hanqiang1011
Senior Member
Yes manz, 三国演义 is a romanticized story and 三国志 is the actual history. Till this day, many ppl are still confused by the story and historical events.
Red Cliff 2
- Thread starter AcueMedia
- Start date
- Status
Yes manz, 三国演义 is a romanticized story and 三国志 is the actual history. Till this day, many ppl are still confused by the story and historical events.
foreverlovex
Senior Member
I think u mean the novel bah. In the history for that period.....
1. Sun Quan was the one who "borrowed" arrows from Cao cao, although it was an unintended borrowing. In the novel that was Zhuge Liang.
2. In that battle, Zhou Yu was the key man. He was the "Man" until Luo GuanZhong wrote the romance of the three kingdom and made him a narrow minded guy. There were plenty of poems accorded to him by poets who knew he was the "One".
Last edited:
foreverlovex
Senior Member
Now guys,
Let's put it this way. You are paying S$10/- a ticket to watch a blockbuster movie or history documentary? If you want a muti-million dollar film to follow exactly the same as a history facts or from the novel, isnt it better off buying ''三国演义'' (which I very much like the series) from Commerical Press bookstore?
Below is an extract from a similar review in CS:
Dear all,
I beg to differ. This is my 2 cents worth of opinion on this 2 films:
''Romance of the 3 Kingdoms'' is based on the ''Record of the 3 Kingdoms'' by Zhou Yu. The latter is a historical record. In addition Sima Quan also recorded the events. The "Romance" is basically a novelization, meaning "romanticization" on actual events. The ROTK is actually written in the 14th Century during the Ming Dynasty, more than a millennia after the 3 Kingdoms occurred. When John Woo's directing this film, he chosed to follow some events happened in the ''Record of the 3 Kingdoms''.
Personally, I think the battle scenes are well-fought and simply marvellous and well-constructed. The battle scenes are almost comparative to those of Lord of the Ring: Part 2 & 3, where the latter used mostly CGI. Thus, I view this movie more as an epic production rather than historical records. Perhaps now let's see this ''Red Cliff series'' as a movie by itself but not as the series of Romance of the 3 Kingdoms or from any actual events happened in 3 Kingdoms' history. If you guys want a 100% historical accuracy, then I think it might be better of watching a documentary, isnt it?
My verdict --- Its an epic. Never in the history of Asian movie industry has filmed movies of this magnitude. To film movies of this calibre required massive amount of investments and experienced crews. Partly beause of his years of experience in the movie industry as well as Hollywood filming experiences, I am able to see the emerge of an oriential movie as well as western style of filming effects. Every movie does have its drawbacks. The only flaw in this movie is that the naval battle was not as great as those being fought on land. However, despite this minor flaw, I am giving this movie a 4 stars out of 5.
:thumbsup:
The link is here: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=461819
Come on guys, let's give credit for the fact that we have an epic afterall. Anyway, I think the 'best way' to enjoy this movie is to forget the original history facts and the novel, just enjoy the movie as a 'story' by itself. I did. And the fact is that the history and the Romance of the 3 Kingdoms is not the same as well, so I myself, watch this 2 parts as a viewer of great movie.
Cheers
you mean 陈寿 and not forgetting Mr 裴松之 who added in materials to make it easier for us.
who was sima quan ya? OR u mix it up with Sima Qian. The one who wrote 史记。But he died like few hundreds years before san guo.
foreverlovex
Senior Member
Yes manz, 三国演义 is a romanticized story and 三国志 is the actual history. Till this day, many ppl are still confused by the story and historical events.
Alternatively one can also refer to 后汉书 written by 宋范晔. Also got some parts on san guo.
hanqiang1011
Senior Member
Ah... I think I got mixed up too.
Anyway, I did enjoyed the movie, cos its my hard earned money afterall.
Anyway, I did enjoyed the movie, cos its my hard earned money afterall.
It was a terrible movie. Ignoring the changes (or butchering) of the story and plot, my main gripes with the movies were the rubbish pacing thanks to hugely unnecessary scenes (mainly involving the women) and the utterly illogical fight/battle scenes.
