Triangle

Fear not: the juicy premise of putting three masters of HK violent cinema in one movie delivers one of the most entertaining action movies of 2007.

The film is a palpable thrill-ride, with an air of unmistakable cool and sheer brassiness of style. With scarcely time to slow-down, the silly and initially confusing but heavily entertaining and ultimately straightforward plot runs through a hundred twists and turns on its way to the seat-gripping finale that is the last third of the film.

The three segments directed by Tsui Hark, Ringo Lam and Johnny To (apparently in that order, although it was not indicated in the film) are distinct in style and mannerism, but near-seamlessly integrated into a single experience. Not only did they use three directors, they also used multiple script-writers. Do not expect any section-markers here, though: it is not three stories, but one story told in three consecutively more elaborate segments which represent the vision and prowess of one director each - without, however, appearing needlessly patched-together or unfocused. So, to compare this to that other Asian 3-in-1 package, the excellent Three Extremes (with Takashi Miike, Fruit Chan and Park Chan-Wook), is to miss the point. Here we are dealing with a unitary experience, one not divisible by three.

Fans of each director will find much to comment on the stylistic differences between each section. Best known perhaps for his kung-fu productions (at least in the West), the multi-talented Tsui Hark delivers a cool, crafty ambiance in his piece. Ringo Lam, a long-line police action-drama director, likewise carries the torch with a surprisingly mellow and tactful show-of-hands. It is really the last segment of the film, under the steady hand of the miracle-worker Johnny To - the brilliant director of gems such as Election I & II and Exiled - that really puts this work in the category of must-see cinema. It would be impossible to describe just what makes the last act so good without giving something away, but suffice to say the success lies in its mixture of suspense, action and black humour in a dazzling tour-de-force. And yet, To's section makes sense only in the context of the whole; it would not be possible to appreciate the finale without going through the first and second acts. The third act is the charm, but only because the first two acts lead to it and suggest it with force and clarity. By its combination of three geniuses, the impeccable thrill of the film gets multiplied by three, making the end result something greater than the sum of its parts.

The actors are adequate and the chemistry between them works well. This is not an especially 'deep' thinking-man's movie by any stretch - character-development especially is among the real weaknesses of this movie - but for what it's worth, the characters deliver their lines and express their emotional range quite convincingly (with a few notable exceptions). The fraternal chemistry between the main characters saves much of the hapless script. But really, this film is about action, violence, crime, morality and love - the stuff of entertainment. Maybe not serious or tight enough for some, the over-the-top story proves highly entertaining as a backdrop for the stylish visual work emanating from the three great directors.

I'm willing to forgive this movie its obvious shortcomings: its unexplained plot-ends and side-tracks, its focus on action and shine over drama and substance, its use of three writers in the seemingly impossible task of writing a single storyline. Bottomline: It works! Sometimes heckling about details seems petty when what is iffy in ideation is saved in execution. Minor script is turned into a major movie.

Absolute entertainment, with a touch - or two, or three - of genius.

My clockmaker friend was not pleased. His rating system is such: If you look at your watch once, its a good movie. Twice is pushing your luck and three times and you're out of luck. ( No clock being the perfect movie ). He took 3 looks. Though having some decent scenes you sort of get a mixed bag of plotting, double-crossing and old style Tsui Hark slapstick. Still we found it worth talking about afterward a bit, so maybe its worth a look... Side plots aren't concluded and motivations aren't all too clear, the segmentation isn't really clear, you don't really see the 3 parts differentiate from each other. Still, could have fared worse since for a change the action was not the consuming theme, instead the few fights being portrayed in what i'd imagine to be a realistic fashion, won't tell more.. Some good comedy , good milieu, gotta be fair it had some OK content to it too.

A notable collaboration between three of the most iconic directors in Hong Kong, Triangle is a complex crime film from which one should expect the unexpected.

This is a not a Pulp Fiction (1994) or Three Extremes (2004) style anthology, but instead a single, linear story in which the baton is passed from one director to the next, a bit like The Signal (2007).

Tsui Hark, Ringo Lam and current favourite Johnnie To each used their own scripts and production teams to create 30 minutes of this crime drama.

