According to the Chinese media, France’s MK2 has secured theatrical rights for the new Jia Zhangke (贾樟柯) film 24 City (24城记), which is going to screen soon at the Cannes Film Festival.
Chinese movies don’t make any money: or at least, the only directors that make money are Zhang Yimou and Feng Xiaoggang, says one real-estate investor who also dabbles in the media. This from a brief Chinese article on Sina.com:
尽管冯仑是一名地产商人，但开办了一本电子杂志《风马牛》。对于“竞争”者如徐静蕾《开啦》等电子杂志，冯仑大揭其底，称“这些杂志基本上赚不了钱”。而记者询问他是否也会投资电影，冯仑连连摆手，称“一年中国电影票房也就三十几个亿，赚钱的就冯小刚和张艺谋两个导演，投资电影其实赚不了钱”。 记者 巫天旭
That’s what he said. Sounds a bit bleak, but on the other hand, considering the DVD market and whatnot, it’s not hard to believe that profit margins from box office and other related products are going to really pull in a lot of money.
Hidden in plain view among the abundant offerings of this year’s San Francisco International Asian American Film Festival (which runs from March 13 to 23) was a program of four short films under the title By Hand. Aside from the delightful opening bit of animation, three were documentaries featuring men of a certain craft, from a pushcart cinema operator in India, to the proprietors of a halal slaughterhouse in New York, who intend to pass their hand-made talents to their children.
In Salim Baba, the pushcart man has several sons who already help him on his daily runs through Calcutta, wheeling the cart with his century-old, custom-rebuilt film projector to show eager children an assortment of classic Bollywood videos and trailers, which the old man cuts and splices himself. The skills will be passed on, but it remains to be seen whether such an out-of-time tradition will survive our digital age.
When we first meet 27-year-old Imram in A Son’s Sacrifice, his dress and demeanor suggest hip-hop more than halal. The business his elderly Bangladeshi father started in Queens has flourished, thanks to the influx of South Asian, African, and West Indian immigrants into New York. All he needs is a successor, whom he finds in his hamburger-eating, half-Puerto Rican son, whose competence is exceeded only by his devotion to his family.
But the centerpiece was Tailor Made: Chinatown’s Last Tailors, where brothers Bill and Jack Wong are the endearing victims of their own success story, and seem quite comfortable with it. Their father started Modernize Tailors in 1913, and the two eldest brothers have run the business for the past fifty years. In the postwar boom, they were the largest men’s tailor shop in Vancouver, employing 20 people and suiting up celebrities like Sean Connery and Gordon Lightfoot. In the off-the-rack, globalized 21st century, they still do a boutique business, from the mayor of Vancouver who rolls in throwing around a few Cantonese phrases, to the department store who seeks them out for their vintage Singer Buttonholer, which is almost as old as they are.
They are now 85 and 83, and their North American success story has produced an extended family of doctors, business folk, and other professionals, but no tailors. It turns out that neither Bill or Jack intended to take this path either. After World War II, they both graduated with engineering degrees, but were unhireable as Canadian Chinese. Nevertheless it’s clear the wise and witty Bill loves the business he turned to because of the limits white society imposed upon him. The more reticent Jack tends to stay in the background. When asked about his trade, he says at one point, “Maybe I can be a carpenter,” a remark expressing both ambivalence in his path and as well as an inherently hopeful attitude that’s made them and Modernize Tailors endure.
Their youngest brother Milton, whom they helped raise, did breach the wider world, and spectacularly, as an investment banker, university chancellor, and Order of Canada honoree. As a gift to his brothers, he buys the original storefront which he then converts into a retirement home-cum-living museum and work shop, for the brothers to continue part-time tailoring. The only thing left to do, is find a successor to take over their store.
It is this search which takes up the lion’s share of the CBC documentary, with two strikingly different candidates. One is an Asian-American architect and part-time fashion reporter, who is attracted by the artistry as well as a desire to make connections with his roots. Unfortunately he does not sew and never really picks up the essential skills, which dashes his romantic and somewhat rose-tinteed aspirations. It’s a testament to Bill’s integrity, that he dissuades the apprentice from continuing at the probable cost of seeing the shop close forever.