For people comparing LotR battle scenes with Red Cliff and thinking they are similar, you must be kidding man. At least Lotr has a fantasy setting, so we can close one eye. Even then, it didn't really make sense when Deux Ex Machina like the ghost army save the day. Red Cliff is far far worse however. As someone pointed out, the trebuchets were like some homing missiles. In the days of 100++ or so AD when RC was set in, the counterweight trebuchet had not yet been invented. This was invented a ATHOUSAND years later during the Mongols' period. I seriously doubt a Greek-type Phalanx was used in the Han dynasty as well, and why the hell would a warlord's sister risk her life to be a spy, when there are tonnes of more capable and better suited people around? She has to pretend to be a man, which is really needless when there are actual men around for that purpose.
The battles were overall way too flashy, with unrealistic and implausible formations utilised. I can accept the god-mode hero armour that the named generals have, but seriously, the two movies are ****. A great historical epic could have been made, but the chance and resources was wasted due to John Woo's overextravagance and losing sight of his main objectives. A great example of a historical epic is Braveheart.
For people comparing LotR battle scenes with Red Cliff and thinking they are similar, you must be kidding man. At least Lotr has a fantasy setting, so we can close one eye. Even then, it didn't really make sense when Deux Ex Machina like the ghost army save the day. Red Cliff is far far worse however. As someone pointed out, the trebuchets were like some homing missiles. In the days of 100++ or so AD when RC was set in, the counterweight trebuchet had not yet been invented. This was invented a ATHOUSAND years later during the Mongols' period. I seriously doubt a Greek-type Phalanx was used in the Han dynasty as well, and why the hell would a warlord's sister risk her life to be a spy, when there are tonnes of more capable and better suited people around? She has to pretend to be a man, which is really needless when there are actual men around for that purpose.
The battles were overall way too flashy, with unrealistic and implausible formations utilised. I can accept the god-mode hero armour that the named generals have, but seriously, the two movies are ****. A great historical epic could have been made, but the chance and resources was wasted due to John Woo's overextravagance and losing sight of his main objectives. A great example of a historical epic is Braveheart.
foreverlovex
Senior Member
Think they r trying to cast the actors and actresses into the characters. And not finding suitable actors and actresses for the characters. Need to create sufficient screen time for all these "famous" actors and actresses mah. The ROTK serial drama by CCTV(?) was way way better in terms of casting.
How to distinguish the trebuchet with something like 霹雳车 (a form of 投石车 which has been historically recorded to exist during that period)? All look the same to me.....stones throwing machine. lol.
The main difference is how the stones are propelled. My details are fuzzy for the movie but I recall them NOT using human power, but instead, counter weights as leverage. This style of trebuchet was only invented in the middle ages. What Cao Cao used was the primitive traction trebuchet, which is frankly quite **** and had a range of at most 100 m or less. Also did not use baskets to store the projectiles, but a sling. Duh right, if it was a basket its range would be even worse than 100m. The traction trebuchet is manpowered, is lots of people pull downwards on the other end to throw the stone missile.
hanqiang1011
Senior Member
For those who didnt appreciate this movie and maybe saying it isnt comparable to LOTR, then so be it. I am voicing out becos I just adore the silver screen of Asia having a great movie, not promoting this show.
What I am saying is the the battle scenes of Red Cliff and LOTR were simply fantastic and great to watch. If you were still being bulge by the fact that the movie sucks or f888 or whatever, leave it to yourself. A movie is a movie. if everything is done according to historical facts, then I dont think this worth a multi-million production and a waste of your ticket money. Anyway, the movie was named 'RED CLIFF', so its not ''3 Kingdoms - The movie''. For the fact the term 'movie' is usually max 4 hours, when to squeeze the entire actual historical events at Red Cliff into this 4 hours.
Lastly, if you would have think the Part 2 sucks after watching Part 1, then why waste your hard-earned money to watch Part 2, and complained about it.
In any case, every piece of artwork (and this is the ''Art of Film Making'' thread) doesnt really suit everyone's taste. What is my cup of tea might simply be others poisons.
Anyway, you guys have already watched it and just get on with it.
