The Assassin

I'm surprised by the bad reviews on IMDb. I think the problem is that a film titled "The Assassin" happens to attract a certain type of audience--people who are only interested in martial arts flicks, or who walk in expecting an action-packed adrenaline ride. You might be disappointed in this film, but I don't think this movie was meant for you.

A previous review mentioned the "depressed, stilted tones" of the actors.

I don't know what you were expecting ... an assassin during the Tang Dynasty to burst out into song about her inner anguish and emotional turmoil? I watched an interview with Hou Hsiao-hsien, the director who won the prestigious Best Director award at Cannes for this very film. He used a tennis analogy to explain it perfectly, so I'm just going to paraphrase below:

"If you watch the tennis greats like Federer or Nadal battling it out, there's not much expression on their faces. The speed that they're going at, the power in each exchange, there's no room for emotions."

The director, Hou, actually instructed Shu Qi (The Assassin) to tone down her expressions. The crew filmed the fight sequences again, and again, and again, until the actors were all bruised up and the fight flowed naturally, by instinct. By this point, there was really no need for dialogue or excessive expressions.

If you're an assassin fighting for your life, kill or be killed, are you really going to be thinking "let me get my blue steel pout ready for the camera"?

If you can get over the need for overly dramatic expositions and go into a film knowing the main character only has approximately nine spoken lines, and if you can enjoy a film for how starkly beautiful it is.... this might be the film for you.

Many of the audience will not find this movie to be much flattering. Even in China, where the cultural barriers are not supposed to be a big problem, lots of people fall into sleep in the cinema. But there are still some fans of this movie, just like me.

1). Actually it has a quite complete story, which is about politics. In history of China, the tension between the central control and the local force has always been a problem for thousands of years. Weibo, the place where the story happens, has witnessed two different political forces fighting with each other. One group, inclined to make peace with the central court, includes Nie Yinniang and her family. The other group, inclined to the strengthening of local power, includes the wife of the lord (their marriage is a political alliance at the beginning, the same with the marriage of the lord's princess mother). As a fan who always love dramas of political fights, I quite fancy this story.

2). Tang Dynasty has always been a fantasy to most Chinese people. With a frequent communication with different ethics and civilizations, Tang's culture was quite inclusive, and even a little bit exotic for Chinese people. While most shoddy TV plays and films fail to represent Tang's lifestyle, this film presents not only the dazzling costumes and dances, but also original Tang Style's architecture. All those elements make the film attractive.

3). The film's pacing is very slow, and the actions of characters are very simple. The dominance in the shots is shared by natural elements, such as wind, smoke, fog, etc. The way how natural scenes are unfolded, as well as how people are embedded in the space, follows a pattern of classical Chinese poetries and paintings. People who love Chinese poetries and paintings would certainly like this film.

Honestly I wasn't sure how to feel about this film after seeing it.

It looks absolutely gorgeous. The cinematography and production design are really top notch. If I were to judge the merits of this film based purely on its visuals, then I think I'd give it something closer to a 9 or 10. The visuals also comprise some of the best parts of the story telling. Occasionally the film will present an image without context, only to later have the meaning of that image revealed by a character in whatever dialogue driven scene will directly follow that image. It's pretty neat and adds an nice component to the visual splendor beyond simply the surface level appeal.

This element of the visual element of the film though, does hint at what is probably this film's greatest weakness. In the same way that one can become really confused when viewing some of the key images without their meaning revealed until after their presentation, the story of the film as a whole is potentially incomprehensible. I don't think it's because it's necessarily too complicated either. It seems more like the director had no patience for conveying information to the audience. There are key pieces of exposition early on which are never referenced again and that you could easily miss if you aren't laser focused from minute one. This is a problem throughout the film and it's not even limited to expository dialogue. There is one scene in particular when two characters are having what I assume was a deadly showdown. Again, visually very nice. The problem though, was that I couldn't tell who one of the character's was, if they had been mentioned/featured in the film previously, or why the fight was even really happening to begin with.

It's honestly really frustrating, because this film seems to squander so much of the potential I see in the visual elements for reasons that I can't understand. The incomprehensible nature of the story is frankly needless, and I think it severely limits the amount of people who can truly enjoy it. I like a lot of it, and I might watch it again in the future. I think before I recommend it though, I should preface that recommendation by saying that you can't let your attention falter for even a moment, lest you lose track of the narrative completely.

i'll start off by saying I like slow movies. I like movies that tell stories through cinematography, editing, sound design. I like to watch movie and feast in the details and bits that the movie carefully exposes. But this movie... I mean, I know there was a history in there, in the middle of the odd editing and weird characters and dialog. But did I care at all? Did I, at any point, looked for the meaning, the motivations? Well... I tried too. I started the movie with a piece of paper and a pen, taking notes, writing the names of characters, trying to make sense of this good- looking mess. But at 30 minutes, I just gave up. It's not the Mallick type of movie, where you don't know exactly what's going on, but you feel that it's okay, it's a subjective experience. The Assassin is like that pretentious friend that uses a colorful, bright, beautiful prose to talk about something you don't get it, and you don't want to get it. You admire its beauty, but... you just don't care. It's not a beauty that touches, it's a beauty that dares, but you just don't get anything. I don't like to say something is pretentious, but I wouldn't be able do find another word. The Assassin is neither style or substance. I don't see a reason to watch it again, or recommend it.

The images in The Assassin are like a massive coffee table book that you swear you'll open some day: Beautiful, lush, even overwhelming.

The pace doesn't suit a typical American audience, however. The action sequences are too infrequent, too much like ballet, too beautiful, and with too little blood, to satisfy the palates of my countrymen.

There are many quiet scenes--of vast landscapes, of sick old men, of beautiful women and children--that are almost as still as portraits but for the flutter of veils, drifts of smoke, and the sway of trees against a sky of wandering clouds.

A few of you will enjoy this film, appreciate its sensibilities and splendor. Too many, however, may leave the theater confused or lost as to what just transpired.