Simultaneously overcomplicated and TV drama simple, Johnny To and Ka-fai Wai’s Mad Detective is an oddball film that is still worth a viewing, providing your sanity is firm enough to withstand enormous plot holes. In the film, Ching Wan Lau gives a charismatic performance as Inspector Bun, a police legend known for his curious detective methods. Early on in the film, we see Bun solve crimes by cutting up a dead pig and then by purposely falling down stairs while in a suitcase. His methods earn him newspaper headlines and respect, however his dramatic tendencies also put him on the outs with his squad. At a retirement party for his boss, he cuts off an ear and presents it as a gift. Before you can say ‘awkward gift choice’, Bun is forced into early retirement. But his retirement his short-lived, as a young detective seeks out Bun’s help in uncracking a cop disappearance.Mystery fans should not get too excited by a basic introduction of the film, though, as Mad Detective is not much of a who-dun-it. The culprit is pretty obvious within the first few minutes of the film, and even the inevitable plot twist near the end is clear by at least the halfway marker. And without a serious mystery to entertain us, the film then must rely on what it can do between points A and Z. In this effort, Mad Detective is a mixed bag.Most enjoyable of all, surreal images are cleverly woven into the story. Bun’s schizophrenia, or supernatural ability to see people’s true selves, allows the film to take us into very strange territory. One scene, for example, shows Bun urinating on a woman who is herself urinating into a urinal. This bizarre moment leads to a fight between Dun and the seven personalities inside the mind of another police officer. This scene, as well as others, compound in strangeness. And if the film viewer is like the characters in this film in having inner personalities, at least one of those personalities will be asking: “How can the filmmakers do that, or how can they think to do that?”But as creative as individual scenes were, they just barely make up for the film’s story problems. As we get further into the story, we find out that a missing gun plays a central point. Lost guns must be a serious problem among Hong Kong police officers, because this missing gun theme is common. It’s also something that must be taken with deathly seriousness, because characters in this film would rather kill then report a gun as lost. (That said, they don’t seem to mind lending their guns out to people who need them.) One can only hope that the actual police don’t overreact to this degree. But then once the crime is committed and covered up, what becomes more surprising are the efforts undergone to further hide the crime. The killer risks his life trying to cover his tracks, even after his tracks are sufficiently buried. In fact, the only thing that the killer could accomplish by “winning” would be to raise suspicion that he is the bad guy.Mad Detective could’ve used a re-write to fix these glaring mistakes. And while at it, writers could’ve given more work to the near-anonomous multiple personalities that make up the killer’s mind.Bottom line: check out Mad Detective for some good performances and a bunch of equally enjoyable images. Forget about the story though, as it backfires terribly.Rating: 3 out of 5 drunken iron monkeys.