Chinese Perspective on CTHD and the Oscars
Mark Pollard
(My apologies if this post appears more than once. I'm having troubles with
Outlook.)
"Crouching Tiger" Stirs Chinese Pride But Viewers Turned off
BEIJING, Mar 26, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) "Crouching Tiger, Hidden
Dragon" sparked frenzied interest in the annual Oscars ceremony in China,
but most punters dismissed the Chinese-language movie as watered down fodder
for Western audiences.
Sina.com, China's most popular website, experienced one its busiest days
ever Monday as people tracked the Oscars ceremony in Los Angeles live to see
how the martial arts fantasy fared.
The site received 10 million page views on its entertainment section by the
time the award ceremony was over at 1:00 p.m. (0500 GMT) and "Crouching
Tiger" had picked up four Oscars including best foreign film.
The film also picked up Oscars for best cinematography, artistic direction
and musical score, out of a total of 10 nominations -- the most ever for a
foreign film.
Chen Tong, the Sina.com's deputy content manager, said it was the site's
busiest day since last year's Olympics and he put the interest down to
ethnic pride at the film's success.
"People are interested in the Oscars, but it's mainly because there is a
Chinese movie nominated," Chen said.
But while Chinese movies fans jammed the website, they were also quick to
pour scorn on "Crouching Tiger" in Sina.com's chatrooms.
The movie directed by the critically-acclaimed Taiwanese director Ang Lee
has seen only mediocre returns at the box office in mainland China, where
the movie was shot and the plot was based.
Even vendors who sell pirated VCDs and DVDs -- the way most Chinese see
their movies -- said sales had been lukewarm.
"It's not very good. It's not doing as well as 'Eyes Wide Shut,'" said a
vendor named Zhang, referring to the Stanley Kubrick film starring
heartthrobs Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.
"Chinese people prefer overseas movies," he added.
Many Chinese filmgoers criticized "Crouching Tiger" for its inauthentic
martial arts moves -- rather than the real-life moves of Bruce Lee and
Jackie Chan movies, "Crouching Tiger" takes on a surreal tone with actors
and actresses flying through the air and fighting in the tree tops.
A saleswoman who watched the movie said: "The moves are not realistic.
They're not like the kung fu movies Chinese people are used to."
Chinese audiences are also fed up with the portrayal of China in a
traditional or old fashioned light -- world-renowned films such as Zhang
Yimou's "Raise the Red Lantern" and "Red Sorghum" may have conquered foreign
audiences but were considered by many at home to be a yawn.
In the Sina.com chatroom, many people thought "Crouching Tiger" deservedly
lost out to "Gladiator" in the battle for the prized best film category.
"This movie is neither Chinese nor Western and it's not as good as people
said it would be. If this movie gets the Oscar, then it is making fun of
Chinese culture," one writer said.
"It's too shameful a movie. That long queue (leading Hong Kong actor Chow
Yun-fat's hair) makes Chinese people look humiliating. What foreigners like
is the queue because it makes them laugh," another writer said.
"The film is not very good, even though it has a well-known director and
many famous stars. After seeing the film, it feels like it's using high
technology to make the moves, flying here and there among trees, only to
suit Hollywood's taste," a third writer said.
"It doesn't fit Chinese viewers' taste. It's Chow Yun-fat's worse movie."
Like eating, Americans do not like authentic Chinese food, but prefer
Americanized Chinese food, one writer quipped.
"Ang Lee is very smart, he knows this. The film is successful economically.
Ang Lee is using a Chinese person's brain going along an American's path,"
the writer said. ((c) 2001 Agence France Presse)
john
CTHD is an excellent film, for entertaiment purpose. Why can't they just
leave it at that! I don't think the film in any ways, misrepresent the
Chinese culture or people at all. Ofcourse, in real life people don't fly or
fight on tree tops - but for haeven's sake, it's a movie, and in movies
you're allowed to create fantasy a little...
Lets enjoy the enjoy the movie for what it is!
Mark Pollard wrote in message ...
Man and Natalie
>My Lord! Why does everything has to be so bloody POLITICAL!
>CTHD is an excellent film, for entertaiment purpose. Why can't they just
>leave it at that! I don't think the film in any ways, misrepresent the
>Chinese culture or people at all. Ofcourse, in real life people don't fly
or
>fight on tree tops - but for haeven's sake, it's a movie, and in movies
>you're allowed to create fantasy a little...
>
>Lets enjoy the enjoy the movie for what it is!
>
Yes, I think we're beating a dead horse here. But what I do find
surprisingly in line w/ what I've been suspecting are the reasons these
mainlanders offer for calling CTHD an Americanized film.
>Mark Pollard wrote in message ...
>>Reprinted from Inside China Today (www.insidechina.com)
>>
>>Even vendors who sell pirated VCDs and DVDs -- the way most Chinese
>>see their movies -- said sales had been lukewarm.
>>
>>"It's not very good. It's not doing as well as 'Eyes Wide Shut,'" said a
>>vendor named Zhang, referring to the Stanley Kubrick film starring
>>heartthrobs Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.
>>
>>"Chinese people prefer overseas movies," he added.
>>
So then, this reason for the lukewarm-to-bad reception of CTHD points more
to mainland tastes for typical Hollywood fare, not Chinese films.
>>Many Chinese filmgoers criticized "Crouching Tiger" for its inauthentic
>>martial arts moves -- rather than the real-life moves of Bruce Lee and
>>Jackie Chan movies, "Crouching Tiger" takes on a surreal tone with actors
>>and actresses flying through the air and fighting in the tree tops.
>>
Sounds like they simply don't appreciate "wu-xia" storytelling then.
Admittedly, as one contributor of ACD points out, "wu-xia" storytelling is
influenced by the romanticism found in the West. But then again, I really
wonder how can the roots of Chinese cinema help but be somewhat influenced
by the West since that's where the medium and art form came from in the
first place.
>>A saleswoman who watched the movie said: "The moves are not realistic.
>>They're not like the kung fu movies Chinese people are used to."
>>
Obviously, these Chinese people haven't seen too many "wu-xia" films or HK
TV serials or comic books.
>>Chinese audiences are also fed up with the portrayal of China in a
>>traditional or old fashioned light -- world-renowned films such as Zhang
>>Yimou's "Raise the Red Lantern" and "Red Sorghum" may have conquered
>>foreign audiences but were considered by many at home to be a yawn.
