A Point of Reference for Kung Fu Hustle
I saw this movie twice. Each time with a different person. The first woman loved it, the second, well, thought a couple parts were funny. Oddly, though I enjoyed it greatly the first time, it doesn't hold up well. Worse, it has no point of reference for the non-Kung Fu movie person. The slapstick in this movie relies on an understanding of the well-exaggerated effects in the older Kung Fu movies, especailly those like Tai Chi master that portray the hidden forces of Qi power.
Is there an authentic basis for Kung Fu Hustle? The slapstick humor is an exaggeration of an exaggeration. The only people who should really laugh are those who've seen enough crazed cheap movies to know what is being laughed at. Otherwise the movie comes close to being cartoonish farce. Fortunately, many American audiences have seen the various high-end martial art movies that have come around recently, including House of Flying Daggers, Hero, and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. And, of course, there's Kill Bill. To a lesser extent, the choreography and exaggeration of magical Kung Fu has been done in the Matrix.
Still, it's a bit surprising this movie is getting pushed in the American market. Unlike a Jackie Chan or Jet Li movie, (or even Tony Jaa), there are no visually amazing authentic stunts, and very little honest martial arts. Also, Jackie Chan built his routines and shoulders of American silent stars, like Harold Lloyd and Buster Keaton. But here, Stephen Chow utilizes, at best, a three-stooges aesthetic, one that has not been popular in this country for awhile. Certainly not among the women.
posted by dan @ 4/25/2005 02:04:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home