Saturday, January 14, 2017

yang yin: gender in chinese cinema

yesterday i decided on a whim to watch this documentary on gender in chinese film. it's directed by stanley kwan, whose work i'm not very familiar with aside from rouge (1990), which i watched last week (it's a great film and i'd recommend it to anyone, though i kinda felt like it was kind of missing a piece or something.. idk. anita mui's performance makes it worth it though). stanley, whose voiceover is narrated by tony rayns, interviews some of the biggest and well-known sino directors at the time (including john woo, tsui hark, chen kaige, ang lee, xie jin, edward yang, hou hsiao-hsien, tsai ming-liang.. whew!) on their views on a variety of gender-related topics, including homoerotic male bonding, father-son relationships, and cross-dressing characters in their films. stanley kwan "came out" as gay for the first time in this film.. he's my new director hero after tsai.

i think this documentary is valuable because you get to hear what all of these big-name directors think about topics that were (/are still) considered taboo for public discussion at the time. stanley's interviewing style is very direct, at times even verging on being presumptuous and leading, but the directors' reactions to his questions are pretty interesting.

i took a lot of stills so i'll put them here! 


the film begins with the topic of homoerotic male bonding and images of hypermasculine naked men in the director chang cheh's films. here's what peggy chiao had to say:







and here's chang cheh's response to claims of homoeroticism in his films:






hmmmmmmmm.. 

john woo is in this, too. when asked about the homoerotic tension in his films like a better tomorrow  and the killer, he responds by saying that it was all unintentional, but that his films don't really "belong" to him after they're released and that people have the right to form their own interpretations of the film. i liked that a lot, since it seems like a lot of directors (*cough* chen kaige) don't seem to have the same approach to their own films. john woo also made this interesting statement on making films that feature strong male bonding in hollywood versus in hong kong:




i wonder what he meant by this. did hollywood producers tell him this? does he mean that american audiences more readily read strong male relationships as gay? hm.

also, my star, my love, my one and only idol is in this too! he has some good moments.

narration: leslie cheung has played more than his fair share of narcissistic characters. i asked if he owns up to being a narcissist in real life. 

leslie: "oh, absolutely!"



hehe!

and here's leslie on why he gets asked to play so many effeminate roles:






"in a delicate way", he says in english. god i love you

next we come to chen kaige. here's him responding to accusations of homophobia in farewell my concubine:








can someone pay for my ticket to china so i can fight chen kaige?? honestly.. how did he manage to make fmc and still be so stubbornly insistent that dieyi is "a man". and the way he asserts that there's a core meaning to the film.. kaige.. let it go

stanley also interviews the three big taiwanese new wave directors - hou, edward, and tsai! their portion focused mainly on their relationships to their fathers. i was a little disappointed because it felt fairly short and i wanted to hear more of their insights. but it was cute nonetheless!







here's tsui hark on brigitte lin playing male roles in films:







leslie on brigitte:


(in english) "sorry. too bad. she's a very good friend of mine, but i have to say."



LMAO so i honestly don't know if his judgment of brigitte is fair since i've only seen her in the bride with white hair and a few wong kar-wai films, but you have to give it to leslie.. he had no qualms about speaking his mind!








yes! tell them, leslie.. he makes such a crucial point. chang cheh said that he essentially wanted to re-masculinize chinese men onscreen; leslie is doing the opposite with the roles he plays in films, and it's scary - femininity in men is still seen as threatening to the heteronormative chinese state. i also think that you can tell that leslie's speaking from a place of personal frustration with having to deal with the horrible insults and rumors about his private life that circulated after farewell my concubine came out. 









he was honestly everything...

some other interviews that i didn't take screenshots of were with ang lee, who comes off as such a nice person (he talks about how he thinks filial piety is flawed and that love should be the important element in parent-child relationships), xie jin (who made red detachment of women and stage sisters), and also his son, xie yan. the independent director zhang yuan is also interviewed, and he speaks briefly about east palace west palace (which i wrote about in my last post!), which he was currently filming at the time. i really want to see more of zhang yuan's films!

at the end of the documentary, stanley interviews his own mother on her views on yam kim-fai, a famous cantonese opera star who was known for playing male leads. yam kim-fai was in a committed relationship with her co-star, bak sheut-shin.







!!!


i really enjoyed this last part of the film because stanley's mother is just so sweet! she also reveals that she's happy for stanley's relationship and it's obvious that she loves him so much. it's wonderful!

anyways those are all the screenshots i had. i'd highly recommend this documentary; i linked to where you can stream it at the top of this post if you're interested in watching!


xoxo c.

5 comments:

  1. This is really interesting! And I agree with you about Chen Kaige... Dieyi's struggle with their gender is the core of the film from that really painful scene as a child all the way through their love for Xiaolou. I hold to my interpretation that they're a straight trans woman, or at least that the film is much more about gender than it is about sexuality, though of course those are interlinked. Do you know Barthes' "Death of the Author"? Barthes' theory is quite extreme as he wants to discount the author altogether and I do think the author's input can be important, but the reader's interpretation (especially if the reader is in a different sociotemporal context) is also important because it shows the values of the time at which the interpretation is made. And especially in cinema, Barthes' argument is quite relevant because it rejects auteur theory. Isn't FMC based on a novel anyway? Who gave Chen Kaige permission to insist on the core element of the film... especially when Chen was more trying to express the turbulence of the 20th-century and coming to terms with his denunciation of his father during the Cultural Revolution. Like, that was the personal element to it for him. The "queer sphere of feelings" (as JH Hsu mentioned in the essay that like I said I don't totally agree with) in FMC was not the one closest to Chen IMO.

    Oh, and have you seen Lan Yu, directed by Stanley Kwan? I haven't yet but I'm going to try and see it soon. It's apparently excellent. (Liu Ye and Hu Jun were on 爸爸去哪儿 and Chinese netizens were apparently being annoying by connecting their real-life interactions on the show with their roles in that film.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow i sound so intellectual im so proud of myself

      Delete
    2. omg right i was like.. kaige.. did you direct this film?? did you learn anything about peking opera dan performers or the history of cross-dressing in chinese opera?? gender identity is such a crucial part of any story about dan performers but somehow kaige still wants to assert that dieyi is a man at his core (??!)..... and i havent really read barthes actually (shh don't tell anyone) but i think what you said is def applicable to film i agree.. like kaige first modifies the original story that the film is based on and insists that his ver is better.. then he turns around and claims that his vision of the film is the only legitimate way to understand it?? but yeah i think his investment in the film had more to do w a personal desire to come to terms w what happened to him during the cultural revolution.. there are many "spheres" to fmc but not all of them are explored with equal depth. idk

      also I CAN'T BELIEVE i still haven't seen lan yu lol im so glad you reminded me!! i've been meaning to watch smth with liu ye bc he sounds so interesting, i was reading his wiki and he's like an indie actor..? and hu jun was in east palace west palace too.. i'm literally going to download this right now. also c-netizens need to back off omg..

      Delete
    3. Exactly! Of course Chen has autonomy as the director but I don't think it's in his place to talk about the gender/sexuality aspect of the film as a cis het man who obviously wanted to focus more on the historical/communal trauma aspect of it. And Liu Ye is such a dilf his children are adorable.. yeah he used to be more indie but now has been integrated into the mainstream (he literally played Mao in that CCP-commissioned, star-studded cringefest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Founding_of_a_Party)

      Delete
    4. first of all thanks for letting me know what a d**f is, i'm promptly erasing that from my memory fjfgfjgljhh second of all... wtf... im crying why did liu ye play mao.. i'm looking at the cast list rn and oh my god they really did that didn't they..

      Delete