The Raid: Redemption

With 8" of snow having fallen in the last 24 hours and wind chills dropping to -40 tonight, I've spent a lot of time indoors this weekend. So what better excuse for watching tons of movies!

The Raid: Redemption is the second movie starring martial artist Iko Uwais, his first being Merantau (click here for the review on Zen Throw Down). The two movies could not be more different in tone and style. Merantau was a coming of age film, with Uwais playing an innocent young man from a village making his way into the big city as part of a rite of passage.  In The Raid he plays Rama, a rookie member of an elite SWAT team. Merantau was also much more plot driven, while The Raid is gritty, dark, and focused on fights.

The Raid concerns Rama's SWAT team raiding an apartment building in a slum held by a notorious drug lord and his mob of scumbags and murderers. The mission goes south very quickly, and the surviving officers are trapped halfway up the building with machete and gun wielding psycho criminals coming out of the walls. All the remaining officers can do now is try to get out alive. Very simple plot, but it sure works in serving up fight after fight after fight after fight. 

And there are a lot of fight scenes. They are shot and performed very well, with plenty of opportunity to see the martial arts at work. Another plus, given the gritty subject matter, is that there are no obvious wire-fu moves. Just straight up fighting as far as I can tell. And once The Raid starts moving, it gathers speed like a runaway freight train going downhill. You will definitely get all the action you can handle, and the violence level in the unrated edition is extremely high. Positively, there are a few plot twists along the way to add some flavor to the proceedings, and we get eye candy (as far as that goes in a movie like this) via model and former judo athlete Joe Taslim as Sergeant Jaka.

Bottom-line, The Raid is all about fight scenes. That will make it a must see for many people. I enjoyed the movie, which kept me engaged and - in some points - on edge all the way through to the end.

BTW: Word is that a sequel, with Uwais on board, called Berandal is scheduled for release in March 2014. 

War of the Arrows

War of the Arrows (South Korean poster)

I've been on a lucky streak with martial arts movies and have seen one excellent film after another. Although, technically speaking, this South Korean blockbuster is an action movie and not a martial arts movie. There is no hand-to-hand combat and no mention of the martial arts in even a tangential way. Instead, War of the Arrows features combat via sword and, mainly, archery.

But, nomenclature aside, this is a thoroughly enjoyable movie! Set in the 15th century during an apparently brutal Chinese invasion of Korea, the story is a standard trope: hero rescuing woman kidnapped by foreign villains. Of course, in an action film we're not looking for the plot complexities of Tolstoy. War of the Arrows executes its story well, and earns a unique feel through its gritty camera work, awesome period feel, and making the most of the focus on archery. The pace is a little slow until the action kicks in, but from there on out the movie is a taut as bowstrings and never looks back.

Another big plus was that there was little in the action that was over the top, and the realistic feel enhanced the tension. Also, the teasing of archers pulling back bowstrings and holding, aiming, waiting creates near constant suspense. This is because the long distance nature of an archery strike means there's a wait between the attack and the payoff that is totally different than you see in martial arts movies or action films using guns. The director - Kim Han-Min - exploits this to the hilt in the way he shoots and paces his film.

The final battle scene is like a chess match, with each surviving participant taking actions that then change what the rest of the participants must do. This constant set of reactions leaves the viewer completely unsure how things are going to end and who will live or die. Really well-executed finale to a satisfying rescue and escape storyline.

No, this is not really a martial arts film (despite the label I have here). However, people who like martial arts movies will probably enjoy it anyway. Also, for those looking to escape from the ridiculous bombast of most recent Hollywood action movies, War of the Arrows will be a refreshing change of pace and quality. Easy to see why it was a massive box-office hit in South Korea.

Shaolin

I'm definitely going to gush in this post, because there is no way I can overstate how fantastic Shaolin is! That's all I need to write, but I will go on nevertheless.

Shaolin is incandescent with the spirit of the martial arts, and it's no surprise the Shaolin temple itself endorsed the movie. It must be said that the fights are not ends-in-themselves scenes that you get from most great martial arts movies. There's nothing like Jet Li schooling a crowd of martial artists in Fist of Legend or anything like Tony Jaa wrecking dozens of thugs on the way up a massive staircase in The Protector. The fight scenes in Shaolin are satisfying for sure, but they are also  completely integrated into the plot. This is a good thing, and it elevates the film into the stratosphere, but it is something to keep in mind if you like your martial arts films to heavily emphasize fights. That said, I can't imagine anyone into martial arts movies being dissatisfied with Shaolin because the martial arts and - what the movie terms Martial Zen - are so central to the plot.

Aside from that tiny non-caveat, Shaolin has everything you could possibly ask for in a martial arts movie: rousing battle scenes, amazing fights, martial arts philosophy, Zen monks, a spiritual journey for the hero, a believable villain, great characters, a fantastic cast, genuinely touching drama, and terrific comic relief. At just over two hours, I loved Shaolin so much that I wish there was a version that works in the deleted scenes so I could enjoy the additional depth they provide in future viewings. Of course, as good as the deleted scenes are, I can understand why the director cut them. Strictly speaking, there are not necessary. Further, for a wide audience, pumping the length of this movie towards three hours would likely be too much. I found Shaolin so rich in plot, character, and action that I would eat up the extra material! Director's Cut please!

I'm not even sure where to begin in discussing this phenomenal movie. It must be said that the plot is not original. Andy Lau plays evil warlord Hou Jie, whose ambition overtakes him and causes the destruction of everything he has and most of the people around him. Brought to utter despair, Jie becomes a Zen monk and rebuilds himself through Martial Zen amid the monks of Shaolin temple. We've certainly seen this kind of story before (e.g., Fearless). However, the path Shaolin takes through the trope makes it as engrossing as if it's the first time we're seeing it. For example, since Jie defiled the Shaolin temple just before his fall, most of the monks are not thrilled that he has claimed sanctuary with them and Jie has to prove himself. Also, fate washes up wave after wave of bad karma for Jie to wade through, and it's not long before he has to face the music for his past offenses despite the fact that he has changed. (Again, the deleted scenes deepen Jie's transformation from warlord to monk in some wonderful ways).

All this plot works up to a massive battle scene at the end. Despite the huge scope of this final battle, every detail resonates powerfully because we have so much back story on all the characters. Even secondary and tertiary characters are filled out (often in the deleted scenes) so as to be like flesh and blood people, an example of the amazing writing and characterization woven into the action and fights. This movie would definitely reward multiple viewings.