The other apprentice candidate, a Caucasian, who turns up is none other than the tailor from Holt Renfrew, the department store client of Modernize. Unlike the architect, he can sew and do all the tailor stuff well. That makes him attractive to the fashionistas on London’s Saville Row, where our young tailor ends up. He comes back to break the news to Bill, but not before he shares a Saville Row catalogue and we are let in on a rich moment: young tailor points out excitedly to old tailor that the haute coutre fabric of the day can be found right on his shelves, to which Bill replies laconically, “So, it’s back in fashion.” Young tailor decides to return to Saville Row, but not before both apprentices and many family members help them move across the street to their new old home.
The film ends with a postscript, showing the now part-time tailors at their new shop. I felt comforted by that sight, as well as by this Vancouver Sun article. In addition to more background on the Wongs and Vancouver Chinese, it indicates that the Chinatown area, long in decline, may be poised for a resurgence that could support once again an exemplar of craft such as Modernize Tailors. But Bill and Jack Wong are irrevocably the last of something – they are the final generation of pioneers, every bit as pioneer as the frontiersmen, trailblazers, and homesteaders of the North American West – and I strongly hope that people who see this story will begin to view the brothers and their achievement in that same spirit.
Tailor Made: Chinatown’s Last Tailors
Directed by Leonard lee, Marsha Newberry
Canada 2007, 45 min.
We came across some interesting tidbits in the news today. First off, Yu Lik-wai (余力為) the Hong Kong director/cinematographer that lensed most of Jia Zhangke’s movies, will be starting principal shooting on his new film Plastic City 《塑料城市》. This film is a 2006 Hong Kong-Asia Film Financing Forum alumni, and will begin shooting in Sao Paolo, Brazil — a location which intrigues us very , very much. We didn’t find out what the movie was about, but it’s been said that it will involve actors Anthong Wong (黄秋生) and Huang Yi (黄奕), and Japanese actor Joe Odagiri (小田切讓) — reports say that the film is a Chinese/Japanese co-production.
The other piece of news that we found interesting was that another HAF alum, the Taiwanese actor/director Lee Kangsheng (李康生), is screening his movie at the film festival in Hong Kong. The movie is called Help Me Eros (幫幫我愛神), was directed by and stars Lee Kangsheng, and was produced and art directed by his long-time collaborator and mentor, Tsai Mingliang (蔡明亮). They say the film features a lot of brooding, melancholy, alienation, and graphic sex — which is not surprising, given the two guys behind it. Should be a good one. We’ll be looking out for it on the DVD shelves in Shanghai soon.
Director Ang Lee, perhaps frustrated and angered by the recent ban of Tang Wei and spate of criticism leveled against his movie, has reacted by publcily defending Tang Wei — as well a good director ought to, protege or not.
However, in so doing he made a statement that hasn’t gone over well in the blogosphere. He said that “not watching Lust, Caution would be shameful.”
Here is what the above article quotes Lee as saying:
李安說：“戲中那些激情場面，是演技最精彩的部分。我教過無數演員，都沒有那麼高水準。這些是好私人的表演，是這部戲的重點，主導了整部電影，不去看才羞恥。” [emphasis mine]
The article then discusses Lee’s remarks in that typically specious avuncular “tsk, tsk” officialese tone that we all know so well, that patronizing tone mustered by those who will live to their last day without ever becoming aware of their own incorrigible mediocrity. The writer is the calm voice of reason, the artist is petulant and extreme. In a pluralistic society like China, everyone has different tastes and interests, no need to be saying what we should or shouldn’t watch, what is “shameful” and what is not. There’s no need to point out the doublespeak — in film and the arts, SARFT and their ilk reserve the final right to decide who’s on the pluralism party list and who gets bounced.
