like but what causes that? is it like some personal abstraction that isn't relatable? i'm just curious about ratings from people with strict criteria.

Nah, there's no recipe for a 10, it's purely based on how it affects me. Like Taxi Driver is a 9 for me because I think it's perfectly crafted and evocative and puts its finger on something in existence that I have experienced in a very specific way. I find it totally entertaining and am willing to watch it anywhere, with anyone, at any time. I think it's straight up ingenious, and these things generally go for all movies I give a 9. But something about watching it isn't nearly as intense an experience as watching movies I give a 10 to. If it's a 10 then it's a film that continues to challenge me, continues to overwhelm me, continues to capture me with its mystery. Like I said, it's a movie that puts me in a constant state of intense aliveness that doesn't let up. Movies that when I watch them are equal in intensity to the most intense moments in my life. Not just this even, but that I value what it's doing to me very deeply. Trash (a 9) I experience just as intensely as I experience Faces or Safe, but I don't value that experience quite as much, even though it's just as intense and ingeniously created. It's hard to explain and it's a very personal thing. It's not like I'm saying the movies I give 10 to are THE masterworks which everyone must bow down to, but they are the ones that I personally value the most and would be very distressed if I could never watch again.

cool that's way less strict and more personal than i thought. i don't know why imagined a stringent criteria. i wish i had a similar level of deep appreciation for art; i don't feel i've gotten to a point where i can honestly say i am that captivated and moved by art as you describe it. i think i take it for granted a lot. :/

1994 Chungking Express 9.6
2000 In the Mood for Love 9.4

I gotta watch Days of Being Wild soon.

Part of me wants to watch My blueberry nights and part of me doesn't. So far, from what ive seen of wkw, he can do no wrong, and i like that view. Anyone seen it yet?

Yeah. It's worth seeing to see how Kar-Wai can be "off". It's not terrible of course, but it's uninspired and it makes you appreciate his other films more.

The title for Kar-Wai's upcoming film has been changed to The Grandmasters.









If the posters are to be believed it looks like he's brought on a co-director for the action scenes.

Apparently this is supposed to be a full on Kung-Fu movie, but I have my doubts considering Ashes of Time was similarly publicized as a full on Wuxia movie and ended up being just as self-consciously "high art" as anything else he had done (or has done since). This could just be a ploy by the producers to get butts in seats after general audiences found 2046 to be a crashing bore. Whatever the case, making a bad movie is beyond Kar-Wai's capability.

Apparently Tony Leung has gone through an incredible amount of dedicated preparation for the role, both mentally and physically, with his trainers saying he has proven himself to have exceptional professional-level martial arts ability.

Some have said that shooting will continue throughout the new year with others saying that it should be released for Chinese new year. Here's to hoping we can get it stateside as soon as possible.

Its hard to judge a film by just a poster...but man, that looks awesome.

People found 2046 to be a crashing bore? Fuck'em. Glad he's with Leung and Zhang, btw. Those names cannot fail.

Sad that they had to stop shooting for 2 months because tony broke his hand/wrist. Im so pumped

yeah jia zhangke is making a martial arts movie as well, which is also very interesting to see what that looks like.

He is? Is that what ciqing shidai is going to be? imdb is a poor source, i want more sources!

I've taken to watching In the Mood for Love and 2046 over and over again lately and it's an incredible experience. With each new viewing I uncover new gradations, complications, tones, problems, echoes, etc. I'm writing about it madly.

It is essential first of all to view these two films together. Not necessarily back to back in time of course, but in mind. We must understand In the Mood for Love with 2046 in mind and vice versa. Perhaps the most recent revelation for me is in seeing how In the Mood for Love is not just an extremely beautiful expression of longing, as I have once thought (and recently explained to Led), but something much more. We must consider that the traditional Chinese title for In the Mood for Love is "the age of blossoms" or "the flowery years"-- a Chinese metaphor for the fleeting time of youth, beauty and love, which is quite a different emphasis than that of simply In the Mood for Love, which places all of its emphasis on individual emotion and not its place in time. In this film, we see two people who, among other things, lose love and are unwilling or unable to act upon new love not just because of social trappings, but because of their own emotional confusions and fears. In choosing not to act upon new love, they harden themselves, and essentially waste this crucial part of their years. 2046, then, shows us the result of this emotional hardening in one of the characters, and how once you have hardened how difficult it can be to break out truly and love again. Different strategies of breaking out are attempted with different women. Ancillary characters illustrate even more failed strategies and gradations which reverberate off the central focus in a glorious opera of passion and human cluelessness.

There is so much going on in these films. I thought I had figured them out but whenever I think I do some new angle explodes in my mind. I love art!

Wong Kar Wai is now a prettier version of The Matrix meets Zach Snyder?

Im hoping for just the type of film like house of flying daggers, and not 300