Andy Lau in Shaolin

As for the performances, I just can't say enough about Andy Lau as General Hou Jie. He commands all the different facets of his character - cruel warlord, doting father, shattered man, earnest monk, and contrite hero - equally well. The evolution and (I think it's fair to say) enlightenment of his character is totally believable and presented in a seamless fashion. Lau also does a great job communicating his character's state of mind, even when he has little or no dialogue. I especially found the scene where he lies at the bottom of the pit and stares at the stars asking "Why?" to be emotionally affecting and right on the money from a 'Martial Zen' point of view. His character's transformation in this movie is one of the most complex performances I've ever seen in a martial arts movie, largely because it can stand on its own as a true dramatic performance.

But the rest of the cast is also strong. Of course, Jackie Chan is a highlight. As Wudao, the eccentric cook, Chan provides comic relief without ever going over the top. His character also has its own subtle transformation, although a lot is left open. This is, of course, a sign of good writing and a movie that doesn't look down on its audience. We don't need every little thing spelled out for us. Elsewhere, Nicholas Tse delivers a wicked villain whose learned his lessons too well at Jie's knee. It would have been easy to overdo this character, but Tse is able to go right up to the edge without losing control. Martial artists Wu Jing and Yu Xing (the latter a Shaolin monk in real life!), and actor Shao-Qun Yu play senior monks in the temple. Each is given a fully-defined character and - in the deleted scenes - subplots to help us get to know them. Xing is especially sympathetic as the fiery Jing Kong who reaches enlightenment when an unexpected refugee arrives at the temple. Great stuff! And this is only about half of the characters that get small but critical screen time without at all detracting from the flow of the main story.

While the martial arts content satisfied me, as I said if you really must have fights that are totally upfront and center, then Shaolin might not be as obvious a 'thumbs-up' movie for you. On the other hand, the amount of material relating to martial arts and Zen philosophy that is sensitively and believably worked into this script (without being preachy), for me, would make up for any possible deficiencies in the number and length of fight scenes. It should also be noted that Shaolin relies on a good number of large battles and, as usual, these scenes tend to displace the hand-to-hand fighting most desirable in martial arts movies. However, on the plus side, every fight and battle is driven by the character's paths. When characters die, triumph, or meet their fate, there is always a resonance for the viewer because these people are so clearly drawn for us. The final battle is totally satisfying and a worthy capstone to the complex story and excellent action that has occurred up to that point.

I've just watched Shaolin, so I hate to be too laudatory. However, I really believe Shaolin will ultimately end-up as one of my favorite martial arts movies of all time. Like Fearless, this is a beautiful-looking movie that celebrates the martial arts spirit, has strong fights, and yet also goes above and beyond by delivering affecting characters in a well-acted and powerful story.

Definitely a must see!

13 Assassins

Takashi Miike's 13 Assassins is an excellent samurai movie filled with loads of swordplay and action. Samurai movies aren't my usual cup of tea, because I prefer weaponless hand-to-hand combat. However, I was fully able to enjoy this movie thanks to the direct nature of the battles. Unlike many large-scale battle scenes where individual combatants are like ants on the screen, this movie places you right in the midst of the battle with specific characters. This has a lot to do with how well-shot 13 Assassins is. There is nothing low-budget or amateur about the look or cinematography of the film (although a few CGI scenes are off). Despite the polish, the movie never gets in the way of showing us action and plenty of it. Miike struck a near-perfect balance there.

While I typically do not demand character development to enjoy a martial arts movie, I certainly don't think it's a bad thing when it is well-integrated in the story. In this case, characterization is definitely thin, and 'development' is not on the menu. Given that we have thirteen assassins, that means some of them get lost or seem the same. However, I felt I could distinguish them enough for the movie's purposes, and their comradeship and interaction - such as it was - was compelling enough for me. If the movie had spent a little more time with them, yes it would have been a better movie for sure. However, the movie was not harmed by the lack of focus on characterization.

The movie is really in three acts: 1) assembling the assassins for the battle, 2) traveling to and preparing for the battle, and 3) the battle. In order to drive deeper characterization, the movie would have had to pump up acts one or two, and I think this would have made the movie take too long to get to the pay-off. And make no mistake, the pay-off is the battle at the end. It's a long, amazing battle that totally delivers! Best of all, I don't recall any use of wires, gravity defying superhumanism, or poetic beauty shots. This made everything much more exciting, in the moment, and rendered the swordplay much more impressive to me.

The only exception to the realism was when the vagrant character, Kiga, reappears at the end alive and well. He was obviously killed earlier in the movie, and I did not understand why/how he came back to life. However, the movie is so strong, that I attributed this to me missing something related to samurai culture/folklore rather than the movie doing something goofy. And it certainly didn't hurt my enjoyment; I just went with it.

13 Assassins was a thrilling ride, and I would definitely watch it again. Recommended!

The Grandmaster

While flying home from LA on a business trip, I was stunned and delighted to find that the selection of movies included a martial arts movie: director Wong Kar-wai's Ip Man biopic The Grandmaster! Thank you, United Airlines, for not limiting my choice to the usual airline fodder: the latest attempts at comedy from former SNLers and formulaic rom-coms.

From what I understand, three cuts of The Grandmaster have screened (insert annoyed growl). There's the original Chinese theatrical release (130 minutes), a version shown at Cannes (123 minutes), and the typically slashed US version (108 minutes). From what I gather in the always helpful consumer reviews on amazon, no 'full' or 'uncut' version of The Grandmaster exists because new scenes were added to the Cannes version that did not appear in the Chinese release. So buying a copy of this movie right now is risky, as the situation cries out for a Director's Cut or Collector's Edition. I'm not sure which version I saw, but I'm 99% positive it wasn't the US version because a) what I saw had to be a minimum of two hours, b) there was no option for dubbed English, and c) dialogue concerning martial arts philosophy is what usually ends up on the cutting room floor in US versions of martial arts movies.

