ELECTION IN THE UK - NOT SO NICE

I thought this would be a nicer post, but maybe you can pretend today is opposite day so when someone writes, "ELECTION is a confused, muddled mess," what they really mean is, "ELECTION is great!"

ELECTION has opened in seven theaters in the UK and Richard writes in that the reviews are, well read them for yourself:

David Mattin at the BBC says it has a "confusing, disjointed narrative...under-developed characters and slipshod storytelling...ELECTION can't get the basics right."

The Telegraph's Tim Robey writes that, "The endless Triad board meetings would be confusing enough without the dismal cinematography, which makes it impossible to see people's faces for entire scenes."

3 out of 5 stars at The Times from Wendy Ide who demonstrates her artful knowledge with, "To, not the most artful of directors, slams on the brakes at the 75 minute mark for a clumsy 'Triad History 101' segment...the action never exactly thunders along in this predominantly static, overly talky take on the Hong Kong crime genre...ELECTION looks positively lacklustre next to, say, the stylish gangster v. cop treachery of the INFERNAL AFFAIRS trilogy. It also lacks the visual impact that attracts audiences to the best of Hong Kong crime movies." She also demonstrates her ability to write colorfully when she claims that the movie "takes place in underlit noodle shacks accompanied by a death- rattle of mah jong tiles." I can only remember one mah jong scene in the film (at the beginning) and I don't recall a single noodle shack. Then she goes totally out to lunch with this closing paragraph:

"I’m yet to be persuaded that what cinema audiences need when we’re about to be bombarded with football day and night is even more soccer. But several distributors over the past few weeks seem to believe that our appetite for the beautiful game will not be sated until we have seen what independent cinema has to say on the subject."

Seriously, that's her closing paragraph in her ELECTION review. No links, no "click here for more", nothing. Trust The Times to have to work football into everything.

The Guardian's Peter Bradshaw seems baffled, "there is a strange lack of life in the story itself, a baffling absence of dramatic charge in any of the principals and no urgent sense of what is at stake between them...We are plunged into this dispute, but with insufficient time to get to know any of these players, they never fully come to life."

Empire Magazine, surprisingly, awards it 3 stars (and gives POSEIDON 4) and says it's a "cert for a Mafia-set Hollywood remake." Something I can't imagine happening unless the Mafia decides to become fashionably Chinese and fight over things like Dragon Head Batons because they think that will make them seem more equal opportunity and inviting to Asian-Americans.

Time Out can't even get too excited about it, claiming that ELECTION "suffers from problems of tone and identification..." although they have decided that the dark lighting is style and not an issue of China not having enough light bulbs, "boosted by strong performances, To's directorial lightfootedness and the widescreen cinematography of Siu-Keung Cheng."

Leave it to Stephen Teo to write a positive review for Sight & Sound and then Channel 4 who call it "an unconventional, effective and powerful drama."

I think someone should write a letter to Johnnie To that he needs to learn how to make a movie as good as a white person before he tries to crack our sophisticated Western markets again.

(Thanks to Richard Taylor who has totally ruined/made my day with this)