Red cliff 2, crap or good show?

[goldenmonkey]

Actually we do know, that is what we call history

As I said in LKY, there are loopholes even in modern day history. Was Emperor Hirohito an active player in the invasion of China/Asia? That is a question historians may struggle to answer till today. That was only about 100 years ago.

Who wrote SGZ? chen shou from the time of the Jin dynasty in the late 200s just after the end of the 3 kingdom period. note that chen shou actually lives through the times of the three kingdoms. it was further annotated by Pei Songzhi in the 400s from the time of the northern and southern dynasties Jin got their dynasty by displacing Cao Wei, and surely there must be some motivations to decorate characters like the Simas, and to some extent some Cao people. Don't get me wrong, I rate Sima Yi highly and think he is the real victim of SGYY, as what his deeds towards Cao Wei has little to do with Sima Zhao replacing Cao Wei's kingship.

and who wrote SGYY. luo guan zhong from the ming dynasty in 1600s

Was Zhao zhilong a mediocre general? zhao zhilong was an accomplished commander known for his bravery and common sense

Zhilong was never in "five tiger generals" rank, there was no such rank. Only Zhang Fei, Guan Yu, Huang Zhong, Ma Chao were given title, not Zhao. Wei Yan was a brave general, and his "betrayal" after Zhuge's death tarnished his name forever. Liao Hua was an "accomplished" general under Zhuge's premiership too.
Was Zhang Fei actually a good strategist? the histroical zhang fei was according to SGZ an accomplished caligrapher. he was certainly not known as a great strategist since field generals do not strategise, that is left for the higher officials like zhuge liang e.g. the creation of three kingdoms was a strategy to ensure that neither could destroy the others

"Lu Zhong Dui" - the creation of 3 kingdoms were often accredited to Zhuge. There were discussions till now who was the original mastermind - Xu Zhe? Lu Su? Zhuge Liang?

Cao cao a wife-snatcher, villian and a traitor to the king he serves? Cao Cao is too complex a character to be generalised as either of these and he served an emperor and not a king.by all acounts, cao cao never dared to declare himself emperor and was quite content to let his sons take over the han dynasty. he is a machiavialli kind of character

Or is Cao a great revolutionist to replace a failing and corrupted regime? the sociology at work here is much more complex. it involves the struggle between two social classes; the confucian elite and the lower class aristocrats and not just a few personalities.
But cao was no revolutionary (revolutionist). in fact, all the characters like Sun Quan, Liu Bei, Yuan shao and Cao rose to prominence because of their roles in supressing a peasants' revolt then and also agst Dong Zhuo the usurper.

Cao is indeed a complex character, but to me, he is the most "honest" and always carried out his way in the simplest form. He rebelled with a cause (against Dong), carried it out till the last when others swayed half-way. He enjoyed women, and seldom was ashamed about it. His poems are often inspiring and not flowery. He could have been the people's king, I blame the "lu jia" (confucisus thinking) which stopped him from being one.

 

[sleaguepunter]

Cao is indeed a complex character, but to me, he is the most "honest" and always carried out his way in the simplest form. He rebelled with a cause (against Dong), carried it out till the last when others swayed half-way. He enjoyed women, and seldom was ashamed about it. His poems are often inspiring and not flowery. He could have been the people's king, I blame the "lu jia" (confucisus thinking) which stopped him from being one.

Actually i like Cao Meng Te more than Liu Bei. He had been tainted badly by later scholars because Cao want to do away with the confuscius thinking. He want the court to be run efficient, want ppl of abilities to be in charge instead of those of nobilities but with no capabilities. He will use talented ppl even the person had immoral characterities. He also want to do away with the old traditions that were hampering the welfare of the "masses"

Just look at his taxation system, his tax had been fair to the "masses" And he demobilised 300k of the capture "Qingzhou" rebels and put them on the farmland to produce food for his army.In fact it was so successful that Shu and Wu copied it. Just look at the novel again, there were never mass rebellion by the "masses" under Cao area because most were living as free man and were content with peaceful and plentiful they enjoy under Cao rule despite being list as a despot who exploit the "masses" which all wanted to kill. ie, the city of Hefei, it was Cao who turn it into a city of half a million and make it the integrated part of Cao's defense against Sun Quan.

Liu Bei had been the person that were exploiting the "masses". Just look at the attle of changban, he used the "masses" as human shields while he escape in another direction. The farker really can act when after Zhao Yun save Ah Dou, he was freaking happy then he actingly dump his son on the ground for endangering the life of Zhao Yun. By doing so, he gained the loyalty of Zhao Yun who was his last capable general at that time. Also the part the capture Shu by tricking his own relative.

Actually, one must beyond the surface of the book, there are many open ended meaning inside. Look beyond the standard of right and wrong, u will can see Cao Cao intention was always for the good of the "masses" As for his lust of women, it only a minor flaw. An for his lust for power, it only natural for Man destined for greatness to behave in this manner.

As for Sun Quan, he just a two timer. Always play on both sides to gain advantages. Farking loser, can lose to a force of 8,000 men in the battle of Hefei despite leading a force of 100,000 himself.

