"Wong relies once again on voice-over, but in [Happy Together] its role is somewhat reduced, more conventionally, to providing minimal exposition, as well as the intimate calibration of Yiu-fai's feelings. In the earlier films, the very existence of so much voice-over was a sign of the characters' alienation from one another, but Happy Together actually contains a great deal of dialogue. The alienation remains, but it's shown through the more conventional--and perhaps ore emotionally involving--method of having characters talk to (and scream at) each other." (Brunette, 74)
Before the screening, I introduced Happy Together as a gay film, which cares less about the social-political issues surrounding the notion of homosexuality. In Teo's reading, a debate on whether Happy Together should be categorized as a gay movie was deployed by introducing Edward Lam's critique of the film published in City Entertainment (See Teo 105: "A Man and a (Wo)man"). Teo, having a counter viewpoint from Lam, analyzed the role of our two protagonists by quoting one dialogue between them, and augured that Wong was trying to "parodies the notion of the surrogate woman and the idea of acting like a man" in Happy Together. (Teo 108)
For this week's response, either investigate how dialogue is being used in Happy Together, how it is different/similar to the voice-over in the film and how it contributes to the overall meaning of the film, in consideration of WKW's earlier works or analyze how those dialogues (or other techniques) in Happy Together are adopted to complicate the discourse of homosexuality.
* Happy Together is available on netflix (although not for instant watch). Our library also has a VHS copy with English subtitle aviable at the 4F circulation desk, and there are players right next to it.
[Dialogue 1: Lai gets sicks and sleeps on the sofa. Ho tries to wake him up]
HO: How do you feel?
LAI: Terrible.
HO: You're feverish.
LAI: Of course I am... jogging in that unbearable cold
HO: Didn't know you're so weak... getting sick so easily... Can you get up?
LAI: For what?
HO: Cook something... We haven't eaten for two days!
LAI: Are you cold blooded or what? Asking a sick man to cook for you?
(Lai goes cooking...)
[Dialogue 2: Ho is lying on the bed as Lai sleeps on the sofa. He goes over to the sofa and snuggles up to Lai] (see Teo 108-9)
LAI: Why do you want to sheep here where we're so pressed for space?
HO: Because I like it.
LAI: Don't you think this is too small for us?
HO: No it's comfy.
(Ho gives Lai a bite)
LAI: Ow! Why are you biting me?
HO: I'm hungry.
LAI: Do you want to sleep here on the sofa?
HO: Why?
LAI: Because I'll sleep on the bed then.
HO: Don't go on about it. Just go to sleep.
LAI: Or else you take the bed and I'll sleep on the sofa.
HO: What an old fusspot you are.
(Lai stnads up and gets into the bed. Ho follows, and again tries to snuggle up to Lai)
HO: You are not so heartless, are you?
LAI: We are tight for space.
HO: Not at all
(Ho climbs on top of Lai)
HO: I'll get on top and we'll just sleep like this.
(Ho lies on top, his face digging into Lai's neck)
LAI: So you want to sleep here?
HO: Are you going to be like that?
(Lai pushes him aside and tries to get up)
HO: All right... I'll sleep here. Let's sleep together.
LAI: All right. Go to sleep. But don't you trifle with me.
HO: Who, me? Don't you trifle with me.
(He quickly plants his lips on Lai's cheek)
Give us a kiss! Good night.
Emily
ReplyDeleteThe dialogue in Happy Together could be adopted to complicate the discourse of homosexuality. Using the definite roles of man and woman, one can point out who is who. Maybe WKW just wanted to put a different twist on things and use gay men, but "gay film" was not what he was thinking. You can see in the first dialogue between Lai and Ho that clearly Lai is the women in the relationship. No matter how sick or upset he is, Ho expects him to cook for them. You can get the feeling that Ho fufills the male role by addressing Lai's weakness, "Didn't know you're so weak... getting sick so easily...." The fact that Ho doesn't even consider himself the cook shows that Lai has to do the women's chores, cooking. The use of other techniques show that WKW does not debate the ideas and interpretations of gays and lesbians. In this film nobody has an issue of Lai being homosexual. The fact that Ho can come to the bar with men and openly make out without making a disturbance is ignoring the whole aspect that a gay couple is open in public. Almost ignoring the fact they are gay, WKW films a love story, and not a story about the complications of being openly gay in public.
I agree that there's certainly male/female roles being played with theses characters. There's also the overarching path the the dialogues take. Often they kind of work in a roundabout way. Usually because of the persistence of Ho, the conversation will dip in to a fight about halfway through, then it is resolved (for the most part) at the end. It's a constant bickering that really goes nowhere, and I think it says something about being a homosexual. Possibly that there's a difficulty letting go of a partner for the fear that you may never find someone else. There's never an instance where the viewer is lead to believe that the characters enter a new relationship with different partners AND are happy about it. There's always that longing for one-another that hangs on each-others heads. It's like the relationship between Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck. When you put the two together they fight and exchange quickly back and forth. Yet these characters have solidified their relationship around the fights. So it's pretty much a self destructive Catch-22. If they live together they are miserable, but once the conflict is gone they yearn to crawl back to each-other.