>>
Sigh. They really don't care for tradition and heritage, do they. Or
perhaps, they really also are too prideful as a nation to accept that some
Westerners can indeed appreciate many aspects of traditional Chinese culture
and perhaps do so w/ far greater reverence than the mainlanders themselves.
>>"This movie is neither Chinese nor Western and it's not as good as people
>>said it would be. If this movie gets the Oscar, then it is making fun of
>>Chinese culture," one writer said.
>>
More prideful posturing.
>>"It's too shameful a movie. That long queue (leading Hong Kong actor Chow
>>Yun-fat's hair) makes Chinese people look humiliating. What foreigners
like
>>is the queue because it makes them laugh," another writer said.
>>
That's a silly presumption. Would they really rather the movie be
historically inaccurate on something as obvious as the queue? And of
course, they ridicule the movie for being un-Chinese.
>>"The film is not very good, even though it has a well-known director and
>>many famous stars. After seeing the film, it feels like it's using high
>>technology to make the moves, flying here and there among trees, only to
>>suit Hollywood's taste," a third writer said.
>>
Sigh again. They just don't get "wu-xia" storytelling.
>>"It doesn't fit Chinese viewers' taste. It's Chow Yun-fat's worse movie."
>>
If that's really true, then I and many HK, Taiwanese and Singaporean folks
are not really Chinese at all.
>>Like eating, Americans do not like authentic Chinese food, but prefer
>>Americanized Chinese food, one writer quipped.
>>
That may be so in a majority of cases, but I really wonder what they mean by
authentic Chinese food. There are afterall a wide variety of
styles/cuisines throughout China and not all are suitable to everyone's
tastes.
>>"Ang Lee is very smart, he knows this. The film is successful
economically.
>>Ang Lee is using a Chinese person's brain going along an American's path,"
>>the writer said. ((c) 2001 Agence France Presse)
>>
I wonder if they get fed so much propaganda that they look at all
cross-cultural issues like this. "If it appeals to Americans at all, then
it must be Americanized. Don't even bother to see w/ an open mind for
oneself." I wonder if anybody over there ever think: CTHD made ~$100M in
the US, but that probably only amounts to ~15M tickets sold to a population
of ~250M (give or take some). Even if 15M different people saw CTHD, that's
still only a relatively small %age of all Americans and easily small enough
to represent a segment that can appreciate a good Chinese film that doesn't
steep on too many inside jokes or require too much exotic genre background
info.
Oh well...
"Houh wueh yowh kay!"
_Man_
--
Please remove **NOSPAM** from my address to reply by email.
WCMFGINC
accepted and love, but the Chinese people themselves would reject it.
Chris Tan
> vendor named Zhang, referring to the Stanley Kubrick film starring
> heartthrobs Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.
Geez, isn't it obvious why Eyes Wide Shut is selling well?
> Chinese audiences are also fed up with the portrayal of China in a
> traditional or old fashioned light -- world-renowned films such as Zhang
> Yimou's "Raise the Red Lantern" and "Red Sorghum" may have conquered foreign
> audiences but were considered by many at home to be a yawn.
This pretty much says it all, I guess. Same with Ran's flopping in Japan.
SpeedDragn
So, is The Patriot the #1 film in China these days?
_joe
* * *
Davisk
"Chris Tan" <ad_na...@nospamyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ac07741$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> > "It's not very good. It's not doing as well as 'Eyes Wide Shut,'" said a
> > vendor named Zhang, referring to the Stanley Kubrick film starring
> > heartthrobs Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman.
>
> Geez, isn't it obvious why Eyes Wide Shut is selling well?
>
It's gonna sell even better once they re-release it with the alterations to
a couple of scenes removed. That's supposed to be happening soon...
head...@lava.net.ssppaamm.no
: This is funny. Finally, there's a Chinese movie that many Americans have
: accepted and love, but the Chinese people themselves would reject it.
I think you guys need to really balance the comments and understand
what is happening. The Chinese don't "reject" it. CHTD just could
have been better. The Americans don't know that. They are ignorant
to some of the nuances in the movie.
Also consider the choice of actors. Chow and Yeoh are good actors
but they don't speak the dialect well. Of course people are going to
criticize that when there are so many Mandarin speaking actors that
could have been chosen. Imagine Schwartzennegger and Stallone
together in a serious cowboy or Shakespeare movie. They speak English
but their accents would make Americans would roll their eyes because
we know what they should sound like in that genre.
CTHD is not causing rabid fan boys out of the Chinese while its
creating new kung fu movie fans in the US. To the Chinese, the kung
fu thing is old and been done for decades. Nothing new. What if
Hollywood makes another American Wyatt Earp movie or mars movie, is
that going to surprise the Americans and make them want to vote it
into the Oscars? I doubt that will happen no matter how well its
done.
For the younger Chinese its met with mixed reviews. Its cool to see
one of their movies FINALLY making headway into the American market
WITHOUT being butchered in the language soundtrack. On the other
side of the coin, the Chinese make a lot of other movies in Hong
Kong, China and Taiwan. Its back to the racial stereotypes of why a
martial arts movie when there are so many other genres in Chinese
cinema?
Basically CTHD is foreign to Americans and they will overlook certain
things they are unfamiliar with But its under closer scrutiny back
home because they know more about it. Thats normal.
Websurfer
Other Chinese like it.
Actually I think some Chinese in mainland like it
but they don't want to admit it.
How humiliating if the Americans make a more
well known British film than the Brit movies?
Some mainland Chinese like to view it on illegal VCD
than legal copy because it is more affordable.
Dale Hicks
says...
>
> CTHD is not causing rabid fan boys out of the Chinese while its
> creating new kung fu movie fans in the US. To the Chinese, the kung
> fu thing is old and been done for decades. Nothing new. What if
> Hollywood makes another American Wyatt Earp movie or mars movie,
Dear god, no, not another Mars movie.
--
Cranial Crusader dgh...@bellsouth.net
WCMFGINC
any good, some of them did quite well.
Jet Li's "Fist of Legend" was just another "Chinese Connection(Bruce Lee)" and
it was great.
