Talk:Zhang Yimou

the bit about "Chinese Leni Riefenstahl"

Some anonymous user keeps deleting this sourced statement, on the grounds of partiality from the publisher, the New York Times, generally considered to be one of the most authoritative publications worldwide, fitting without a doubt the criteria laid down by Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Needless to say I think he's wrong, and also a little biased.--Piccolo Modificatore Laborioso (talk) 10:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, the person does have a point. Any reference to Leni Riefenstahl can be polarizing after all. I think the reference should be kept in the article, but right now, it is given rather undue prominence in the introduction, and it gives only one perspective on Zhang's role of the Summer Olympics. If anything it should be put in the section on the Opening Ceremonies (which needs to be expanded with global reactions anyways).Tryptofeng (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Upon reading the article, I think the reference as it stands is even less proper. First, it refers not so much to the Opening Ceremonies, but rather as a blanket criticism of Zhang for his recent shift in film style and new close relationship to the government. As such, I think it can be kept in the introduction, but it definitely needs more context. For example, "Though Zhang Yimou's early career was marked by government interference and censorship problems, recently he has been seen to embrace the government, with many of films, such as the controversial but internationally successfulHero, being seen as glorification of Chinese authoritarianism.(ref) Criticisms leveled against Zhang include that he has become something of a Chinese Leni Riefenstahl.(ref) His newly popular position among President Hu Jintao's administration nevertheless has allowed Zhang opportunities that were unavailable to him in the earlier part of his career, including the directing of Beijing's Opening Olympics." Any reactions to the Opening ceremonies, both positive and negative, could be left in that section.Tryptofeng (talk) 14:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

That's fine for the lead then--I'll play with it a bit and put that in. --Asdfg12345 00:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

One has to consider how to structure an encyclopedia article about film directors. For living person, see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Presumption_in_favor_of_privacy. The lead section serves as a summary, thus should be concise and be an introduction. See how other directors articles' lead section are summarized, it definitely shouldn't include specific criticism about the director's career. About the discussed New York Times article, the article itself was citing "opinion", not stating fact. The piece states "critics of Zhang..." It can stay on the article, but the lead section should be a summarized section. Trimmed the lead and moved the statements chronologically according to the director's career since it is a recent piece.--TheLeopard (talk) 00:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, let me check that thing BLP out, I agree that's something which needs to be respected. If all the information is in the article, that will be my minimal requirement. I don't care enough about this to spend much time on it. basically, I think it's notable though, and probably the most significant thing about the director. History will sort it out.--Asdfg12345 07:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you indicate which part of that policy you cited is relevant to us? It seems that this note (that he is pro-CCP, and using films and his apparent artistic talent to glorify its rule) is not just a once off, but an ongoing thing. Could you explain how it is not relevant or significant?--Asdfg12345 07:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Lumping a large chunk of paragraphs citing a New York Times news article analyzing the director's critics accusation of the director is not a good general introduction section, but of rather opinionated persepective. If you want an example of general biography of Zhang Yimou from film critics and authors, you can check out Jonathan Crow's biography of him at Allmovie [1] and Mary Farquhar's at Sense of Cinema [2].

Frankly your comments above strikes me as personal and you kind of lost me. This is a general film biography about a director, and we should at least maintain a neutral point of view (however, juding from your comments, and I hope I'm wrong, you seems to be purely editing this article out of eh, political motivation...); these articles should've also been written from an auteurist persepective. The most important thing is to clean-up and format this article as per a film article should've been done (hence the copyediting tag at the top). His personal view and non-film information and everything else could be mentioned in the article, but sorted based on timeline and sections.--TheLeopard (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think both perspectives are relevant, it's just about adding sourced information to the article in a meaningful and useful way to the reader. Check out the article on Leni, for example--these people are not making films in a vacuum; if reliable sources comment on a directors' films appropriation or design to achieve political ends, then obviously it's notable etc., and in some cases rather significant. It depends on the weight of sources, as always. Anyway, I appreciate your explanation and engagement. What needs to be done to clean the article up according to how a film article should be done? Maybe I should follow the link and have a look into that, to see how I can help. If it's not in that link at the top, please let me know where I can find out. Also, what do you mean about the articles written from an auteurist perspective--I know that word, but do you mean like, they are meant to examine and point out the unique characteristics of the director? also, I'd like to point out that your remark about the view of the critics as being opinionated is also your own opinion. What I mean is, you may think it's opinionated, but others think it's a simple statement. Anyway, let me have a look at that clean-up stuff later, and I might do a quick google about the other stuff.--Asdfg12345 08:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

CCP involvement?