 

[Maximilian Chua-Heng]

I still remember many chinese characters and can hold a decent convo in mandarin which is much more than many ppl these days.

Good to hear from you are proud of that! Cheers!

 

[lancheowman]

Cao is indeed a complex character, but to me, he is the most "honest" and always carried out his way in the simplest form. He rebelled with a cause (against Dong), carried it out till the last when others swayed half-way. He enjoyed women, and seldom was ashamed about it. His poems are often inspiring and not flowery. He could have been the people's king, I blame the "lu jia" (confucisus thinking) which stopped him from being one.

if he is complex, he cannot be simple. pls learn to separate the fact from the fiction ...i.e. the part abt woman loving (pls check whether it is from the novel or the SGZ chronicles). btw, cao was not the only one who rebelled agst Dong Zhuo.... in fact everyone did ...from yuan shao to sun quan and liu bei too. for a flowery poem of cao cao, pls see below:

塘上行

蒲生我池中，其葉何離離。
傍能行仁義，莫若妾自知。
眾口鑠黃金，使君生別離。
念君去我時，獨愁常苦悲。
想見君顏色，感結傷心脾。
念君常苦悲，夜夜不能寐。
莫以豪賢故，棄捐素所愛？
莫以魚肉賤，棄捐蔥與薤？
莫以麻枲賤，棄捐菅與蒯？
出亦復何苦，入亦復何愁。
邊地多悲風，樹木何修修！
從君致獨樂，延年壽千秋。

 

[Maximilian Chua-Heng]

Originally Posted by goldenmonkey
Cao is indeed a complex character, but to me, he is the most "honest" and always carried out his way in the simplest form. He rebelled with a cause (against Dong), carried it out till the last when others swayed half-way. He enjoyed women, and seldom was ashamed about it. His poems are often inspiring and not flowery. He could have been the people's king, I blame the "lu jia" (confucisus thinking) which stopped him from being one.

Cao Cao wouldn't have the balls to declare himself Emperor, it's no fun being Public Enemy No.1 .

History has proven time and again that it's no joke to be KING at an inopportune time, confirmed die pain pain.

 

[lancheowman]

Cao Cao wouldn't have the balls to declare himself Emperor, it's no fun being Public Enemy No.1 .

History has proven time and again that it's no joke to be KING at an inopportune time, confirmed die pain pain.

it is not abt balls, its abt timing and winning hearts and minds. pls note the distinction between king and emperor... if he declare himself emperor, he will rank himself in history alongside usurpers like Wang Mang and he will probably been associated with and be regarded as the forerunner of the backstabbing and blatant throne-snatching culture of the 16 kingdoms era. Because he did not do it, most regards Sima Yi and his descendants who founded the jin dynasty as being responsible for this moral decay conveniently forgetting that Cao's descendants were themselves usurpers

 

[singveld]

football star in china????

funny thing that the attacking ships go through the burning ships without being burn themselves.

it is so so show only.

the history was so distorted.

 

[Maximilian Chua-Heng]

I used King and Emperor interchangably in my posting.

Yes I know the diff. betw 霸业 and 帝业.

Your idea and my idea abt the same lah, 2 words: timing.

Have a nice day!

 

[lancheowman]

football star in china????

funny thing that the attacking ships go through the burning ships without being burn themselves.

it is so so show only.

the history was so distorted.

there are playing a variant of football known as Cu Ju and history records that the game began well before the 3 kingdom era.

the use of inciendary ships is also well-known and recorded in history not just in china and during the red cliff battles but also in other parts of the world such as in the Meditteranean involving Greeks, Byzantine and Persians.

 

[red amoeba]

tht is the first instance of suicide bombing....the Chinese first used suicide bombing...not Japanese.

 

[etherc]

So I guess you're a proponent of 时势造英雄?

Life is such, everything is already destined, man and country alike...

They say if Raffles din't find Singapore in 1819, this country will not be like now...

They say if LKY din't lead Singapore in 1965, this country will not be like now...

Please... The fate of a country is not decided in this manner... Like a quote from the latest Tom Cruise show... It is the very momentum of history that brought Singapore from its early days to prosperity and now the chaos of recession... LKY is just a fish in a river, he just went along the flow but others glorified him like a demi-god...

Go figure...

 

[lancheowman]

tht is the first instance of suicide bombing....the Chinese first used suicide bombing...not Japanese.

that was in 200AD, certainly not the 1st time someone has packed a ship with flamables and rammed it into the enemy

 

[Perspective]

Crap.

The ending turned from a zhanpu novel to a wuxia novels. Generals swordfighting? Nothing shows that generals or kings would fight close to that extent.

 

[jimmyfallon]

Its never meant to be historic. All the figures from history are caricurtured into "lord of the ring" characters. Its made with populous appeal in mind. The scenes are beautiful but the fighting and story are way too lame. They blew their chance at making it a timeless epic.

 

[red amoeba]

I think they have to balance the story in view of the audience probably having no idea about the history of the Red Cliff.

Also, I think they may want to sell this film to the international market - and think about the ang mohs who have no clue who is Cao Cao and who is Sun Quan...