What I am saying is the the battle scenes of Red Cliff and LOTR were simply fantastic and great to watch. If you were still being bulge by the fact that the movie sucks or f888 or whatever, leave it to yourself. A movie is a movie. if everything is done according to historical facts, then I dont think this worth a multi-million production and a waste of your ticket money. Anyway, the movie was named 'RED CLIFF', so its not ''3 Kingdoms - The movie''. For the fact the term 'movie' is usually max 4 hours, when to squeeze the entire actual historical events at Red Cliff into this 4 hours.
Lastly, if you would have think the Part 2 sucks after watching Part 1, then why waste your hard-earned money to watch Part 2, and complained about it.
In any case, every piece of artwork (and this is the ''Art of Film Making'' thread) doesnt really suit everyone's taste. What is my cup of tea might simply be others poisons.
Anyway, you guys have already watched it and just get on with it.
Last edited:
The problem with watching too much movies is everyone gets to become a critic, without fully understanding the complexities of the film making process. Yet the urge to praise or criticize is inherent because, as an audience you get so engrossed to the film for 2, maybe 3 hours inside the theater. And the impact of the experience during that duration is felt even stronger as we are so focused to it.
My fault with Red Cliff is not so much that it was a bad production, but rather a disappointment as it was a material with so much potential and so much resources. But the producers and director could only fulfill the eyes (effects / sets) of the audience and not their hearts.
LOTR was an epic not only in its production scale, but more importantly it has a strong story that won almost every audience's heart throughout it's 3 episodes. So it deserved the Oscars it won. Any film, not just epics, needs to be more than just a movie with huge sets or with thousands of extras. It still needs to have a well written script that delivers the essence of the entire story within the film duration, at the same time engaging for the audience with plausible characters. To translate a historical story is even trickier as the audience is already familiar with the material.
What I saw obvious in Red Cliff, was that the producers used a rich material and turned it into a profit-driven film. There was almost no underlying theme within Red Cliff that I could conclude at the end of the 2 episodes. I do not feel any connection with a single character in the film that would make me yearn for what their outcome would be. There wasn't any intrigue in the film that kept me in suspense. The action was at the very least, decent.
The characters in the film just talked, fought battles and looked good in front of the camera. Too much time was spent not even on building the tension and suspense before the final battle, but by coming up with unnecessary events to prolong the film's duration. E.g Dancing with the sword, playing musical instruments, soldiers playing soccer, sick soldiers, Zhao Wei befriends the enemy, Lin Zhi Ling...etc They would have worked IF the events mentioned above somehow added to the stories details. But they don't. Even the last battle at the end of Part I was a poorly imagined attempt to satisfy audiences. Which was why mid-way through Part II, I literally got bored, because there was nothing engaging with the story or it's main characters to keep me interested in the film. Red Cliff I & II ultimately is like a very beautifully laid out dish that simply fails on the taste bud.
But I wouldn't say that Red Cliff is the epic film to define Asian cinema. I personally feel that there are already some asian films worthy of the epic label which we can feel proud of. Once Upon A Time In China I & II (Wong Fei Hong) by Tsui Hark are what I consider as epic.
Perhaps there are other suggestions of the really good asian films that has been released over the years?
My fault with Red Cliff is not so much that it was a bad production, but rather a disappointment as it was a material with so much potential and so much resources. But the producers and director could only fulfill the eyes (effects / sets) of the audience and not their hearts.
LOTR was an epic not only in its production scale, but more importantly it has a strong story that won almost every audience's heart throughout it's 3 episodes. So it deserved the Oscars it won. Any film, not just epics, needs to be more than just a movie with huge sets or with thousands of extras. It still needs to have a well written script that delivers the essence of the entire story within the film duration, at the same time engaging for the audience with plausible characters. To translate a historical story is even trickier as the audience is already familiar with the material.
What I saw obvious in Red Cliff, was that the producers used a rich material and turned it into a profit-driven film. There was almost no underlying theme within Red Cliff that I could conclude at the end of the 2 episodes. I do not feel any connection with a single character in the film that would make me yearn for what their outcome would be. There wasn't any intrigue in the film that kept me in suspense. The action was at the very least, decent.
