Haven't read the book... saw the movie.
It's OK.

What threw me most of the way through it all was...
"Why is this drama, set in Japan, been cast with Chinese women in all the lead roles?"

Not ONE is native Japanese.
Where there no Japanese actresses who could have been given a role?

Oh and the 'dance'.
(smiles)
VERY DV8.

Aside from that- it's OK. I can see why Speilburg dcided to direct Munich instead though.

I saw it and haven't read the book.

It was pretty and shiny but it had issues.

a) There was obvious language issues. The cast had some trouble with English (or at least that's the only forgivable reason I can think of) and this showed up in a few scenes where the dialogue was delivered poorly.

b) The pan-asian cast. They weren't all chinese, there was a mix including some Japanese. It REALLY struck me as the kind of simplification that we have seen in Hollywood for decades. For an Irish person it's easy to appreciate. Think of "The Quiet Man" and you've an idea of what I'm talking about.

c) The argument that one of the actresses gave about how Ralph Fiennes could play multiple nationalities for an American audience. I'm sorry but this doesn't work for me. I can tell if an Eastern European actress is not Irish if she is playing an Irish character. Equally you can do the same for a Chinese and Japanese character/actress. Just because the average US cinema-goer cannot tell them apart does not mean it's ok.

d) The simplicity of the dialogue in parts and the simplicity of themes. There were times when this annoyed me. I know it was an attempt at a victory of style over substance but some parts of the plot were too wooden and simplistic for me to stomach. There just wasn't enough development of character for me to get my teeth into, if you know what I mean.

It was like a Jane Austin book made into a film and set in Japan and then simplified for an American audience.


Overall, I enjoyed it though. It was very pretty. :)

Just because the average US cinema-goer cannot tell them apart does not mean it's ok.

*applause*

Acupuncture? Or amputation. One of the "a" ones should help.

Is it a sharp pain (pinched nerve) or a burning pain (strain)? Have you tried giving it a hot soak? If you pulled something that might help.

I've read the book but even though the film deviates a lot from it I still liked it. I presume the changes were made as the book didn't lend itself well to filming, I think regardless of the changes the spirit of the book comes through.

I've already heard all this debate on IMDB but I feel quite strongly about it. I don't think it matters what type of person plays the characters whether they are from Hong Kong, China or Japan, or elsewhere.

(BTW, big fan of book.)

But, it's supposed to be about the acting. People don't generally complain about American people playing English or the other way around. Black characters playing what were traditionally white roles and so on. Look at Othello, Romeo and Juliet and the like, it's about the strength of character and acting.

Now, when it comes to dialogue and actually being able to speak the language, that's another matter entirely. That's what acting is about. And of course, putting across the character of the individual to portrayed.

I have read the book and have plans to see the movie. I have friends who are regular movie goers have both read the book and not, and both have enjoyed the movie as a stand alone piece of work. You cannot compare it to the book. Although one thing that was mentioned was that it was easier to understand elements of the film if you had read the book.

Why does it matter that a couple of females in lead roles happen to be Chinese? If you want to be really picky... someone here says 'Chinese women in all the lead roles'.

Hatsumomo - Li Gong - Chinese
Sayuri - Ziya Zhang - Chinese
Mameha - Michelle Yeoh - Malaysian
Korin - Eugenia Yuan - Hong Kong
Satsu - Samantha Futerman - Korean
Mother - Kaori Momoi - Japanese
Auntie - Tsai Chin - Chinese

I'll post further comments when I see the movie on my own LJ. I'm sure I will enjoy it for what it is.