ArchNacho
should just enjoy the movie for what it is, I think the point here is that
many Chinese think it's a bit sad that when Chinese cinema finally has a big
breakthrough in the West, it's with a movie that many of them don't see as
truly Chinese. As a matter of fact, *I* didn't think it was very Chinese,
and I'm not even Chinese myself. It's so obviously an attempt to reach
Western audiences that talking about wuxia traditions and so on becomes
meaningless IMO. Although I myself thought it was pretty good (even if it
was a great disappointment after all the hype), I can understand why some
dislike the fact that Westerners seem unable to accept anything Asian that
hasn't first been through the "Western-o-matic 2000"...
> I think you guys need to really balance the comments and understand
> what is happening. The Chinese don't "reject" it. CTHD just could
> have been better. The Americans don't know that. They are ignorant
> to some of the nuances in the movie.
I agree. It could definitely have been better. There were so many weaknesses
and the story was so Hollywood-ized that I was a bit disappointed when I saw
it, and found it really puzzling that so many seem to think it's so
incredible.
> Also consider the choice of actors. Chow and Yeoh are good actors
> but they don't speak the dialect well. Of course people are going to
> criticize that when there are so many Mandarin speaking actors that
> could have been chosen. Imagine Schwartzennegger and Stallone
> together in a serious cowboy or Shakespeare movie. They speak English
> but their accents would make Americans would roll their eyes because
> we know what they should sound like in that genre.
You know, even though I don't speak a word Mandarin, I thought it was so
incredibly obvious that they didn't speak it well. Yeoh was often reading
her lines rather than acting them and the dialogue often became a bit
"stiff" because of their problems. The fact that those actors were chosen,
despite their poor Mandarin, only goes to prove that CTHD was in fact aimed
at Western audiences, IMNSHO. After all, a lot of Westerners know their
names by now...
> For the younger Chinese its met with mixed reviews. Its cool to see
> one of their movies FINALLY making headway into the American market
> WITHOUT being butchered in the language soundtrack. On the other
> side of the coin, the Chinese make a lot of other movies in Hong
> Kong, China and Taiwan. Its back to the racial stereotypes of why a
> martial arts movie when there are so many other genres in Chinese
> cinema?
Of course that must be frustrating. However, I have to mention that "In the
Mood for Love" has received very good reviews and has gotten quite a lot of
attention in film magazines etc. (at least here in Norway). I don't know how
well it has done/will do when it comes to ticket sales, though...
> Basically CTHD is foreign to Americans and they will overlook certain
> things they are unfamiliar with, but its under closer scrutiny back
> home because they know more about it. Thats normal.
Besides, I think the "greatness" of CTHD has been vastly exaggerated in
Western media. It's not a bad movie, but seriously, it's not as good as many
would have us believe. Personally I also think Chow and Yeoh have been a lot
better in other movies, and acted a lot better too, although I wouldn't go
so far as to say this is Chow's worst ever, as someone had done...
Ian McDowell
1) CTHD didn't actually open on the Mainland until, what, October or
November? At that point hadn't it already played to considerable acclaim
in Taiwan? According to the Taipei Times back in December, it's become
the most popular Chinese-language film of the year there (with similarly
boffo business in Singapore and Malaysia, apparently). An acquiantance
tried three times to see it in Taipei theaters and found it sold-out each
time. Its Mainland debut had been pushed back from the sumer due to the
PRC's anger at the distributor over DEVILS ON THE DOORSTEP.
2) Wuxia, at least of the theatrical variety, doesn't seem terribly
popular on the Mainland. Part of this is due to historical "accident'
(that's probably too mild a term), with the Nanjing Government banning
Wuxia films in the early 30's for "promoting superstition," then World War
2, postwar isolationism and the Cultural Revolution all drastically
limiting filmmaking. While the 70's martial arts boom inspired the PRC to
make the Shaolin Temple trilogy of the early 80's, the later HK vogue for
cinematic Wuxia doesn't seem to have inspired any Mainland imitations, at
least not on the big screen. Mainland swordplay films from the 90's seem
to be all of the glum SWORDSMAN IN A DOUBLE FLAG TOWN sort.
3) This point has been debated elsewhere and I may well be talking through
my ass, but there remains a possibility that the genre is a kind of
Diaspora Fiction. Is it _just_ an accident that the most famous (to us,
at least) names in Wuxia are are not Mainlanders? Think about it. King
Hu made his 60's films in Taiwan. Louis Cha was a Hong Kong journalist.
Tsui Hark was born in Vietnam, educated in Texas and went to Hong Kong to
make movies. Ang Lee seems like a natural extension of that tradition.
Are there any famous Mainland wuxia directors or writers? (That's a
sincere question, not a rhetorical one.) Ang Lee called CTHD "a dream of
China.." Who dreams more of a "Mother Country" than someone who doesn't
live there any more? I'm reminded of the way that more Americans than
Brits, even proportionally speaking, read Celtic and Medieval Fantasy, and
how all the bestselling (other than Tolkien, who is long dead) writers of
that genre are American rather than British. Perhaps, to borrow a title
from an otherwise irrelevant film, Wuxia is a cinematic Song of the Exile.
4) Some of the so-called "Western" qualities of CTHD, especially its
"arthouse" or "Merchant-Ivory" tone, strike me as seeming just much
Taiwanese as anything else. I'm not sure that many of us, with our
limited exposure to Asian cinema, aren't falling into the trap of
"different from Hong Kong" equals "Western."
5) The dialect barrier. This was unavoidable, given the rise of synch
sound. Would Bruce Lee have caught on with Hong Kong audiences if they'd
heard his real voice speaking halting Mandarain (the cinematic language of
the time)? Would Jet Li have been able to revive his career playing a
famous Cantonese folk hero with a heavy Mandarin accent? Would Brigitte
Lin have been able to make the transition from Mandarin weepies to
Cantonese action films with her real voice? Would Maggie Cheung's accent
proved a barrier? What about Michelle Yeoh's Convent School one? Perhaps
the decline of dubbing creates an obstacle to pan-Chinese filmmaking.
6) The "more Western than Eastern" charge hasn't just been applied to Ang
Lee and Kurosawa. It's also been leveled against Tsui Hark, Wong Kar-Wai
(as somebody said elsewhere, why aren't folks debating the "authenticity"
of IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE?),. John Woo and King Hu. Chinese Martial Arts
films were heavily influenced by Japanese cinematic techniques (and by the
Mifune remake of JUDO SAGA) in the 60's, and then by spaghetti westerns.
For a "pure Chinese" kung fu movie, I suspect you might have to go back to
the Shanghai-lensed black and white Wong Fei-Hung series and their like.
