Crazy Stone Is A Poisonous Weed

It is a proof of the socio-political progress of China that the following article was published at the Tianya Club forum.  The key point is not the article itself, but the public response.  The article is written in the classical style of the Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution.  In 1968, such an article would strike fear in anyone who was involved in the making of this film.  

But since we are now living in a state of post-modernist politics in China, most of the readers are now completely certain that this was a brilliant spoof!  It is just no longer possible to write this sort of thing and expect that the public will take it seriously.  The more you insist that you are serious, the more your readers are sure that you are a brilliant spoof artist!

(Tianya Club)  The movie "Crazy Stone (疯狂石头)" is a big poisonous weed that promotes liberalism.  By 正科级的副科长.  August 10, 2006.

[in translation]

The movie "Crazy Stone" is now being shown across China.  Many people are heaping praises upon this movie and calling it the hope of Chinese cinema.  After reading many magazine reviews of the movie, I went out and rented a disk to watch it.  I did not imagine how wretched this movie was.  It was enough to make me boil with anger.  In 1951, Chairman Mao published "The Importance of the Discussion of the movie 'The Life of Wu Xun (武训传)'" and pointed out the appearance of the movie 'The Life of Wu Xun' (and the corresponding praises for the character of Wu Xun and the movie) demonstrated the chaotic state of Chinese cultural life!  Today, the appearance of "Crazy Stone" and accompanying high praises also reflect the chaotic state of thinking in Chinese cinema and more generally in the cultural field as a whole.

It is no exaggeration to say that the movie "Crazy Stone" is a big poisonous weed that promotes liberalism.

First of all, "Crazy Stone" did not follow the spirit of Chairman Mao's speech at the Yenan Literature Forum because it failed to perform any political service on behalf of literature.  I have no idea what this movie is promoting or praising.

There is practically nothing positive in the movie.  There were just all sorts of con games being played by people.  What will the repercussions be if this movie were to be shown internationally?  If I were a Hong Kong businessman and I saw that Mark was conned by the "baggage trick" as soon as he stepped out of the airport, would I invest in Chongqing?  This will have very bad consequences in terms of the ability of the city of Chongqing to attract foreign investments.

It is even more unbearable to watch the negative attitudes in the movie about the economic reforms in China.  The movie used the words of the character Bao Shihong to accuse the state enterprise leader Old Xie of "selling out everybody at the factory."  At the same time, it used many scenes to depict the hardship of the state enterprise workers.  For example, Sanbao's home was dark and tiny, Bao Shihong had not received wages for eight months, etc.  The movie's portrayal of the private entrepreneur Feng Dong was even more wretched.  Feng lived an extravagant but rotten life with hints of criminal activities -- in the words of his secretary, "eight lifetime prison sentences won't be enough" and Feng actually killed someone with his own hands in the end.  The movie conveyed the general impression that the private entrepreneurs who got rich before others were crooks who collude with the state enterprise managers to seize state property under the name of economic reform and to oppress and exploit the workers.  Is this is not a public negation of the current economic direction of the central government?  This is truly deplorable.

Secondly, the movie did not follow the principle of "Three Emphases" in the cultural line of thought.  The principal character Bao Shihong is a flawed person.  He thought that he was smart, but every judgment of his was wrong.  When he was the security chief, the thieves could come and go to the exhibition hall as if it were a public restroom.  Xie Xiaomeng flattered him and gave Bao a pack of cigarettes, and then Xie opened up the glass case and switched the stone without Bao being aware.  Later on, Bao suspected that Sanbao had stolen the precious stone, but he did not report to the police.  Clearly, he was guilty of three mistakes -- receiving a bribe, dereliction of duty and covering up a crime.  Finally, in his battle with Daoge, if it were not for the fact that Daoge was involved in an automobile collision by chance, he would not have caught him.  Afterwards, Bao boasted to Sanbao: "I could tell from 200 meters away that it was a Jialing 250" and so on, while the latter flattered him about his 'martial arts skill."  Such was the positive character in the movie.  In a movie about economic reform, he does not deal with politics and the overall situation.  Instead, he openly and unreasonably deplored the leaders.  I don't know what evil intentions are harbored through such a principal character in the movie.

Generally speaking, the movie has no redeeming values whatsoever.  We are not opposed to movies being sarcastic about certain flaws in real life, but the spoofing in this movie made it really difficult to accept.  For example, the movie mentioned the "civilized enforcement of the law" twice.  Elevating the quality of law enforcement personnel should be a good thing, but the film did not deal with this positively.  Instead it adopted a sarcastic attitude.  On the first occasion, Bao Shihong said, 'Don't talk to me about civilized enforcement of the law.  Bring a bag of lime instead."  On the other occasion, a porter made fun of the image of our municipal administrators.  This is really infuriating.

Overall, the movie "The Crazy Stone" is a big poisonous weed that promotes liberalism.  We hope that the State Administration of Films, Radio and Television will ban it quickly.

Related Links: