THE CICAK.com

If you liked this article, here are some related posts:

• The Departed or Infernal Affairs, which film is superior?
• Win RM5,000 for your film proposal “Democratic Space – Making Room for Human Rights”
• 'Dare 2 Document' 2008 - filmmaking competition – deadline extended
• James Lee's latest films, long kissing scene snipped by censorship board
• Coming soon: Films with a conscience

Responses || Discussion || Debates || Commentaries

1. Infernal affais did a better job where a lot of its key element I done very subtely wherelse the adapted version try to overdo it.

   Plus, the ending of Departed just isn’t on par.

   Comment published by KY on 8 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +3

2. I guess I am in no position to say which film is better since I never bothered with watching The Departed. A film is 1/3 about pacing and suspense, and it takes half the fun out of the movie to know exactly how it went.

   That aside, I think The Departed doesn’t deserve the awards it got. It is like awarding a Grammy to Westlife for the covers they did.

   Comment published by PT on 9 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +4

3. I liked The Departed. I liked Infernal Affairs, even if I had to keep my eyes focused on the subtitles because I could not understand anything.

   But I don’t understand why the vote system did not allow me to like both. What the heck is up with that?

   And for a writer to boast that he is a social democrat and not have this choice made available, well….

   I liked the Departed because I like Scorsese movies. I like the way he portrays violence. I also like the way he managed to get the ensemble of actors he did. Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon, Leo Dicaprio, Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg, all of them portrayed the characters well.

   My guess is the main attraction to this movie was the language.

   English is the main attraction.

   Plus, he has no reason to thank Infernal Affairs because, well, the studio bought the rights to the movie.

   All paid for.

   Comment published by Aput on 9 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     --3

4. Hi Aput,
   I’ve added another option for the poll. Sorry bout that, it was my fault and not Shijun’s.

   So now you can vote, if you haven’t already.

   Thanks.

   Comment published by Poh Si on 9 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +0

5. I sincerely thought the Departed was a comedy.

   The emotional depth, the subtle hues, the brilliance of Infernal Affairs - all gone, all gone!

   A travesty of æ— é—´é?“, I tell you.

   On its own an okay movie, but after the ingenuity of Infernal Affairs, the Departed by no means lives up to its “Hollywood reputation”.

   I did, however, like Leonardo DiCaprio in the movie. Not bad, his acting, not bad. But that’s probably the only good thing about the Departed - the acting. All other facets pale when compared to Infernal Affairs.

   Haiya.

   Jack Nicholson was horrid - what did you guys think about the scene with the scattering of cocaine and two prositutes? Unnecessary and diversional, in my opinion. I remember reading somewhere that Scorsese gave him the green light to do whatever he saw fit, which, I think, ruined the movie.

   Comment published by Andrew on 9 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +3

6. Hey guys. First off, just wanna say thanks to Poh Si for adding a poll a the bottom

   Secondly, this was actually the second thing I wrote about The Departed. It’s actually more of a comparison and complaint about how Hollywood has sidelined Infernal Affairs than an actual movie review. And another thing, I’ve noticed that the last line in that piece above came out sounding quite ‘rough’. Lol, sorry to confuse Poh Si during her editing, but in my original post I was actually challenging a good friend of mine who was hell-bent of opposing me just for the sake of it in respect to TD being better than IA, without providing much support for his views. Me thinks he was just trying to piss me off

   To anyone who’s interested, I had actually written a more comprehensive review of TD. Of course, I don’t expect everyone to agree with my point of view on this, but what the heck, free world right?

   So anyway, here’s a reproduction of my original review of TD from my blog below. It was written when it was first showed in the cinemas, way before it won the Oscar:

   P.S.: Please forgive the slightly ‘crass’ tone of it

   Hahahaha. Sorry, had to first laugh before beginning to write this review. After all those hype and superlative reviews by idiotic Yankee movie reviewers on Rottentomatoes.com, I at least thought TD would at the very least give its original progenitor, Infernal Affairs, a good run for its money. To paraphrase TD, how “fucking� wrong I was

   *Warning: Contains some spoilers in my review below*

   The Departed is supposedly one of the best ‘works’ by director Martin Scorsese in recent years, if we are to believe those US horsecrap reviews of it. Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, and Mark Walhberg, it is in actual fact a remake of the 2002 Hong Kong hit thriller ‘Infernal Affairs’. Heck, Scorsese even followed IA in the casting department by hiring an all star cast for it.