God knows, in recent years Jackie Chan and the directors of the current
crop of big budget Hong Kong action films sure seem to have been _trying_
to be "more Western than Eastern."
None of this proves the innate worth of CTHD, but the arguments over its
"authenticity" strike me as fairly risible. As Jun Yan has observed,
Louis Cha himself was as much influenced by Stevenson and Dumas as by
Chinese traditions. And whatever else the film has or hasn't done, it
seems to have brought more Chinese (and female) posters to this newsgroup
than it's seen in a while.
ArchNacho
> "arthouse" or "Merchant-Ivory" tone, strike me as seeming just much
> Taiwanese as anything else. I'm not sure that many of us, with our
> limited exposure to Asian cinema, aren't falling into the trap of
> "different from Hong Kong" equals "Western."
Well, I know little about Taiwanese movies, so it's quite possible that what
I interpret as Western is in fact Taiwanese, but if that is the case, then
Taiwanese cinema is obviously very Western-influenced, so the end result is
more or less the same... I personally prefer Japanese movies, so I
definitely can't claim to be an expert on Chinese cinema, but I still think
it doesn't seem very Chinese. I actually never really compared CTHD to Hong
Kong films, I compared it to Hollywood films, and I thought there were
striking similarities. Others may disagree, but that is my opinion. And I
repeat the point that CTHD was in fact made just as much for Western
audiences as for Eastern, so it would probably be more strange if it
*wasn't* a little Westernized.
> 5) The dialect barrier. This was unavoidable, given the rise of synch
> sound. Would Bruce Lee have caught on with Hong Kong audiences if they'd
> heard his real voice speaking halting Mandarain (the cinematic language of
> the time)? Would Jet Li have been able to revive his career playing a
> famous Cantonese folk hero with a heavy Mandarin accent? Would Brigitte
> Lin have been able to make the transition from Mandarin weepies to
> Cantonese action films with her real voice? Would Maggie Cheung's accent
> proved a barrier? What about Michelle Yeoh's Convent School one? Perhaps
> the decline of dubbing creates an obstacle to pan-Chinese filmmaking.
I don't quite follow you here. How can you say it was unavoidable? They
could've used different, Mandarin-speaking actors, but they chose to use
well-known actors who would draw crowds and bring in more money. It's as
simple as that. Personally, I think it's strange when even I, without
knowing a word Mandarin, can easily notice their difficulties, but they
wanted to make money and we just have to accept that.
> 6) The "more Western than Eastern" charge hasn't just been applied to Ang
> Lee and Kurosawa. It's also been leveled against Tsui Hark, Wong Kar-Wai
> (as somebody said elsewhere, why aren't folks debating the "authenticity"
> of IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE?),.
Quite simply because "In the Mood for Love" hasn't been marketed as an
"authentic" Chinese story. The entire marketing campaign for CTHD was based
on this whole "authentic Chinese" image, IMO, and that's the difference.
> John Woo and King Hu. Chinese Martial Arts
> films were heavily influenced by Japanese cinematic techniques (and by the
> Mifune remake of JUDO SAGA) in the 60's, and then by spaghetti westerns.
> For a "pure Chinese" kung fu movie, I suspect you might have to go back to
> the Shanghai-lensed black and white Wong Fei-Hung series and their like.
> God knows, in recent years Jackie Chan and the directors of the current
> crop of big budget Hong Kong action films sure seem to have been _trying_
> to be "more Western than Eastern."
Well, since you mention spaghetti westerns, you can actually make a
comparison here:
One can immediately tell whether a western is a spaghetti western or an
American western, that is what makes a spaghetti western "authentic". One
couldn't immediately tell that CTHD wasn't an American movie, and that is
the bottom line, IMO, that is what people are whining about. I'm not saying
it's not a good movie or anything like that, but as I said before (although
not in this thread, I just noticed) I think it's understandable why many
react the way they do.
Anyway, to try to explain better, I've pasted what I'd written in the other
thread:
"I wouldn't like it if a Norwegian movie, which was obviously not typical of
Norwegian movies, was celebrated
as an authentic, typical Norwegian movie, by people who hadn't seen any
other Norwegian movie. I think that's more or less what's happened with
CTHD, and probably what happened originally with "Rashomon"/Kurosawa, and I
think it's understandable that some react negatively."
deadmead
news:iankmcd-2803...@pool-63.52.7.172.atln.grid.net...
first of all, wellcome back, Ian!
> A couple of points come to mind:
>
> 1) CTHD didn't actually open on the Mainland until, what, October or
> November? At that point hadn't it already played to considerable acclaim
> in Taiwan? According to the Taipei Times back in December, it's become
> the most popular Chinese-language film of the year there (with similarly
> boffo business in Singapore and Malaysia, apparently). An acquiantance
> tried three times to see it in Taipei theaters and found it sold-out each
> time.
In fact, CTHD is the most popular Chinese-langauge film in Taiwan since
Jackie Chan's
"First Strike." And after its re-released, it becomes one of the most
popular (in terms of boxoffice
record) Chinese-language film in Taiwan, along with "God Of Gamblers,"
"Project A" and several
other Jackie Chan's movies. Note, before "God Of Gamblers," only Jackie
Chan's films could
gross over NT $ 100 million in Taiwan (back in the old days while most movie
theaters played
Chinese-langauge films rather than Hollywood productions, usually a Jackie
Chan movie could
gross from NT$ 50 m. to 70 m. in Taipei alone).
> Its Mainland debut had been pushed back from the sumer due to the
> PRC's anger at the distributor over DEVILS ON THE DOORSTEP.
This could lead to another iusse: none of the "serious" mainland films such
as "In the Heat
of the Sun" (Jiang Wen's directing debut before "Devils on the Doorstep")
and every single
film by the 5th generation mainland filmmakers from their "revolutionary
years." Are all these
movies not "Chinese" enough?
(BTW, "In the Heat of the Sun," IMO, is the best post-80s mainland film;
maybe "Devils" is better,
but don't have chance to see it...)