So, with that out of the way, the other elephant in the room is how Kar-wai's The Grandmaster stacks up against what (I imagine) is its key competition, Donnie Yen's Ip Man and Ip Man 2 (click to get to reviews on Zen Throw Down). My conclusion is that the Kar-wai and Yen movies are so different in approach and style that it's a bit hard to compare them. Yen's Ip Man (the original, that is, the sequel is pretty lame across the board) is the better picture in terms of fight scenes. While Leung reportedly studied martial arts to star in Kar-wai's movie, Yen is without question a far better martial artist. Ip Man has far more satisfying displays of martial arts than we get in The Grandmaster. The latter movie uses a too much wire-fu, slow-mos, cuts, and slick art direction to compete on this score. For example, the first fight in the movie employs a ludicrous amount of rain to dramatize the scene. It's like the actors are fighting in a pool of water! It's not that the fight scenes in The Grandmaster are bad; they're just not intended to be as direct and visceral.

That said, the fight scenes in The Grandmaster are given a far better context than Ip Man provided. Ip Man was a bit dark in tone and lacked much focus on martial arts philosophy. The Grandmaster delivers this content in spades. Over and over, the dialogue - and perhaps the whole theme of the movie - is steeped in martial arts philosophy and questions of honor. Several fights are driven by or preceded by such content. For me, this makes the fights resonate more. For a fan of martial arts movies, I think both are worth seeing depending on your mood. If you want straight-up fight scenes, then Yen's movie is your choice. If you want something deeper then opt for Kar-wai. For those not into martial arts movies as a genre, The Grandmaster is the best choice.

The Grandmaster has flashes of the cinematography and graceful wire-fu that made Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Hero beautiful to watch. Wisely, Kar-wai doesn't take his film anywhere near as far in this direction as those movies. The Grandmaster and remains mostly grounded in reality. This approach fits the more dramatic tone of the movie, yet does not make us question whether the movie belongs in the genre. The Grandmaster is also propelled by the performances of an excellent cast. Tony Leung's portrayal of Ip Man outshines Yen's for, while Yen is without doubt the better martial artist, Leung is without doubt the better actor. The Grandmaster also offers the always compelling Ziyi Zhang. She very nearly steals the movie as - strangely - she has more storyline than Leung!

As a biopic overall, The Grandmaster works better than the Yen franchise. The Grandmaster covers the same historic timeline as the two Ip Man movies however, since Ip Man 2 is a very weak movie, The Grandmaster does a better job telling the whole story. Both films also have brief references in their endings to Ip Man meeting the young Bruce Lee. In Ip Man 2, this meeting is handled in an embarrassingly ham-fisted manner. In The Grandmaster, it is quite subtle. The facial resemblance of the child playing the young Bruce Lee to the actual actor is the only cue we're given and we are allowed to make the connection ourselves.

I'd highly recommend The Grandmaster, even if you have seen Ip Man. It's a different take on the story and a different kind of movie altogether, and it's a satisfying viewing experience filled with dialogue and fights that breath in the spirit of the martial arts.

Dragon (starring Donnie Yen)

It's been a while since I watched a new martial arts movie, and I just got done watching Dragon. [FYI: I saw the uncut, 155 minute version. The US version apparently cut over 30 minutes. Grrr!] In Dragon, Donnie Yen plays Liu Jinxi, a quiet paper maker and family man who lives in a small village. He becomes a hero when he inadvertently defeats some thugs who come to the village looking for trouble. An investigator (played by Takeshi Kaneshiro) looks into the case and slowly unravels Jinxi's past, which is much darker than anyone suspects. Don't worry; no spoilers!

The movie raises a couple themes, such as: Can people change? What is the relationship of mercy and justice? Admittedly, Dragon doesn't tie these questions up too well, but I did find myself watching Yen's character for evidence one way or the other of the answer to the first question. That was rewarding. Plus I was able to overlook the lack of full resolution for a lot of reasons, mainly because Dragon has a strong plot as well great martial arts scenes. This is a pretty rare combination in a martial arts movie. Second, I totally bought into Yen and Kaneshiro's characters. Good performances by the males leads made this side of the film a highlight, especially during some creepy scenes where we're not sure what Yen's character is capable of. All this, plus a great look for the film placed Dragon in the above average category pretty much from the start. Noteworthy that Yen directed the action sequences himself, and he did a top notch job.

On the downside, as the movie progressed it unfortunately tried to up the ante on the quiet, character-driven story through the use of over-the-top melodrama and bat shit crazy violence. As Dragon made Liu Jinxi's past darker and darker and a long-lost person from that past nuttier and nuttier, I found the film less and less engaging. I was actually kind of underwhelmed during the final fight scene, not because the skill or filming was off but because I just didn't buy the situation and characters anymore. It's almost as if the writers didn't have enough faith in their story, so they felt they had to introduce extra flashbacks of cruel violence and dysfunction to compensate. For me, it hurt the film.

Part of my objection is that I generally find martial arts movies that get too dark just don't work for me. The best martial arts movies display great skills from the stars which, of course, entails a degree of violence (and even some 'ick factor' too!).  However, the best films also rarely stray too far from the spirit of the martial arts. Dragon starts out really well along these lines, and it does a great job subtly working in some martial arts/Zen philosophy early on. Later, however, we get bloodthirsty psychos, cruelty to children, and a lightning bolt. That stuff just doesn't fit with the spirit of martial arts, and it falls flat. Of course, this is just my taste, but I doubt I'm the only martial arts fanboy who feels this way. Plus, Dragon did not need to go there in order to work.

Bottom-line: I enjoyed this movie very much but my enjoyment definitely dipped in the last third of the movie. I recommend it as a strong martial arts movie, especially for Donnie Yen fans and those who want a solid plot in their martial arts flicks.

Samsara

Twenty years ago director Ron Fricke released Baraka, a film consisting of disparate visual vignettes from all around the world. The point of the movie seemed to be adding up the visuals into a holistic semi-whole. It was a gorgeous movie and a wonderful viewing experience.  In 2008, he released Samsara, a movie with a similar approach.

The title of the movie suggests what the holistic message might be. Samsara is a concept that seems to recur in multiple religions. In Zen Buddhism it refers to the world around us, which is rife with delusion and contention. When we are wrong-minded, we buy into it and create suffering. Another - more Zen-like - way of describing this is "the cycle of life and death". Hence, the initial brief images before the credits consist of related images: a sarcophagus, a mummy, lava erupting.

After this there is a shot of monks painstakingly using sand to create a mandala which (I'm willing to bet) is a depiction of samsara. (If not, I'd love to know what it is as I think it must be a key to understanding the movie's message). The film goes on to lay out some beautiful images, drawn from all over the world. The fractal-like shapes seen in the mandala are echoed in shots of highway systems at night and housing developments over the sea in (I believe) Dubai.

