Wong Kar-wai:

In a Zen
by Wade Major

To fans of Hong Kong martial arts films, Ashes of Time holds a uniquely distinguished place. A stylized, frenetic shot from the hip, the megalithic all-star epic from 1994 remains the subject of fierce debate; some call it a masterful reinvention of the Wuxia genre, while others dismiss it as simply another predictably confusing Wong Kar-wai vanity piece. Perhaps most telling of all is the fact that both fans and foes alike have continued to follow Wong's career with almost religious attention, despite the fact that Ashes of Time remains his only foray into the martial arts genre. Or is it?

A closer analysis of Wong's films can perhaps help to throw a more illuminating light on the subject. For despite their high stylization, Wong's films tend to be less about plot and character than emotion, Zen-like explorations of Asian identity superimposed against a variety of different periods and backdrops.

It wasn't until after winning the Cannes Film Festival's 1997 Best Director prize, however, that Wong's career and films began to truly receive their just due, empowering him with the creative freedom to make his most recent film, the ambitious, uncharacteristically sublime In the Mood for Love -- which bested his 1997 feat by picking up two awards at the 2000 Cannes Film Festival -- one for technical achievement and a second for Best Actor Tony Leung. All in all, it may be Wong's most telling film to date, a tender romance set in 1962 Hong Kong and starring frequent Wong collaborators Leung and Maggie Cheung as neighbors who fall in love after uncovering an affair between their spouses.

After a tumultuous 15-month shoot that was repeatedly interrupted and prolonged by financing troubles associated with the Asian financial crisis, the film was finally completed and assembled into its present form -- an arduous process that makes the film's warm critical and commercial reception all the more rewarding for Wong and his cast.

Wong Kar Wai Interview
Wong Kar-wai: How were the reactions at the screening?
Wade Major: My gauge was that...
Wong: Because, you know, normally, when I ask this in the U.S.A. they say, "Oh, great! Very good!"

WM: From the people I talked to, the reaction was astonishing. Particularly from people who may only know you from "Ashes of Time" and...
Wong: (laughing) How many times have you seen "Ashes of Time"? Once?
WM: Four, actually.

Wong: Have you seen "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon?"
WM: Yes. And that's an outstanding film, too. But what's going to take a lot of people off-guard is that anyone knowing "Ashes of Time" or "Chungking Express" isn't going to be remotely prepared for how utterly different this film is.

Wong: So I got you!
WM: In a very big way. And I have to say that I think this is probably your masterpiece. It's so unassumingly poetic, so spare in the way it presents its emotions. Did you know this film was going to be different when you started?
Wong: Yeah. It's all because of you. You guys. It's like playing tricks, now. You give us challenges. And each time people say, "Okay. Can you make a film without hand-held camerawork? Can you make a film without voice-over? Can you make a film without cigarettes?" It becomes kind of a challenge. Over the years I realized everybody expected something like "Chungking Express." So I said, "Okay. We're going to make a film without handheld camera, without voice-over." We tried to get away from cigarettes, but I failed. So it's intended to be different.

WM: It almost feels like a European film in many ways, like something by Kieslowski, or "Remains of the Day" or "Brief Encounter." It seems an incredible challenge to make a love story about two people who, for the better part of the film, don't even touch.
Wong: For me, I think, it is totally a surprise. At first I was a bit worried about this topic. Because it's about a Chinese community living in Hong Kong in 1962. And I thought, "I'm not sure the audience will get it." But since I've been traveling with this film through different countries for a few months already, in each country they get it. In the U.K. they would say, "The film looks like 'Brief Encounter.'" And in Hamburg, when they gave me the Douglas Sirk Award, they said, "You must have been influenced by Douglas Sirk." And I said, "Yes but not in a very direct way because I get my influence from Fassbinder, and Fassbinder is influenced by Sirk." In France they said, "Have you seen this Chabrol film?" And I said, "Yes. I know what you're talking about. And in Italy they said, "This film is like Antonioni." It's because the story is simple and people in different countries have already made films on this topic. But my main influence in making this film, actually, was Hitchcock. I wanted to make a film like Hitchcock. And I think the film should be treated like a Hitchcock film. In our previous films we worked like CNN, just like on a documentary. We captured everything in front of the camera. In this film there are so many things happening outside of the frame, you have to guess. And I learned that from Hitchcock. We have to treat the audience as one of the neighbors. Because in the film the neighbors are always spying on these two persons. And that's fun.