>
> 2) Wuxia, at least of the theatrical variety, doesn't seem terribly
> popular on the Mainland. Part of this is due to historical "accident'
> (that's probably too mild a term), with the Nanjing Government banning
> Wuxia films in the early 30's for "promoting superstition," then World War
> 2, postwar isolationism and the Cultural Revolution all drastically
> limiting filmmaking. While the 70's martial arts boom inspired the PRC to
> make the Shaolin Temple trilogy of the early 80's, the later HK vogue for
> cinematic Wuxia doesn't seem to have inspired any Mainland imitations, at
> least not on the big screen. Mainland swordplay films from the 90's seem
> to be all of the glum SWORDSMAN IN A DOUBLE FLAG TOWN sort.
In a way, "wu-xia" is a "foregin genre" to mainland China people. Jin Yong /
Louis
Cha's novels just began to capture the imagination of mainland readers in
the past decade,
while wu-xia has been very popular in Taiwan, HK, and other Chinese
communities as both
filmic and literary genre since the late 60s. As you pointed out, there were
"Shaolin Temple"
movies from mainland, but wu-xia is much, much more than "kung fu
demonstrations."
I would consider "Swordsman in a Double Flag Town" as mainland version of
"wu-xia": realistic
cinematic style, and a "Chinese-ilzed" Westerner master narrative / story;
it's certainly different from
the wu-xia genre we've been familiar with in Taiwan and HK. More
importantly, "realism" isn't
something new in "wu-xia filmmaking"; Wang Tung did that a decade before
SIABFT in Taiwan.
>
> 3) This point has been debated elsewhere and I may well be talking through
> my ass, but there remains a possibility that the genre is a kind of
> Diaspora Fiction. Is it _just_ an accident that the most famous (to us,
> at least) names in Wuxia are are not Mainlanders? Think about it. King
> Hu made his 60's films in Taiwan. Louis Cha was a Hong Kong journalist.
> Tsui Hark was born in Vietnam, educated in Texas and went to Hong Kong to
> make movies. Ang Lee seems like a natural extension of that tradition.
> Are there any famous Mainland wuxia directors or writers? (That's a
> sincere question, not a rhetorical one.) Ang Lee called CTHD "a dream of
> China.." Who dreams more of a "Mother Country" than someone who doesn't
> live there any more? I'm reminded of the way that more Americans than
> Brits, even proportionally speaking, read Celtic and Medieval Fantasy, and
> how all the bestselling (other than Tolkien, who is long dead) writers of
> that genre are American rather than British. Perhaps, to borrow a title
> from an otherwise irrelevant film, Wuxia is a cinematic Song of the Exile.
Basically, people from Taiwan and HK and people from mainland China have
very little, if any, "common memory" or "experience," both culturally and
socially.
In Taiwan and HK, most "pre-X generation" people would remember or at least
know
the massive popularity of "The Love Eterne (aka "Butterfly Lovers")" in the
mid 60s,
the rise and fall of wu-xia genre that was initiated by King Hu and Chang
Cheh, the series
of KMT political (yet, extremely sentimental) propaganda films in the 70s
and 80s ("Heroes
of Jan Bridge" even became the higest grossed movie in HK in 1977), and etc,
and etc...
These are "common memories" for people in Taiwan and HK, have any mainlander
ever shared
these memories? In the 60s Louis Cha began to wrote wu-xia novels and
published them
as series in his own newsapaper, and thus revived a literary genre that was
pretty popular during the
20s and 40s in mainland China. Wong Du Lu, the author of the original novel
that CTHD based on,
was one of the most important old-school wu-xia novelists, and Louis Cha is
the leading figure
of the new-school writers. As I pointed out in the other posts a while ago,
Louis Cha publically
stated that he's heavily influenced by Wong Du Lu, and one of the characters
in his first novel
is his version of Jen in CTHD. After wu-xia as a literay genre got revived,
King Hu and Chang Cheh
in the cinema scene caught up very quickly. How many mainland China people
who was born
after 1949 had the experience eagerly waiting for the newspapers to come out
just to see what's
going on in the wu-xia series on them, and experienced King Hu's elegance
and Chang Cheh's
bloodfest on big screen?
>
> 4) Some of the so-called "Western" qualities of CTHD, especially its
> "arthouse" or "Merchant-Ivory" tone, strike me as seeming just much
> Taiwanese as anything else. I'm not sure that many of us, with our
> limited exposure to Asian cinema, aren't falling into the trap of
> "different from Hong Kong" equals "Western."
Ang Lee's filmic and narrative styles (as you can see in CTHD and all his
other
Taiwan productions) are very different from that of contemporary major
Taiwanese
directors, such as HHH, Edward Yang, and Tsai Ming-Liang. And CTHD is
certainly
not an "arthouse" film for Taiwanese audience.
>
> 5) The dialect barrier. This was unavoidable, given the rise of synch
> sound. Would Bruce Lee have caught on with Hong Kong audiences if they'd
> heard his real voice speaking halting Mandarain (the cinematic language of
> the time)? Would Jet Li have been able to revive his career playing a
> famous Cantonese folk hero with a heavy Mandarin accent? Would Brigitte
> Lin have been able to make the transition from Mandarin weepies to
> Cantonese action films with her real voice?
In fact, back in her Mandarin weepies days, her voice was dubbed by those
who were more talented in voice performance. It was almost a "proverb" in
Taiwan at that time that "if Chun Hon (the most frequent male main character
in Brigitte's films at that time) and Brigitte Lin would never become stars
had they
used their own vocies in the movies.
> Would Maggie Cheung's accent
> proved a barrier? What about Michelle Yeoh's Convent School one? Perhaps
> the decline of dubbing creates an obstacle to pan-Chinese filmmaking.
In the CTHD case, whie he decided to use synch sound, I do think Ang Lee was
considering
the "Western Standard" of filmmaking in making CTHD. Basically, the dubbing
is still a common
practice in both Taiwan and HK, in both movies and TV serials. I tend to
think that if CTHD is
a standard HK films, both CYF and Michelle Yeoh would speak Cantonese while
shooting, and
if this film is set out to be a "Mandarin film," their voice would be dubbed
in the theatrical release.
>
> 6) The "more Western than Eastern" charge hasn't just been applied to Ang
> Lee and Kurosawa. It's also been leveled against Tsui Hark, Wong Kar-Wai
> (as somebody said elsewhere, why aren't folks debating the "authenticity"
> of IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE?),. John Woo and King Hu. Chinese Martial Arts
> films were heavily influenced by Japanese cinematic techniques (and by the
> Mifune remake of JUDO SAGA) in the 60's, and then by spaghetti westerns.