The film goes on to some beautifully shot but disturbing images: juxtaposing human-looking robots with images of the sex trade, seeing animals trapped in pens for feeding and then obese people eating the products of those animals at a fast food restaurant, people in slums and then convicts doing calisthenics with dance music tracked over it, the manufacture of weapons of war with tribal peoples holding the weapons.

If I'm correct about the meaning of the mandala the monks create at the start of the movie, then one of the last scenes is especially pointed. The monks wipe away the mandala they have painstakingly created. This would be the solution that Zen suggests for dealing with samsara and delusion. Don't.

Samsara is beautifully shot and is very interesting visually, although be prepared for some disturbing images in this amazing video essay.

Last Summer in the Hamptons

This is the second Henry Jaglom film I have watched (Deja Vu was the first), and I enjoy the rough but immediate feel of both these films. Deja Vu seemed very cinema verite, while Last Summer seems less so. That could reflect that the approach works better in this film or that it was more scripted. Not sure which.

It is very talky, and that does tend to make the movie a bit slow in pacing. However, I like how his movies unfold. The standard plot devices and progression are tossed aside in favor of characterization and interplay between the characters. This makes the film far less predictable and truer to life. It also allows for the characters to be understood as you get to know them, and even for certain aspects of them to remain unresolved.

For me the key to the movie is the first scene - the one before the credits start. In this scene the eldest member of the family consuls her granddaughter about how to make sense of a part she is playing. I'm paraphrasing, but the essence of it was that acting is learning. It's about what happens to you from the moment the scene starts to when it ends. I drew this as a parallel to the entire movie. Each character (and really all of us) are going from scene to scene in life, and perhaps the trick is what happens between the start and end of each scene. The one thing I'd love to learn the meaning of the word the grandmother uses to describe the annual event at the house. No one in the family knows, but I bet Jaglom does and it probably is a big key to understanding his aim with this movie at a deeper level.

Jaglom has created a movie that is an atom smasher...with characters as the atoms. If you like the idea of seeing flawed, intelligent, creative people interacting, combusting, and arriving where they arrive, then you'll love this movie. If you need something a little bit more linear...you'd better pass.

Iron Monkey

This 2002 movie has a lot of potential: The director (Yuen Wo Ping) has done many martial arts movies, and it stars the talented martial artist Donnie Yen. There was also a reasonable cast and plot (about talented martial arts masters playing Robin Hood against a greedy governor) to hold together the many fight scenes.

Naturally, there is some wire-fu since the fight scenes are choreographed by the same people who gave us Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. However, do not expect the fluidity of those fights here; the budget behind Iron Monkey was clearly a lot lower. Even so, the wire-fu is not annoyingly overdone, and there is plenty of skill on display (mostly from Donnie Yen, of course).

Unfortunately, Iron Monkey is so poorly shot that it's sometimes difficult to appreciate the skill of the fighters. There are also too many scenes of 'comic relief' involving the corrupt governor, who is a horny buffoon. For me, this made the movie much sillier than it had to be and detracted from the martial arts.

A lot of people rate Iron Monkey very high as a martial arts flick, but I found it reasonable and not much more. I might watch it again someday, but it's definitely not a 'must-see'.

Deja Vu

I could not get my blue-ray of Shaolin (the movie I started to watch two nights ago) to work. Concerning! So, on a whim, I decided to rewatch this old favorite. I'm not big on romance movies, but Deja Vu overcame all my objections to the genre the first time I saw it at the (sadly gone) Fine Arts theatre in Chicago.

No spoilers! Deja Vu is a love story through and through, but it's really about how we make big choices in life. The story concerns a woman named Dana who's in a lukewarm, comfortable engagement. While in Jerusalem on business, she crosses paths with an older woman who relates a fascinating, but sad, tale of how decades ago she met the love of her life but that they did not act on their immediate awareness of their connection. She hands Dana a ruby pin her long-lost love had made for her. After they part, Dana realizes she still has the woman's pin. She tries to locate the woman in Paris without success and ends up - on a whim - in Dover. There she meets a stranger (Sean) with whom she has an instant, unexplainable, and overpowering attraction. Like the woman Dana met, she knows Sean is the love of her life. Even odder, he feels the exact same way about her. The rest of the movie is about how Dana and Sean decide whether to give into this amazing connection or to remain in their comfortable lives.

I was swept into and off with this movie in a way that rarely happens anymore, largely thanks to the absolutely phenomenal acting. I also enjoyed the cinema verite approach, where the actors seem to be improvising their rather deep conversations about life and love, passed up chances, and lost connections. One of the other strengths of the movie is that the story does not obsess about the attraction between the two leads. Are they or aren't they in love? Does he want her as much as she want him? All that neurotic nonsense is bypassed as the film quickly establishes the love is real and reciprocated. This leaves the movie to focus on the implications of acting on such emotions. Through the conversations the characters have with each other, we see relationships that represent the warmth and happiness of long-term commitment and others that embody the freedom and adventure of following the moment. The downsides of both lifestyles are also presented.

And there are no easy answers. This isn't a movie about cutesy Reese Witherspoon who just don't realize she's in love with a douchebag when sweet little Luke/Owen Wilson is right there in front of her (or vice versa with some other himbo and American sweetheart of the moment). Dana and Sean are not the 'good guys' stuck in lives with obviously bad partners. They are in committed adult lives, and it's easy to see why they like those lives and people. However, it's clear that those lives fall woefully short of the connection they have found with each other.

This is the most powerful choice the writers/director made in Deja Vu: there is no easy answers here...and, more importantly, no guarantees. This creates a great deal of suspense, because there is no feeling from the movie that if Dana and Sean end up together that they must be happy or that they will not regret the choice. The film certainly sets us up to want these two characters to be together, but this is because we are caught up in the romance and connection that seem to be pushing them together. Jaglom and his wife (and lead actress) wrote this film to never give us any sense of security. Deja Vu promises no 'happy ever after'; there is a choice to be made and no guarantees that what the characters choose will outweigh what they must give up by choosing it. The only certain thing is that whatever choice they make will affect them for the rest of their lives. Even at the very end of the movie, when Dana has a conversation with her father (such conversations usually providing the audience with permission to expect a 'happy ever after'), his last words to her are charged with double meaning.