A chinese film history professor told me Zhang exposed his father as a KMT sympathizer to the Chinese Communist Party when he was 15, and had him arrested. Does anyone know if this is true? --NEMT 02:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

-> Your professor was likely talking about Chen Kaige, see [3]. I'm not sure if Zhang Yimou did so also, but he was a member of the Red Guard, like many young people in his generation.--Tryptofeng 15:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe so, I'm pretty sure Kaige Chen was compelled into red guard activities, as many of his films contain an anti-mao slant (emperor and assassin when compared to hero, most notably), whereas Zhang Yimou appears to have actively embraced it and openly endorses chinese sabre rattling. I may also just be remembering all of this incorrectly though, as it would be a pretty big coincidence if both had similar stories about their fathers, despite different beliefs. --NEMT 05:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you click on the link? It's pretty well established that Chen Kaige denounced his own father (just do a google search to see interviews where he himself discusses it). His attitudes in his films are perhaps a direct reflection of his remorse over his actions.Tryptofeng 05:07, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Format?

So I'm not really a fan of the current format of the article, in particular the movie by movie division. It feels disjointed and it becomes kind of difficult to discuss the bigger trends in Zhang's films (i.e. the recent big budget films and their backlash, the mid-early 90s streak of international art house hits, and the early forays into film in the 80s). Anyone else agreeTryptofeng 15:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Character

Why is it stated that he 'had to sell his blood'? He did not have to sell his blood, he chose to sell his blood. During his university years he was financially supported by his peasant wife, who did not earn very much. He repaid her by having affairs and finally dumping her. A great film director he may be, but his character defect is that he has no sense of responsibility to or respect for anyone who sacrificed their life to help him and give him what he desired. This is reflected in his directing, there are lots of superficial effects such as the intense colors, but no deeper meaning than the 'I must have' attitude. 217.42.58.201 (talk) 03:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Was he married at 18? Anyway, it was during the Cultural Revolution that he sold his blood, I don't think anyone can get by without doing any work. He did work in a textile mill. BTW "had to sell his blood" simply means he has no money to purchase a camera otherwise. DORC (talk) 19:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Whatever the case with the note above (source please?), the notes about his propaganda on behalf of the CCP shouldn't be ignored or dusted away.--Asdfg12345 06:13, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

What propaganda? Zhang Yimou has already stated many times he is not interested in politics. 121.6.96.194 (talk) 16:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Birthdate

The birthdate is listed variously as 1950 or 1951. For 1951, see [4] [5] [6] [7]. For 1950 see [8] [9]. For both see this new york times bio [10]. Keep in mind that the Wikipedia source has probably been used elsewhere, possibly erroneously. For note, it was originally listed as 1950 on this article, but changed by this edit.

I don't know which is correct, but someone with some more reliable sources would be appreciated. Edit summaries and sources help clear up confusions over these sorts of things, so please use them if you make edits that change long-standing information. Shadowjams (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

More 1950 sources, [11] and [12] -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Copy edit, September 2010

While copy editing this article for the Guild of Copy Editors September drive, in addition to working on style, grammar, etc, I've also done a number of other things. I've removed quite a lot of unsourced commentary and analysis which had been tagged since 2008 or early 2009, and have replaced some examples with material taken from articles about Zhang's films themselves, and I've also removed some of the more excessive flowery praise. I've also standardized on British English, which appeared to be the dominant version (and I hope I haven't missed any), and have removed some overlinking. I was unable to resolve the contradictory reports of Zhang's year of birth, and could only add another couple of inconclusive sources to the talk section above. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:34, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

potential NYT resource

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/world/asia/filmmaker-zhang-yimou-walks-a-fine-line-in-china.html by Edward Wong 97.87.29.188 (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disribution

I was hoping this article would clearly state which films were cleared by sarft and distributed domestically, and which ones only went overseas (like "to Live").