Yes (to the sword part), but I thought the most interesting was the question of a 'hero'. Was Nameless a hero? Or was the Emperor a Hero? What exactly defines heroism?

Well I'm dying to see the director's cut. As for Shih Huang Ti; yeah some background is helpful. Box office-wise, I think it'll do okay. It's definitely one of those 'love it or loathe it' films.

Hmmm...i thought it was obvious who the "Hero" was, in the context of the film. The hero is "Nameless". Heck, the epilogue even said so.



That's why I totally do not buy the end message. But I do have to admit it was well-done.

Yup. And you said it doesn't "deserve" a widespread US release. Who are you to make that decision? (Granted, I'll take pretty much anyone's word over Harvey Swinestein's...)

I, too, consider CTHD over-rated (especially since it shamelessly steals a couple of scenes from "The Hero of Swallow"), and contrary to what you may think, I am not hyping myself up too much for Hero. Of more concern to me is MiramAxe's disgusting treatment of Asian cinema; I'm eager to see the general reaction to Hero's release from those who are in the know (it's been in the can for ages) and those who are not ("Thank God Miramax continues to bring us all of these exciting martial arts films! Thank God they usually release dub-only DVDs and inaccuately translate the others! Thank God they spare me the trouble of watching the REAL movie by giving me a retitled version with 20 minutes missing! Yee haw!" You know. Them.).

No, I don't think it was obvious who the hero was, but we'll leave it as that, knowing how our previous arguments about films have gone.

BTW, NYT's article about Chinese govt's support for the film:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/arts/02ARTS.html (Spoilers, registration required)

just came back from the Hero screening at the Palm Springs Int'l Film Festival. The theater was packed, mostly with locals (middle to upper middle class caucasian senior citizens). Overall the audience enjoyed it a lot. The elderly couple behind me kept chuckling throughout the movie on almost every wire-fu scene though.

This gets my vote for the most aesthetically accomplished movie of the year and one of the best swordplay action ever put to celluloid.

Regarding the political subtext of the movie; I can see how this movie can easily be read as propaganda for the chinese gov't, but given Zhang Yimou's history of inserting subtle critiques of the government's policies in his past movies I think there's more to it than meets the eye. For example, even though his portrayal of the Emperor may seem sympathetic he is dressed in black throughout the movie -- a color that traditionally symbolizes evil. This is transposed with Jet Li's version of the story in which the color scheme is white (symbolizing truth and the good).

In my opinion, this is partially the reason why Zhang chose to go with the multiple color palette to complement the multiple narratives.

If this movie ever gets released theatrically in the US it probably won't do well as some of you have suggested. But because of its style of narrative and cold and detached interaction between the characters, not its politics. Most people who attended the screening tonight were not even aware of the controversy until one guy brought it up, based on what he read in some newspaper.

As a side note, to be fair though, most Hollywood war/action movies are also propaganda for US militarism. Movies like Pearl Harbor, Behind Enemy Lines, Black Hawk Down, and Rules of Engagement are basically advertisement for Pentagon's and the US military's latest dangerous toys and they also legitimize US military intervention abroad. Then we have action movies like the Rambo trilogy, Missing in Action series, Raw Deal, Collateral Damage, Commando, Cobra, etc. that celebrates vigilante violence and individual heroics. HERO celebrates individual sacrifice for collective gain as the highest ideal that anybody can aspire to in society.

I think it's purely hypocritical that anybody would point out those flaws in a cultural product of a communist country and totally miss similar flaws in a cultural product of a capitalist country. I'm not taking sides here and I'm not interested in getting into a communist vs capitalist argument. I'm just pointing out something that a lot of people simply don't see.

Back to the original topic: Frankly I think Miramax is being too cautious. I think US audiences will like the movie, and though many will walk out of the theater saying "DUH HUH?" There'll be enough word of mouth on the stunning visuals to make it a reasonable hit. Not enough to be the next CTHD, but enough to make Miramax forget Zu Warrriors. (Did that ever make it to US theaters in the first place?)

I heard so many different things about the theatrical release of this movie in the US I don't know what to believe anymore. So is HERO still planned for a US theatrical release? If so, when?

Sounds like a Nov 2003 release is the target now.

And btw, guys...could you please not discuss your interpretation of the movie? Or if you have to, then please put it in spoilers. Even if you're not discussing the plot, I still don't want to know what you think the movie's about. Right now, I know basically nothing about the movie and that's how I want to keep it. If you insist on discussing the movie without spoilers, please create a new thread. Thanks...

No. There were a couple of test screenings where it was dubbed, rewritten to make Zhang Ziyi's character the narrator (even though she only has a couple of scenes), and cut down to 80 minutes from 104. Audiences hated it, and rightly so. I have (regrettably) seen the REAL, COMPLETE version ("Legend of Zu" is the real title) and I can scarcely believe that anything Miramax could have done would make it any worse, but they managed.

"Zu Warriors" is still slated for a direct to DVD release, as far as I know.