Aside from the fantastic story, acting, and direction (be prepared to look past some rough editing likely necessitated by the cinema verite approach), Deja Vu appeals to me because the characters are all very intelligent, successful people who are past their twenties. These are adults: established, with deep connections to the people in their lives, a firm sense of themselves, and solid direction. This exponentially increases the gravity of Dana and Sean's choice and the risks they run by 'jumping into life'. This isn't about the right prom date or 'do I get the guy/girl'. This about being faced with the pain and excitement of a life-altering experience, and having to decide whether to embrace or reject it.

Clash

Clash is the latest movie by Johnny Tri Nguyen, the star of Force of Five and The Rebel. Or at least it's his latest movie available in the US. Clash has a very different feel than The Rebel, the last Nguyen movie I saw. That movie was a period piece, while this one is a stylish thriller set in the present day.

The plot is pretty straightforward, but the competing interests of the characters and their resulting double crosses of each other lead to enough twists to lift the story in to the better-than-average category for a martial arts movie.

That said, the plot doesn't get in the way much of the action, and the fights are really good. I can't think of any fights that looked like they used wires, which is good given Clash's grittier feel. While there are guns and knives used, the martial arts remain the focus in all the fights. The only downside to the guns is that it's a bit laughable what bad shots the characters must be in order to miss some of their targets!

Nguyen remains a strong performer, with a good deal of screen charisma beyond his skills as a martial artist. Some of his spinning kicks in this movie are especially impressive. Also, both he and costar Thanh Van Ngo (also from The Rebel) engage in more submission moves than I recall from recent martial arts movies. That was cool.

Downsides? There are two big ones. First, the romance between Nguyen and Ngo is extremely forced and, since it takes up a good deal of time in the middle third of the film, that's a problem. I didn't feel any sparks that suggested these two characters could overcome the obvious trust issues enough to fall in love. As a result, the love story is a big minus. It slows the movie down too much, despite some of the additional complications it introduces (no spoilers here).

The other downside is that Le Thanh Son's direction ends up spending a bit too much time on shots of his stars smoking, drinking, and otherwise 'looking tough' and this makes them come off like dorky poseurs. Nguyen is a hot guy; he doesn't need the film to sell him to us. An extended example of this is when Nguyen and Ngo tango in a club. The director's (or scriptwriter) is trying to be stylish, but it just seems out of place. Exactly when does a woman who spent her teens in a brothel, was a mother, and then lived as a mercenary find time to learn tango moves? Plus, the obvious use of a dancing double for Nguyen (who clearly couldn't 'cut a rug' if you gave him scissors) makes the whole thing kind of embarrassing. On the plus side, Le Thanh Son does a good job with the rest of the film.

While these flaws definitely slow the pace of the movie down in places, especially in the middle, Clash is a great ride. I have yet to see Nguyen give a bad performance or dish out a bad film, so here's hoping his star continues to rise.

Atlas Shrugged, Part One

For me, Atlas Shrugged is one of the ten greatest novels ever written, and I can say that even though I do not necessarily agree with Objectivism. So I went into this flick with high demands but not super high expectations. While this is not a stellar film experience, I must say I was engrossed! For me, an Atlas Shrugged movie would have to do three things really well: convey the philosophy, rock the plot, and get the characters right.

Rand's philosophy gets very little air time here, but I'll give Part 1 a pass because this is a trilogy. The director may be relying on the second or third 'acts' to develop the philosophical angles. Since Rand did her philosophy to death in some portions of her book, a less heavy-handed approach could be a plus.

In terms of distilling Rand's mammoth plot, I think they made some good choices. As opposed to the slow economic decline Rand painted, we start out in the middle of a crisis. This was a brilliant choice as it allowed a good deal of explication to be avoided. We now know what the problem is, so the film can focus on who caused it, who can stop it, and what's in their way. I also like how they drew the crisis into parallel with some of the feelings and issues Americans have today. They also quickly deal with the obvious plot problem: why should the audience care about railroads? This issue is credibly handled in the first minutes of the movie, and it was wise not to dwell on it. The use of blackberrys and texting seems shocking in Rand's speechifying world, but they are a perfect way to telegraph some of the conversations and keep things moving.

On the downside I'm not keen on the early revelation of a man behind the 'disappearances', perhaps because I felt the mystery aspect of the novel was one of the key plot hooks. Even though the way they have the men 'disappear' makes good dramatic use of the visual medium, I still feel they could do more with it. The 'destroyer' could be portrayed in a horror movie, stalker way (he kind of is already with the shadows and waiting for people to be alone). Have some fun with it! I also found the pacing a bit rushed, but I also find Gone With the Wind rushed compared to the book. Perhaps any movie based on a book this big can't help but seem rushed by comparison. No matter, a longer run time (an extra 30 minutes would only take us to 2 hours) is clearly needed. Given the trilogy approach, a longer run time would help with pacing but wouldn't burden the audience too much.

As for the actors inhabiting these larger than life roles, I like the choices they made though there is some wooden acting. The actress who plays Dagny is sometimes a bit stiff (and I'm not sure she knows how to walk in heels), but she definitely 'gets' the character and conveys her aura. Hank Rearden is also well-played, and the actor is physically perfect for the role. The jury is still out on John Galt and Francisco D'Anconia who each get minimal screen time, although the updating of playboy Francisco into a 'playa' is pitch perfect. Likewise, the updating of James Taggart into the typical do-nothing, pampered executive all too common in the business world today is spot on. We'll see how the actor does as his character starts to show his true colors. A big plus is the guy who plays Ellis Wyatt! He totally sinks his teeth into the role and steals the scenes he's in. On the other hand, the woman who plays Lillian Rearden needs more juice. She's playing the vixen-bitch in this philosophical soap opera, and she should camp it up a bit. The actor playing Hugh Akston was able - in one minute of screen time - to repel me. He played Akston with the aura of a surly Walmart check-out clerk rather than a brilliant scholar. Terrible choice and actor.

One surprising note is how the saggier acting moments were more than offset by the benefits of the cast of virtual unknowns (or at least a cast with low recognition quotient). These actors were definitely committed to their roles. Besides, I find it terribly distracting in dramatic movies to have recognizable stars onscreen. It's like when I saw a biopic on Jane Austin starring Anne Hathaway. I never got past the fact that I was watching Anne-Hathaway-playing-Jane-Austin. Of course some of that was her poor performance, but some of it is just the star power. You really have to be as talented as Meryl Streep or Colin Firth to overcome that so that the viewer can forget they're watching a film with a star. I don't think I would have enjoyed this movie as much if Dagny had been played by Julia Roberts or Kate Hudson or whoever, even if they did the job perfectly. Brad Pitt as Hank Reardon? Ick.

