wcdleung There are many pieces that should have been done better, but overall, the presentation is quite refreshing (interpersing footages and interviews with the main part of the movie)) and a story well-told.SPOILERS THROUGHOUT THE REST A few things worth clarifying -- Ruan was not married to Chang Ta-Min and she was not concerned about his accusation. It was her affair with Tang Chi-Shan (who refused to get a divorce) that bothered Ruan. Furthermore it was unclear to me if Ruan's union with Tang was voluntary or not. He's the boss of the studio afterall, and the scene with blowing the cigarette at him was taken from a movie in which a prostitute was forced to bed with a gangster.She clearly liked Tsai Chu-sheng, but this person only "talked." He flirted with her and used her for his movies but never stood up to protect his movie or Ruan (even when the immediate trigger to Ruan by the press was her role in his movie).Ruan rarely demonstrated her emotions but one can see them clearly during the filming of her movies.In the end, it seems that part of her depression came from thinking out loud with the characters she was acting and empathizing with their predicaments. Then, these were amplified by the many unfairness tossed at her in real life, leading to her suicide. Pretty devastating! PS. I actually liked a lot of the earlier slow scene between Ruan and her mother and adopted daughter. Much was reveal in those seemingly casual daily conversations (like the soup her mother prepared for Chang). Later on she was hiding almost everything to herself, and one can only get hints from subtle facial expressions etc.

wickest The experience of watching this film in 2006 has been similar to watching Marilyn Monroe in "Don't Bother to Knock" after having seen her later, greater performances. Maggie Cheung's (Garbo-like) capability to release interior emotion that will later haunt viewers in "In the Mood for Love" is beginning to take root in "Yuen Ling-yuk." Later on, Wong Kar Wai was able to use editing to sculpt her performance into consistent, unrelenting intensity. Here she is just beginning to explore the boundaries of her talent. This fits in with director Stanley Kwan's need to create a work in progress, like the productions we watch as they are filmed. He both exploits and denounces the artificial milieu as the actors slip in and out of their roles and the film steps in and out of period. The trial-and-error method of Yuen Ling-yuk is matched by Kwan's letting Cheung find her way through the moods of the character, as if she were trying on a different mask for each moment of the life she is embodying. By 2000 the integration of facial and corporal expressions into dramatic expression would be seamless. It would be interesting to know which directors saw this film when it was shown on the festival circuit. Did Tim Burton know that he had a Chinese counterpart who also let his affection for a forgotten era in cinema guide the pace (disconcerting for many) of his tribute when he made "Ed Wood" a year later? In 1999 when Benoît Jacquot filmed "La Tosca," did he think of this film for his distancing technique that juxtaposed real singers at a recording session filmed in black-and-white with their operatic characters in colorful period costumes? Perhaps even Scorsese took inspiration for "Aviator" from the 1930s shadowy wood-paneling/glossy brilliantine look that comes much more easily to Kwan.This film can be placed alongside "Sylvia Scarlett" or "The Unbearable Lightness of Being," wherein young actresses were given the freedom to go beyond what they had done before and reach for what they would do, under the guidance of a director whose search to take the viewer into (then) uncharted waters inspired the performers to deepen their potential.

Dilip Barman I saw Stanley Kwan's "Centre Stage" ("Yuen Ling-yuk") at a university series "New East Asian Cinema" on February 27, 2006. The film is a biography of Ruan Ling-yu (1910-1935), a silent film star of Chinese silent films.The film describes the life and meteoric rise to fame of young Shanghai actor Ruan Ling-yu (played well by Maggie Cheung), who from the age of 16 till her death at age 24, was featured, often in a lead role, in over a dozen films. She was involved in extramarital affairs with two men and eventually the double standards that women suffer by catch up with her (but not with the married suitors), and dogged media slander her reputation. With her honor at stake, she sees no recourse but to commit suicide, and does so with an overdose of barbiturates. According to the wikipedia entry about her (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruan_Ling_Yu), "her funeral procession was reportedly three miles long, with three women committing suicide during it."The film cleverly goes back and forth in time, and includes excellent interludes from some of Ruan Ling-yu's films. These snippets, as well as the local color we see in 1930s Shanghai, reveal a vivacious setting in Chinese history that I would enjoy learning more about, including seeing some of the period cinema.Not previously knowing anything about Ruan Ling-yu, I of course cannot vouch for the realism of the portrayal, but the acting of Maggie Cheung revealed a strong, magnetic, kind, talented, determined, and yet slightly aloof woman who enjoys many admirers. The other characters were not nearly as well developed, but that is understandable with the focus being on Ruan Ling-yu.I wonder if Kwan could have set the stage, so to speak, a bit more economically, and found the first half to two thirds rather slow. But, without giving anything away, the ending (of course we know that suicide is the true history) is calmly dramatic and captivating. The manner in which Cheung shows the actor saying goodbye to her close friends, who don't know that this is in fact her farewell, is touching - I wonder if this is how it happened. A film worth watching and which I would like to see again - 7.5 stars out of 10.--Dilip Feb. 27, 2006

Andy (film-critic) This film took me two weeks to watch. I had begun this film , but found myself so bored with the story that it couldn't keep my interest. In fact, last night when I finally finished the film, I had to keep myself awake by pulling at my hairs on my head to keep me from dozing during this documentary.I call it a documentary, but it is actually a representation of her life as an actress played by modern actresses. It is similar to the film JFK with several actors playing the part of actual people with clips of the event sewn throughout the film. This was quite possibly the dullest film ever made. I am surprised that it won any awards, much less sweeping the Hong Kong Film Festival. The characters were one-dimensional. They had no spirit, no soul, no care only to walk around in period piece costumes. Everyone in this movie is exceedingly composed - they speak carefully, and walk perpetually as if on eggshells. No one really comes alive until a scene at a dance hall near the end. But despite all the sugary politeness, Cheung successfully conveys a woman who is being slowly destroyed by her oppressive environment. There are a couple scenes in which she completely loses it, and it's very affecting to watch, but not worth two hours of my time. I had trouble understanding this film. There was a rumor that when it was released at the film festival in 1992, it was accidentally shown out of order, yet it still won the praise of critics. That doesn't make any sense to me. How can a film be out of sequence, yet still being considered the best out there? There was times that I felt I was watching a PBS special, but a very poorly done special.If a person from the streets were to come up to me and ask me what my favorite part of this film to me would be, I would have no answer. I did not like one portion of this film. The characters were dull, the story was tough to follow, and the pacing was completely off. Nothing made sense in this film. No acting actually occurred in this film. This was one of my first experiences with Hong Kong cinema, and I think I perhaps started on the wrong foot. I am looking forward to my next film from Hong Kong, because it can only be better than this. Even if it only showed growing grass for an hour and a half, it would be better. Perhaps I am being too negative about this film, but I just couldn't get into it. Sorry Hong Kong! Grade: * out of *****