To me, cinematic form could be universal (or go one step further, "form"
could
be universal: "form" as an artistic way for the artist to communicate with
the audience).
As much as I want to theorize that Ozu and HHH's cinematic forms are
genuinely
"Eastern," I still can their counterparts in Western cinema scene.
"Cinematic
form" isn't dead yet, it is still developing, and it's created by filmmakers
and most filmmakers,
more often than not, watch and "study" movies from all over the world and
from various culture;
thus, filmmakers from different cultures inevitably would influence each
other. I would argue that
the cultural aspects of a film is difficult to learn, but filmic style
certainly can be learned. So who
can really say such and such filmic form is "Eastern" or "Western."
If we look at the content / narrative of a film, we can certainly see the
difference between East and West.
> For a "pure Chinese" kung fu movie, I suspect you might have to go back to
> the Shanghai-lensed black and white Wong Fei-Hung series and their like.
Kwan Tak-Hing's "countless" Wong Fei-Hung movies were made in HK, after
1949.
Actaully, Kung-fu and wu-xia movies had no place in the mainstream Chinese
cinema
(studio production films since 1930s) until King Hu and Chang Cheh created
the genre
in the mid 60s. Wong Fei-Hung and other wu-xia movies before King Hu and
Chang Cheh's films
were all Cantonese-langauge films. These movies were considered as sort of
"B" movies at
that time. Yet, they were indeed "pure" Chinese kung fu movies in the sense
that they were heavily
influenced by Chinese local stage drama and Chinese theatre traditions.
> God knows, in recent years Jackie Chan and the directors of the current
> crop of big budget Hong Kong action films sure seem to have been _trying_
> to be "more Western than Eastern."
"Making HK movies Hollywood style" has gradually become a trend in HK film
industry
since the late 80s (or even earlier). In fact, when "A Better Tommorrow"
just came out, several
Taiwanese and HK film "critics" thought that "we finally have a Hollywood
quality film!" and of course,
Taiwanese Golden Horse Award gave John Woo a best director award.
>
> None of this proves the innate worth of CTHD, but the arguments over its
> "authenticity" strike me as fairly risible. As Jun Yan has observed,
> Louis Cha himself was as much influenced by Stevenson and Dumas as by
> Chinese traditions.
Louis Cha frequently talked about how some Western novelists and Western
literary
and dramatic theories influenced him.
> And whatever else the film has or hasn't done, it
> seems to have brought more Chinese (and female) posters to this newsgroup
> than it's seen in a while.
Or more variety of perspectives.
Some would say "who would give a fuck about this movie if there's no fight
scene in it,"
and the other would say, this movie isn't just about kung-fu...
deadmead
--
色戀無用
Folly and villainy are integral motives, necessary
to wisdom or virtue.
--- Kenneth Burke
deadmead
news:20010327061550...@ng-ca1.aol.com...
> This is funny. Finally, there's a Chinese movie that many Americans have
> accepted and love, but the Chinese people themselves would reject it.
Then I think I myself and those who booted CTHD's boxoffice record over NT$
100 million
in Taiwan aren't "Chinese people," even we can read geunine Chinese written
langauge
better than people from mainland China.
WhoLeadr
Chinese don't think a popular movie is Chinese, almost as though it must be a
"Western" movie for it to be popular. Same with the directors - any that get
acclaim in the US or the West must be "Western" directors.
The attempt to distance themselves from anything American or Western in China
may be the factor causing all of this.
Man and Natalie
I agree to some extent. But we should not discount the fact that mainland
tastes are bound to be different from HK or Taiwan or Western tastes given
its severe separation from the rest of the "free" world for a few decades.
Further, one could reasonably argue that the mainlanders don't generally
make good critics anyway given their limited exposure to any kind of a
well-developed cinema (or most any other kind of "artistic entertainment").
Basically, they've been taking a crash course on cinema (amongst other
things) for the last 15 years or so, and not everyone in the mainland began
that crash course at the same time.
And pardon my generalizations, if anyone finds them offensive. Do give some
thought before responding. I'm not trying to be offhanded here. Thoughtful
responses are genuinely appreciated.
Man and Natalie
>> 4) Some of the so-called "Western" qualities of CTHD, especially its
>> "arthouse" or "Merchant-Ivory" tone, strike me as seeming just much
>> Taiwanese as anything else. I'm not sure that many of us, with our
>> limited exposure to Asian cinema, aren't falling into the trap of
>> "different from Hong Kong" equals "Western."
>
>Well, I know little about Taiwanese movies, so it's quite possible that
what
>I interpret as Western is in fact Taiwanese, but if that is the case, then
>Taiwanese cinema is obviously very Western-influenced, so the end result is
>more or less the same... I personally prefer Japanese movies, so I
>definitely can't claim to be an expert on Chinese cinema, but I still think
>it doesn't seem very Chinese. I actually never really compared CTHD to Hong
>Kong films, I compared it to Hollywood films, and I thought there were
>striking similarities. Others may disagree, but that is my opinion. And I
>repeat the point that CTHD was in fact made just as much for Western
>audiences as for Eastern, so it would probably be more strange if it
>*wasn't* a little Westernized.
>
Your impressions and opinion are probably correct to a good extent. From
what I can gather, what you expressed is more or less one of two sides to a
coin. Actually, it's quite arguable that we're seeing 3 sides to the
equation. There is the Western, the Diaspora as Ian puts it (ie. HK, Taiwan
and elsewhere), and mainland China. And you could also break up each side
into smaller factions.
Obviously, not all Westerners hold the same perspectives, but generally,
they don't see this issue from the inside and are mostly influenced by very
similar origins. That's why they are on one side despite their diversity.
And I don't only mean Western caucasians, but all Westerners who don't
really identify w/ the Diaspora nor mainland China.
As for Diaspora, obviously, HK is not the same as Taiwan or Singapore or
other ethnic Chinese societies including those small ones in the US. But
they all have something in common, and that is they are (or have been for
many years) "free" societies w/ cinemas (and other things) developed more or
less "freely" like Western societies. But this group does idenitfy strongly
w/ traditional Chinese culture while experiencing a fair dose of Western
influence.
As for mainland, don't assume that all mainlanders are the same despite the
Cultural Revolution. I'd say before the Cultural Revolution, there was
probably just about as much diversity (or even more) in China as there are
in all of what we consider the West, which consists mostly of West Europe
and US. And even now, much of that diversity still exists at the grass
roots level. An American can get a glimpse of that by just looking
carefully at the various New York City Chinatowns(!).
