MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Triad Election (2005, *** 1/2)

STEEPED IN MANY OF THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS OF THE DECADE IN HONG KONG SINCE THE 1997 HANDOVER of the former British colony, a supple parable of the absorption of Hong Kong and Macau into the Chinese dragon, the eyes-wide, visceral, fluent, violent Triad Election is one of director Johnny To’s most accomplished. (Comparisons to the French master Jean-Pierre Melville, a major influence on John Woo, are not misplaced here, either.) 30361728.jpgFramed by a crooked real estate deal in Guangzhou, across the border from the former colony, that resembles the erection of airport and Disneyland on Lantau Island, To fully exploits the remarkable, diverse, compacted topography of the teeming city-state in a gleaming fashion that requires no special knowledge to appreciate. The plot’s about honor, and the selection of a new gangland boss for a two-year term, and to what violent temptations the half-dozen or so characters will succumb. (Think the dogs of Abu Ghraib, bloodied currency, Pollock-spattered walls, floors, and a meat grinder.) Scenes unfold with quiet alacrity: the coldest of killers glugs from a half-pint in a sack as he circles a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse where inside, the radar of the coolest of killers is tipped as he begins to order food. (There is also a horrific image of a luxury car driving to the horizon as we can still see through the windows three passengers claw-hammering a fourth to certain death.) Once power is consolidated, the victor is ensconced in the back of a luxury vehicle: is it any chance that the newspaper he reads is fronted by a picture of Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (who retired in 2005 as this film was being shot)? The words “I believe in China” resound throughout with tremendous force, and the climactic meeting of the movie is cold and brilliant, almost as bold as the door slammed in Kay Corleone’s face. To is a genre technician of the highest order, and “Triad Election” boasts extremely fine widescreen work. [(Ray Pride.] (Now playing Chicago at the Music Box with Election; opens July 27 at Starz in Denver; August 1 at Austin’s Dobie.)

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon