Zhang Yimou's gold medal

Great thoughts, Roger. I completely agree about the impact of the spectacle last night. It will never be equaled, and the planners in London must have watched in horror! I was most impressed with the concentric circle formations of green men, then the lighted dove, then the amazing human Bird's Nest. You can't use enough superlatives to describe the entire program.

Any doubts about China's legitimacy as a global presence must have been put to rest last night...

No one delivers spectacle these days like Zhang Yimou. The director's film and opera careers have clearly trained him well in dealing with massive ensembles of costumed performers, resulting in a show the sheer scale and beauty of which the world may never see again.

But what a travesty to have such a pageant undermined by illogical editing and inane commentators! Why not let Zhang into the control booth to oversee the camera angles, instead of letting the NBC amateurs keep panning up to the digital scrim above the stadium and away from the 2008 dancers below?

Have we learned nothing from Busby Berkeley? Instead of showing closeups of the performers, give us the god's-eye-view of things, so we can appreciate the choreography -- the way it was intended to be seen by those in the stadium. The scripted commentary reveals that the network had access to dress rehearsals, so what excuse do they have for not knowing which camera angles would best represent the show?

And Bob Costas? Must every cultural observation be followed by a witless remark? Take, for instance, the moment in which conversation turned to the dancers' subtle hand movements. Costas quips, "So you order a Big Mac and fries and they give it to you with conspicuous elegance?" Thank you, Bob, for undermining millennia of culture by reminding us of what America contributes to the international equation.

This was China's moment -- bravo! Here's hoping someone produces a proper documentary of the event, with better footage and less chatter.

Ebert: Quite true. The ceremony required no voice-over but spoke eloquently for itself, as everyone in the Bird's Nest could witness. But if there had to be a commentary, why didn't one of NBC's researchers slip a note to Bob Costas about the significance of the arena's design in the land that created Birds' Nest Soup? Or did I miss that comment.? Should have been room for it along with the Big Mac.

I can only hope that Chicago is able to win the Olympic bid for 2016. While the city might not be able to pull off an opening ceremony like the Chinese, the spirit of volunteerism will happen in Chicago. We witnessed this first hand in Sydney during the 2000 Olympics. The Olympics did more for community spirit and infrastructure than you can image.

Now, 8 years on, it was the best 16 day party we have ever attended and we're still enjoying the hangover. The Olympic venues, roads, sculptures, and improved transportation system are some of the fall out from hosting such a grand event.

Is it possible that Zhang Yimou filmed the spectacle for later release? (IMAX? Blue-ray?) I'd certainly pay to see that without the insipid offensive commentary track that NBC provided.

The American commentators annoy me. They can't keep their mouths shut, they have to tie everything into American pop culture, they cruelly ridicule athletes in sports they don't deem worthy (ie. not male-oriented enough, not popular enough in the US, doesn't get high TV ratings, etc.), and they judge everything and everyone by how unthreatening they are to the stereotypical American view of the world. I don't think Americans feel that way, but don't tell Bob Costas that.

The producers are worse, though. They'll preempt coverage of a medal-winning performance by an American athlete in a less well-known sport to repeat for the 143rd time a taped interview with some supposed hero and the immense sacrifices he was forced to make to qualify for the Games. (Then you find out that his training budget was ten times that of some of the countries represented.) Instead of cutting away for commercials during breaks in the action, they cut away during the action so the commentator can take the opportunity to yap when the athletes are on a break. They think Americans are too self-absorbed and too ignorant to care about athletes from other countries, except to laugh at them.

I too was amazed by last nights performance. Stunned really. I was also annoyed by the commentary and especially the commercials. I went to SAIC and found it just insulting to the arts and the grand spectacle that was the opening ceremony to interrupt it for car commercials.

Concerning Chicago and 2016. I am torn on this issue. Chicago is my favorite city and while I know it would be a great benefit for the city in many ways, I find myself hesitant to want them to come. Well first, does Chicago even have enough money to put on even a moderate Olympic Games? I also wonder about all the construction that would be needed. I lived in Hyde Park and have great love for the parks on the South Side. The idea of building a large stadium in Washington Park (even if they reduce it later) is just something I couldn't easily accept (I sort of see it as a scar). Thats just me though, plenty of pros and cons to the idea. I guess we all have plenty of time.

Last night was a once in a lifetime spectacle. I sure am glad a saw it in HD.

In a century or two, our most lasting world heritages may the idea of personal freedom, and the role we played in helping make English an international language. But we could be a bankrupt nation.

While I hope that such a future won't come to pass, if it does, you can be assured that English *won't* be the international language. Consider: in the 19th century, the language that all educated people (in the West, anyway) had to learn was French, not English. English replaced French not for any linguistic reasons, but because the British and then the Americans displaced the French as the leading culture militarily and economically.

I tried watching, I really did. Unfortunately I couldn't enjoy it untainted by thoughts of China's disquieting human rights record and the ongoing suppression of even the basics of free speech. In the end it was just all too depressing and I had to turn it off.
It's a little like how much less I enjoy Jimmy Stewart's movies now that I've read more about his political ideologies. No matter how affable or heroic he comes across, I can't help but think of the ugliness lurking just under the surface.

The ceremony was quite a wonderful show, but to me the most important thing that the ceremony demonstrated is the grandness of spectacle and art that people can achieve if their limitations are practically nonexistent. Not only did they have the 300 million dollars to work with, but the stadium itself was planned along with the opening ceremony; the venue was built to showcase that very performance. Zhang Yimou is a singular talent, but I get a warm feeling of excitement at the thought of the potential in other artists, other people, if they had access to the kinds of resources that were needed to put on last night's performance. What if everyone could plan a 300 million dollar ceremony? It really makes you appreciate how rare an occasion the ceremony was.

Completely agree with everything above. Putting aside the political differences, this is indeed one of the best (if not the best) production in modern history, among all other creative properties: film, TV, musicals, etc.

Also, as mentioned above, the commentary was un-necessary. It's one factor that added viewpoints that were often times critical.

- Aanarav

My idea for Chicago is to have two thousand and sixteen overweight city patronage workers (excuse the redundancy) hoisting aloft two thousand and sixteen Italian beef sandwiches, some of which will be with hot, some with sweet, and some dipped.

It's funny that NBC wouldn't think of throwing the commentary track of a "movie analyst" on top of a movie they were showing, but the second a sports-related connection can be drawn they feel the need to throw some yahoos in a booth to interpret what we're seeing.

you guys are lucky not to watch the spectacle filmed by CCTV （chinese official tv station） commentators are really disgusting.They never know when to say something and when to shut up. Moreover, the camera always stay zooming in and focused on the chinese polititians

It was a great show.

I wouldn't mind China's rise so much if it wasn't for the fact that the West isn't losing so much as giving up. And I wouldn't mind our journalist's constant reporting of China's rise so much if it wasn't for the fact that they're positively joyful about it.

Have you had a chance to view Zhang Yimou's "Curse of the Golden Flower?" It's a great spectacle of a movie.

Let me be clear. The Chinese people deserve their time in the spotlight. They've worked hard to achieve it.

But I did not watch the Olympics, and will not watch any of it, because of the cost at which the Chinese government has achieved it's so-called glory. We can debate forever about how sports should be separate from politics, but I cannot bear the thought of repressed Tibetans, the Chinese muslims of Xinjuan, the silencing of Chinese parents during the Sichuan earthquake over their children's deaths, or the massive displacement of the poor on route to construction of massive Olympic venues.

How I wish the Chinese government could be held accountable for its actions. When that will happen is anyone's guess. But in all sincerity, I do wish the Chinese people the best in enjoying their Olympics. I just can't enjoy it with them.

Did you read Black Man (Thirteen in the US) by Richard K. Morgan? It's set in near future in which the United States just self-distructed after 60 or 70 years of botched foreign policies and internal tensions when the Pacific coast states, fed-up by the growing nationalism and jingoism of the southern and midwestern states, just decided to gave up and secede, and the northeastern states just followed suit.

I really don't understand how Americans would have the gall on complaining on human rights violations by the Chinese government. Chicago is bidding for 2016 and there is Gitmo and Iraq. The US invaded Iraq on the basis of non-existent WMD. Human rights are violated at Guantanamo, re: wakeboarding, long detention. Maybe if Chicago hosts in 2016, we won't expect US soldiers goosestepping, of course. Lets see the guards from Abu Ghraib prison raising the US flag instead.

Ike, as one of those complaining about China's human rights record, would it help to know I'm Canadian? We keep our hands clean by letting other countries do our dirty work.

I was lucky enough to accidentally come across the live feed online, without any commentary (!!!) and it was a gorgeous, spectacular and awesome event. I live in Vancouver where the city is gearing up for the 2010 winter olymics and it is literally tearing our city up. The new buildings and infrastructure have our roads ripped up for new transit and entire neighbourhoods rebuilt. It seems a lot to go through for a month long sporting event, especially when we have a huge homelessness and drug problem in our city but on the other hand we have never had so much pressure on our elected officials to deal with our worst problems than right now.
Watching the upheaval in Beijing for their games I can only hope there may be some upside when all is said and done. I see protesters making statements that everyday citizens may not have ever been exposed to, international visitors flooding the city, too many to possibly be censored at all times, socializing with China's general population and exchanging ideas, attention from around the world on China's policies and business relationships.
I am also learning how complicated a political situation modern China inhabits. I grew up with an idea of China as a communist country where you lined up for your food and everyone wore grey clothes and rode around on bikes with their little red books. I am now trying to intergrate that with this vision of Beijing and it's luxury stores, Starbuck's, BMW's, and young people who don't seem all that different from me at all.
For those of you not watching I would urge you to tune in, if not for the events, then for the periphery coverage of the city and country where all this is happening. There's much to see and learn.

Roger, I agree with your artistic observations on the amazing Beijing opening ceremonies within your realm as a film critic. Please spare us the political observations unless you plan to change your title to "political commentator" as your political observations are factual incorrect. God bless America.

I was intrigued by your comment "Did you see our president, tapping his little American flag idly against his knee?" NBC showed a lot of embarrassing shots of Bush that they just "happened" to catch -- or was that instant replay to make a point? But they didn't show Hu yawning, Sarkozy picking his nose or Putin on a cell phone (if any of those things happened). In fact they didn't show Putin at all knowing full well his country just invaded Georgia. Maybe they didn't want to embarrass such a great man. Knowing how much you hate Bush, how would you have filmed these leaders?

Just as you describe them.

Whenever someone mentions human rights abuses in China (especially if they're Americans), I ask them about what happen to the Native Americans.

Love the column, and hope we get to see you on the airwaves again soon. I always enjoy reading your too-infrequent political observations because I think they are spot on. That said, as soon as I read this piece I knew that there would be people taking issue with your comments. It's unfortunate that a large segment of the American public holds the view that only political opinions that are 100% pro-America should ever be expressed. I find it hugely ironic when people, such as Dan, wants to be spared your political observations while simultaneously sharing his own. Part of what makes America a country worth praising is our free speech and ability to express dissenting views. It's a shame more people don't understand just how valuable that freedom is.

Yea Roger, how dare you speak your mind on your own blog! Stick to movies, movie-man!

Dan seems to be well prepared already to welcome our Chinese overlords. He'd fit right in, provided his prejudices aligned with theirs.

Roger I thought the same exact thing watching the opening ceremonies. It was terrifying AND exhilarating to behold. And fundamentally un-American in its grandeur.

I also noticed that when the US team took to the parade of nations, many of their Ralph Lauren designed uniforms were adjusted. Some had their ties off. Some weren't wearing their hats. It seemed to be for the sake of "individual cool." That contrasted with the uniform discipline of the Chinese really had me thinking about the will of this nation, and the heights it will reach in the coming century as we get more selfish and apathetic.

"Please spare us the political observations unless you plan to change your title to "political commentator" as your political observations are factual incorrect. God bless America"

Hi Dan,

I was just wondering why you read Roger's blog, when you don't want to know his thoughts on things other than films. Some of us are interested in his observations and think this format (blog) provides a good way for him to do that. If you are not interested, you can always ignore this blog.

Thanks,
Vijay

Almost forgot- as someone else said, or intimated, the opening ceremony is being somewhat overpraised, or at least MISpraised. Obviously it was beautiful, but are you really saying an American or a Russian or a German director wouldn't have been able to do as much with that much money, that much material, manpower, support, and so on? In a stadium built specifically for the event, with the support of the entire nation? The most impressive thing, then, is not the spectacle/event itself, but rather the occasion- which was indeed rare. I could think of a few directors who'd have done just as well if given similar situations in their home countries.

I also find the notion that spending $300 mil on- whatever that was- somehow proves that "Everyone was right! China is here for real! Can't be stopped!" I mean, we waste $300 mil, or our studios do, in a week. If China showed anything it was that it really, really wanted to impress the West and create just the impression it has. Roger, your comparison to Triumph of the Will, then, was perhaps better than you knew. This was a propaganda assignment- not necessarily the lavish production itself (which aside from the Ivan Drago-like Yao Ming marching at the head of the line, and the goose-stepping Chinese soldiers, was apolitical), but moreso in the media reaction afterwards. NBC/GE seems to have utterly sold out its own nation in this regard- they, like many in this sick capitalist country of ours, seem willing to jump onto any ship, or support any atrocity, so long as it pays, pays well, and pays for a long time. We'll be paying for their betrayal and for our betrayal by big business for the foreseeable future. When you allow your companies to become bigger than your country, and the companies later bail on the country to do business with the country that's going to bury your country- well, maybe we'll deserve it.

ps
Of course China is a monstrous nation. The US is as well- no world power is ever anything else- but the US at least is in some respects democratic, and in some respects its people are free. Of course the almost unfettered capitalism ended by eroding democracy in this country, and real freedom, too, but it's a better start than the Chinese have got- a capitalist totalitarian nation? We're going to wish socialism- even totalitarian socialism- had succeeded there, when we see what happens next.

The irony, for a nation that still calls itself Communist, is that China and the Chinese are born capitalists.

This is so true. I'm a Chinese who was born in Hong Kong and lived there for years before emigrating to Canada. I really think that most of the world does not comprehend how deeply entrenched the concept of making money, of building wealth, is within our culture. It's practically a part of our DNA. Almost embarrassingly so.

I'm sure that almost the entire world knows by now that the number "8" is considered to be a lucky number by the Chinese. A lot of you may even understand the reason is that it sounds like another word: "FA". So what does "FA" mean? Wealth? Prosperity? Well, kind of. But frankly, those terms are far too polite to be the most appropriate translation. More fittingly, "FA" means "to get rich". As in closing a profitable business deal. As in winning the lottery. As in having a sudden, big, fat financial windfall. Great if it's achieved through hard work. Even better if it's gotten by sheer luck!

During the Chinese New Year, "FA" is also part of the our most common greeting: "Gongxi facai", which basically means "wish you a financial windfall", or "wish you'll get very rich". Sure, during that festive period, we also wish happiness, health, and all those other goodies upon our friends and relatives. But generally, the first greeting uttered by pretty much everyone is "Gongxi facai". Almost instinctively. We are all taught to say that as kids.

With that in mind, I really find it ironic that the number "8" is so heavily emphasized in these Olympics. It's a really fitting symbol for the re-emergence of China as a capitalistic society, as well as the degeneration (more or less) of the Olympic movement into such a materialistic enterprise.

We Chinese sure pulled a fast one on the IOC, eh? But, don't tell Jacques Rogge that. In my opinion, Chinese sounding numbers that would have been more attuned to the original Olympic spirit are:

3 - sounds like life.

9 - sounds like eternity.

Too bad that the Olympics don't take place in years that end in those digits. And I don't think China really wants to wait another 20+ years to host it. But then who really wants to watch fireworks at 3:33 anyway?

The ceremony was certainly stunning. Can anyone top that in the near future? Hmmm...I don't know. If technology improves sufficiently, perhaps. Can we apply Moore's Law for this stuff?

As for the human elements of the presentation, it will be improbable to beat, but not impossible (well, I think...). India may have a shot, if they were ever awarded the Olympics. Our Asian neighbour is certainly blessed with a storied history and a sophisticated culture, so there will no shortage of ideas to be painted on the canvass. They also have the money and the labour, as well as their share of talented directors who are experienced in churning out those Bollywood song & dance extravaganzas. So, who knows.

But then, perhaps trying to outdo China is simply wrong approach. Here's an idea that I picked up from a Vancouver newspaper. Basically, the columnist has already given up trying to match China when the city opens the 2010 Winter Games. This is the show:

Stadium turns dark.

Suddenly, a spotlight shines at the center of the stadium.

You see a boy. He has a hula hoop.

He twirls the hula hoop. Once.

That's it.

Simple. Singular. Tells you absolutely nothing about Canada. Taxpayer-friendly. Polar opposite of the Beijing show. Don't know about anyone else but I would definitely give that a standing O.

Dan, if there is something "factual incorrect" about his observations (rather than something that you strongly disagree with) could you be bothered so far as to tell us what exactly it was. I'm sure there's a possibility that Roger got some fact(s) or piece(s) of data incorrect - but unless you identify what exactly it was that was wrong (and how it was wrong) your post seems kind of pointless. ("Hi Roger. I like it when you talk about movies, but film critics should spare us their political thoughts, since you're not political commentators. And by the way, you're demonstrably wrong. God bless America.")

Though, it should be mentioned, even if some of his points were incorrect, it wouldn't really destroy the validity of the general "gist" of his observations, which I, as someone who is not a political commentator (but who is fairly politically aware), consider to be absolutely spot on.

Wow, "Dan," you seem eager to deflect any critical viewpoint on our country's imminent downfall. I have to disagree that cultural critics cannot read political significance into cultural phenomena; the opening ceremonies had a message that Mr. Ebert received loud and clear, as did you. Incidentally, that's "factually correct," not "factual correct."

With your forgiveness, I would like to add the following links to the discussion. The first is the recent New York Times article about Zimou--

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/sports/olympics/08guru.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=zhang%20zimou&st=cse&oref=slogin

--which details a situation that has been clear in the art world
for some time: some of the top Chinese artists are working directly
for the state. This includes Ai Wei Wei, who helped design the
"Bird's Nest" stadium, and Cai Guo-Quiang, who organized the fireworks.

Commenting on this state of affairs, much like commenting on China's human rights record, is a complicated undertaking when one is a citizen of the United States, which has arguably paved the way over the last six years for human rights abuses of every imaginable stripe. But I would suggest that what we are seeing in China right now might be something like a death knell for the old avant-garde idea of the dissident artist that we saw under the old Communist regimes.

In the new China's blend of authoritarianism and capitalism, there is plenty of money to go around and plenty of flexibility in positioning oneself in relation to the state. I predict that before long the Chinese government will realize, if they haven't already, that they can allow artists to mouth off about politics, as Ai Wei Wei recently did to the New York Times, without any real repercussions from their merrily consuming populace. See Ai's comments here:

http://olympics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/chinas-olympic-crossroads-birds-nest-designer-ai-weiwei-on-beijings-pretend-smile/

One more thing must be noted, and it is very important. China and the United States are not separate entities. Commerce unites nations inextricably. The opening ceremony might be about Chinese pride, but don't get too caught up in a perception of "them" and "us." China's possession of our debt means that we are a part of them, and they us. And the capital generated by the games benefits international corporations without centers; I'm not just talking athletic gear. This piece by Naomi Klein explains:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-klein/the-olympics-unveiling-po_b_117403.html

Just Curious, how did you know the preformers are unpaid?

Ebert: The NBC commentary said so.

Vijay, Paul and AMB,

Thank God that America has freedom of speech where we can disagree.
In China, Roger would be silenced by the government.
In the USA, he can speak his mind from the forum which he possesses and that I am free to read and comment upon!
God Bless America, again!
Again, I thought his artistic observations were quite correct.
But, excuse me, the following is "factually incorrect" or is it an opinion and/or speculation which cannot be challenged?

