Red cliff 2, crap or good show?

[VIBGYOR]

Crap like shit. What can you expect to come out from Christian John Woo

can　you　do　better　than　him?

 

[VIBGYOR]

Its totally distorted from the history..Never know that Xiao Qiao had so much influence in the war...in real history, she is just worth a few lines.

normally　if　one　wants　to　get　the　true　picture,　one　should　read　a　book,　history　books　to　be　precise.

movies　are　just　for　entertainment　lah!

 

[lolabunny]

normally　if　one　wants　to　get　the　true　picture,　one　should　read　a　book,　history　books　to　be　precise.

movies　are　just　for　entertainment　lah!

Many books are better than the movie. Jurassic Park for one. The book has many interesting facts about DNA mutation etc whereas the movie is bigger on special effects.

 

[VIBGYOR]

Many books are better than the movie. Jurassic Park for one. The book has many interesting facts about DNA mutation etc whereas the movie is bigger on special effects.

but do your hair stands when you read about the veroceptors breathing down the door window which sounded like a powerful steam engine??

 

[mudskipper.]

can　you　do　better　than　him?

Dickhead, John Woo make the movie for people to watch, so I am commenting on it from the point of view of a viewer.

 

[lolabunny]

but do your hair stands when you read about the veroceptors breathing down the door window which sounded like a powerful steam engine??

Nope. Not scared like that. I think it was the T Rex? But the scene with the running velociraptors in a pack and fanning out while hunting was uber cool.

Then again, the book was awesome. At the start of every chapter, there was a line which made you think about life. Plus the extra geek stuff inside about genomics etc was interesting.

 

[goldenmonkey]

As I often says on the subject of SGZ being the "true accounts" since it is the "official records", can anyone please confirm in modern-day terms if LKY really forces his corrupted minister CZY to commit suicide. Official records says no... who knows....

Who wrote SGZ? and who wrote SGYY. How long ago did all that killings take place at the Red Cliff? slightly less than 2000 years ago.

Was Zhao zhilong a mediocre general? Was Zhang Fei actually a good strategist? Cao cao a wife-snatcher, villian and a traitor to the king he serves? Or is Cao a great revolutionist to replace a failing and corrupted regime?
We can never know for sure, can we?

 

[lancheowman]

People say Qin Shi Huang is a tyrant and want him dead. If he was killed, he would never have unite the whole of China.

So sometimes we want a leader to step down or be dead, it doesn't mean things will turn out better

nonsense if qin shi huang was dead, there were no shortage of candidates who would have united china and made himself emperor....just take note that there were many dynasties and emperors after Qin Shi Huang

 

[Royston46]

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]

Who wrote SGZ? and who wrote SGYY. How long ago did all that killings take place at the Red Cliff? slightly less than 2000 years ago.

Was Zhao zhilong a mediocre general? Was Zhang Fei actually a good strategist? Cao cao a wife-snatcher, villian and a traitor to the king he serves? Or is Cao a great revolutionist to replace a failing and corrupted regime?
We can never know for sure, can we?

Actually we do know, that is what we call history

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

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

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

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.

 

[lancheowman]

Oh Gosh, another RTK idiot?!

RTK is 80% fantasy, 20% fact. As for the Chronicles? It only fares slightly better.

History is always open to interpretations. John Woo did a decent job in telling us what he thinks of the Red Cliff Battle.

The movie is called Red Cliff, it got nothing to do with RTK hor!

altho your post is one month old but the idiocy that accompanies it has not lessened by any bit. RTK is actually 80% fact 20% fantasy ...you dun have unicorns or talking lions in the RTK. The Chronicles (if you meant the Sanguozhi) is almost 100% fact since it was written by someone who lived through the three kingdom period.

john woo made a mockery out of the rich histroical tradition of the three kindgoms by turning this into an oriental odysessy of helen and troy.

and having the chinese fight in a Roman legionnaire testudo or turtle-like formation with overlapping shields is a big sick historical joke.

 

[red amoeba]

SGZ (chronicles) is the true history - even though that is the considered the truth, it is still written from a human point of view - the original writer was from Jin dynasty - which we know, was evolved from original Cao Cao's kingdom.

Hence, in SGZ, Cao Cao is not portrayed as the baddie - its only through years and when Romance of the 3 Kingdoms is written, the writer intentionally put Cao Cao down and elevate Liu Bei and also where applicable, add new plots to make Liu Bei look better and Cao Cao look worse.

For example, Battle of Red Cliff was never dipicted as a major battle - in fact, it was only mentioned in a few lines and historians believe in real history, this is only a small battle not too worthy of mentioning. The writer of RTK saw this loophole and elaborated on it.

As such, if there isn't such a major incident in history, there couldn't be case where Zhuge Liang "borrowing" the Wind from East. The case of Borrowing Arrows is true but its not by Zhu ge Liang, it was by Sun Quan in another battle.

