I’ve been
interested in this Tony Leung Chiu-wai movie for a while, but in my
anticipation for it, I wasn’t really thinking about the time in which it was
made. Given the era, some of the nuance
with which the story presents its subject matter is impressive, but on the
whole, there are some glaring issues that are hard to get around, which is
disappointing.
Dr. Tsui
works as a psychiatrist in Hong Kong, and in among his more nine-to-five
patients, he takes to the streets to provide support and care for people with
mental illness in the city’s homeless population. His work attracts the attention of Tina Lau,
an ambitious reporter, and against the doctor’s protests, she’s given
permission to shadow him on his rounds.
There, Tina begins to understand the full weight of Hong Kong’s broken
mental health system and realizes there are no simple solutions to dealing with
the homeless “eyesores” of the city.
As I
said, this is 1986, so it’s not really a surprise that a good chunk of the plot
hinges on harmful stereotypes about “violent lunatics” posing a danger to
others. After all, it’s 2017, and films
still trade on that idea (hello, Split.) And to the movie’s credit, it does make an
effort to show the provocations against Dr. Tsui’s patients that lead to this
violence – whether it stems from ignorance (Tina getting up close and personal
to interview a homeless woman despite Dr. Tsui repeatedly urging her to back
off) or fear and hatred (a butcher shouting at a homeless man in the fish
market, waving a meat cleaver in the hopes of scaring him away,) it’s
frequently members of the general populace who make these people afraid or
antagonize them to the point that they lash out. Still, even if there’s some complexity in how
these situations occur, the end result of the “dangerous psycho” brandishing
deadly objects at people is a lot more clear-cut and problematic. I understand why the film goes that route,
especially in light of the times and how much further we still have to go in understanding people with mental illness 30
years later, but it doesn’t make these scenes any less problematic to watch.
Which is
a shame, because there’s actually a refreshing amount of nuance in other
aspects of the story. The film addresses
a number of complex issues – the overworked system that can’t keep up with the
demand and thus does everything possible to keep patients out of hospitals, the discrimination and struggles patients face
trying to reintegrate into society after rehabilitation, the seemingly-hopeless
battle being fought by those who are genuinely trying to help – with a fair
amount of care. It even shows that
having a mental illness, even a severe one, doesn’t preclude people from
pursuing relationships or having children.
That said, the reinforcement of violent stereotypes isn’t the film’s
only problem. Additionally, despite
being relatively sympathetic towards Dr. Tsui’s patients, the movie keeps the
narrative focal point squarely on Dr. Tsui and Tina rather than any of them,
and the tragedy porn gets cranked up pretty high in many scenes.
I was
little surprised at how little Leung is in this movie. The DVD I got my hands on is clearly a newer
release, retroactively capitalizing on actors’ fame by prominently featuring
Leung’s name and picture on the cover (along with Chow Yun-fat’s) – in truth,
Leung is only in two memorable scenes, and Chow features in just one extended
sequence.
But I
digress. Leung plays Doggie, one of Dr.
Tsui’s patients. He’s very childlike,
approaching strangers to “play” with them and then becoming frightened and
bewildered when they recoil from him.
He’s also relatively low verbal, communicating mostly in noises with a
few words or sentences thrown in. For
the most part, I’d say Leung does well with the role. With limited screentime, the character hits a
few important notes, and the more over-the-top moments are grounded by the
genuine pathos of his situation. I feel
like we just get hints, though. I’d have
liked to see more of Doggie, and not just because Leung plays him – his
character feels designed to introduce us to the world of the homeless and
mentally ill people, and it would’ve been nice to get a little more sense of
who he is when he’s not causing scenes at the fish market.
Recommend?
In
General
– I hesitate to recommend it outright, because it does play on these damaging
stereotypes about mental illness. That
said, it also features some more thoughtful storytelling and fine acting. If you go into it prepared for these
unfortunate plot devices, I think there’s something to get out of it.
Tony
Leung Chiu-wai
– Maybe. Leung pulls off a neat trick
here. Doggie seems at first ridiculous,
a “whacky” crazy guy, but in just a few minutes, Leung is able to flip it and
make you feel for the guy without a dramatic change in tone or
characterization.
Warnings
Violence,
strong thematic elements, disturbing images, language, and smoking.
No comments:
Post a Comment