Hero
Grade:
|
 |
Plot Summary:
The King of Qin in fragmented ancient China is close to taking over his neighboring kingdoms. Many famous assassins are sent to stop him, including the powerful warriors Sky, Flying Snow, and Broken Sword. Then, one day a nameless man shows up at the Qin castle and says he has defeated all three on behalf of the King. Much color ensues...
Opinion:
"Hero" is a
wuxia (martial arts) movie by popular Chinese director Zhang Yi-Mou, known mostly for less ambitious period dramas. Comparisons to
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" will be unavoidable (and in many ways encouraged), since to the mainstream American audience CTHD will probably be the one and only point of reference to
wuxia they possess (the
wuxia genre predates "Hero" and "CTHD" by many decades, of course...) In fact, it is familiarity with CTHD that undoubtedly led to Miramax purchasing the rights to "Hero"--originally released in China in 2002--and given it a somewhat wide release in America (albeit after sitting on it for two years), figuring after CTHD's success, more Americans had a taste for Chinese martial arts films. Though somewhat similar (in style, not in plot--film connoisseurs will recognize a closer link to the classic Japanese film "Rashomon") "Hero" is not the equal of CTHD (although, in my opinion, no film is) either in quality or accessibility to a US audience. This is a very 'Chinesey' film--foreign in many ways other than just speaking a different language. "Hero" is also frustrating in a lot of ways--there's a lot of absolutely brilliant stuff here, yet it still seems to fall a couple of steps short of a masterpiece. It is a film that is still leaps and bounds ahead of most 'average' films and will leave you with many beautiful, indelible visions in your mind, yet you might feel curiously unmoved at the end.
So, what kind of person will enjoy "Hero" the most? Put simply, "Hero" is an 'artsy' movie. What's an 'artsy' movie, you ask? "Artsy" movies put the emphasis on style over substance, focusing extensively on scene construction, lighting, costume design, cinematography--emphasizing 'looks' at the expense of plot and continuity. "Artsy" movies have scenes like a female warrior in a bright red dress stoically looking off camera while a flurry of leaves fly up behind her in slow motion. Or a male warrior striking a dramatic pose while large bright green banners of cloth fall down behind him in slow motion. ("Artsy" films use lots of slow motion--for dramatic effect, you see...) Or when one of the main characters has a dramatic death scene THREE DIFFERENT TIMES during the course of the movie. (And it has nothing to do with being 'undead'--but for an explanation, you'll have to see the movie...) Another way to describe "Hero" is a 'right-brain' movie. The more abstract and artistic 'right-brainers' will have a field day watching "Hero", while the left brain will probably have questions about the plot.
RIGHT BRAIN: "Oh, my... Look at the colors! The landscapes! This is SO beautiful!"
LEFT BRAIN: "Hmmm...I'm not really getting this. So...those two guys are fighting in their minds? How does that work?"
RIGHT BRAIN: "Did you see those two in blue outfits floating gracefully across the clear blue water...in SLOW MOTION? This is SO COOL! (starts drooling...)
LEFT BRAIN: "Okay...did they just start playing
ping-pong with a drop of water? What the heck...?"
The characterization and emotional core of "Hero" isn't as strong as CTHD, a little disappointing since those areas are usually the strength of Zhang Yi-Mou's other movies like
"Raise the Red Lantern" and
"To Live". I found the choreography in "Hero" also to be disappointing--although, again depending on your brain preference, you may find it enchanting and mesmerizing instead. The fights in CTHD was graceful, fluid, and lovely...but they were still
fights. You always got the sense that it was still a combat--albeit a more elegant one than in your usual action movie. (In the CTHD analysis, I compared it to--in the words of a Jack Handey 'Deep Thought'--a 'ballet where the dancers hit each other') "Hero" takes this a step further by having 'ballets where the dancers dance around a lot and only hit each other on occasion'. There's less of a sense of actual attempts to injure your opponent in "Hero" and the fight scenes lose some of the necessary intensity in the process--while still being pleasing to the eye in an artistic sense. (Again, it's that 'right/left' brain thing...)
"Hero" is definitely worth seeing--there's no question. Zhang Yi-Mou's strength has always been 'art in movies' and the use of colors and landscapes in this movie is first rate, filled with images that you'll remember long after the movie ends. (You probably won't say the same for the story...) I doubt you'll see a better looking movie all year--but you might have to make some sacrifices as far as plot substance. (Two thirds of the movie doesn't actually 'happen' in any real sense--you'll have to see the movie to understand why--and you might see scenes that are absolutely lovely to behold, but lose some significance and tangibility upon later reflection--take the 'red' scene between Moon and Flying Snow, for example.)
Content Analysis: (PG-13 for a 'scene of sensuality' and some very toned down martial arts violence. 0-3-2-0 on the Baron's scale)
CTHD took great pains to remove the blood and brutality from its fight scenes, and "Hero" takes much the same road (in fact, is probably
less violent). The fighting is more artistic than brutal, and while not entirely bloodless, it uses at most a few drops here and there for artistic effect. The 'scene of sensuality' is also toned down from the CTHD equivalent--enough for a PG-13 perhaps, but nothing more. Basically, if you could handle one, then you can handle the other....
