The First Emperor

Reviews on The First Emperor Chin on US papers First emperor was aired on Discovery USA on Jan 29th at 9pm.

N Y Times

Review: 'The First Emperor' A Soap Opera With a Little Archaeology By ANITA GATES Published: January 28, 2006

He was called Qin Shi Huangdi. In the third century B.C., he ruled what is now China, and he is credited with unifying that country and building its Great Wall.

The dramatizations in "The First Emperor" are more detailed than in many examples of the genre, 21st-century conversational ("Or am I missing something?" the emperor asks sardonically at one point) and, for the most part, better acted. Wang Ji, who plays the emperor's mother, stands out, possibly because her character has so much to emote about. By the time her son came of age, she had two younger sons by a new lover, Lao Ai (Tom Wu). Recognizing the threat to his power, Qin Shi Huangdi had Lao Ai executed (in the film, he is pulled apart by horses) and the boys strangled.

Full Story: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/28/arts/television/28gate.html

Hollywood reporter Hollywood reporter Jan 24th.

Writer and director Nic Young employs a colloquial approach to their ancient dialogue in colorful scenes that are at first disconcerting but come to be entirely believable. He is helped by some spirited acting, especially by James Pax as the emperor who soars to despotic heights and then descends into deadly madness.

What can I say !!!! Firstly I fell in awe for the history of a country I visit for one night infrequently,to perform Karaoke!!!! James Pax appeared the archetypal Emperor-commanding,all powerful and seducer of all be it land,ladies or Luddite's! I now through this yearn to learn more about this great,spiteful,forward thinker with a dream that became reality much to the detriment of his enemies Even in death he lives albeit a restricted view of what he envisaged James Pax - I thank you ! ( It does appear that James Pax in the past has been a supportive actor,however in this role he depicts what I see as an honest and real portrayal of an inspired ruler with aspirations yet with the constant watchful eye behind him. Even his portrayal as the spoilt son shows us what may happen even in the "normal"world -murder of the siblings!!)

210 BC saw the laying to rest of the most powerful man on earth – Emperor Ying Sheng. He had made China one of the greatest countries of Earth, had massive armies and had greater riches than the pharaohs of Egypt. His resting place saw him in the largest mausoleum on earth, surrounded by a model of his world and rivers of flowing mercury. This was always the legend and was based on very limited evidence but the discovery of the Terracotta Army threw greater light on the subject. As the search for his tomb continues we are shown a dramatisation of the Emperor's rise to power starting when the death of his father makes him the King of Qin at only 13. Under the Machiavellian guidance of scholar Li Si, Ying defeats the neighbouring state of Zhao in a bloody and ruthless battle.

There have been a recent trend on channel 4 in the UK for taking subjects worthy of documentaries and making them into docu-dramas. So it was with this look at the fascinating life of Ying Sheng, the King who unified China (or what became China) and left behind a legacy of clay soldiers that pointed to the great kingdom he had. The subject easily made me invest my time in this documentary and it was almost enough to carry it. The discussion about Ying is interesting and the investigation into the legend of his tomb easily held my attention. This part of the film uses experts but uses them far too sparingly and doesn't do their knowledge and passion justice.

For the majority of the time we are presented re-enactments of the past with Samuel West's narration over the top. And sadly this is where the film falters. As I said, the story is fascinating enough to carry the film and while West narrates, having pictures underneath doesn't do any real harm. However it is the dramatisations that are a problem because, although they look good, they are flat and poorly delivered. The acting is almost laughably bad and I could not help but feel that the film would have been much better just using the dramatisations as silent back drops while the narration did the work – yes it would have lacked the emotional engagement of the acting but the acting stopped that happening anyway in my opinion. Despite this though the film just about works simply because the story is fascinating and the revelations at the end made me interested to find out more.

Overall then this is not a great film but it manages to be worth watching just for the subject. The dramatisations are clunky and poorly acted and they take away from the value of the film – just sticking with the narration would have been better. However the basic seeds it gives the casual viewer will be enough to make it worth watching, although I doubt that it will offer much to anyone who actually knows anything about Ying Sheng.