The article then claims that statemetns like Lee’s are sound-bytes that the attention-starved people in the movie biz do to get more publicity for themselves:
當前，影視界或藝術界的一些人，太急功近利或浮躁了。總喜歡發出一些“怪論”、“偏論”，或引起人們的注意，或顯示自己的與眾不同。其實，那不過是一種“很傻很天真很幼稚”的表現。
This is then criticized as being naive and immature. The author says that some artists (obviously meaning Ang Lee in this context) are so obsessed with “immediate profits and gains” that they have to make “strange and provocative statements” in order for that to happen. It seems highly ironic, the terms they use to describe this — “怪論” (strange arguments/statements) and “偏論” (biased/skewed/provocative arguments or statements) — because to us the best instance of such statements can be found by attending government press conferences, political meetings (Party Congresses), or maybe by bringing a mirror into wherever these writers work.
It’s not that we’re fans of Ang Lee’s movies, and even though he’s publicly pitted himself against the SARFT-Goliath, he’s no culture-hero. He is morally obliged, we think, to stand up and say something, but not everything he has said has been right, or even helpful. The issue of “shame” should never have come up in the first place, because that’s precisely how SARFT wants you to think about Lust, Caution. And they certainly don’t want you to notice the rhetorical sleight-of-hand that editorials like this one use to distort the issue, making it about Ang Lee’s big mouth instead of about the real issue — China’s puzzling lack of a film-ratings system and the government’s anachronistic role as the cultural nanny of the general population.
This hypocrisy is gloriously displayed on the last line: “李安應為自己的話道歉”，這是許多網友的呼聲，不知我們的李大導演可否注意到？是否懂得“不敬人者，人恒不敬之”的道理？Roughly translated this means that Ang Lee ought to apologize for his own statements, doesn’t he know that ‘he who does not respect others will never gain the respect of others.” When is China going to start respecting artists and filmmakers, and more importantly, the general population as adult, mature, consumers of cultural products? If the Chinese government is not going to respect its own cultural producers, why should anyone in the world who gives a shit about art and culture respect the Chinese government?
Technorati Tags: ang lee, lust, caution, china, media, 媒體, 中國, 色戒, 李安
Those of you who are are film buffs, coffee, or cute foreign exchange student connoisseurs in Beijing probably have heard of the cafe “Sculpting in Time” (雕刻时光). The place is practically a Beijing institution; it was started ten years ago by a Taiwanese guy named Zhuang Songli who used to be a film student at the Beijing Film Academy. He started this store, named after a film by Andrei Tarkovsky, and it was devoted to stuff relating to film, in addition to being a cafe. The whole thing really took off these last years, and they started a couple more stores in Beijing. Now they are doing all kinds of business, coffee catering, coffee shop business training, etc.
