Shanghai Trance (2008) User Reviews

Traditional Chinese values that seem to clash in a modernizing society.

[markfromamsterdam · 7/10 · 26 October 2008]

The movie is beautifully shot in Shanghai and manages to catch the local atmosphere by focusing on the typical (modern) Shanghainese architecture.

The movie depicts the story of three relationships that don't seem to work out, one because of an unanswered love, one because of jealousy and the last because of a lack of commitment. The cast is good and despite the language barrier, to me they seem to act very natural.

The 2 hour movie is long, but the beautiful shots, atmosphere and acting make it worth it. However my friends thought the movie was too slow, most likely caused by the only minus of this movie: the story. Unfortunately it's not too strong; the themes are not original and this movie has little to add. What it does show (or add) is that Chinese are still striving for traditional relationships and family ties, which clashes with their environment that is modernizing and westernizing.

8 of 10 because of the beautiful images and acting.

Pointless with few redeeming qualities

[JantjeB · 3/10 · 24 September 2008]

I was not impressed at all with this movie. The beginning, in which the characters are introduced, seems promising. But from there it goes nowhere, and to aggravate things it takes a very long time (over 2 hours) to get nowhere. There is plenty of dialogue, but most of it is clichéd and repetitive. The character of Jochem especially added absolutely nothing to the story. My guess is that the movie was supposed to give a 'slice of life' of people in modern urban China. Certainly there are some nice shots of the Shanghai skyline and a few funny moments highlighting how much China must have changed the last few decades. But the uninteresting characters and pointless drawn-out scenes mostly leave a feeling of immense boredom.

Like watching paint dry! Extended student film-making at its worse!!

[qwertyman2008 · 1/10 · 9 December 2008]

This film looked really nice in places, the first 10 minutes was OK but then it became probably one of the most boring, uninteresting films I have ever watched! David Verbeek's scriptwriting is amateurish at best and self-indulgent student film like at best. It is the typical frustrated, non-talented art film director's fare.

Why do people always make these crap art house filmsabout 'real' people and then never have actual stories?

"How can I make my film really deep man?...." must have been Verbeek's thoughts before he wrote this dribble. The answer: Fill it with really unhappy people who look moodily at their own reflections or outside of windows. Thats soooooooooooo deeeeeeeeeeeeeep! Always moodily, always with a surly glint in their eyes. Extended (incompetent) student film I hear you say? You'd be absolutely right!

Characters have no real motivations because we are never explained what is going on in their heads. In the end we actually truly care about them because we don't understand them.

Also the obsessive (again another European film student trait...) use of 'subjective' wide shots meant we were constantly at a distance so again we didn't really care about the characters because not only did we not know what they were thinking, but we also couldn't get close enough to these characters faces to care about them anyway.

David Verbeek is obviously so obsessed with European art house cinema that he has made all the classic mistakes without truly knowing what he wanted to say. An audience needs to identify with a film's characters if it is to invest in a story. Sorry did I say 'story'? There was none!! e.g. A beginning, a middle and an end. Even the most obscure art house classics have something that we can latch onto to hold our interest, this didn't at all. Unhappy people, no reasons given for why they are like this, no story!

For someone who actually managed to get funding to a make a film, I am very surprised at how incompetent David Verbeek truly is. Bad direction, very bad scriptwriting. He actually managed to have really interesting locations, good actors and a great city to work in like Shanghai and yet made this rubbish, uninteresting film. What a waste!

This is the typical film that comes of Asian film schools these days. They should all be titled: "Ohhh how miserable life is, in the big Asian city!" But this is not the truth, in reality living in places like this can be quite exhilarating - it's not all bad. From watching this film you would get the impression that all young people in Shanghai are unhappy with their lot - which is completely untrue.

This is what happens when you a let a Europen make a film about a place he thinks he knows about but in reality obviously doesn't in the slightest.

David Verbeek should never ever again be allowed to inflict his brand of boring, bleak, uninteresting, amateurish, student film like,rubbish art house cinema on unsuspecting future audiences ever again!!!! Take this man's film-making privileges away please, before we slit our own wrists.

"Oh life in the big modern city so so terrible!!!!!!!!" Where do these incompetent talentless directors come from?