   The storyline, a complete rip-off from IA, is basically this: There are 2 undercover agents, one in the police force and the other in the Irish mafia, each feeding tip-offs to their respective bosses. One fine day, after a botched transaction dealing, both sides discovered that they have a mole in their midst. Each then attempts to flush their moles out by appointing the moles on their sides to discover themselves I know, I know, great plot eh?

   Being a remake, it’s inevitable that I should be allowed to compare it with the original. And heck, it definitely cannot hold a candle beside IA. For starters, the great plotline and terrific twists were all taken from IA. The only additions that TD have is a pointless love triangle between DiCaprio (the undercover police in the mob) and Damon’s (the mobster mole in the police force) character with the psychiatrist. The other one was again, the meaningless character addition of Sergent Dignam (Walhberg). I really had a tough time trying to take his character seriously, what with his constant laughable stream of invectives.

   On to the actors. This film really made me realise how some actor’s abilities in Hollywood can be ‘institutionalised’ by automatically being thought of as ‘good’ in any film he stars in. This situation perfectly describes how I felt about Nicholson’s efforts as the mob boss, Frank Costello. He overacted in this film, to the point of being embarrassing. I think the audience will get it that he’s supposed to be this ‘tough crazy mobster’ without needing to bombard us with his swearing-saturated dialogue or giving us so many sexually-charged hints to try to nudge us into believing he’s also an oversexed old man to boot. Total overkill with Nicholson. In addition, his original character in AI was just supposed to be a good supporting actor. Here, just because he’s Nicholson, Hollywood had to expand his role, so now when compared to the smaller role of his opposite, the police head Queenan (Martin Sheen), they’re no longer evenly-balanced opposite characters.

   DiCaprio and Damon were alright, but Andy Lau and Tony Leung was definitely the better duo in terms of their performances. The latter duo could express a lot more of their inner turmoil in a restraint kind of way. Of the former duo, DiCaprio nailed his role better by being suitably angsty. However, I felt that Damon (or Scorsese) had completely misunderstood how his role were originally conceived to be. In IA, Lau’s character was suitably ambiguous in terms of where his allegiance lied. Obviously, in the beginning, he was a bad guy courtesy of being a triad mole in the force, but as he began to rise in the ranks as an ‘good guy’, he begins to question his actions, culminating in ultimately deciding to side with the ‘good guys’ in the end. In TD, Damon’s character did not do that. He was a ‘crook’, and ultimately stayed a ‘crook’ throughout the whole development of his character. So it lacks depth actually. There were many instances where viewers could actually even empathise with Lau’s character, but there was never a moment where I could do that with Damon’s character. I just wanted DiCaprio to beat the crap out of him at all times, full stop.

   Typically, Hollywood has decided to to ramp up the violence and sexual material in TD. Again, this is a totally unnecessarily change. Whereas AI looks sleek and uber, TD just looks, well…. ‘Hollywood-ised’?

   There were many good, some even iconic scenes from IA that were incorporated into TD. However, most of them did not turn out as well as in IA. Firstly, the terrific feeding of information through modern cellular technology on one side versus the archaic Morse code on the other and by those two moles during a drug transaction with the Thais in IA was completely omitted in TD. Instead, a boring ‘SMS match up’ was used in its place. The cast-breaking scene lost all of its objectives and unexpected impact in TD. It was just more of senseless, gratuitous violent act in in TD. Lastly, in the scene where Martin Sheen dies totally cannot compare with IA’s original scene in terms of dramatic impact. The failed drug/microprocessor chips (???) transaction scene which was supposed to reveal to both sides that they each had moles among them was also delayed way to long in TD. In fact, the whole film of TD was dragged overly long (an extra 30 mins compared to the original), and in the process, it did not feel as taunt and thrilling as IA.

