Sony Pictures
I think it’s tricky when watching movies based in other countries, because the sensibilities of a foreign culture don’t always translate effectively. China and the US are not the most different of places, but they aren’t that similar either. The overwhelming reach of the government seems like almost anathema to Americans, but that doesn’t mean we have the right to judge them for their system. So following from that thought, a story which affects a Chinese audience may not affect an American or Western one in the same way. What seems powerful or moving may seem trite or maudlin. It’s a tricky balance, but sometimes it works.
Wolf Totem is based on the 2004 Chinese semi-autobiographical novel of the same name by author Lu Jiamin, although he originally released it under the pseudonym Jiang Rong due to its potentially controversial content and criticism of PRC policies. The book was based on his real experiences with a few dramatic touches added. The movie is directed by French director Jean-Jacques Annaud, who had been banned in China for his movie Seven Years in Tibet but was allowed back to work on this film. In 1967, two young men, Chen Zhen (Feng Shaofeng) and Yang Ke (Shawn Dou), are sent from Beijing to the grasslands of Inner Mongolia. They are tasked to teach English and implement policies delivered by PRC higher ups, and as to be expected, they are skeptical of the agrarian lifestyle and find it all to be quite quaint and primitive. The Mongolians live as nomads, living carefully and cautiously off the land, always concerned with protecting the delicate balance of the natural ecosystem.
But things change for Chen Zhen when he stumbles across a pack of wolves that don’t attack him. Suddenly he has a new respect and fear for the laws of nature, and he feels a closer connection. Drama gets involved as there is tension between the old ways, represented by Mongolian elder Bilig (Ankhnyam Bagchaa) versus radical progressivism from PRC rep Bao Shungui (Yin Zhusheng). The PRC is pushing more industrialization and more settlements, eschewing the old balance thoughts for newer views of science over nature. Naturally the Mongolian nomads believe that wolves have a part to play in maintaining balance, but greed and stupidity lead to increased tensions between the wolves and the humans.
Relationships between humans are pushed aside in the movie to focus on how people are responding to nature and handling or mishandling interactions as the case may be. The film paints industrialism as a danger and a negative force that pushes aside valuable traditions and only leads to numbness and death. Several brutal scenes are shown of wolf attacks, and there is one particularly thrilling and haunting action scene involving a horse stampede in the middle of a thunderstorm. The focus on the importance of the wolf as a metaphor for humanity at a base level takes precedence over classic genre conventions, so the characterizations get minimized and only a few have arcs of interest or note. Although the piece is about this perspective on balance versus progress for progress’ sake, for some people many scenes may seem redundant.
The acting tends to be more subtle here, with most critical work done in a few key scenes. Most of the movie is about seeing everything at once; the cinematography here is beautiful, filming on location in Inner Mongolia where the story was set. The brutality of the wolves is not sugarcoated or minimized; CGI and practical special effects are used very well to really delve into this dangerous, wild world. I don’t think this movie will appeal to everyone; it makes sense that it struck a chord with people in China, but the fears about tradition versus industrialization aren’t really as present in most Western countries in the modern era. The story, though it is based on truth, of a man learning a purity and truth among seemingly primitive people, is a common trope seen even in movies like Avatar. Obviously the trope is based on how people really have experienced such insights in their own lives, but it probably won’t seem as original to the more experienced Western audience.
The metaphor of the wolf resonates through the movie, giving a near mystical quality to these animals. The encroaching forces of reality, represented by guns, cars, and electricity, seem to be impossible to stop. The question then, whether or not this is the right path, that is the debate.
These ideas are important and useful, but I think it’s more useful for China to have an understanding of this idea of protecting nature; we’ve had plenty of films in the US about it already, so it’s not quite as radical. Similarly, the idea of criticizing the government is hardly new here, although cultural mores associated with it change over the years. In general I liked the movie, finding it exciting at times and beautiful at others. The story doesn’t really resonate with me as strongly as it might with others, but I won’t minimize that possibility or likelihood. The director had very little oversight from producers or even China, which is both good and bad. Although there are a lot of things that probably wouldn’t have gotten into the movie without that, the truth is that the movie does get slow in parts and might’ve improved with a bit more trimming. Overall, I’m positive on the film, but it’s not for everyone.
Annaud’s new film is opening around the country and he talked with Hotchka about the film’s message and working in China.
Share this post
