Triangle

A notable collaboration between three of the most iconic directors in Hong Kong, Triangle is a complex crime film from which one should expect the unexpected.

This is a not a Pulp Fiction (1994) or Three Extremes (2004) style anthology, but instead a single, linear story in which the baton is passed from one director to the next, a bit like The Signal (2007).

Tsui Hark, Ringo Lam and current favourite Johnnie To each used their own scripts and production teams to create 30 minutes of this crime drama.

Tsui Hark's first act establishes the characters, handing over to Ringo Lam for an intense second act and it's therefore down to Johnnie To to wrap things up in the chaotic final act. These are directors who know how to use conventions, such as the mcguffin, the chase and gunfight, but delight in adding unexpected twists to subvert our expectations.

The result is a surprisingly natural film experience. Distinctive styles, such as Tsui Hark's intense visuals, may make the audience aware of who is in control but generally it's almost impossible to determine which director's work we are watching at any given time. Cinematographer Cheng Siu-Keung deserves credit for maintaining a beautifully atmospheric tone throughout, even during the many unusual moments.

As is appropriate for a film with three directors there are three lead characters. Simon Yam, Louis Koo and Sun Honglei play desperate men planning a robbery when a mystery man approaches leaves in their possession a piece of gold which sends them in a new direction, toward buried treasure.

It's the set-up for a conventional heist movie, the kind of film we have seen many times before, but in the hands of these skilled artists it becomes much more. The triangle of the title can be interpreted to mean one or several things. Meaning extends beyond simply referring to the collaboration between the trio of filmmakers.

It can be said to refer to the three-stages to this story and the journey the audience accompanies the characters on. The poster art presents the words "destiny" "jealousy" and "temptation" on each side of the shape, hinting at a philosophical construction. Triangle is an ambiguous film from which we can take from what we wish.

I was personally drawn to the "love triangle" interpretation. At the heart of the film is a woman, the wife of one of the criminals, who has been having an affair. For a notable three years. Awareness of the betrayal has a direct influence on the direction of the story and things become increasingly unpredictable. I'm being intentionally vague about whose wife she is and with whom the affair is taking place as there are so many wonderful nuances and surprises in the narrative that it would be a shame to spoil them.

Simon Yam, a serious actor with a surprising number of action films in his filmography including Wake of Death with Jean-Claude Van Damme, is a Johnnie To regular and it's his cold, emotionless performance which grips the audience most. From the moment he is introduced on screen we never know what to expect from him.

Louis Koo (with whom Yam and To worked on the Election films) is also good as a small-time criminal getting in over his head with some nasty characters. The only weak link is Sun Hong Lei as an antique store owner who aids them in their heist. Too often off-screen and unmemorable when he is on it.

Triangle is an intriguing piece of work. Those seeking a fast-paced thriller would be advised to look elsewhere, but if you enjoy slow- burning character studies then this will not disappoint.

If a movie can't hold your interest in the first 25 minutes, it's over as far as I'm concerned. This concept that you have to simply deal with a slow first third of a movie and be rewarded later is nonsense. A good movie has to start and end strong. It all seem interesting and some decent shots and lots of promise, but ultimately muddled and irrelevant. There are so many other movies from Asia to watch, many of which I am sure most of you have not seen, that I would really skip this one and look elsewhere. Why exactly does IMDb require a 10 line minimum for reviews? I said my piece and I hope this helps a few of you move on to the next film.

Very good effort from the three directors. The story were made so compact that the movie appeared too short to me. Because I am not a fan for either of them, I could not really tell which part was made by whom. However, the movie has kept quite a consistency in style, to me it is already an achievement for the three.

Great layout of stages and clues were provided to the audience. Some particular points may looked chance-medley, but there were also inevitability alongside (e.g. the crazy guy kept shaking his head seems odd, but he is the man who gives convincing enough reason to bring the wanted police, the three ghouls and the police officer together.).

The blackout section was the most exciting and breath taking part of the movie. When all the forces came meet together with interaction and conflict of interests. Very dramatic and humorous, with a touch of personal loyalty for covering each other.

There were also many choices available to characters, obvious one was when the antiquary guy throwing the treasure in the reed bush, when he had kill-or-not-to-kill option the moment before. Another example is when all 4 of them got out of the bush and looked back to the surrounded cop, they kept looking till confirming the cop is really good at shooting, and passed the option on to him.

Overall, with the discussion of the human nature against survival, the movie made itself outstanding.

My clockmaker friend was not pleased. His rating system is such: If you look at your watch once, its a good movie. Twice is pushing your luck and three times and you're out of luck. ( No clock being the perfect movie ). He took 3 looks. Though having some decent scenes you sort of get a mixed bag of plotting, double-crossing and old style Tsui Hark slapstick. Still we found it worth talking about afterward a bit, so maybe its worth a look... Side plots aren't concluded and motivations aren't all too clear, the segmentation isn't really clear, you don't really see the 3 parts differentiate from each other. Still, could have fared worse since for a change the action was not the consuming theme, instead the few fights being portrayed in what i'd imagine to be a realistic fashion, won't tell more.. Some good comedy , good milieu, gotta be fair it had some OK content to it too.

With all the negative reviews and opinions I had read about Triangle before watching the film, I expected to be disappointed. Actually, I was pleasantly surprised.

Triangle is by no means a masterpiece that lives up to any of the three directors' names, but it is certainly not the incoherent mess some people make it out to be. Tsui's first third establishes too many subplots, but I thought that even in Lam's third, I was able to follow everything. Sun Honglei really shines in the film, and it would be great seeing him in other Milkyway films. But what's most important is that despite the slightly confusing plot, Triangle always remains an entertaining movie - from the great car chases in Lam's segment to the typical Johnnie To shootouts in the final third, it always kept me on the edge of my seat. Great music has become a staple in Milkyway productions since the last few years, but Zerafa's score here shows strokes of brilliance, adding to the mythical tone established by Tsui in the first third. And that piece playing in the credits is beautiful!

I also really liked the ending, which in a way comments on the theme of "fate" which I thought was illustrated pretty well throughout the movie.

Sure, you perhaps need to be a huge, huge fan of at least one of the directors present here (To's style seems to be prevalent, even in the segments not directed by him) to appreciate this film, but I thought it was pretty great. Maybe people just need to be a bit more open-minded and not expect a masterpiece from three legendary directors who are just having a bit of fun - and contrary to what others said, I felt I was able to participate in that fun.