   The cinematography in TD pales in comparison to IA. TD just used regular camera tints and shots, while Christopher Doyle painted IA in shades of subdued blue and dark shades. The symbolism for ’self-reflection’ or ’self-identity’ were also a constant theme in IA, especially in those rooftop scenes with all those reflective buildings around it. TD lacked any of those things.

   Lastly, the ending. Being Hollywood, like the Communist China, they cannot stomach anything less that the bad guy getting what he deserves. And this was what happened in TD, through a new scene which was added. In AI, ambiguity remained, where Lau’s character remained unpunished by external forces, but he was slowly punishing himself instead (hence the Chinese meaning of the title). TD took the elevator-shootout ending too, but made it less dramatic though.

   Also, TD should have acknowledged that it was a remake to Infernal Affairs at the beginning of the film, like what The Lake House did. Instead, it tried passing off as a Hollywood original and only acknowledged IA in tiny print in its credits. Pathetic. Legalised plagiarism anyone?

   To cut the story short, TD disappointed me. Scorsese disappointed me. Nicholson annoyed me. And I have lost all respect for US movie reviewers.

   Verdict: 2 stars

   Comment published by sigma on 9 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +2

7. I watched Infernal Affairs twice and never finished watching The Departed. I think that says something.

   Comment published by Bob K on 10 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +1

8. I have not seen The Departed yet. I have watched Infernal Affairs and loved it. I heard that Hollywood was adapting it and was curious to see what the outcome would be like.

   Watching the Academy Awards the other night, I saw The Departed be nominated for a number of awards. The point at which I tore my hair out was when the presenter described it as being based on a Japanese[sic] movie! How could they get that wrong?! Is it the influence of The Ring? or was it just ignorance? Considering the presenter would have been reading from a teleprompter, perhaps it is someone elsewhere who was misguided!

   It just kind of ruined my night. Respect should be given where it is due!

   Comment published by chris on 11 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +4

9. Yeap, Chris, I heard it too!! Initially thought I had been mistaken.

   Japanese film? Wow, since when did Andy Lau and Tony Leung become Japanese.

   Comment published by Poh Si on 12 March 2007.
   Was this a good comment?     +0

10. My vote goes for Infernal Affair.

    I might be bias, because I had things for Tony Leung.

    That aside, Infernal Affair is a genius. I like the elements of that movie. The triad, the Buddhist principal, the ‘oldies’ song, and the fact that they pointed out that Yan had a photographic memory, the tall buildings, … I could list them out all day.

    The ending of The Departed, just kills me.

    And I agree with sigma, Martin Sheen’s fall just doesn’t affect me much as when Anhony Wong falls, I actually feel sad.

    Comment published by Farhana on 12 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

11. Completely concurring with your stance. “The Departed” is like a 90% duplicate of “Infernal Affairs”, with the remaining 10% being omittance of the very remarkable role by Chapman To and addition of offensive words from the beginning to the end.

    Comment published by Jann on 14 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

12. Well, honestly, i’ve and will never hear about Infernal Affairs if it weren’t for the Departed. And even if i notice there is some 8.++ rating in IMDB, i wouldn’t have download to from the internet too if there is any. However, there may be a chance i’ll watch it if there’s nothing good on tv, provided there’s subtitle, and i sincerely do hope it is not in BM this time if in Astro.

    What i’m saying here is, Scorsese made this film international. He made it famous. No mather how good it is, if you haven’t ever heard about it, what good is it eh? Scorsese did a good job doing justice to it as a remake, probably a very good remake that won oscars btw, and he obviously won’t take credit for the story. So what’s the fuss with all the Hollywood steal Hong Kong masterpiece crap, IF you really pay for the cinema to watch that crap it only cost you Some RM 10 or less.

    And also, i think that jack nicholson scene with the prostitutes with coke is the only interesting part, aside from that part that he eats some strange gooey breakfast with a severed hand. The plot is boring.

    Comment published by Dedude on 14 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     --4

13. Hm. I’m about to watch The Departed after just watching IA and IA 3 (sequel)… reading by this review I can;t help but feel pessimistic about the Hollywood counterparts.

