Phill Renteria
Now in my previous exposure to Asian films I've only seen two films from Hong Kong, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and Fung-Fu Hustle. Until recently in fact I didn't even know Hong Kong had such a thriving film industry with gangster films at the helm. So I would consider Too Many Ways To Be No. 1 to be my introduction to the genre of Chinese gangster movies. A dimly let subterranean setting and cast of morally questionable fellows who let money be the force that drives their every move give this film a real Scorsese vibe and the dialogue which sometimes slips into clicheland is as cool as Reservoir Dogs. The film contains some of the best experimental movement I've ever seen and I would consider the cinematography to be the best part of the movie. After this I will definitely be interested in viewing more of what Hong Kong cinema has to offer.
grandmastersik
The first thing a viewer will notice about this film is the camera-work: some love it, some hate it... me: I found it distracting. There are some nice ideas, like when the crew all sit around the table in the first act and the camera revolves from the centre, but for the most part, it stinks of an amateur director playing around with a hand-held.Should one outlast the "annoyance" of the "cinematography", the film is actually quite enjoyable - it features some truly humorous moments and some really good ideas... just a shame really then, that it all needed a bit more time during the script development stage, because, cameras aside, that's what really let's this film down: the underwhelming build-up and/or pay-off to all the characters, gags/events and plot.Verdict: not horrible, but it definitely could have been a lot better.
ebossert
I have no idea why everyone loves this movie so much. I found it underwhelming.And I'm not just talking about the camera-work either. That's the least of this movie's problems. Everything is just way too schizophrenic. Characters (and references to characters) just pop out of absolutely nowhere, only to then be dropped like a bad habit only minutes later. As such, the viewer is given nothing to work with in terms of dramatic tension, suspense, or well executed action. The comedy always feels forced because there's no setup time for any of the scenarios; they do this, then they immediately do something completely different, then they instantly do something else, etc. ad infinitum. The script can be summarized as follows: a bunch of stuff happens, very little of which is interesting or fun. It tries to be stylish but comes off as simply cheap. And no, it's not funny at all.This movie is the posterchild for underdeveloped concepts. Virtually everything here is wafer thin, as expected when you throw in dozens of superficial elements that are given a few minutes of screen time each. The structure and light-speed cadence is so irritating that it grates on the nerves within the opening 5 minutes. Someone should have given the director some depressants and taken away the cameraman's Red Bull.This was a huge disappointment, and a waste of two great actors.
fuldamobil
One of the best films to come out of Hong Kong in many years. The cinematography is an outstanding play on Chris Doyle's Wong Kar Wai films. This is the story of an inept group of gangsters and Kau, the poor sap, played by the great Lau Ching Wan, who gets mixed up with them. The story is told twice a la Sliding Doors. Kau makes two different choices and we see the outcomes. The film is hilarious and sometimes a little sad. The star is the stunningly acrobatic camerawork. Two scenes are shot upside down, a shootout is filmed entirely in the dark, wide angle lenses abound. The film never stops moving and never stops surprising. A 10 out of 10. Some have said it is an allegory for the Handover, and I can see it. Kau's choices are Hong Kong's, and that makes this a very subversive film. Either way, it's an amazingly entertaining experience.
AD
