Shanghaiist: The Departed will never arrive in China

horse

Sun, 18 Feb 2007 09:12:32 +0800

There's a lot to complain about in China, but it also is a catch-all complaint for every other kind of frustration. Very easy to pin the blame on things you don't necessarily understand. Girlfriend in a bad mood -- damn Chinese! Too much stress at work -- damn Chinese! Can't get a good table -- damn Chinese! Hit by a snot rocket -- well, there must be some legitimacy in it! Expat life is tough, but you can always blame the locals, especially when they are so blamable!

ange

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:33:20 +0800

re above comment: well, it seems to me that just about everyone leaving comments on this blog is bad mouthing China.

Bob Chippens

Tue, 06 Feb 2007 00:23:51 +0800

No-one, and I mean no-one, is allowed to say a bad word about China. Ever. We wont allow it. Though we aren't quite sure why... Pa-----THETICCCCCCC!!!

Trev

Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:58:08 +0800

No. Let it go ... If you really REALLY want to analyse accents then analyse the collection of mish-mash Boston accents.

LAT

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:34:59 +0800

epay, I agree that it would have made the most sense to have the representatives of the Chinese government speak Mandarin, particularly because they were speaking through an interpreter. However, why would they necessarily only speak Mandarin? It is not outside the realm of possibility that a group of Chinese government officials from Guangdong would be making the buy, in which case they might speak Cantonese. I live in Shanghai and find that when Shanghainese congregate they are just as likely, if not more so, to speak in Shanghainese. Would this not apply to a group of any other Chinese dialect speakers? Anyway, shouldn't we be suspending disbelief to enjoy any movie? I speak Mandarin, not Cantonese, but I've heard enough Cantonese to also guess that could be what they're speaking (it sounds slightly off to me too, somehow). Can anyone confirm what language/dialect they are speaking?

Kristof

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:31:16 +0800

@epay I cannot speak to the accents, but it is simply not true that Cantonese are disinterested in conducting military espionage, as the recent Mak family case proves.

epay

Wed, 24 Jan 2007 10:39:47 +0800

My biggest issue with the scene in question is the fact that the Chinese arms dealers are speaking Cantonese... and not only that, but it's kind of crappy Cantonese (or else some similar dialect that I'm not familliar with, in which case I'm blushing). In my estimation, the only governments who might be interested in arms include Taiwan (who just get the stuff direct from the US gov't anyway) and Beijing, neither of which are Cantonese-speaking areas. I know Cantonese speakers are easier to come by in LA, but I'm sure there are some Mandarin speakers looking for bit parts too. And the least they could do was pick someone who spoke better Cantonese.

skyboxxx

Sun, 21 Jan 2007 01:43:20 +0800

Okay, whether it is the first time or not is really academic. The important question is, why is the scene essential to the movie? I think the answer to that is that the scene shows the extremity of Sullivan's allegiance with Costello. Not only does Sullivan betray his friends, colleagues, community, and professional duty, but this scene shows that Sullivan is willing to betray his country -- to act as an accomplice to treason -- to protect Costello.

LAT

Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:22:41 +0800

Well, aside from the grocery store "bribe" and education as a young boy, he receives a gift from Costello the moment he graduates from the police academy. A few minutes later in the movie, immediately after he meets his girlfriend in the elevator, he speaks to Costello on the phone and gives him information about the surveillance van following him. The arms dealing scene is still crucial, but it isn't the first time we are made to be clearly aware he's in bed with Costello.

skyboxxx

Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:19:09 +0800

...or 'character', if you insist on correct spelling.

skyboxxx

Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:17:57 +0800

...That's the charactor Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon).

skyboxxx

Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:16:05 +0800

I do believe that the arms-dealing scene is the first time that the actor Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon) is actually shown to be directly cooperating with the Frank Costello's (Jack Nicholson) gang and it is the first irrevokable, positive proof of his character's complicity, as he tips off the gang members with a text message. If you know another, earlier scene, do tell. Regardles, I guess the whole thing is a litte too close to home for the Chinese censors!!!

Simon Templar

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 16:57:58 +0800

Looks like China got the micro-chip technology anyway judging by the satellite they just shot down. So no reason to ban the film.

nanheyangrouchuan

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 12:06:04 +0800

At least Hollywood gets some credit for not backing down and calling "bad China" "bad China".

Steve

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 11:38:37 +0800

I like how their criticism that using Chinese arms dealers as a sterotype was to argue that they should have used other sterotypes (Iraqi or Iranian arms dealers)instead. But what do you expect from the people who banned Mission Impossible III because it showed scenes of hanging laundry that defamed the image of a modern Shanghai (where of course no one hangs launry outside)?

LAT

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 11:09:26 +0800

skyboxxx, do you mean the Hollywood ending, or the Chinese government arms dealers scene? Neither one is the first time Matt Damon is shown to be a dirty cop. We know from the moment Jack Nicholson's character meets him as a young boy (buying his complicity for some groceries). And it is further reinforced various times before the arms deal or his final demise. Do you mean it is the first time the police realize there is indeed a dirty cop among them?

skyboxxx

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 07:17:23 +0800

*** PLOT SPOILER *** The offending scene is DEFINITELY necessary as it is the first time that Matt Damon is definitely shown to be the dirty cop. Admittely, I never saw the HK version, but I must say that the adapted script is brilliant... reads like Mamet.

Dirk Diggler

Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:32:56 +0800

Jakob, ANY remake loses points for lack of originality, in my opinion. The Departed is a great film, but Infernal Affairs will always be better because it was an original concept. It has its faults, but I liked how they avoided the Hollywood ending that Scorsese couldn't resist. Maybe he deserves an Oscar, but he didn't make a better film than Andrew Lau.

Dan

Thu, 18 Jan 2007 23:32:07 +0800

I actually liked The Departed, Jakob. That was just fictitious government censors saying those bad things.

Jakob

Thu, 18 Jan 2007 22:52:19 +0800

Are you guys insane? The Departed was WAY better then Infernal Affairs! Give Scorsese finally an Acadamy Award for it, he f*cking deserves it!