    To me, a film, remake or not, should never ever be compared with the other. Why? Because you are experiencing one film at a time. To sit through a movie while thinking about how crap it is because it’s a rehash is just not worth the movie experience.

    I still have yet to see criticisms about TA that is not a comparison to IA. There is no point right. It’s another movie technically speaking.

    Comment published by Chih on 15 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

14. Chih: Why produce remakes in the first place?

    Do Asian/European production houses make remakes of Hollywood films? If Asians/Europeans can learn to understand the peculiarities of American culture in their good films, albeit sometimes with the help of subtitles, then why can’t American audiences do the same for non-American movies? Are Americans that dense? I thought they were a superpower nation?

    Comment published by sigma on 17 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +1

15. well,i saw the departed first and i loved it very much,it’s one of the most outstanding gangester movies i’v ever seen, good acting,great screenplay and amazing directing by genius director scorsese.
    after all what i have been hearing about the critisism,i realized that i have to see infernal affairs.
    and so i did…..
    and honestly speaking,infernal affairs is waaaay better that the departed.
    first of all the departed is a clone of infernal affairs,so how hard is it for america,the great movie industry to make a good film with legendary actress if it already has the story,the story is the most attractive part for both infernal affairs and the departed.
    so if they already took the story……………….!

    i want to remind you that i’v loved the departed ,everybody did,it’s a great movie really it is .
    but like i said before.it’s a clone.
    so if i gotta decide which movie is the best.i think that i should pick the original one”infernel affairs”

    Comment published by nahla on 17 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +1

16. I hope this post is just a satire.

    IA is meant to be a suspense thriller, The Departed is more like a crime drama/black comedy. Thus the tone of the latter is much different from the former (even though plot elements are borrowed).

    Being Asians, of course we are more likely to declare IA as an unrivaled masterpiece, yet I’m actually starting to get increasingly tired of the hate The Departed had been getting from hardcore fans of IA recently. Look, I love IA as much as anybody, I watched it repeatedly just like anyone here does, but I enjoyed The Departed too. Liked what Scorsese brought into the movie, definitely believed that if a lesser director had chosen to do a frame by frame remake of the film (like Gus Van Sant did with Psycho), the movie would never had worked.

    Anti-American sentiments are high, hating Hollywood is cool, so it’s unsurprising that dissing them for remaking Asian films, or accusing them of creative bankruptcy is the way to go. Of course, we should conveniently try to FORGET the fact that all these years, Asian cinema had borrowed shamelessly from Hollywood, without even giving credit to the source materials.

    But since when The Departed should be penalized for being a REMAKE? Perhaps we should start spitting on Magnificent Seven because it’s a remake of Seven Samurai. How about going one step further and start condemning ALL adapted works? Lord of the Rings sucked because it was adapted from JRR Tolkien’s books and didn’t spring up from Peter Jackson’s loins… I mean, brains. Or Star Wars sucked because it’s really a remake of Kurosawa’s Hidden Fortress. Now, I wonder whether we should crucify Kurosawa because he was sooooo unoriginal that he had to *GASP* STEAL Shakespeare’s King Lear to make Ran.

    Speaking of Shakespeare, It’s fortunate that I never saw Shakespeare fans throw a hissy fit when The Banquet bastardized Hamlet. Oh, but then, being Asian cinema, I’m sure we can forgive them for anything they do.

    Moments like this would usually overwhelm me with this sense of Asian pride, I have no idea what, in this case, almost the contrary had happened.

    Comment published by Swifty on 18 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +3

17. I agree that The Departed shouldn’t have won - but that’s due to my preferences: I wanted The Queen to win; I thought Letters From Iwo Jima was the best film among the five; failing that, Babel was ambitious and succeeded by being gutwrenching and painfully depressing … and for what it’s worth, Children Of Men should have been given the bloody Oscar for Best Picture.

