The Hospital/ 白色巨塔

The Hospital is perhaps the greatest Taiwanese TV drama ever. This is definitely a top-notch production. With a star-studded cast and a great source material (the novel of the same name), the Hospital is great in every respect. While at first glance, this may seem to be a rip off ER or other such established medical shows, the Hospital is original in that it takes the good elements from previous medical dramas and runs with it. It is the ability of the producers to bring out these elements that make the Hospital truly unique.

The Hospital stars Jerry Yan, formerly of F4 glory and is directed by Tsai Yueh Hsun, who created the hugely successful Meteor Garden series. Yan's character is rising surgeon who gets caught up in the political strugle within the hospital that occurs as two department heads fight for the position of chief-of-staff. It is a vicious battle, with sacrifice and loss on both sides. Unwittingly, Yan's character is dragged deeper and deeper into the struggle, and soon he must choose a side. Adding to the confusion is a female coworker Yan has chased after for 10 years. As his personal and professional life become indistinguishable, Yan must decide what his real goals are and what he is willing to give up to realize them.

Political struggle is not something one would normally associate with a hospital, and it is amazing to see it realized on screen. The Hospital shows that such struggles are commonplace, in every aspect of life. They continue onwards, bringing forth a vicious cycle, as each succeeding generation is forced by the system to rise thru the ranks. As one of the characters say, that's the way the game works. In order to do what he wants, he must first amass power. And if sacrifices have to be made along the way, so be it. Such brutal executions bring forth many questionable judgements, and the audience will find that their ethical sense is challenged at every turn of the story. The surprising thing is that, as the audience gets to know the characters, it will appear that no one is wrong. There're winners and losers, but no one is right and no one is wrong. The two do not equate, and The Hospital exemplifies this beautifully. It is when the audience begins to take sides that the twists in the plotline prove all the more astonishing, and ultimately satisfying.

The characters in the story are all very dynamic. Each of them come alive, as they each strive toward their own clear purposes, with many of them changing their perspectives along the way. This great feat is achieved in part due to the spectacular acting. There are a lot of actors/actresses present, lending a greater feel to the story. There is never a point where the drama felt repetitive or slow, as is often the case with long dramas with a rather small cast (The Hospital is 39 episodes long). I was pleasantly surprised at the believable performances from the cast, which was helped in part by the small use of "young" talent. Contrary to Meteor Garden, where the entire staff seems to be under 30 and the acting was sub-par, The Hospital aims to be a serious drama, and it largely succeeds due to the realistic setting it employs. Other than the main actor/actress, the rest of the staff appears to be veterans, giving the drama solid production values. With an emphasis toward portraying human-human interactions in as realistic a manner as possible, the "sappy" feeling that may otherwise surround The Hospital does not exist. Although some viewers may find that this detracts from the romantic elements in the story, I find that the concentrated bursts is more akin to real life. Work doesn't take a break for personal relationships, and the two intertwine at the hospital where everyone works, creating a hotbed of drama potential waiting to be unlocked in the series.

One area I found disconcerting was the pace of time progression in the story. Many major events occur in short succession, and a change of scenary often indicates a passage of several months. This quick movement of time occurs throughout the series, making the story sometimes a little hard to swallow. Even as the characters all behave plausibly in their life, the situations that crop up are not entirely so. This is noticeable many times, as important characters move on in the story. While one would expect them to return at some point, the story seemingly abandons them and continues on with the remaining cast. Thus, sometimes the drama does seem to get carried away, trying too hard to distinguish itself, to be different, to be captivating at all times, with no dull moments. This actually creates the opposite effect at times.

But these are little concerns in relation to the entire production. The Hospital is a great drama series that is well worth watching, if only to reach the end and understand the overall themes and morals being expressed throughout the story. The Hospital does not try to answer questions about life; it merely raises them. That is perhaps its greatest asset - it tends to ask the right ones.

Pros: Great depiction of the inherent struggle in life; great acting all around; good message!
Cons: Some elements that are not entirely fleshed out; not for those wanting a mindless show (especially the younger crowd)
Conclusion: This should be on everyone's must-watch list!
Score: 4.5/5

The Lives of Others/ Das Leben Der Anderen

How many of us truly know what it meant to live in East Berlin, a time when secret police were everywhere, and any stray thought was considered treasonous? The Lives of Others depicts the life of two individuals in such a situation in 1984, just five years before the fall of the wall. Georg Dreyman was a famous playwright suspected by the secret police and Gerd Wiesler was the agent assigned to keep taps on Dreyman. What occurs is that as Wiesler keeps tabs on every action by Dreyman, he is slowly influenced by the free thinking, love, and literature of Dreyman's world. But Wiesler is a survelliance agent. His own career is on the line to come up with incriminating evidence on Dreyman. What must he do now?

The Lives of Others is a refreshing film. It doesn't attempt to give us a history lesson. It assumes the audience already understands the basic framework of society depicted in the film. Instead, The Lives of Others gives a very select view of one individual, Dreyman, and the one agent, a part of the terrorizing secret police who receives a humanizing treatment. Thus, the story works wonderfully. Without any special effects, the plot slowly unfolds, with only the suspenseful music and the naunces of the characters' expression to move it along. Because of this, I find the acting superbly performed.