The characters in the film just talked, fought battles and looked good in front of the camera. Too much time was spent not even on building the tension and suspense before the final battle, but by coming up with unnecessary events to prolong the film's duration. E.g Dancing with the sword, playing musical instruments, soldiers playing soccer, sick soldiers, Zhao Wei befriends the enemy, Lin Zhi Ling...etc They would have worked IF the events mentioned above somehow added to the stories details. But they don't. Even the last battle at the end of Part I was a poorly imagined attempt to satisfy audiences. Which was why mid-way through Part II, I literally got bored, because there was nothing engaging with the story or it's main characters to keep me interested in the film. Red Cliff I & II ultimately is like a very beautifully laid out dish that simply fails on the taste bud.
But I wouldn't say that Red Cliff is the epic film to define Asian cinema. I personally feel that there are already some asian films worthy of the epic label which we can feel proud of. Once Upon A Time In China I & II (Wong Fei Hong) by Tsui Hark are what I consider as epic.
Perhaps there are other suggestions of the really good asian films that has been released over the years?
foreverlovex
Senior Member
there r too many......
3 chinese movies I like a lot
英雄本色
霸王别姬
阿朗的故事
and many more.......
胭脂扣
无间道
投名状
阿飞正传
秋天的童话
海角七号
色戒
倩女幽魂
男人四十
。。。。。。。。。。
1st instalment still okay. 2nd instalment 
my advise is just watch only lah and don't take it like its some materials for history lessons. I believe general Zhao Yun was the one leading the boats out to sea to 'borrow' arrows from CaoCao's navy, not Zhuge Liang (pigbrother Liang)?
Also Guan Yu and Zhang Fei's awe seems overshadowed by the other '2' HongKong lead male actors :bsmilie:
Just because we know 'Xiao Feng' and liked him doesn't mean he always have to fight side by side with them
my advise is just watch only lah and don't take it like its some materials for history lessons. I believe general Zhao Yun was the one leading the boats out to sea to 'borrow' arrows from CaoCao's navy, not Zhuge Liang (pigbrother Liang)?
Also Guan Yu and Zhang Fei's awe seems overshadowed by the other '2' HongKong lead male actors :bsmilie:
Just because we know 'Xiao Feng' and liked him doesn't mean he always have to fight side by side with them
Last edited:
The first part, the beginning where zhao yun was rescuing "ah dou", is so similar to the drama series "Romance of the 3 kingdom" produced by CCTV (I guess).
Some scene is a bit like "cut & paste".. one can just recall those scenes from the drama series. If the viewer have not seen the drama series, then maybe it is quite impressive. But for someone who have seen the drama series, the first impression is, why spend money to watch the movie when it is the same thing as on TV drama series? In some part the actings by the drama series actors seems even better..
Some scene is a bit like "cut & paste".. one can just recall those scenes from the drama series. If the viewer have not seen the drama series, then maybe it is quite impressive. But for someone who have seen the drama series, the first impression is, why spend money to watch the movie when it is the same thing as on TV drama series? In some part the actings by the drama series actors seems even better..
Last edited:
This film is not a guide to history, it's priority is to earn money... but if one is quite well-versed with 三国志, they will know that the battle of red cliff is quite a short affair unlike the one the movie describe or the novel 三国演义 narrates. The significants of the war is the beginning of the the separation of 3 kindgom and not the intensity of the war.
Well... if every movie needs to follow a novel... I believe it can be boring or stale at times. Look at ROTR, if Peter Jackson is going to follow J.R Tolkein full novel... I bet he will find it difficult to capture the mass crowd.
Like most said.. can watch but dun expect too much... it's like most hard core ROTR fans..... they find the trilogy lousy... but for some... it's an epic
Well... if every movie needs to follow a novel... I believe it can be boring or stale at times. Look at ROTR, if Peter Jackson is going to follow J.R Tolkein full novel... I bet he will find it difficult to capture the mass crowd.
Like most said.. can watch but dun expect too much... it's like most hard core ROTR fans..... they find the trilogy lousy... but for some... it's an epic
- Status