    Now, I didn’t care for Infernal Affairs (one of the first movies in which I fell asleep while watching it at the cinema), but I understand it’s popularity. I didn’t care for The Departed either, because I couldn’t give a damn about Scorsese and even less for Nicholson … which is something you don’t often hear a genuine film student say, I suppose.

    So I very much don’t mind if an article tries to diss The Departed’s win at the Oscars.

    But please, could it be done more intelligently? This one is painfully Malaysian in its naivete.

    Why shouldn’t remakes be awarded Best Picture? Where is the logic?? Did anyone stop to think about that before agreeing to the statement?

    That the directors to IA were disappointed with The Departed has no bearing to whether the film should or should not win Best Picture. And this is before we start talking about Hollywood politics - which is far more complicated than the average Malaysian not following Hollywood punditry will ever be able to understand.

    And easily the weakest insult possible - the statement that the Academy is at least smart enough to recognise The Departed as Adapted Screenplay; seriously, pause to think, will it ever be considered as anything other than Adapted Screenplay? [For the record, I thought Notes On A Scandal should have won - biting narration, deliciously naughty and humorously dark.]

    And how many times should Scorsese *acknowledge* the contribution of the HK original version? Scorsese did, in fact, mention Andrew Lau in his acceptance speech and made it a point to mention that it is from HK in order to (subtly) correct the announcer who made the mistake of saying that the original version is from Japan.

    Comment published by McGarmott on 21 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +3

18. McGarmott: Bleh, just a latte-sipping critic who thinks he’s better than the ‘average Malaysian’s naive opinion’.

    Firstly, I couldn’t care less about your ‘insider knowledge’ of Hollywood’s internal workings. Got better things to do in my life than to aspire to be an ET reporter.

    Secondly, you laugh at my commendation that Hollywood at least was aware enough to award it with ‘Best Adapted Screenplay’, but then what irony that you concede that Hollywood couldn’t even get the original film’s origins right! Lol.

    Lastly, bull. Credits for IA was never prominently featured. I think of this as a courtesy thing, and so I commend films like The Lake House and such for crediting their original films prominently. You try defending TD that it has no problems with acknowledging IA, but that isn’t the perception of many people. Firstly, if that were the case, why wasn’t TD decent or ‘man’ enough to just spell it out that it was a ‘remake’, and not some pathetic attempt to boost Hollywood’s superiority complex and keep stating that it was ‘inspired by IA’? And I heard Scorsese’s acceptance speech. No mention whatsoever about IA in there. Anything else?

    Comment published by sigma on 22 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +1

19. Transcript of Scorsese’s speech from Oscar.com:

    ACCEPTANCE SPEECH
    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Rick. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Please, please. Thank you. Thank you. Could you double-check the envelope, please? I mean, I’m overwhelmed with this honor from the Academy and also the honor of being presented by my old, old friends. We go back 37 years. I’m so moved, so moved.

    I’ve got thank Warner Bros.’ Alan Horn and Dan and Jeff and I’ve got to thank our producers Brad Grey and Graham King and Mac Brown and my old friend Joe Reidy, we’re working for 20 years. And Rick Yorn and John Lesher and Chris Donnelly and Ari Emanuel. And that crazy script by Bill Monahan that got me in all this trouble in the first place. And Andrew Lau’s original film from Hong Kong, the wonderful Asian cinema. And Michael Ballhaus on camera. And Howard Shore’s wonderful score. And my old, good friend Thelma Schoonmaker. Ellen Lewis for her casting.

    And so much of this belongs to the cast, I can’t tell you. Jack Nicholson for his courage and his inspiration. Leo DiCaprio, six-and-a-half year’s work we’ve done together. I hope another 12, another 15. Mark Wahlberg, Matt Damon, Alec Baldwin, Ray Winstone and Vera Farmiga and Marty Sheen.

    I just want to say too that so many people over the years have been wishing this for me. Strangers. You know, I went walking in the street, people say something to me. I go in a doctor’s office, I go in a whatever. Elevators, people saying, “You should win one, you should win one.” I go for an X-Ray, “you should win one.” I’m saying, “thank you.” Friends of mine over the years and friends who are here tonight are wishing this for me and my family, I thank you. This is for you.