However, it would also be very silly to assume that mainland is THE true
traditional China and dismiss Diaspora out of hand. How can 4 decades of
Chinese communist rule not have severely impacted mainland culture? Marxism
isn't exactly a Chinese product afterall, and any kind of traditional
culture MUST somehow link back to and identify w/ two millenia's worth of
imperial rule under a variety of major "Chinese" people groups.
FYI, yes, there are indeed major people groups (why do you think we have so
many dialects and yet not all are equally different??), and these groups are
actually often at odds. Just go back to Chinese history before the First
Emperor (Qin) "united" the nation. There were many many simultaneous
kingdoms before they got narrowed down to just a handful and then just the
one, which changed dynasties from time to time. In many ways, China was
just like America before European imperialism took over. However, America
never got to the point that China did 2200 years ago--the 17th-century
Europeans took care of that.
>> 5) The dialect barrier. This was unavoidable, given the rise of synch
>> sound. Would Bruce Lee have caught on with Hong Kong audiences if they'd
>> heard his real voice speaking halting Mandarain (the cinematic language
of
>> the time)? Would Jet Li have been able to revive his career playing a
>> famous Cantonese folk hero with a heavy Mandarin accent? Would Brigitte
>> Lin have been able to make the transition from Mandarin weepies to
>> Cantonese action films with her real voice? Would Maggie Cheung's accent
>> proved a barrier? What about Michelle Yeoh's Convent School one?
Perhaps
>> the decline of dubbing creates an obstacle to pan-Chinese filmmaking.
>
>I don't quite follow you here. How can you say it was unavoidable? They
>could've used different, Mandarin-speaking actors, but they chose to use
>well-known actors who would draw crowds and bring in more money. It's as
>simple as that. Personally, I think it's strange when even I, without
>knowing a word Mandarin, can easily notice their difficulties, but they
>wanted to make money and we just have to accept that.
>
But doesn't that make it unavoidable? People don't make films just for the
sake of making films. Yes, obviously, some films are made knowing that they
won't see much, if any, $$$ returns. But each filmmaker generally do not do
that across the board. They need the $$$ from the popular films to fund
their pet projects. Sure, CTHD itself could've been one of their pet
projects or could it really? And really, a film requires more than just one
filmmaker, so...
And don't you think dubbing can look strange also as I (sort of) commented
about Jet Li in OUATIC on an older thread? And most HK movies use dubbing
in their original language. That was the point Ian made. He's saying would
all those HK/Taiwanese stars become stars and help create popular films
(this is mutual btw) if they didn't use dubbing all these years? No one
really knows for sure, but I'd say probably not, given how difficult it is
for most stars to rise out of the sea of mediocrity.
BTW, there was a good HK TVB serial from the late-70's on just this subject
about HK stars--actually, not so much the dubbing part though, but the
becoming a HK star part. I believe the show was called "Sing Chun"
(Cantonese) which means "Stardust" and co-starred then-newcomers (both real
life and in character!) Carol Cheng Yu Ling and Chang Hing Yue.
>> 6) The "more Western than Eastern" charge hasn't just been applied to Ang
>> Lee and Kurosawa. It's also been leveled against Tsui Hark, Wong Kar-Wai
>> (as somebody said elsewhere, why aren't folks debating the "authenticity"
>> of IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE?),.
>
>Quite simply because "In the Mood for Love" hasn't been marketed as an
>"authentic" Chinese story. The entire marketing campaign for CTHD was based
>on this whole "authentic Chinese" image, IMO, and that's the difference.
>
Nope. I don't recall seeing much hype about CTHD being an "authentic"
Chinese movie. All this "hype" you're suggesting seems to only be visible
(at least to me) on usenet. I think it's pretty much assumed that it's
authentic by most Westerners. Afterall, everything in the film looks
Chinese even if you can argue critically that it doesn't "feel" Chinese.
And how many Westerners really sit down and reflect on whether it "feels"
Chinese?
>
>Anyway, to try to explain better, I've pasted what I'd written in the other
>thread:
>"I wouldn't like it if a Norwegian movie, which was obviously not typical
of
>Norwegian movies, was celebrated
>as an authentic, typical Norwegian movie, by people who hadn't seen any
>other Norwegian movie. I think that's more or less what's happened with
>CTHD, and probably what happened originally with "Rashomon"/Kurosawa, and I
>think it's understandable that some react negatively."
>
I don't know about Rashomon/Kurosawa, but I and plenty of other current
usenet posters (not just here in AAM) are Chinese and have seen plenty of
Chinese films, TV programming and other media like comic books while growing
up, not just in some 5-year crash course. And the only Chinese who really
could NOT grow up w/ much in the way of Chinese films, TV programming and
other media are the very large majority of mainlanders. They are the ones
going through the 5-to-10-year crash courses, and as one can plainly see in
these discussions, they're already bored w/ it and flocking to
American/Hollywood blockbusters.
BTW, if I start coming across as too aggressive, please forgive me. It is
hard to not be a bit emotional about this issue if you're Chinese. And I'd
say especially so if you're of the variety that people might be tempted to
call "banana" even though you don't agree in truth AND in principle.
Best regards,
head...@lava.net.ssppaamm.no
: In article <99ruas$lbo$3...@mochi.lava.net>, head...@lava.net.ssppaamm.no
There's only several dozen Mars movies and we are sick of it. There
is like what...a few hundred martial arts movies and not all of the
Chinese are praising the new ones. Now imagine the Chinese going
bonkers on the next Mars movie.
There's a soul gem on my forehead
> is like what...a few hundred martial arts movies and not all of the
> Chinese are praising the new ones. Now imagine the Chinese going
> bonkers on the next Mars movie.
Ghosts Of Mars (yes there is a new one coming) has Ice Cube in it.