Bottom-line, Atlas Shrugged is technically a low-budget movie, but it looks and functions very well all things considered. I thoroughly enjoyed it and, like I said, my demands were pretty high as I can easily hate adaptations of my favorite novels. Part of the fun here was anticipation: how will they handle the lighting of Wyatt's Torch? What will Wesley Mouch look like? From what I understand, Part 2 is coming in Fall of 2012 and I'm looking forward to it very much!

Merantau

Merantau is an Indonesian martial arts film featuring Iko Uwais. From what I gather the martial art that he practices is called silat.

Merantau is a pretty good film. Not as fast paced or intense as a Tony Jaa film, but definitely some interesting fight scenes. One thing I liked about the fight scenes is that Uwais' character (Yuda) actually gets knocked around a bit more than the hero is other martial arts films does. He gets hit and in one scene even gets the worse end of a beat down. It added a bit of realism to the movie, especially since Yuda is so young.

While the production is not terribly slick, the colors in the movie are really intense and there are some wonderful shots scattered about. As it turns out, Uwais is a reasonable actor and he invests his character with a positive, likable vibe. That said, there is only the barest of motivations given for why Yuda risks his life for the two orphans he meets, and I was confused as to how he could have been sent to Jakarta to a place that was torn down and no phone number available. Call ahead? Oh well, it's not all about the plot.

Like I said the pacing in Merantau was sometimes a little slow, and perhaps the movie spent a tad too much time advancing its serviceable plot than was needed, but I did enjoy this movie and I look forward to seeing more from Uwais.

Ong-Bak 3

In my prior post I reviewed Ong Bak 2 which, despite its serious drawbacks went on to become Tony Jaa's most successful film yet. To clean up the loose ends left by the disorganized and chaotic production, the studio went ahead and made a third film - Ong Bak 3 - but this movie is no less a hot mess than Ong Bak 2. It's just a different kind of hot mess.

Ong Bak 3 has a clearer story than its predecessor. But instead of just tying up all the loose ends from Ong Bak 2, the third movie adds more subplots! We learn that there's a curse on...all Thailand? The village? Oh, I don't know! There's a curse. The evil king has captured and is slowly torturing Tien (Jaa) to death while uttering the most cliched Jabba the Hutt bad guy laugh ever - literally: hah hah haaah! hah hah haaah!). However, he's also going nuts because - as we learn from yet another flashback - he poisoned his predecessor to get the throne. Then there's that weird crow fighter. He's back and turns out to be some kind of evil spirit (I think?) who wants to take the throne so that he can...um, I have no idea why this crow-spirit-thing exists or what it's really after. Meanwhile, Tien is rescued deus ex machina by royal decree and carted off to his village to slough off his vengeful nature through meditation. It got to the point where I just didn't care! "Please Ong Bak 3!" I screamed. "Pick a plotline, any plotline, and just get on with it!"

Ong Bak 3 is filmed with a much more appealing style, so the feel of the movie is less oppressive that the first sequel/prequel. We even get some beautiful shots of Thailand, as opposed to the muddy, rainy slopheap Ong Bak 2 seemed determined to portray Thailand as. However, this improvement is undermined as Ong Bak 3 takes on a religious subtext that is truly from outer space. Nothing against a religious subtext, but this stuff is nutty with a capital freak and I couldn't figure out what religion this subtext is supposed to reflect. There's tons of Jesus imagery: the 'chosen one' dies a death of crucifixion level violence, is resurrected, and then provides salvation to his people. Jaa even grows a beard and wears white when fighting the evil crow spirit, and he hurls his wooden staff down to put everyone on alert that he's there to free the slaves. Moses and Jesus all wrapped up in one? Yeesh. The whole thing is so heavy handed that it quickly goes over the line (WAY over the line!) and becomes a messianic ego-trip for Jaa.

There's some Buddhist/Zen Buddhist philosophy rattling around in the script like a loose pebble in a rusty bucket, but it seems more like window dressing than anything seriously presented. But the worst aspect of religious theme is the over the top supernatural aspects. For example, the crow spirit summons an eclipse at one point, and at another sends wicked black smoke at a monk (never did figure out that the heck that smoke was all about). Later, Tien summons white lighting after he dispels the eclipse. What religion does all this hocus-pocus bullcrap come from? Wicca maybe? No, I can't even say that because it'd be insulting to Wiccans. Long story short, a religious subtext has to have some kind of consistent morality or philosophy. Otherwise it's just a whole bunch of crazy.

Worst of all - for all the backstory in these two movies - by the end of Ong Bak 3 I still have little understanding of what and why most of the action in the film took place. Why is killing Tien so important to the evil king? Why did he kill Tien's parents? Why did the king's boss allow Tien to live? How did Tien end up captured by the slavers? Why does the one guy become a monk? What does Tien learn that makes him turn around? And, if he learned it, why does he go from monk to monkey and literally bite a hunk out of a guy's neck in the final fight? What caused the 'instant replay/do over'? It's hard to take Ong Bak 3 seriously or become invested in the characters when there's no clue as to what's driving or at stake for any of them.

At the end of watching these two movies (total running time of three hours), I felt like there was definitely a good Tony Jaa flick buried in there somewhere. However, it's lost in a mix-master script of ridiculous and overwrought plots/subplots and a lack of logical flow that would give the story elements coherence. The movie takes itself far too seriously and, while some of the fight scenes are good, others are sub par and the use of wire-fu is truly disappointing. Despite the obvious potential and panache used to film these movies and the evident potential, they fall far short of being enjoyable on just about any level and come off as pretentious, dull, and ridiculous.

Hopefully this is just a slip-up for Jaa, and his next offering will be tighter and more focused. He's too good of a performer to throw in the towel!

Ong-Bak 2

Ong Bak 2 and Ong Bak 3 combine to form a single story that is a prequel to Tony Jaa's wonderful Ong Bak. The story told in these movies takes place 600 years earlier than the modern day Ong Bak and, further, the two stories have nothing in common. So if you like Ong Bak you do not have to see installments 2 & 3. That's good because although this pair of movies tell an epic story with great potential, these movies are what is commonly referred to as 'a hot mess'. I'll start with Ong Bak 2 and then review the third movie in tomorrow's post.