"We are destroying ourselves by spending money we do not have. To cut taxes and raise spending, our national policy under Bush, is suicide. In a century or two, our most lasting world heritages may(even Roger has a typo here)the idea of personal freedom, and the role we played in helping make English an international language. But we could be a bankrupt nation."

What money don't we have? I assume Roger means loans from China? What spending has been raised? Clearly, English will never be an international language but the spread of democracy is a noble cause even though it is arguably not worth the price. As for a bankrupt nation---this is a dream of only the Islamic fundamentalists!

Ebert: Our national debt now stands at nine trillion dollars. I beg you to see an upcoming documentary named "I.O.U.S.A." It is non-partisan. The state of the economy and the size of our national debt has nothing to do with liberals or conservatives, Democrats or Republicans, and the film features spokespeople from all sides. It is literally true that Bush has cut taxes and increased spending. This is not a matter for debate.

Did "the unknown rebel" - the student in Jeff Widener's famous photo of the siege at Tiananmen Square - watch the opening ceremonies from his backyard with a beer, or not at all because he's in a jail cell?

I can't watch the Olympics without thinking of Roger Water's great song, "Watching TV." In the song, he grieves the loss of his "yellow rose, and her bloodstained clothes" in Tiananmen Square. He asks the question, "Did we do anything after this?" His answer, "We were watching TV." Prescient!

The ceremony was incredible spectacle, no doubt, lavish and beautiful and unlikely to be matched in quite a long time. However, there were a few points that stood out to me:

1) Chinese soldiers goose-stepping in the arena, mimicking non-too-subtly the Nazi march. We must not forget that this is a Communist country who is currently violating many human rights. How much choice do their athletes have in training? How many of them are pressured by the STATE to train robotically to win? I don't have the answers, but with China's recent history and the reputation of the communist system, they are answers we must seek.

2) Taiwan being forced to march in the Parade of Nations as Chinese Taipei, and being denied the right to use their own flag. Wasn't their some rule about the Olympics being apolitical? Hm. China, it seems, showed their true colors right there. They are an oppressive, totalitarian nation with no respect for the international community, and no ideal higher than their increasing power.

My disgust is aimed at the government, of course, which has acted so dishonorably in what should be held as a sacred event. I know nothing of Zhang Yimou's politics, though undoubtedly he has great pride in and love for his country, as well he should. His production was mind-boggling and exhilarating. I loved it. But never can I let the awesome spectacle blind me from the hard and sad truth that hangs over hundreds of millions of Chinese people.

I honestly don't mean any disrespect whatsoever when I say this: There is just something about the Chinese performers as a whole, throughout their modern cultural history, which has (to me) always seemed just a tad 'stiff'; not only in terms of artistic/physical prowess but indeed of their whole attitude towards performance execution.

Without sounding like some arbitrary bigot, let me just say that I've always appreciated and admired the way many of the Chinese people engage in their performances. Their is a magic to their tapestry laden-ideas, their perfectly synchronized harmony and their often used gargantuan numbers of bodies. However, just because something is bigger and louder does not necessarily make it better.

It goes without saying, that the entire opening ceremony at the Olympics this year was the most spectecuarly stunning spectacle I'd ever seen in my life (or at least on television).

However, as I sat their watching the screen, partially in awe and partially distraught about what I'd seen, many things began to cross my mind. There is just something mildly depressing about watching some 10,000 or so idle drones (whom all look exactly alike by the way--I mean this as objective observation and not as an attack on ethnicity and race) parading along as they 'bang' their way so to speak through a tired and clich� array of colors, lights, sounds and noise.

In a strange way this is simply too tacky and corny to be taken seriously. Perhaps is Jimou would have opted for something a bit less traditional, but something that employed more of a sensibility of individuality, rather than a mass of bodies all beating to the same drum. In a strange way, this ceremony, though spectacularly full of pride, cultural tradition, and honorable in its attempts to be something important and different, has somehow set the human race back a few decades.

These kind of things I might, add trickle all the way down the corny food chain, all the way to all those stupid commercials of Yao Ming sporting a mystical dragon as he tries to fight off Kobe Byrant, only to be united by: you guessed it, a corporate symbol which is as empty as the tired sediment our humble NBC announcers find it so necessary to expostulate on the air (not to mention while interrupting what is potentially an enjoyable experience).

There will be many of you who will be either angry or elightened by my comments. Then again, maybe you won't care, or more likely, you'll feel that such comments are empty rhetoric which not only wastes time, but instead, illuminates that which is seemingly apparent: The misinformation and lack of credibility from the writer(s) or observer(s).

This I feel is false, however, I am not here to lift myself up or increase my own worth in any way. I am simply one person. I cannot hope to change the world, I can only hope to change myself, and hope that others do the same. I think I can say, that most people believe at least that much, no matter where they come from.

The Olympics can be a symbol of hope for humanity, it can also serve as a beacon, to let us know where we are, where we are going and where we stand as a race of beings. We can spend zillions of dollars on such projects, (much of that money could be used for other more important things). Despite this, events like the Olympics I suspect will continue on, probably forever, or perhaps until we humans get fed up with simply measuring one another by how much faster we can carry a stick to a taped line.

And yet, of all the many things in this world and universe, one only suspects that there are more important things to be had than simply sports and athletics, commercial commerce/pride and advancement in corporate growth. Then again, maybe people really believe in them, or for lack of a better argument, they simply don't know any better. Such things are at once necessary and arbitrary. Few minds know the most credible and righteous path (if there even really is one).

I can only say this much though, in considering what I've witnessed so far. I hope that people take the time to stop and look around. Are they really getting what they've hoped for, or instead are the Olympics simply another empty corporate shell, a magnitude of misfires into the heart of darkness, where the frailties of humanity are truly exposed. And as we carry the shoulders of our children on our backs, we can remember if we are truly good inside, or not.

Comments have been made about President Bush's tired gestures as he watches the games. While simply a physical occurence of little or no consequence, a powerful symbol all the same...Maybe we're all like the President in that moment during this time of our lives. We'd do better to snap out of our ways if we're ever to improve at all.

China may or may not have done great things with the Olympics. Just do yourself a favor.. Leave it to you to decide for yourself, rather than an empty plastic box in a small room.

it's so interesting that people can argue about everything and anything.I just enjoy reading how Ebert has put his comments up and have been admiring his observations and thoughts. Nothing more, nothing less. Polictians and plolitics are same everywhere. When we throw a judgment on a system/government, the only question we need to ask the people is: are you better off than...before?? Most of average Chinese people will tell you YES.

Roger....Why the cheap shot at Bush in your praise of the Opening Ceremony?

In my hardcopy of the SunTimes you further critique W's impatient body language even though we now know Bush had just learned of Russian attacks on Georgia and had to sit next to the thug who ordered the war for three hours.

Some context about why Bush might not have been overly enthralled by a high-priced global high-wire act would have helped your entry into political commentary.

AC

Et tu, Roger! You've struck upon one of my pet peeves, from 25 years as a daily newspaper editor. (Been raising the little guy ever since he was a tiny peevelet...)

Anyhow, it's like this: In your first graf, it should be "free rein" (not "free reign"). Has something to do with horses vs. kings.

Caughtya!

Ebert:: Mybad! I've been typing so many years my fingers sometimes go on automatic.

The opening ceremonies displayed the power of collectivism in all of its awesome, horrific splendor. (The comparison to the spectacle of fascism is quite apt.) Simultaneously wondrous, haunting and chilling.

"When we throw a judgment on a system/government, the only question we need to ask the people is: are you better off than...before?? Most of average Chinese people will tell you YES."

That's shockingly naive. Germans under Nazism were better off than they were under the Weimar Republic, when people were pushing around wheelbarrows full of worthless marks in order to buy bread. Of course, there was that inconvenient matter of all the Jews...

Zeiram: "In a strange way this is simply too tacky and corny to be taken seriously. Perhaps is Jimou would have opted for something a bit less traditional, but something that employed more of a sensibility of individuality, rather than a mass of bodies all beating to the same drum. In a strange way, this ceremony, though spectacularly full of pride, cultural tradition, and honorable in its attempts to be something important and different, has somehow set the human race back a few decades."