Because of this need to comply with history at the end, Cao Cao cannot die after the Red Cliff battle- he must escape. And in order to once again, elevate the status of Guan Yu and highlight the fact he is loyal, the plot for RTK was written to have him guarding the last point at Hua Rong Path - and then, cleverly set Cao Cao off and at the same, use as a token to repay his kindness in letting him go a few years earlier.

Funny perhaps with the influence of computer games and media, everybody like LIu Bei more than Cao Cao and a large of which, RTK was the main cause of influence.

 

[lancheowman]

just because it was mentioned in a few lines does not meant that the writer thought it was a small battle. pls note that the same controversy exists for the Battle of the Fei River between the forces of the Eastern Jin and the Former Qin in a battle that matched the red cliff encounter in terms of size and consequences(both delayed the reunification of the country). In fact fei river was like a sequel to red cliffs.

so why the scanty treatment for such battles?

if you look at how historical text like the SGZ or Sima Qian's Shiji are written and organised, you can see it is written like a bibiliography of different persons rather than events. the writer is trying to tell you the history of the three kingdoms by telling you the exploits and deeds of its central characters. There is no separate chapter on "major battles" or "minor battles".

 

[char_jig_kar]

altho your post is one month old but the idiocy that accompanies it has not lessened by any bit. RTK is actually 80% fact 20% fantasy ...you dun have unicorns or talking lions in the RTK. The Chronicles (if you meant the Sanguozhi) is almost 100% fact since it was written by someone who lived through the three kingdom period.

john woo made a mockery out of the rich histroical tradition of the three kindgoms by turning this into an oriental odysessy of helen and troy.

and having the chinese fight in a Roman legionnaire testudo or turtle-like formation with overlapping shields is a big sick historical joke.

heng ah... i didn't go cinema watch the show, nor download it via torrent. what a waste of time this movie by john woo.

 

[Maximilian Chua-Heng]

altho your post is one month old but the idiocy that accompanies it has not lessened by any bit. RTK is actually 80% fact 20% fantasy ...you dun have unicorns or talking lions in the RTK. The Chronicles (if you meant the Sanguozhi) is almost 100% fact since it was written by someone who lived through the three kingdom period.

john woo made a mockery out of the rich histroical tradition of the three kindgoms by turning this into an oriental odysessy of helen and troy.

and having the chinese fight in a Roman legionnaire testudo or turtle-like formation with overlapping shields is a big sick historical joke.

If Lu Su could be portrayed as a bumbling idiot in RTK and Zhou Yu, a freaking petty gu niang, I see nothing wrong in John Woo having his own interpretations of the Battle of Chi Bi.

 

[makapaaa]

激动赳客《山寨版赤壁2》
http://v.blog.sohu.com/u/vw/2143289​

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

altho your post is one month old but the idiocy that accompanies it has not lessened by any bit. RTK is actually 80% fact 20% fantasy ...you dun have unicorns or talking lions in the RTK. The Chronicles (if you meant the Sanguozhi) is almost 100% fact since it was written by someone who lived through the three kingdom period.

john woo made a mockery out of the rich histroical tradition of the three kindgoms by turning this into an oriental odysessy of helen and troy.

and having the chinese fight in a Roman legionnaire testudo or turtle-like formation with overlapping shields is a big sick historical joke.

INteresting. I never really read into the Romance novels or whatever. Just knew the names of the few major players like cao cao, zhu geliang for eg. Since reading the novel in chinese would kill me and the english translation won;'t be accurate.


What waring methods did the ancient chinese ppl use to fight their enemies????

The turtle shell shield thing looks quite effective since it seems impenetrable and allows more troops to survive.

 

[Maximilian Chua-Heng]

Since reading the novel in chinese would kill me

If you learn Chinese as a Second Language, it shouldn't kill you.

If it does kill you, then shame on you for telling ppl that.

 

[kakowi]

Actually we do know, that is what we call history

,,,

Would you like to share more details on Cao Cao?

By far, he was a most interesting and complex man. In particular, i do not understand how he can lose out to Zhuge Liang. Is it because Zhuge Liang has hidden knowledge? After all, both seemed equally wise and good strategists. And why is Cao Cao not considered in the same category as Zhuge Liang and Zhou Yu - after all, his battle strategies are not below theirs.

Thanks.

 

[Jah_rastafar_I]

If you learn Chinese as a Second Language, it shouldn't kill you.

If it does kill you, then shame on you for telling ppl that.

I am not ashamed.


EVen if u posted an article here in chinese, just an article not even a novel mind u which would be in traditional chinese and ppl would be asking for english translation.


Many of the younger generation dun even speak in chinese amongst themselves much less read chinese.


I can read it but not as easily as reading english and i read novels for leisure, thus reading it in chinese would be like homework.


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