    And I also want to thank my daughter Cathy, who is here tonight, who worked on the film. And Domenica, my wife Helen, and our little Francesca, who’s seven years old who’s watching right now. Francesca, stay up for another 10 minutes but then jump up and down and make a lot of noise at the hotel. Okay. I’ll see you in the morning. Thank you.

    Comment published by Swifty on 22 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     --1

20. Swifty: Thank you for proving my point. Infernal Affairs was never mentioned in Scorsese’s acceptance speech, nor at any other time during the award, if I’m not mistaken.

    Give you an example. Let’s say you think that the movie ‘Children of Men’ was da bomb. And let’s say that Japan decided to remake it. It was a great success, and the Japanese director won the best director/best film awards in their own film society. He thanks Alfonso Cuaron for the great plot. And let’s assume that Alfonso Cuaron isn’t that well known in Japan. The average Japanese will be like “Who the heck is Alfonso Cuaron?” and be on their merry way, never to watch the great original film because the director did not mention the original film’s name.

    Get my point now?

    Comment published by sigma on 22 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +1

21. … oh, right, you’re throwing a fit because the actual title of INFERNAL AFFAIRS wasn’t mentioned. I had assumed that you were burning with righteous Asian fury because Scorsese did NOT acknowledge the actual existence of the movie AT ALL. Right, I guess Scorsese messed up oh so verily by mentioning ANDREW LAU’S ORIGINAL FILM IN HONG KONG and not the actual title, INFERNAL AFFAIRS.

    In my opinion, if people are interested in the actual movie, they WILL find out about it regardless of whether Scorsese SCREAMED Infernal Affairs like a little girl, or whether he mentioned INFERNAL AFFAIRS. It’s not as if the mere mention of INFERNAL AFFAIRS would actually have everyone flocking into the theaters DYING to see the movie. People aren’t as stupid as you think.

    Comment published by Swifty on 22 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     --2

22. The focus in IA is much on the two undercovers, the two organisations, the mistrust, lost identities. The two undercovers have time to develop their split personalities and are in their early forties. The symmetry is beautifully sarcastic. The drawback is the female roles, which are superfluous and superficial. The screenwriter and director are daring in their willingness to challenge the audience in the ‘ambush’ scene, a pure tour de force of acting, directing, music and cutting. The ending never stops to surprise. There is an unbearable irony. It presents some genuinely new ideas, which are a rarity in this genre.

    This irony is lost in The Departed, which is mostly about Jack Nicholson, with de Caprio and Matt Daman (and Matt Daman in particular) in supporting role. The two are in their early thirties, both are still awkwardly trying to adapt, unlike in the IA where the two are so much in character in their ‘covererd’ lives. The irony is how much Andy Lau is tempted by a promising career in the police.

    The police is largely nameless and colourless. The roles of Martin Sean and his lieutenant are superfluous and superficial. I think the Departed has made inadequate use of the brilliant idea of the IA. It is not bad, but Scorsese has made better movies, and so has the cast. It is slightly disappointing.

    Comment published by cheung fai hung on 24 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +1

23. I’ll be honest, I didn’t watch either movie as yet; so I won’t compare them. It’s just that I think some people are misunderstanding this. Just because Scorcese makes a mention to Andy Lau in the speech, you have to realize that a lot of people don’t pay attention to the speeches - they just want to see who won, lol. The majority of movie fans and people who make these directors and actors rich go for the entertainment, and I agree that it isn’t fair to let everyone EXCEPT those willing to look it up go ahead thinking that it’s a brilliant hollywood movie. Just the other night I got into an argument where I said foreign movies were better than hollywood and the man arguing with me used “The Departed” as an example of Hollywood brilliance. I didn’t know about the Departed being based or adapted or inspired or whatever on a HK film until someone told me (just like I didn’t know Vanilla Sky was based on a Spanish film until three years later when I saw it!)
    This isn’t to say I don’t care when Asians or any other foreign cinemas rip off movies. I love bollywood, but everytime they rip off something I feel embaressed (I’m not Indian, but I am descended lol). And they do it so often. So does Chinese cinema (I hate it, but I recall The Banquet, which just killed me inside despite Zhang Ziyi lol).
    Credit should go where it’s due. And for a huge famous director with a huge famous cast, it’s not enough to only mention the fact that it was largely based/inspired/adapted on a movie in an industry that the large majority of westerners only knows about through kung fu movies, despite it’s having really intricate cinema to appeal to everyone (not to diss kung fu lol).