The Lives of Others is Germany's official entry for the Oscars, and it easily won Best Foreign Film. Generally, the winners of this category tend to be more focused on artistic merits, and so it should be obvious that The Lives of Others has these qualities in abundance. However, this might also make it appear slow to audiences expecting something quicker-paced, as the trailer for the movie might imply. But, give it a little patience, and The Lives of Others will surprise with its simple and elegant delivery.

Pros: Great execution of a simple story; intriguing details of the workings of the secret police
Cons: The scenes tend to be of one color - gray; not for those with short attention spans
Conclusion: It won the Oscars for a reason. Recommended!
Score: 4.5/5

Blood Diamond

Blood Diamond is a story that is at once obvious. There is nothing special about it, nothing different. At its heart, Blood Diamond is a simple story that tries to tell the story of a single diamond, perhaps the largest pink diamond ever found, and how two man, a South African mercenary Danny Archer and a local fisherman Soloman Vandy, are forced to work together to secure their future. From the onset, one can see many parallels between Blood Diamond and similar stories regarding precious jewels of value being found, such as the novel The Pearl. Just as in Steinback's story, the finding of a priceless jewel is both a blessing and a sin, as sacrifices must be made to cash in the diamond. This is perhaps the greatest appeal of Blood Diamond, the story of what these two man see in the diamond, what it means to them. The diamond is not something meant to be part of a ring or some spectacular setpiece - it is their future, a second chance in life for Archer and a reunion with his family for Vandy.

The plot has good mixes between those of action sequences and conversation between the characters, which are usually put to good use to comment on various aspects of the ugly side of the diamond business. However, the story does tend to be very positive in nature, which may not reflect the real world well. Archer, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, undergoes a simple transformation for the better, as is expected of his character. Everything is fairly cliche here, as there are little surprises. What the film has going for it is that the viewer is still compelled to see the ending. This is perhaps the highest compliment a movie can receive.

There is a romantic element introduced in the film between Archer and a journalist. This part I found very superficial, as her character did not appear to be necessary to the plot. However, it does work out in the end when she returns to England and Archer is still in Africa and the two converses on a satellite phone. This part is quite sappy, but I enjoyed it nonetheless, as by this part I had started to care about the fate of Archer. What an appropriate title "Blood Diamond" is.

Pros: Gets you emotionally attached to the characters; some good action scenes to break the monotony
Cons: You can probably guess how the story will go fairly early on.
Conclusion: Makes you wonder where those diamonds really come from...
Score: 3.5/5

The Last King of Scotland

The Last King of Scotland is a story about a select part of the world few people know about: Uganda. In the 1970s, military leader Ida Imin seizes power and takes control of the country. At the same time, a Scottish doctor decides to travel and ends up working in a Ugandan hospital, where he meets the new dictator, who at once uses all his charm to enlist the doctor as his personal physician. As a close confidante to Imin, Dr. Nicholas Garrigan wielded a sizeable amount of power, seemingly second only to the president himself. However, as time goes on, the reality behind the dazzingly lights of the parties and the fancy cars began to set in, and Dr. Garrigan suspected that something was very wrong. The country was not heading toward a new golden age, as Imin had promised when he seized power. Instead, the violence he vowed to end was perpetuated more fiercely by himself. People were dying in the hundreds of thousands. When Garrigan accidentally causes the death of a close colleague by merely casting suspicion on a colleague's motive, he realizes the peril he himself is in. He must get out of Uganda, away from this madman, this man who claims to love Scotland and rules Uganda with an iron fist.

Although this movie's plot is entirely fiction, based on a book exploring the possible relationship between a dictator and his fictional physician, Imin is a real historical figure. The film utilizes several ingenious devices throughout to keep the audience captivated. In the beginning, the innocence of the good doctor is very believable. As doubts creep into his mind, so do they creep into the audience's mind. Can the doctor be wrong? The evidence slowly builds against Imin, and there is a wonderful transition in Garrigan at each stage of the process. Garrigan does not appear to be an idiot sold by the charm of Imin. Instead, the film portrays the plausibility that anyone in Garrigan's position may make the same, bad choice. Other than the shock the viewer must feel along with Garrigan when he "switches sides," the greatest suprise in the movie is perhaps at the end, during the credits, when true facts about the terror of Imin is told in simple, plain text. The greatest shock is that such a tyrant existed in this world and was allowed to reign for eight years.

A large part of why this film succeeds is due to the mood it sets. Without the use of expensive setpieces or add-in effects, the film successfully portrays the mood at all times, usually mirroring Garrigan's mood. However, there really isn't much else to say regarding this, as there really wasn't much that warrants extra attention.

A particular point that did stand out was the performance of Forest Whitaker as Imin. He was very convincing at all points in the movie. His facial features switched from a charming to a genuinely frightening look in quick second. After watching the film, one has to wonder how scary it would be to have man like Imin around, as Whitaker's version of him is so good. I cannot praise Whitaker's performance enough, and I was not surprised when he won the 2006 Academy Awards for Best Actor.

Overall, the Last King of Scotland was a surprisingly good film that I felt was educational and entertaining at the same time.

Pros: Accurate portrayal of dictator Idi Imin, Whitaker's excellent performance
Cons: Some parts were predictable, ending could use more work, film style was nothing special
Conclusion: As far as plausible stories go, this is as close as it gets.
Score: 4/5