Yi jiu si er

the bad: there is a lack of a decent plot, the movie is more an assembly of different episodes that happened during the famine, told through the eyes of a former landlord and his family. Unfortunately most (if not all) of these episodes are cliché' and predictable (there is a pregnant woman, guess when she will deliver; there is a girl with a cat, guess what will happen to the cat; there are corrupt officials out to buy women for their own pleasure, guess who they will buy;). The episodes told are so many that there is no time to sympathise for a character, or at least that was my feeling. Most scene are a brutal graphic depiction of what hunger is, but I found it less involving than, for example, Fires on the Plain.

the good: the subject treated is historically important, especially the fact that the government was aware/unaware able/unable to do something to prevent this catastrophe. The action scenes (the bombing of civilians) are shot with mastery and makes you feel uncomfortable all the way through. What I found more interesting though (but haven't seen anybody pointing it out so far) is that Feng Xiaogang is indirectly (and very subtly, of course) criticising todays government. There are many parallels with what is happening now in China, the top leaders who lost touch with the people, corrupt officials who take money and women, foreigners who have to point out faults of officials, Chinese against Chinese with their insatiable hunger for wealth. Even the Japanese, though enemies, are depicted as more human than the Nationalist officials.

The Ugly: Tim Robbin's role, or the whole religious part for that matter. It doesn't add anything to the, already thin, plot. Also why Christians and not Buddhists or Daoists?

Overall it's an interesting movie to be watched, not only for the famine, but also as a new step for Chinese cinema becoming more international.

6/10

There are many stories that can be told all over the world that probably are not on your radar. This is one of them. Even if you know the facts (the numbers in that case), seeing that playing in front of your eyes is something completely different. It's devastating watching events unfolding especially when it's clear that some things might have been avoidable.

With some American star power (Brody and Robbins in this case in smaller roles), the movie depicts war and the cruelties to the common folk. So you won't be able to see much fighting (though there are still quite a lot of war scenes), but the effects it has on civilians. A difficult movie, not only because of the running time, but a very well made one. Even if you're not that much interested in History, this is able to grab you and hold your breath/attention until the end

In 1942, China and Japan are in war. In Henan, the drought brings famine to the locals, but the wealthy landlord Master Fan Dianyuan (Guoli Zhang) has enough grains and food to supply to the villagers. Out of the blue, the village is looted by a gang of bandits that kills Fan's son and burns down the village to the ground. Master Fan is forced to flee with his wife, daughter and daughter-in-law and his servant Shuan Zhu (Mo Zhang) and they join the refugees. Along their journey, they are rob by the Chinese soldiers and bombed by the Japanese airplanes. Soon the starvation reaches Master Fan and his family with tragic consequences. Meanwhile he stumbles on the road upon the snoopy Time correspondent Theodore Harold White (Adrien Brody) that heads to Henan to investigate the famine and finds evidences of cannibalism among the survivors of the starvation.

The underrated "Yi jiu si er", a.k.a."Back to 1942", is a magnificent and heartbreaking Chinese epic, with the sad drama of the Second Sino-Japanese War. The plot follows the journey of the landlord Master Fan from his wealthy village to the need to selling his daughter to prostitution for food. The only problem is that it seems that in Mandarin the character speaks less to say the same thing in English. Therefore, it is hard to follow the English subtitles in the Blu-Ray and the end of some sentences is lost. But anyway, it is difficult to understand how an intelligent viewer can rate this film with less than eight. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

Feng Xioagang can be considered China's - possibly Asia's - most substantial film maker. His output is increasingly imposing and his box office clout means that the content of his work must come under intense official scrutiny. That made the IF I WERE THE ONE movies quite amazing as an expression of the notion that to be rich is glorious.

BACK TO 1942 is clearly a tent pole movie for the Chinese cinema and then carries a double load. It is an intense, long, demanding account of the 1942 Hunan famine and refugee exodus, made more terrible by the parallel war with the Japanese and also a revision of history with Chiang Kai Shek now shown as both calculating and remote, as well as caring and authoritative but only a support player in the story of the land lord and serf reduced to destitution on their awful journey.

Intriguingly, Theodore White writer of sixties Wolper Documentaries and "The Mountain Road" shows up effectively in the person of Adrian Brody, as a character.

Master crafted, some of the staging is exceptional. The bombing raids are great set pieces and the film manages to keep disaster chic in hand, even if it's so grim.

Essential for the serious movie goer, a strain on the casual entertainment seeker.

A tamer version of my review in desensitized words:

Good film, could've been a great film.

A rather controlled and somber depiction of a dark chapter in modern history, subtly echoing another tragedy that happened 16 years later. Surprisingly un-judgmental and un-sentimental for a historical film recreating despair and lowest possible form of human existence.

Feng presents the multiple layers of clues and facts that lead to the ultimate tolls almost as-matter-of-factly, leaving the audience putting together the puzzles and drawing their own conclusions, which is a rather clever way of avoiding censorship and engaging the audience.

Could have been A LOT grittier and more affecting. The acting is powerful in this film. However for a film depicting a major famine that claimed over 3 million lives in recent history, not much huger is shown as visuals in the film, most of the lingering hunger is talked about/acted out (as opposed to being displayed visually) which reduces the general affecting power of the film.

Xu Fan and Zhang Guo-Li are amazing in this film with their acting. Xu gives her most powerhouse performance yet, portraying the tough bottom- feeder hillbilly b*tch who would attempt anything/everything in defending her and her family's rights to live. However for a country woman who's been starving for over 100 days and more than willing to sell her bottom half for a couple of crackers, what's with her double- chin? (think Jennifer Lawrence's face in The Hunger Game – she can act all she wants but I'm sorry, girlfriend is just NOT that hungry) What TF happens to her makeup artist team and special visual effects people?!

Adrien Brody is effectively engaging as a very eager T.H. White who's desperately trying to expose the truth, whether driven by his journalist instincts, Pulitzer, or a genuine sympathy for the poor and depraved. However don't even get me to start with Tim Robbins - why is he even in the film??? The couple of scenes he's in are cringe-inducing. Even if you edit them out altogether it would not affect the story's flow whatsoever.