--
Edshugeo The GodMoor
http://www.mp3.com/psychovoyager
http://www.mp3.com/ejam
"I am George! Do you know what I am?" - The Odd One Dies
Darryl Pestilence
>A couple of points come to mind:
>2) Wuxia, at least of the theatrical variety, doesn't seem terribly
>popular on the Mainland. Part of this is due to historical "accident'
>(that's probably too mild a term), with the Nanjing Government banning
>Wuxia films in the early 30's for "promoting superstition," then World War
>2, postwar isolationism and the Cultural Revolution all drastically
>limiting filmmaking. While the 70's martial arts boom inspired the PRC to
>make the Shaolin Temple trilogy of the early 80's, the later HK vogue for
>cinematic Wuxia doesn't seem to have inspired any Mainland imitations, at
>least not on the big screen. Mainland swordplay films from the 90's seem
>to be all of the glum SWORDSMAN IN A DOUBLE FLAG TOWN sort.
>
Interesting point but a bit flawed. While production of wu xia pian does
seem
to fall in the SIADFT mold, the popularity of Taiwanese and Hong Kong wu xia
on video in the mainland (both legally and illegally) is strong enough.
Mainland tv offers up some epic productions that seem similar to wu xia pian
but it is wu xia tv and that means more dramatic exposition and about 60 to
70
to 80 episodes of narrative evolution! Still, good point about HK and
Tawianese productions being distinctive. I do find the diaspora observation
valid.
>3) This point has been debated elsewhere and I may well be talking through
>my ass, but there remains a possibility that the genre is a kind of
>Diaspora Fiction. Is it _just_ an accident that the most famous (to us,
>at least) names in Wuxia are are not Mainlanders? Think about it. King
>Hu made his 60's films in Taiwan.
True, but his appreciation for the wu xia drama and literature dates back to
his days growing up in Mainland China. He was doing radio versions of this
stuff for the VOA Chinese language programs.
Louis Cha was a Hong Kong journalist.
>Tsui Hark was born in Vietnam, educated in Texas and went to Hong Kong to
>make movies. Ang Lee seems like a natural extension of that tradition.
>Are there any famous Mainland wuxia directors or writers? (That's a
>sincere question, not a rhetorical one.)
Wasn't Chang Cheh born in China?
Ang Lee called CTHD "a dream of
>China.." Who dreams more of a "Mother Country" than someone who doesn't
>live there any more? I'm reminded of the way that more Americans than
>Brits, even proportionally speaking, read Celtic and Medieval Fantasy, and
>how all the bestselling (other than Tolkien, who is long dead) writers of
>that genre are American rather than British. Perhaps, to borrow a title
>from an otherwise irrelevant film, Wuxia is a cinematic Song of the Exile.
>
Interesting observations, again. In the case of Tsui Hark's wu xia
exercizes,
they are the the "Redemption Song" of wu xia pian. Sorry, had to get Marley
involved.
>4) Some of the so-called "Western" qualities of CTHD, especially its
>"arthouse" or "Merchant-Ivory" tone, strike me as seeming just much
>Taiwanese as anything else. I'm not sure that many of us, with our
>limited exposure to Asian cinema, aren't falling into the trap of
>"different from Hong Kong" equals "Western."
>
Interesting but doubtful.
>5) The dialect barrier. This was unavoidable, given the rise of synch
>sound. Would Bruce Lee have caught on with Hong Kong audiences if they'd
>heard his real voice speaking halting Mandarain (the cinematic language of
>the time)?
Ian, only THE BIG BOSS was Manarin-language first. FIST OF FURY and WAY OF
THE
DRAGON were released IN CANTONESE. Interestingly, Bruce never did his own
voice on FOF and rather than voice himself in WAY OF THE DRAGON, he voiced
the
black character whom John Benn brings to shake up the restaraunt!!! Bruce
speaking in English amidst the Cantonese dialogue was a trip.
Would Jet Li have been able to revive his career playing a
>famous Cantonese folk hero with a heavy Mandarin accent? Would Brigitte
>Lin have been able to make the transition from Mandarin weepies to
>Cantonese action films with her real voice? Would Maggie Cheung's accent
>proved a barrier? What about Michelle Yeoh's Convent School one? Perhaps
>the decline of dubbing creates an obstacle to pan-Chinese filmmaking.
>
Not really. That's as much hokum as the talkie destroying cinema hundreds of
years ago.
I think this is the pot kicking in for you Ian.
>6) The "more Western than Eastern" charge hasn't just been applied to Ang
>Lee and Kurosawa. It's also been leveled against Tsui Hark, Wong Kar-Wai
>(as somebody said elsewhere, why aren't folks debating the "authenticity"
>of IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE?),.
Because ITMFL is boring. As much as CTHD is flawed - it's not petrifyingly
boring.
John Woo and King Hu. Chinese Martial Arts
>films were heavily influenced by Japanese cinematic techniques (and by the
>Mifune remake of JUDO SAGA) in the 60's, and then by spaghetti westerns.
>For a "pure Chinese" kung fu movie, I suspect you might have to go back to
>the Shanghai-lensed black and white Wong Fei-Hung series and their like.
You mean the Hong Kong-lensed ones staring Kwan Tak Hing? I've seen two in
their entirety and their influence on martial arts films in the late 80s-mid
90s remains surprisingly strong.
Never knew there were Shanghai-lensed ones predating the 50s.
>God knows, in recent years Jackie Chan and the directors of the current
>crop of big budget Hong Kong action films sure seem to have been _trying_
>to be "more Western than Eastern."
Indeed. In fact the proliferation of Bey Logan with his Media Evil
"contributions" and now with the incredibly lame Jackie Chan 7th Sense
"Highbinders" and the last few Milkyway bits of noir written by the French
Duo
(names escape me) - the "more Western" ceases to be and the reality becomes
"western films" period.
A handful of itneresting efforts emerged from this - but the majority suck
ass
beyond belief. Pretty sad, as HK film used to represent a breath of fresh
air
from the typical Hollywood stodginess. Now it mirrors it - but with
infinately
more interesting actors. It's like Plastic with a pleasing vaneer - but it's
still plastic.
>
>None of this proves the innate worth of CTHD, but the arguments over its
>"authenticity" strike me as fairly risible. As Jun Yan has observed,
>Louis Cha himself was as much influenced by Stevenson and Dumas as by
>Chinese traditions. And whatever else the film has or hasn't done, it
>seems to have brought more Chinese (and female) posters to this newsgroup
>than it's seen in a while.
Damn. Well, Project Mayhem is still in effect.
Darryl Pestilence
------------------------------------------------------------
Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at:
http://MailAndNews.com
Create a new mailbox, or access your existing IMAP4 or
POP3 mailbox from anywhere with just a web browser.
------------------------------------------------------------