize the terror-inducing effect, and the conclusion reached at long last is that -- why didn't we think of that? -- BOTH should be shot. The plan is carried out, ending in what's supposedly a twist of fate for the assassins, but by that time if you're still watching, you will hardly care.
#2. Probably not the most pretentious film you'll ever see, nor the most unintentionally funny. But you get a bit of both. Man and woman have a job no real people have, talk like no real people do, and come up with an idea no real people (I hope) ever tried. At one point, the man ingests coagulant (that's THE IDEA), and somehow starts to feel like taking a walk, but finds his room locked. In a fit of anger he punches and shoves a cupboard so very gently that nothing breaks and a 1.5-meter-long ax sitting precariously on top of the cupboard does not fall. Then, still angry, he grabs the ax and judiciously chops away a tiny patch of wall between the cupboard and a full-length mirror, hitting neither the cupboard nor the mirror in the process. "Why is everything like this?" he protests. Indeed, why is everything in this film like this?
#3. We finally get to the better part. There is not a lot of story here -- just a cab driver's struggle with Putonghua -- but what there is, is quite realistic, and told in a natural, restrained tone without unnecessary fanfare. There is a poignant moment when another cabbie observes that Cantonese has never been the privileged language -- before Putonghua it was English. That's today's Hong Kong writ small: the absence of that which has never been, is now more acutely felt than ever.
#4. Arguably the best of the bunch, or at least one of the best, on a par with #3, but with a major flaw. The format (mockumentary) is prefect for the subject matter (a growing movement that calls for Hong Kong's independence). The premise -- after an activist died in a hunger strike, someone burnt him/herself in front of the British Consulate -- while bold, is not far-fetched. The voice of the majority of Hong Kong people (majority in real life now, and still majority in the film) who either oppose independence or do not really care -- this, however, is conspicuously missing. The only representative of such people is a racist store keeper who expresses himself primarily by throwing eggs.
#5. Not what I'd call a credible story (boy scouts turning into Red Guards?), but if you take it as a big metaphor for something untold in the film itself, it can be rather revealing. And no doubt it manages to capture the fear of many Hong Kong people. But to those who do not share the same fear, it may come across as contrived and paranoid.
Overall:
Worth watching, though more for the political perspective than for the aesthetic pleasure. And only for the last 53 minutes (thus just 6 stars for the whole thing) -- as is sometimes said in times of turbulence and uncertainty, it has to get worse before it gets better.