The Rapist’s Union


On Friday, February 12, 1999, South China Morning Post positively printed Paul Fonoroff’s review (which can’t be found online) of Raped by an Angel 4: The Rapist’s Union (強姦終極篇之最後羔羊) by Wong Jing (王晶):



“The fourth, and still as tawdry. Although the title may not live up to the lofty sleaze of its predecessor, chapter four offers as many guilty pleasures as any installment of the series. This is director/producer/scriptwriter Wong Jing doing what he does best – unpretentious and politically incorrect. Hardly a date movie but it is the kind of picture to see with a group of friends in the mood for entertainment.”



Paul highlights the fast-paced nature of the release:



“As is the case with so many Wong Jing films, there is a topical quality as if it had just been shot yesterday (it probably was). The first rape takes place on a minibus where the calendar reads January 16, 1999. Later, the protagonists are outside a cinema with When I Look Upon The Stars (a romantic Dante Lam movie which was released last month) on the marquee. There is not much delay between getting the film stock into the can and onto the big screen.”



Paul knows where to draw the line:



“Rape is not condoned, but neither is it depicted with any insight or maturity. The picture is tawdry fun because it is not meant to be taken seriously, especially when the cops seek help from a rape specialist.”



Paul inexplicably explains why Jing has been described as an evil genius:



“The rape specialist seems to have a monopoly on such roles. This seemingly mild-mannered intellectual committed the crime of abducting pregnant women to drink their milk and then set them free. Now reformed and released from prison, he works as a projectionist in a porn theater, permitting him to both control his sex drive and learn foreign languages. For better or for worse, things like this can only happen in a Wong Jing movie.”



Like what another critic said, Jing knows how to make a cheap film look expensive.



I rate the movie as 7/10. This means that it’s good.



In my opinion, it redefines the meaning of blue movie. In that regard, it could be classified as one of his few arthouse films.



If it had more sociological insight and personal ingenuity, I would bestow a higher rating. With that said, it’s still better than Andy Warhol’s Blue Movie (1969).



In that respect, it’s too bad that Andy didn’t live from 1969 to 1999.



Jing’s movie stands out, in particular, because usually he got other people to direct his erotic scripts.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s