San ren xing

The logic of plot setting is too bad. Every character seems to explain clearly, but in fact it is a model play. For example: the bandits quote the classics in a large section, and the people who laugh at nothing assume who is drunk to come up with it. The whole plot is not clear, and the operation lens is a waste of Cass. The final slow-motion gun battle and the soundtrack destroyed the harsh feeling of the climax of the bandit film.

Watching the new Johnny To films has become a duty. It looks like WHERE A GOOD MAN GOES and MAD DETECTIVE are going to be the best we get out of him but his new film THREE intrigues.

For a movie enthusiast it can be seen as the heir to the great Hong Kong kung fu films. It's a cop movie set in the emergency ward of Victoria Hospital. After some gory close ups of drilling into skulls in the operating room, we move into the plot with shot criminal Wallace Chung being wheeled into Emergency handcuffed to his gurney.

Dr. Vickie Wei Zhao (SHAOLIN SOCCER, RED CLIFF)is already under fire from a patient after her operation left him paralyzed. He spits on her and calls her "Rubbish Doctor" and her success rate doesn't improve. She's at odds with To regular, stony faced police officer Louis Koo, who she feels is treating Chung inhumanely. Doctor and cop get into conflict over Chung's demand for the 'phone call that he is entitled too, with the patient quoting The Hippocratic Oath to her (in English) - good scene.

While this is happening, the crazy in the next bed gets away from his restraints complaining about his treatment, cop Lam Suet is trying to find the conspirator-suit who whistles classical music and the key to his hand cuffs is missing.

Finale is a large scale shoot out in slow motion - impressive moment when the moving camera comes through the ward doors and the action switches to normal speed and the sound of gunfire and panic.

The ending strips away most of the undertaking's dignity but by then there's been enough kinetic action to more than satisfy the target audience.

Do you like your criminals intelligent? With a penchant for quoting Bertrand Russell and Hippocrates, a well-dressed jewelry thief is shot in the head and taken to hospital where he toys with a surgeon's feelings and plays with a cop's heart in this intricate thriller directed by filmmaker Johnnie To.

Don't be put off by the title. This thriller is strictly drama and exposition heavy. The "Three" in this case is the interplay between the surgeon, cop, and criminal, taking risks to get what they want out of themselves as well as life.

Even though it starts out tame and procedural, this film gives us an insight into each person's motivations and interactions on doing the "right thing." By the film's end you're left with some semblance of hope and humanity until the credits roll. Despite some tired clichés, you're also given another sub-set of three patients (which includes the criminal himself) with various problems that seek resolution. Some of it is funny, some a bit poignant, and even a climatic moment that will undoubtedly take your breath away when it comes to a fight inside the hospital itself by the criminal's henchmen.

People say going to the hospital is a risk in itself, perhaps in not quite the high style and carnage as on display here.

The film lightly pits the Hippocratic oath vs hypocritical cops, toss in a charismatic villain and a few cc's of humor to help temporarily release the tension, but you know what's coming in even if you are not an action film aficionado.

I am not one but this film killed time in a tick-tock fashion. Korea may outdo the US on violence and weird worship of homicidal psychopaths, that's okay by me.

If there is a director that knows their way around action, is Johnnie To. He would be great to do an action movie out of a video game, with his choreography and dazzling camera work, his bravura shots and his willingness to challenge the viewer's expectations.

However, "Three" is not much more than a curio, a minor work that could have been much more and ends just being an interesting one hour and a half, with a plot flimsy as they come, and so much silliness the viewer will be forgiven if they start giggling in the action sequences.

The story is simple: a thief has been shot and the police takes him to the hospital to take the bullet from his head. It seems one of the police people shot him but they don't want that to come to light. The thief himself doesn't seem to want to be operated on, and believes his friends will save him. At the same time, the doctor that is taking care of him has a little bit of god-complex.

The movie centers on the thief, the police boss and the doctor, all played quite straight by known actors from Hong Kong, and how their relationship evolves while at the hospital. However the plot doesn't offer much and from the very beginning we have the feeling that a showdown will come sooner or later. The characters are paper thin and as simplistic as they come, and the acting, even if acceptable, doesn't elevate the product.

But what makes this movie something more than just your run-of-the- mill action movie is To. From the moment the thief gets to the hospital, the viewer will notice director To is up to his camera tricks. Long shots, lots of actors, amazing camera work, ridiculous slow-motion moments... To directs the movie as if it was the deepest and most amazing action movie ever and it elevates the movie up a couple of levels. It is just amazing. However, it is so flashy that sometimes falls into the silly and it seems more a class in directing action scenes than a proper movie (some of the excuses for an action moment are as lazy as they come, but To won't let anything pass by if it lets him put the camera at a weird angle).

Acceptable, with great action camera work, but with the same complexity as an empty canvas.