Tony Jaa could never be accused of not trying hard enough. His movies are filled to the brim with plot, subplot, characters of all kinds, wicked villains, and exceptional fight scenes. Of course, Jaa's skills as a martial artist are truly amazing and his movies really deliver, so much so that this viewer finds them almost a bit too much! Unfortunately, Ong Bak 2 is too much. It tries to cover too much ground in a single story and ends up delivering well on nothing. There's a complex political backstory, a love story, a coming of age subtext, and lots of fighting. Since none of these pieces of the movie are fully developed, Ong Bak 2 comes off like a victim of multiple personality disorder. All the different plotlines come forward and then vanish, shouting over each other in a confusing train wreck of storytelling.

Part of the reason the movie turned out so badly is that production of Ong Bak 2 - which was really supposed to be a complete film without a sequel - turned into a Francis Ford Coppola-style debacle: out of control cost overruns, power struggles with the studios, and Tony Jaa apparently disappearing in the middle of shooting for two months. This chaos is clearly reflected in the resulting movie: Ong Bak 2 is so confusing with all its flashbacks, time shifting, and patched-up ending that you wind up lost as to what's going on and what the thread of the story is.

Ong Bak 2 is also filmed in a very dark and overly dramatic manner, with self-conscious cinematography, unnecessary slo-mos and cuts, constant surging music, and strange color effects (not sure what the technical term for that is). And - to underline the dire IMPORTANCE of all that is happening - it is raining pretty much non-stop in this movie. Ong Bak 2 spares no expense to look great, but Tony Jaa (playing a nobleman's son named Tien) is another story. He's truly hideous in his rat's nest of long hair and just hard to look at without wincing. There are also scenes where the color and lighting make him look like Michael Jackson. Creepy!

Finally, while Ong Bak 2 has some good fights, several fall flat. This is very surprising for a Jaa film. Slo-mos clearly reveal the weak contact between Jaa and his opponents, undermining the impact of the fights by letting us clearly see that they are - of course - staged for the camera. Elsewhere fast cuts render many of Jaa's moves impossible to follow. Lastly, the film makes use of wire-fu, shocking considering Jaa has always seemed to pride himself on presenting the real deal.

Ong Bak 2 desperately needed its sequel in order to make sense, provide a resolution, or any viewing satisfaction. The third film was an attempt to provide an emergency clean-up effort after this runaway debacle slammed into a brick wall and splattered onto DVD.

Ip Man 2

I was really looking forward to Ip Man 2, as I enjoyed the first movie a lot (see Zen Throw Down review: http://zenthrowdown.blogspot.com/2010/12/ip-man.html). Unfortunately Ip Man 2 is a disappointment and a surprisingly weak film. It's a classic case of a martial arts movie getting too slick for its own good while trying to go mainstream. Ip Man 2 lacks the fights needed to appeal to fans of the genre, but it's not strong enough in plot and characterization for mainstream audiences to care.

Ip Man 2 is certainly a well-crafted flick, but I just didn't find any heart or soul in it. The fights contain far too much Matrix-esque wire-fu and some of it is so silly that it makes the film ridiculous. You can't treat it as anything other than a popcorn flick, and yet it's trying to (I think) have some kind of heart. Worse than that, there are tons of fast cuts that prevent the performers from showing off their skills, and this makes you wonder if it's all special effects. Big turn off for a genre fan.

So what about the things mainstream audiences will look for: plot, acting, characterization? Ip Man 2 doesn't deliver any of this. Donnie Yen reprises the role of Ip Man capably enough, but his sincere performance seems lost and out of place in this silly movie. It's almost as though he and his character are beside the point. His student, Lueng, was well-played and interesting, but the character is not developed and goes nowhere. His wife's pregnancy was all front and center but has nothing to do with anything. A close friend of Ip Man is homeless after taking a Japanese bullet in the head and...not sure why that's in the movie as it also goes nowhere. Sammo Hung has great presence, but his character is undefined. First, he's a Hong Kong martial arts mafioso (which is a bit silly all by itself), but then we find he's working for the Brits, but then he changes sides...sort of. Huh??? What's the point of this? The final scene with a young Bruce Lee is dorky and feels tacked on to the end of the film.

The main reason Ip Man 2 will fall flat - for any viewer - is that there is no conflict. Who or what is Ip Man fighting? First we see him trying to open a martial arts school to make ends meet. Then he comes into conflict with Hung, but since Hung's having his chain yanked by the Brits they become allies in short order. Then the rest of the movie is about a boxing match with a British boxer, which Ip Man has to take on and win because...uh, well...I'm not sure why he has to take it on or win. So there can be a big fight at the end of the movie?

I also have to say that this Western fight/match with crooked 'bosses' rigging things was done far, far better in Fearless. In that movie, if Jet Li's character didn't take the match or lost it then his school and people would be shamed. Ip Man 2 tries to mine this vein but lacks the heart and soul to can't make the sparks fly. Ong-Bak worked this angle better, too, and it wasn't even trying to nor were those fights the core of the film (except as awesome displays of skill!). In Ip Man 2, the crooked Brit police chief running the match is too poorly played and laughable to be a real villain. His arrest at the end is corny. The match itself is not very interesting, and I still don't get the 'realization' that inspired Ip Man to open the decisive can of whoop-ass at the end. Lame.

Without much martial arts action and without a central conflict or a reason to care, it's hard to find Ip Man 2 anything but empty and directionless. This undermines the impact of the fight scenes, especially since they aren't being showcased for their own sake. I walked away from the movie feeling as though its only point was to cash in on what I understand is an Ip Man phenomenon in the East. Donnie Yen lost a good deal of credibility with me on this one.

Worth renting if you're a huge Donnie Yen fan or can't live without seeing more of his Ip Man franchise. Even in that case, though, don't expect much.

Enter The Dragon

I had shied away from watching martial arts movies from the 70s because they always looked a bit too cheesy. But a friend told me I had to watch Enter The Dragon. So onto the Netflix queue it went.

No doubt there is a lot of cheese here, largely because the movie so clearly shows its date. The "70's mandude" swagger will make you roll your eyes more than once. The music is all over the place; one minute its like bad James Bond spy music and then the next it sounds like something from Shaft. The audio track stinks and makes it seem like you're watching dubbed foreign film when the whole thing is actually shot in English. John Saxon for me is always a Rashid Ahmed from Dynasty. Lame acting, weird clothes and hair, a thoroughly ridiculous story, and a silly villain.