    Comment published by Rosanna on 27 March 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

24. Aiyah both films pale in comparison lah to stories we have from our very own Malaysian secret societies. Maybe one day someone should spill all the beans and make the super duper movie even hk and hollywood put to shame.

    Hmm we can have lah you know stories about our dealings with police, politicians, lawyers, china dolls. To add spice a bit can lah add the part where we infiltrate Special Branch, the judiciary and certain political parties like Mana Cari Aku? hehehehe oh yeah then can add our role in stirring up racial confrontations…hehe

    - Edited for profanity -
    Administrator

    Comment published by samseng on 28 April 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

25. I liked them both. I am, however, partial to the Departed. The Departed could not have existed without Infernal Affairs, and so much of it is the same. However, there are things in Infernal Affairs that make me feel it is inferior. For one, I don’t like the ending. It’s all wrapped up with a nice bow. Even though one of the main characters dies, he basically has to die so that the other main character can get his life back. I would have preferred the alternate ending where he gets arrested, but even that seemed forced. The Departed kind of wrapped things up by killing Matt Damon, but it’s a less Hollywood ending than Infernal Affairs, which is ironic.
    I also didn’t like how Infernal Affairs held your hand during the movie. There would be repeated flashbacks to help remind me of things that I didn’t need to be reminded of. Sometimes the flashbacks were done to reinforce in the audience’s mind the character’s relationships, but it just felt contrived. As far as editing, I give a nod to the Departed over Infernal Affairs. My feeling is that the Departed improved upon the original. Especially in characterization. Although less believable, combining the character of the wife with the psychiatrist substantially improved her overall character. And since I’m on the topic of the wife, the whole “I’m writing a book about a character with many personalities…will he be good?” was just plain poor writing. It’s extremely transparent.

    In the end, I guess I liked the Departed because it cut a lot of the fluff and poetry of Infernal Affairs, and went more for gritty realism. Still, they’re both great,and if anything the Departed has awakened people to watching Infernal Affairs. Nevertheless, I agree with the “Best Adapted Screenplay” nod, because the changes that were made really did improve the movie.

    Comment published by Jason on 6 June 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     --1

26. Jason wrote:
    It’s all wrapped up with a nice bow. Even though one of the main characters dies, he basically has to die so that the other main character can get his life back. I would have preferred the alternate ending where he gets arrested, but even that seemed forced. The Departed kind of wrapped things up by killing Matt Damon, but it’s a less Hollywood ending than Infernal Affairs, which is ironic

    WTF? I completely don’t understand what you’re say here… Just because the bad guy died at the end makes it NOT a hollywood ending? Where’s the nice bow when the good guy died trying to get his own identity back?

    The whole Mark Wahlberg killing Matt Damon at the end was the single worse scene of the movie… okay, add on the bit where Matt Damon killed Jack Nicolson, and the extra cop they threw in when DiCaprio was killed…

    I have to say, I was excited to go see TD, and was hugely dissappointed at it because it basically spelled out the whole damn story for people.

    Comment published by neji on 27 July 2007.
    Was this a good comment?     +0

27. wow there are ALOT of td haters! never knew they existed.
    my opinion is that TD was amazing hands down, in fact even better than IA.
    someone had to speak the truth!

    =)

    Comment published by Fly on 17 February 2008.
    Was this a good comment?     --1

28. Tell you the truth, IA (considering just the first movie and the whole trilogy seperately) is better than TD. While TD is an amazing movie, most of its “Brilliant scenes” as metioned many times before is taken right from IA, IA2, or IA3. And TD is basically an American styled take on IA

    Comment published by Eric on 23 February 2008.
    Was this a good comment?     +0