This article is a thoughtful and profound analysis of the movie “In the Mood for Love” by Director Wong Kar-Wai. The author, Eunice Seng, explores the inevitable and irreversible concepts that the movie portrays, such as love, migration, and temporary identity, from both a micro and macro perspective. The article argues that changes are inevitable, whether it is the 1960s when the plot is set, the filming time in 2000, or even our current time of 2024.
Seng also highlights the movie’s use of “spatial and temporal collage” to capture and convey the old and new cultural ideas that were intersecting in Hong Kong’s transforming society in the 1960s. The article describes how the movie’s portrayal of the intertwined and complex social model of Hong Kong history in the 1960s can be seen through the two couples living in small flats, the narrow living corridors, and the modern dense housing with low privacy.
In fact, Director Wong Kar-wai’s films always record many urban landscapes in Hong Kong that not many people pay attention to. Wong’s another movie can be one of the examples is “Fallen Angel” and how it presents an ordinary landscape, an everyday landscape, in a way that allows us to understand and recognize a space again. The article argues that Director Wong’s films with Hong Kong as the protagonist are similar concepts to the film landscape of the 1960s in “In the Mood for Love.” Overall, the article is thought-provoking and worth reflecting on. It offers an insightful analysis of the movie and Director Wong’s contribution to the cityscape.
Yan Chi Hong
UID: 3035565619
Your response focuses on love, migration, and temporary identity as this text’s key concepts that are much appreciated. However, your response identifies the key ideas but does not clarify them. For example, “changes are inevitable,” but how do you understand it from your reading? This text “captures and conveys the old and new cultural ideas.” What are those differing ideas, and how do they explain social transformation? What is the specialty of Wong Kar-wai’s portrayal of “everyday landscape” and “ordinary landscape”? You mentioned “micro and macro perspective.” Could you clarify your understanding of these two perspectives referring to the reading and the film?