Linkshoch Wonderful Movie

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

peterxnxn A film that could be even longer. A masterpiece, made by all those who cares. There are so many things well done. I appreciate it for it shine,for all scenes and street views, for costumes and interiors,for narration,because not insist over horrific scenes. All story only seems to be lighty but it have a hide loaded ,,weight'' meant for more wise people. Who can to not like this film when it start with shine of the sun and ends in the same manner? Among thousands of insignificant movies with fights, battles, horrors, juicy stories, juicy lovers, this film shows shining. Hard to find one flaw....To see more Japanese guys or battle scenes; or more love? To see more political conflicts? No, it's not the case,all story is perfect (for me so ), as it is presented.

BasicLogic 1) A very bad script with poor arrangement of storyline, scenes, characters appearances, boring narration, extended unnecessary anecdotes.There seems not enough stuff to fulfill the biopic, so the screenplay writer just keeps blabbering lot of boring segments of the heroine's uninterested enough background back story. The heroine died at 31 years old, so there's not a lot to tell but pumped a lot of yada yada to make it longer. A very poorly scripted screenplay, trying so hard to say something but ended up telling nothing and nothing worthwhile telling.2) A movie directed by a too old, too traditionally grabbed director, who could only direct the film with her formulaic ways of directing with similar paces and prescription. She has received many awards but never could get rid of her rigid, one way directing habits. A habitual burden pressed down almost all of her films, long, straight line one direction narrative, randomly arranged scenes forced to patch up with flashbacks, jump-around plots, young and old images of the same character. Too traditional way of directing that not catching up the modern way of viewing paces and tempos of the present audiences. A slow-like-hell pace that only nicotine pills might keep the viewers awakening enough to make the ticket fare worth. 3) Very poor editing. The director obviously always sticks to her peer of editors who got the same problems of evolving with time. This film suffered too many back-and-forth patch-up scenes.4) Too many unnecessary scenes and worthless unimportant anecdotes or incidents, like a randomly patched up quilt with many unrelated pieces of clothes.5) Pumped into this boring film with lot of historical literary characters, trying to get the audiences connected, but ended up in a nothing but Zzzzzz meh big yawn.

tiffanyyongwt 3 hours. This is enough to deter many people from watching the film. Maybe it will be different if it is a three hour Marvel hero movie, but it didn't feel like 3 hours to me at all. The Golden Era talks about the life story of a Chinese female writer 萧红 from the June 2, 1911 – January 22, 1942 in the format which resembles that of a stage drama, a documentary and an interview.Some may find it boring and monotonous, but it was just like how a normal person's life is. Their life was not exaggerated or romanticised or dramatized. I found it enlightening. This is life. It's not a movie, it's not a fairy tale where the male and female lead will get back together and live happily ever after. It's life. A life with regrets and questions.The Golden Era was not biased towards any characters. OK, perhaps it was biased by choosing a good looking actor Feng Shaofeng as Xiao Jun (the real person was not tall and muscular), and audience tend to pity him during the breakup. It made the audience decide what to believe and made me think. I overheard one of the audience said how there was almost no climax throughout the film. But being able to be in the audience's mind, to be able to make the audience think about the film, is a form of success, a form of "climax" to me.Award-winning (female) director Ann Hui had left the whole film true to the life story. Unanswered parts were filled up by with her friends' answers. Different sides of the story (like the real reason behind the break up between Xiao Jun 萧军 and Xiao Hong) were also shown.After watching "The Golden Era", it took me a few days to get over the many unanswered questions that were in my mind. Why was Xiao Hong so calm and unperturbed during her pregnancies and during war time? Why did Duanmu marry her knowing that she was pregnant with Xiao Jun's child? Why did he disappear on her on her final days?Xiao Jun, Xiao Hong's husband remarried after they broke up and had a total of 8 children. Did he still love Xiao Hong? Did he ever regret? What really happened during the break up? Questions that made me search through the web for days, reading the commentaries and forums from various online sources before I could rest my mind.If you are wondering why you should even watch this, when you don't even know who this author is (after all, she's not exactly JK Rowling or Suzanne Collins), this is a film you should watch because it's about living life the way you want it and not the way others want you to live. I love the way the actors depict the different characters. They were not acting the characters but being them. I remembered a scene when a character burst into tears talking about Xiao Hong. The audience laughed. I didn't understand why so. Is it funny when you burst into tears when talking about a deceased friend?Read more: http://tiffanyyong.com/2014/10/15/golden-era-movie-review/

azure_833-1 First the good things: Tang Wei is a competent actress, perfectly cast for the role. high production value. good attention to details.Now for the bad: over 3 hours long! The director is so in love with herself, if she had hired a proper editor, the film would have been a much superior one at 90 min. Deliberately trying to be avant-garde. breaking the mold for the sake of breaking mold. The movie is dotted with interviews of the characters around the author, some experimental technique, which completely breaks the immersion while contributing nothing to the film.summary: tries to be avant-garde like Duras' films, but lacking.