WM: You realize that most people watching this film aren't going to make a connection to Hitchcock.
Wong: Right. Because, you see, the story is so simple. Stories like this have been told many times already. Even a few months ago we saw the film "Random Hearts" with Harrison Ford.

WM: It's funny you mention "Random Hearts," because while the story setup appears to be the same, the films couldn't be more different, either artistically or otherwise.
Wong: We were actually shooting in Bangkok and they told me, "There's a film with Harrison Ford and Kristin Scott-Thomas and the story is very much like ours." And I said, "Okay, let's spend some time and take a look." After that I said, "It's okay. We're different."

WM: Let's talk about the story, then. Because in your previous films your working method has essentially been one of almost writing the story while you were making it.
Wong: I think, as a normal practice, people have a script and then they find the actors, then they cast the right people, then they find the director to direct it, and then they finish the shooting and edit it. We just make it happen at the same time. In my case, I will have two actors in my mind first -- in this case Maggie and Tony -- and I will invent something from their own personalities. It's not like we have a script and we have to cast Maggie and Tony to play this secretary and this writer. I already have Maggie and Tony in mind. And I think, "What should Tony play in a film? What should Maggie play in a film?" And we create the whole thing in the process of making it.

WM: So you wanted to make a movie with the two of them before you even had a story?
Wong: Yeah.

WM: So in a sense, they inspired you to do this particular story, as performers?
Wong: To make a choice to make a film has nothing to do with what you can do. You have to narrow down your options by elimination. First you say, "I want to make a film with these two persons." Then you put conditions on it. For example, I decided to make the film without handheld camera. Then you look at it and say, "How are we going to make a film with all these conditions?" Otherwise you could spend ten years thinking about a story.

WM: The period of 1962 in Hong Kong is not something most of the rest of the world knows a lot about, unlike that same period in England or the U.S. Though it takes place at a time when the rest of the world was in turmoil, it seems tranquil and romantic. Could you talk about what attracted you to that period?
Wong: The most interesting thing about that period, for me, is those people. Because they were Chinese coming from China to Hong Kong. And Shanghai was very sophisticated already in the 1940s. It was a modern city -- the most modern city in China. And these people are coming to Hong Kong because of the war. They don't have any intention to stay in Hong Kong forever. They don't get along with locals. And the locals consider them vain and snobbish. So they live in a certain part of Hong Kong. They have their own culture, language, food, magazines, books, even cinema. We had Mandarin cinemas in those days to cater to these people. And the Mandarin films, actually, weren't about daily life. They were about stories in Shanghai and Shanghai opera. So these people were creating a small Shanghai in Hong Kong. It was like a dream. When I was a kid, we lived in Tsimshatsui, the area where I shot "Chungking Express." And our neighbors downstairs were Indians and Russians, Russians who came from China where they moved after the revolution in Russia. Then, because of the war in China, they moved to Hong Kong. They lived in the guest house and they got drunk all the time. Sometimes I would think, "Well, the Chinese are actually another kind of Russian in Hong Kong in those days." It was the same situation because they didn't think they'd stay there forever. They wanted to go back. They thought they'd wait until some day when things got better. And, actually, the 1960s was a very energetic period. There was a lot of change in the '60s, with the Vietnam War and everything else. And we end the film in 1966 because it was a very particular one in Hong Kong, a very special year for those particular communities because the Cultural Revolution in China affected Hong Kong. Then we had the anti-colonial riots Hong Kong. So for the first time, after fifteen years of peaceful life, these people began to realize that no, they're not going back to China because things are still very messy over there. But Hong Kong was not a place where they could stay to get away from all these things. It wasn't safe to them. So a lot just began to move somewhere else -- the States, other countries. The people who stayed, they began to think seriously that they would live there for a long time. They had to treat Hong Kong as a home, and they had to build something. So we end the film with a shot of DeGaulle's visit to Cambodia because while the story before that is about two persons, at a certain moment I wanted to wake the audience up. There is something really happening at that time in Hong Kong, and I think these people and these things that belong to that period.