In-depth Analysis:
There's a couple of resonant themes from "Hero" that deserve discussion. Originally, the ultimate goal of the three assassins (Sky, Broken Sword, and Flying Snow...and as it turns out, Nameless too) was to kill the King of Qin, thereby stopping him from invading and conquering the other six kingdoms and (in theory) bring peace to ancient China. Upon reflection, though, Broken Sword realized that in actuality, ending the threat from Qin would only result in more years of constant fighting from all seven kingdoms--and more death and suffering. If peace was the
ultimate goal for China, then the best way was to have China be unified under one banner and one emperor. True, this requires the King of Qin (the only candidate at the time with the chance to create and rule over a unified China) to invade and forcefully subject the other kingdoms (and historians are always quick to point out that the King of Qin massacred no small number of people to meet his goals), but from a long term perspective, this (arguably) was still the best chance for
continuing peace in China. (As it happens, the Qin Dynasty lasted only a few years. However, the unified structure of government in China was already in place solidly enough so that a new dynasty--the Han--was able to take over fairly quickly and last for four hundred years)
The "peace through war" philosophy can be a difficult one to accept, but history has borne out that in the long run, some wars have done much to create and maintain peace for a greater number of people. (Consider the right-wing bumper sticker: "Aside from ending slavery, Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, what has war ever accomplished?") Compare the unification of China through invasion in "Hero" to the US's decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan in World War II. Sure, thousands of Japanese civilians were killed which--viewed as an isolated event--would be worthy of condemnation by any peace-loving person. In context, though, Japan had refused to surrender despite severe military defeats and the U.S. had the choice of (a) continuing the long, drawn out war for many more years, (b) invade Japan with conventional forces (how many lives--American and Japanese--would that have cost?) or (c) 'force' the Japanese to surrender without resorting to invasion. The U.S. actions at the time were and are still debatable (since it's hard to prove what would have happened in some alternate historical timeline had another choice been made), but I think in the end it remains something that had to be done as the best possible choice in an essential "no-win" situation.
(Parallels could also easily be drawn to the current situation in Iraq--which suffers from the same 'unknowable alternate history' problem--but in which not nearly enough time has passed to make a final judgment. It may turn out that the Bush administration's choice to invade was not in the best interest of the world, but we'll need at least five to ten more years to find out. Gee, were Japan and Germany peaceful and prosperous houses of order a year after World War II ended? Let's have a little patience...)
The ending of "Hero" also demonstrates the important spiritual concept of the conflict between justice and mercy. At the end, the King of Qin has been deliberately spared by Nameless despite his admitted purpose of assassinating him. Attempted assassination is still a crime punishable by death, even though the King knows through his conversations with Nameless that he was never serious about going through with it. Still, justice demands that when a law has been broken, the price must be paid. The King has the desire to be merciful, yet knows that any chance of a unified China succeeding requires laws be obeyed and enforced. This leads to his decision (again, for the greater good of China) to allow Nameless to be executed. (Nameless, for his part, appears to be at peace with this, and purposefully offers himself as a willing sacrifice for the good of China).
This, of course, is similar to the laws of justice that control our spiritual destiny. God wants to be loving and merciful to all his children, yet the laws of the universe demand that no unclean thing can enter God's presence and withstand his glory. From Alma 42:
Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.
And thus we see that all mankind were fallen, and they were in the grasp of justice; yea, the justice of God, which consigned them forever to be cut off from his presence. . . .
What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God.
Of course, the conflict between justice and mercy can be overcome by a Savior--someone on the outside who's willing to step in and pay the price for us--a blessing that, unfortunately, Nameless didn't have at the time...
Random Notes and Comments:
(1) The film was released in China in 2002, and Miramax immediately bought the rights for distribution in the US. Like
"Shaolin Soccer", though, they sat on it for several years, infuriating Asian cinemophiles in the US, who for the most part ended up buying the Chinese DVD on the Internet in the meantime. Also like "Shaolin Soccer" the US version (which I haven't seen) has twenty minutes or so cut out to (in theory) make it more palatable for an American audience.
(2) Director Zhang Yi-Mou was the one who 'discovered' the young 18-year-old Zhang Zi-Yi, and cast her in his movie "The Road Home" in 2000. Since she had had extensive ballet and dance training, he then recommended her to Taiwanese director Ang Lee for the part of Jen in "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" a year later--proving to be her big breakout role. Since she took to martial arts fairly well, Zhang later cast her again in "Hero" for the smaller role of Moon, and also in the soon to be released "House of Flying Daggers".
(3) Another "Crouching Tiger..." connection: Jet Li (Nameless) was originally cast as the lead male role of Li Mu Bai in CTHD, but later withdrew to work on "Romeo Must Die" instead and was replaced by Chow Yun-Fat.
(4) Tony Leung (Broken Sword) and Maggie Cheung (Flying Snow) are essentially the Chinese equivalents of Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan--starring in a large number of movies together, usually as lovers. Their next film is "2046" by Hong Kong director Wong Kar-Wai, which includes Zhang Zi-Yi as well.