Tsui Hark's first act establishes the characters, handing over to Ringo Lam for an intense second act and it's therefore down to Johnnie To to wrap things up in the chaotic final act. These are directors who know how to use conventions, such as the mcguffin, the chase and gunfight, but delight in adding unexpected twists to subvert our expectations.

The result is a surprisingly natural film experience. Distinctive styles, such as Tsui Hark's intense visuals, may make the audience aware of who is in control but generally it's almost impossible to determine which director's work we are watching at any given time. Cinematographer Cheng Siu-Keung deserves credit for maintaining a beautifully atmospheric tone throughout, even during the many unusual moments.

As is appropriate for a film with three directors there are three lead characters. Simon Yam, Louis Koo and Sun Honglei play desperate men planning a robbery when a mystery man approaches leaves in their possession a piece of gold which sends them in a new direction, toward buried treasure.

It's the set-up for a conventional heist movie, the kind of film we have seen many times before, but in the hands of these skilled artists it becomes much more. The triangle of the title can be interpreted to mean one or several things. Meaning extends beyond simply referring to the collaboration between the trio of filmmakers.

It can be said to refer to the three-stages to this story and the journey the audience accompanies the characters on. The poster art presents the words "destiny" "jealousy" and "temptation" on each side of the shape, hinting at a philosophical construction. Triangle is an ambiguous film from which we can take from what we wish.

I was personally drawn to the "love triangle" interpretation. At the heart of the film is a woman, the wife of one of the criminals, who has been having an affair. For a notable three years. Awareness of the betrayal has a direct influence on the direction of the story and things become increasingly unpredictable. I'm being intentionally vague about whose wife she is and with whom the affair is taking place as there are so many wonderful nuances and surprises in the narrative that it would be a shame to spoil them.

Simon Yam, a serious actor with a surprising number of action films in his filmography including Wake of Death with Jean-Claude Van Damme, is a Johnnie To regular and it's his cold, emotionless performance which grips the audience most. From the moment he is introduced on screen we never know what to expect from him.

Louis Koo (with whom Yam and To worked on the Election films) is also good as a small-time criminal getting in over his head with some nasty characters. The only weak link is Sun Hong Lei as an antique store owner who aids them in their heist. Too often off-screen and unmemorable when he is on it.

Triangle is an intriguing piece of work. Those seeking a fast-paced thriller would be advised to look elsewhere, but if you enjoy slow- burning character studies then this will not disappoint.

If a movie can't hold your interest in the first 25 minutes, it's over as far as I'm concerned. This concept that you have to simply deal with a slow first third of a movie and be rewarded later is nonsense. A good movie has to start and end strong. It all seem interesting and some decent shots and lots of promise, but ultimately muddled and irrelevant. There are so many other movies from Asia to watch, many of which I am sure most of you have not seen, that I would really skip this one and look elsewhere. Why exactly does IMDb require a 10 line minimum for reviews? I said my piece and I hope this helps a few of you move on to the next film.

With all the negative reviews and opinions I had read about Triangle before watching the film, I expected to be disappointed. Actually, I was pleasantly surprised.

Triangle is by no means a masterpiece that lives up to any of the three directors' names, but it is certainly not the incoherent mess some people make it out to be. Tsui's first third establishes too many subplots, but I thought that even in Lam's third, I was able to follow everything. Sun Honglei really shines in the film, and it would be great seeing him in other Milkyway films. But what's most important is that despite the slightly confusing plot, Triangle always remains an entertaining movie - from the great car chases in Lam's segment to the typical Johnnie To shootouts in the final third, it always kept me on the edge of my seat. Great music has become a staple in Milkyway productions since the last few years, but Zerafa's score here shows strokes of brilliance, adding to the mythical tone established by Tsui in the first third. And that piece playing in the credits is beautiful!

I also really liked the ending, which in a way comments on the theme of "fate" which I thought was illustrated pretty well throughout the movie.

Sure, you perhaps need to be a huge, huge fan of at least one of the directors present here (To's style seems to be prevalent, even in the segments not directed by him) to appreciate this film, but I thought it was pretty great. Maybe people just need to be a bit more open-minded and not expect a masterpiece from three legendary directors who are just having a bit of fun - and contrary to what others said, I felt I was able to participate in that fun.