WM: Let's go back a little bit to what makes this film differently from previous films. When filmmakers often get into a certain groove, it becomes like second nature making a movie. When you deviate from that, I would imagine it's harder in a sense because you're thinking more about how you're going to do it, rather than leaning on your instincts.
Wong: It had become a habit that when we'd go to a certain space, we would react like this, we'd put the camera here. But also, at the same time, we became very bored with these habits. So it's hard, but it's very, very adventurous. You're trying to do something different. And, suddenly, there are a lot of possibilities. The only thing that's confusing is having so many possibilities and having to choose one.

WM: Maggie has said that at a certain point during the shoot, before she finally came around to what you were doing, she was starting to get impatient and angry with you.
Wong :...(smiling) Yeah.

WM: She said it was almost to a point of never wanting to work with you again. But by the end she was already thinking about how she'd do better the next time she worked with you. And Tony's comments follow roughly the same line. You have a lot of emotions to deal with. How do you manage all that until it comes together?
Wong: I think I always treat myself as a band leader. In a case like Maggie, she tried very hard to portray a woman in 1962, because this is the only thing she knows about this character. The only thing she thought she had to do was to portray a woman in 1962. But for me it became too obvious. You don't have to portray a woman in 1962. A woman is more important than 1962. You should play a woman, even though the story happens in 1962. You don't have to pretend in a certain way. I wanted Maggie to act in a more natural way. I told her, "We already made this film ten years ago when we made 'Days of Being Wild.' It took place in 1960 and you played a girl in it. Even though it happened in 1960, that girl was totally natural. She was just a girl in all periods. She had the same problems." But she wasn't comfortable with that because she didn't think it was really the same person. And I said, "Why? You can be the same person. It's just a matter of a name. I can call you Su Li-zhen in this film. And you're the same person, but ten years older." And I think that made sense to her. So I have to tune all these creative forces in one direction. That is my job.

WM:Interestingly, you bring up "Days of Being Wild," which didn't occur to me until I read the press notes where you said that this answered the questions that remained after making that film. Because as different as the two films are, once you think about it, the comparisons are interesting. Was there ever a temptation to make this a literal sequel?
Wong: No. I've considered this question seriously over the years. Because everybody always asks, "Are you going to make a part two?" But I think I've changed. The things that attracted me in 1990 were different. So at the very beginning, I decided that this film was not a sequel to "Days of Being Wild," even though they're the same period and they have the same actor and actress. Then, at the end I realized that it is still not a sequel, but more like "Days of Being Wild" ten years older. That means if I were to make "Days of Being Wild" now, it would be "In the Mood for Love." If I had made "In the Mood for Love" ten years ago, it would have been "Days of Being Wild."

WM: Having made this leap forward, then, is there any going back to the way you used to make films?
Wong: My next project is "2046" and takes place fifty years later because I've never made a film about the future. But I'm not sure there are going to be any changes, because to me it's still a job. And I have to finish it. For the next film, though, we're doing shooting it in Cinemascope, which is the first time I've ever worked with that sized-frame. We've already shot part of the film and we're very happy with it.

WM: Can you talk about the cast and the story?
Wong: We have Faye Wong in the film, Tony Leung, Carina Lau and also a Japanese actress.

WM: Any hints as to what it's about?
Wong: It's about promises.

About Wade Major :
Wade Major is a writer based In Los Angeles, California.