That's a lot to look past, but this movie does a great job serving up some really sweet fights. No question about it! The rough cinematography actually works in favor of the film as there are some scenes where you totally feel the power Bruce Lee brought to the table. I knew Lee was big into fitness but holy crapballs! This guy has a V-back I would die to have, and he ripples every time he moves! His skills are presented in amazing clarity, and it makes me understand why Bruce Lee fans object to the slicker cinematography of today (even the stuff that I don't see as slick must seem like it is to them). A roughly shot movie like this further emphasizes that slick studio magic tends to dull the edge of a martial arts movie.

From what I understand, Lee had a lot of control over this film, and I can see it in the way there are pieces of martial arts philosophy lovingly worked into it. Apparently, this new release has re-inserted these scenes as - back in the day - some movie studio douchebag cut them from the film after Lee's death and prior to the initial release. Brilliant decision to put them back in. I just do not get why this material seems to offend the US movie industry so much. Even today, such material is routinely cut from foreign movies for US release. It deadens the spirit of the film to not have it.

So, okay yes, there is a lot about this movie that is dated. No, I can't quite get past the high pitched 'whooo-ahhh!' that Lee lets loose when he's fighting sometimes. Yes, there were times I was watching the story and thinking "WTF?". But I really can't imagine any fan of the genre not being satisfied by Enter The Dragon. The spirit of the martial arts is definitely here, Lee's presence is awesome and smashes through all issues you might have, and his skills are so strong that you can easily see why he became such an iconic figure. I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, and I would consider checking out some of his other films which is surprising given my feelings about these films going into Enter The Dragon. I think I'd even consider buying a copy for my martial arts movie collection.

RIP Bruce Lee

Kung-Fu Master

I read some reviews on Amazon that suggest this movie is actually a TV show or mini-series that has been spliced together for release into a 95 minute movie, and that makes a lot of sense after watching this. Kung-Fu Master is no piece of art, as a movie or as a genre entry. Dou Xiao's direction is incredibly poor, and the martial arts are a curious mix of actual skill, badly done (and silly) wire-fu, and cut aways evincing incredibly bad editing. While a plot can be thin in this genre, it should be at least serviceable. This movie has no discernible plot, and the end makes zero sense.

What's good about it? Well, Kung-Fu Master has some excellent distance shots of some of the fights that incorporate several combatants at once. Most of these sequences involve fights with javelins or sticks. There's also (I think?) some good effort displayed by star Yuen Biao, but the wire-fu and endless cuts always make you question whether it's real or completely choreographed.

It almost seems as though the movie is trying to be a modern day version of one of those cheesy chop-socky movies from the 70s, but I can't quite believe the people behind Kung-Fu Master had that much vision. I got the movie dirt cheap at a close-out sale for a Blockbuster Video store. And that's about all I can recommend you expend for it. Poor.

Who Am I?

It would be hard to imagine any movie being sillier than Who Am I?. Of course, I haven't seen any other Jackie Chan films and my impression is that silly is his forte. Who knows? This might be depressing arthouse for Chan.

Who Am I? doesn't have a single serious frame in its 108 minute length. The plot is inane, the characters ridiculous. It's directed, shot, written, and acted without a shred of style. This movie is sheer cotton candy, and it gleefully embraces its foolishness and slapstick sensibilities. While I think a little Jackie Chan will go a long way for me, I must admit I found this goofy movie fun. Maybe you will too, if you shut off your brain.

There was a low level of martial arts content for my tastes, but the fight between Chan and two adversaries on the roof of a building was inventive, skillful, and comical. Bottom line, yes, I did enjoy this flick. Would I recommend it to anyone? Well.......

Note: This version of the film at 108 minutes is apparently another victim of the hatchet. Reviews I've read on amazon suggest the studios chopped a lot out of this movie for the US release. So beware.

Chocolate

Chocolate is a very good but rather off-kilter martial arts movie. The hero, Zen, is a 14 year old autistic girl with an uncanny ability to instantly learn martial arts simply by watching. Zen kicks ass to collect money owed to the family so she can pay for her mother's chemotherapy. Meanwhile the mother's ex, a possessive gang lord served by a posse of armed and dangerous transsexuals, is trying to keep her from reconnecting with Zen's father. I'm totally not kidding; that really is the plot.

The set-up of this bizarre plot takes the first 20-30 minutes of the movie but, fear not, what's not off-kilter about this movie are the fight scenes. They absolutely rock! When star Yanin Vismitananda gets going, she displays definite skills. She's not as sharp as Tony Jaa or Jet Li or their kind, but she more than delivers. And once the action starts, the fight scenes come fast and furious. There's even a bit of ick factor thrown in for extra giggles. And despite the fact that I usually find guns disruptive in martial arts films, I felt they actually add to the action here rather than detract.

I saw a review for Chocolate on Amazon that suggested this movie is a good test of who's really into the genre. The plot for the movie admittedly requires substantial suspension of disbelief if you're going to swallow it (I mean, really???). However, while I feel an inventive plot can be a plus in the genre, the main reason these movies exist is for the martial arts skills being displayed. So if you watch Chocolate and spend your whole review complaining about the weirdness of the plot or the lack of acting chops or the minimal plot development, then you clearly shouldn't even be watching the movie to begin with.

Of course, the premise means that there's very little of the martial arts spirit to be found in Chocolate. That's a loss, but what we ultimately have here is a very well-made martial arts movie full of off-beat elements that set it apart. For example, to cap off the big fight scene inside the restaurant near the finale, Zen faces off against another 'special needs' martial arts prodigy. As I write this, I am fully aware of how totally ridiculous this sounds, but it worked! I recommend this movie.

On a random note, this is the second movie directed by Prachya Pinkaew that makes prominent use of transsexuals as total bad asses (see The Protector). It's certainly interesting to see transsexuals playing characters like this, especially as the movie presents them as if there is no need to explain their presence. I like that, but I still wonder about their prominent presence. Are drag queens and such just more accepted in Thai culture than in the US? I saw other reviews of the movie where the reviewer didn't object to the violence in the movie, but seemed to be wigged out by the transsexuals. This made me laugh. I mean, don't be a wussy. What's the big deal?

PS: All the reviewers on Amazon are touting the 'making of' extra, so I'm going to watch that right now.