One interesting thing that was mentioned in the article (in Chinese) is that the once hipster word-of-mouth cafe has become a brand, and is therefore going to be replicated and expanded to other places. The plans so far are to up the number of cafes to ten in Beijing and aim for three in Xi’an. For all you living in Shanghai (like me!) and Guangzhou, well, don’t get happy yet. They are looking into it, but nothing definite yet.
Here’s the Chinese article from Sohu:
当独立电影已成往事，当雕刻时光渐渐成长为一个公司、
一个品牌，老板庄菘冽还会带给文艺青年们那个充满人文气息的雕刻时光吗？
推开深绿色的木门，铃铛声响起，拾阶而上，一样的灯影，一样的桌椅，一样的咖啡，一样的熙攘人群。
不看招牌，丝毫不会意识到我们正在走进的这家北京五道口的咖啡馆叫“桥”，这一切太熟悉了，除了它的名字，它以前的名字是“雕刻时?光”。
但是，不要现在就开始惆怅。如今这个一度在北京的文艺青年当中享有很高地位的四字招牌和它标志性的深绿色一起，已经出现在金融街、北航、外经贸大学和丽都饭店，甚至即将出现在西安、上海、扬州、南京等地。
在以发展加盟店的方式出现在每个人步行所及的地方的同时，这家当年以放映独立电影而出名的私人咖啡馆还开办了自己的咖啡培训学院，书也被标上价格放在架上供来客购买。当独立电影已成往事，当雕刻时光渐渐成长为一个公司、一个品牌，老板庄菘冽还会带给文艺青年们那个充满人文气息的雕刻时光?吗？
10年前，当雕刻时光咖啡馆刚刚出现在北大东门边的胡同里，店里静静放映着安德烈?塔可夫斯基的电影，只有少数文艺青年光顾的时候，老板庄菘冽似乎也未像现在这样感到难过。
“从加盟商那里收回雕刻时光五道口店的品牌经营权，在一墙之隔外重开一家的决定像是一次壮士断腕，这次经验让我们今后会更加小心翼翼。”在庄菘冽对《第一财经周刊》说这句话的时候，雕刻时光在北京地区之外的第一家店已经在西安开张。五道口店是雕刻时光第一个加盟店，也是生意最好的一家店，但由于加盟商与总部之间越来越严重的摩擦，最后只能以分家收场。
庄菘冽来自台湾，在北京电影学院导演系毕业后凭着兴趣和太太开了雕刻时光，投资20多万元的咖啡馆在度过了最初的清淡后渐渐有起色，然后开分店，4年后成立了艺丰雕刻时光咖啡有限责任公?司。
2004年，为了更好地发展公司和分散投资风险，庄菘冽决定开放雕刻时光的加盟，采取委托管理型特许加盟的方式，由雕刻时光总部来负责加盟店全部的整体规划和经营管理。
雕刻时光现在在北京有7家门店，大部分属于直营，但每家店背后由不同的股东构成，一般会有三个投资人，由总公司来负责运营。在庄菘冽对雕刻时光未来几年的规划里，他希望投资的方式保持多样性，而对纯正的加盟方式还一直未能下定决心。
在当年的北京大学东门，盒子与雕刻时光相邻不远，那时，咖啡和电影是它们共同的主题。经历2000年左右的拆迁，盒子咖啡馆搬到了清华大学东门，而雕刻时光来到了北京理工大学的南门。
今天，盒子咖啡馆的老板已经换人，但这里依旧每周两次放映世界各地的艺术电影、地下电影，依旧吸引学生来这静静看书，依旧有好的咖啡和好的音乐，而它也似乎拒绝开一家分店。
盒子的经理冯晓龙对《第一财经周刊》说：“也许以后会有盒子酒吧，卖自己酿的红酒，也许会 >>有盒子画廊，在旁摆上咖啡桌，但是盒子咖啡馆不会特别希望复制，因为这本身就会很难，风格会难以延续，外来资本的加入也可能会产生经营上的风险和摩擦。”他现在管理着这家咖啡馆，每天下午到晚上几乎都在店里，几天前，他刚刚拒绝了一笔想投资盒子开连锁店的资金。
冯晓龙认为，开什么样的咖啡馆跟个性有关。这种想法庄菘冽完全同意，“要看创业者本身对什么样的生活方式感兴趣，我喜欢团队，不喜欢一个人操持一切，而盒子那样的店更适合老板亲自经营，有一种特别亲切的气质。”
北京一位不愿透露姓名的咖啡馆老板认为雕刻时光的风格不适合大规模的扩张，“一茶一坐”的风格更适合复制：“风格复制了就会变糙，适应不了北京以外的地方环境，比如南方那些城市可能就不喜欢雕光这样的格调，比如南方人不喜欢木质桌椅，更喜欢上岛咖啡的大沙发，所以连星巴克也只是在二线城市小心翼翼地扩张。”
“我喜欢来这里，介绍朋友一起来，感觉这是个属于自己的很私人的地方，店越开越多的时候，就不是那种感觉了，”小羿在大学时代经常光顾雕刻时光魏公村店，如今在巨人学校做老师的她工作之余还是会跑过来叫上一杯咖啡，“现在看来雕刻时光营造情调有自己的一套，外国人还是很喜欢的，吸引留学生比较多。”
雕刻时光来自于苏联导演安德烈?塔可夫斯基所写的电影自传书名，但关于雕刻时光与电影的记忆却似乎有些遥远了。因为场地限制和版权纠纷，雕刻时光现在只有周年庆的时候偶尔会有一些放映电影的活动。庄菘冽说他很羡慕盒子可以一直放电影，而他在最新开张的西安店，决定延续当年的做法??已经做了一个大型的电影屏幕。
电影的主题并不是在10年岁月中惟一被改变的。在雕刻时光魏公村店，墙上的商业广告慢慢多起来，《周末画报》、《万象》等刊物开始在店内销售，新地产等赞助的书报架被摆放在店内。“我并不排斥商业化，但雕刻时光不会没有选择地成为一个广告的载体，故事的主题不能被影响。”庄的话也多少显示出周遭正在考验雕刻时光对商业化入侵的抵御能力。
“人的成长过程中是需要接受变化的，我跟湖南的太太结婚，接受了很多改变。但是在雕刻时光，咖啡永远是主轴，坚持做人文的咖啡馆，不是星巴克那样商务型的，也不是上岛那样更像饭馆的咖啡馆。”