ReplyDelete-A. Nowak
As with the previous posts, I agree that the two characters have taken on male/female roles, and that the movie really doesn't play out like a typical gay film. "It's a constant bickering that really goes nowhere, and I think it says something about being a homosexual. Possibly that there's a difficulty letting go of a partner for the fear that you may never find someone else". I disagree with this statement however, I believe that has nothing to do specifically with homosexuals, I think that plays out just the same in heterosexual relationships. People are afraid to be alone regardless of sexual orientation. As for the dialogue, which is what I really wanted to talk about, unlike WKW's other films, the role of the voice-over is greatly reduced. In the films we have seen prior to this the voice-over is a tool to show the isolation of the characters. In Happy Together, this comes through the dialogue, as the characters fight and scream at each other. The isolation comes from when there is too much emotion in the dialogue rather than a lone character solemnly speaking about their isolation.
ReplyDelete(slex)
ReplyDeleteI agree that there's certainly male/female roles being played with theses characters. There's also the overarching path the the dialogues take. Often they kind of work in a roundabout way. Usually because of the persistence of Ho, the conversation will dip in to a fight about halfway through, then it is resolved (for the most part) at the end. It's a constant bickering that really goes nowhere, and I think it says something about being a homosexual. Possibly that there's a difficulty letting go of a partner for the fear that you may never find someone else. There's never an instance where the viewer is lead to believe that the characters enter a new relationship with different partners AND are happy about it. There's always that longing for one-another that hangs on each-others heads. It's like the relationship between Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck. When you put the two together they fight and exchange quickly back and forth. Yet these characters have solidified their relationship around the fights. So it's pretty much a self destructive Catch-22. If they live together they are miserable, but once the conflict is gone they yearn to crawl back to each-other.
-A. Nowak
(logan)
ReplyDeleteAs with the previous posts, I agree that the two characters have taken on male/female roles, and that the movie really doesn't play out like a typical gay film. "It's a constant bickering that really goes nowhere, and I think it says something about being a homosexual. Possibly that there's a difficulty letting go of a partner for the fear that you may never find someone else". I disagree with this statement however, I believe that has nothing to do specifically with homosexuals, I think that plays out just the same in heterosexual relationships. People are afraid to be alone regardless of sexual orientation. As for the dialogue, which is what I really wanted to talk about, unlike WKW's other films, the role of the voice-over is greatly reduced. In the films we have seen prior to this the voice-over is a tool to show the isolation of the characters. In Happy Together, this comes through the dialogue, as the characters fight and scream at each other. The isolation comes from when there is too much emotion in the dialogue rather than a lone character solemnly speaking about their isolation.
Dialogue is used in this Happy Together as an explicit platform for establishing the roles of Ho and Lai in their relationship. Ho tends to show more feminine characteristics with his physical actions, but establishes a more masculine role in the relationship through his dialogue. Lai, in my eyes seemed to portray a more masculine characteristics with his physical behavior, but a more feminine role with his dialogue. Wong Kar Wai seemed to dabble with the establishment of unconventional roles of individuals in their various relationships, but i don't think this odd differentiation between words and action could be established with a voiceover. A dialogue between Ho and Lai was essential in establishing their mismatch of physical and verbal characteristics.
ReplyDeleteI definitely believe that this movie was a gay film. I say this because the two main characters were guys who were in love with one another. I honestly don't understand how anyone could argue against that. This being said, it was interesting that within the film the two men did not act like stereotypical, flamboyant homosexuals, which is almost all that is represented of gays in the mainstream media. I definitely do understand the argument that one of the men took on the role of the woman, and that the other was the man. That being said, it still is undeniable that these were two men in love. If you see two gay men walking down the street holding hands, with one dressed up like a woman you don't think, "Oh, those are two heterosexuals, because one is really taking on the role of the woman." You are much more likely to think, "Well, those two guys are gay." You might not make a judgment based upon this, but it would be hard to think you would assume they were heterosexual because of the way they acted or presented themselves.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the dialogue is concerned, I believe that having less narration and more dialogue between the characters really helped to develop the relationships between them. In "As Tears Go By" it is sort of sudden that the two main characters love one another. It seems natural as it is a movie, but at the same time they seem to have no true prior emotional attachment to one another. In "Happy Together" however, there is a true emotional bond between the two characters which is clear from the beginning. Even as the one who is thought to be the "man" in the relationship is narrating the beginning, we see major interaction between the two that shows their connectivity (which I don't feel is appropriate to describe in words). Even between the mysterious man that the man works with and the man, thhere are nice, long scene developing their relationship.
In Happy Together it is very evident that Lai assumes a more masculine role and Ho a more feminine one. This is created not only through the dialogue but also through actions such as Ho's more open displays of affection and Lai's stoicism. These roles, especially evident in the second exchange excerpted above, I don't believe in any way take away from this film's status as a gay movie. It simply speaks more to the personality of the characters, who are free to act as they want. It, I feel, is more detrimental to the perception of homosexual to assume that two gay partners must act in the same ways. I believe the dialogue creates more of a complication in the compatibility of Lai and Ho as lovers, as opposed to a complication of gayness. It is used more in this film as compared to earlier films because the focus is more on the relationship between the two, which is easier expressed through discussion than internal monologue. This relationship is complicated by the personality differences perceived as the conformation to gender roles, and this complication serves as the primary conflict in the film.
ReplyDelete