但是，因为房价问题，雕刻时光在北京虽然大有可为，却很难达到真正好的盈利，外面的市场也许是个机会。雕刻时光的背后投资商有十几个人，两岸三地都有，年利润20％左右，还不算太好。魏公村店每天营业额普通日就是七八千元，部分餐食的价位再提高一些，利润可能会更好。
现在庄菘冽开始看向北京以外的市场，最近走访了上海、南京、扬州几个城市，虽然还没有下什么决定，但他知道雕刻时光未来会在更多的地方找寻机会。在他计划中，北京将再开3家店达到一共10家的数量，而在西安也争取开到3家分店。
随着一步步扩张，雕刻时光同时也在寻找更多的生意机会。最近，庄菘冽多了一个雕刻时光咖啡学院院长的头衔，他将公司内部的培训系统向外推广，用他的话来说是“染指了教育业”。现在，咖啡学院开设了专业班、周末班、白领班、兴趣班等针对各个层次人群的课程。
雕刻时光另一块业务是流动咖啡馆，为公司活动、生日party、朋友聚会、婚礼等筹办咖啡主题宴会。据了解，雕刻时光与万科房产在多年前就已开始合作，万科每次有新楼盘，售楼处几乎都会邀请雕刻时光在现场提供咖啡和餐饮。
庄菘冽最新的设想是要发展装修设计的业务部门，随着店铺的增多，这一部分交由自己来做会更快和更易磨合。“围绕咖啡馆更加多元化的发展是有可能性的，只要有利于这棵大树都有机会。”他说。
On February 16, Chinese director Wang Xiaoshuai (王小帅) won his second Silver Bear at the Berlin Film Festival, taking honors for best script for his new film In Love We Trust 《左右》, a film that has one whopper of a premise: the daughter of a divorced couple develops leukemia and the only way that they can save her is by having another child (which will serve as a donor for the first?). There are a couple of previews and interviews on the video-sharing sites. We’re not sure when it comes out in China, but we like Wang’s movies despite their get-under-your-skin-in-a-weird-way sentimentality, so we’re looking forward to this one. The first video is a preview and the second one an interview with the cast and crew.
So you might have heard that Jackie Chan recently went to Australia to bury his father, who died of cancer at the age of 93.Well, what you might not have known is that Jackie Chan’s father Charlie, aka Fang Daolong, had a whole other family (Jackie’s mother was his second wife) that he lost touch with and then had to leave behind in 1949. There was an article called “Enter the Parents” written a few years ago that gave some of the background. The video above covers some of the same ground, but was made more recently, as it mentions the thorny issue of why Jackie doesn’t want to get in touch with his half-brothers Fang Shisheng and Fang Shide, especially when their father died and there was a funeral to attend. The interviews also broach the question of whether or not they are revealing their identities so openly now in hoping of getting some of Jackie’s (and his father’s) money. To this question they reply that it would be a lie to say that they aren’t hoping for some help (university tuition, jobs for the young uns) but are NOT coveting Jackie’s wealth. The video is in Chinese.
The China Daily reports that Zhang Ziyi (章子怡) is planning on establishing a film production company with the likes of Wendi Murdoch. Another partner the article mentions is Florence Sloan.One interesting tidbit that the article mentions is that one of the projects this company is working is a film about the Empress Wu (武则天), a film in which Zhang will not only act (as the lead we presume?) but also produce.