So basically, what you're saying is that, since the performance does not conform to your - presumably western leaning - taste which favors the individual over the collective, therefore, the performance is conveying a culture that sits at a lower spot on the humanity totem pole than yours.

That's an incredibly arrogant point of view.

There is an interesting article on the Georgian/South Osetian crisis by Anne Applebaum at Slate(to which I was directed by Keith Uhlich of The House Next Door), and it has an excellent opening paragraph:

"For the best possible illustration of why Islamic terrorism may one day be considered the least of our problems, look no further than the BBC's split-screen coverage of Friday's Olympics opening ceremony. On one side, fireworks sparkled, and thousands of exotically dressed Chinese dancers bent their bodies into the shape of doves, the cosmos, and so on. On the other side, gray Russian tanks were shown rolling into South Ossetia, a rebel province of Georgia. The effect was striking: Two of the world's rising powers were strutting their stuff."

My thoughts watching the ceremony mirrored those of Mr Ebert's: Sheer bewilderment, and wonder, punctuated by moments of unease. In fact, it was similar to the feeling I had as I read, last week, the bombastic eulogies to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn by Putin and Medvedev.

Victor, when governments are evaluated there are in fact more questions to be asked than the Reaganite "are you better off than before?" Governments do not only oversee economic policy; they also organize personal freedoms.

For example, China has displaced large numbers of people from their homes to drastically reorganize the city of Beijing for the Games. Those who have not consented to move have been subject to astonishing state punishment. Read about one case here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/sports/olympics/29beijing.html

The thing that people generally do not like to do is to connect spectacle with the sometimes brutal realities that make spectacle possible. Spectacle tries to make us forget the uncomfortable stuff. Thousands of people performing remarkable feats in concert means: this country is united, populous, and committed to achieving great things. In the moment of spectacle, dissent and difference seem to disappear. Spectacle is given over to wonder and pleasure in the service of amnesia.

We (Americans) should know. Ours is a spectacular culture too.

Many contemporary Chinese artists engage Socialist Realist imagery in their work; there is a fascination with this earlier form of state-sponsored art. Perhaps the right question to ask is, was the opening ceremony, for all its splendor, an anachronism? Dazzling the eye with sheer numbers (and not CGI, but real people!) really is the spectacle of yesteryear, of Depression-era musicals or fascist triumphalism.

But here's another reading of Zimou's gesamtkunstwerk: a representation of China's awesome labor power, with which it will continue to dominate the rest of the world. Labor power is that middle space of transition between communism and capitalism, ideology and opportunism. The past is the future.

Does anyone know whether the Chinese government prohibits its citizens from viewing Roger's blog?

Ebert: Apparently not. According to SiteMeter, I've been getting dozens of visits from China, many of them not from Beijing. I have a suspicion I may have been linked ober there.

Mr. Ebert, I apologize for "Dan" and those like him, people who are perhaps too proud to apologize for their own baseless remarks. It is in neither unpatriotic nor ignorant to express due admiration for the accomplishments and ambitions of another nation and rising global power, nor is it blasphemous to express concern at the uncertain state of our own economy and global standing. No, it is not only our "right" as free people to discuss in earnest the challenges ahead, it is among our most immediate responsibilities.

Oh and Zeiram, your overextended tirade into the pseudo-intellectual notwithstanding, I'd spend billions of dollars on an athletics competition over an unnecessary war any day.

I believe that the opening cermonies was the most impressive thing i've ever seen. It was also one of the most beautiful... and I am a fan of "Raise the Red Lantern", but I as well was not a fan of the "we're going to tell you every little detail of what's going on" announcers. Who let them in anyways?

Roger, Roger...

I expect better of a writer. Unless it was a deliberate play on words (and if so, I cannot imagine what the point was) -- "free REIGN???"

Free REIN, Roger. Free rein.

I am reminded of the note George W. Bush wrote on a napkin to Condoleezza Rice -- Let freedom RAIN.

For god's sake.

-- Maryscott O'Connor
myleftwing.com

Mao, cartoonish? I am sure that you heard of his reign of terror while he was in power. And if you saw the segment on him on CBS's "Sunday Morning" a couple of weeks ago you would have seen that he was anything but cartoonish. He was a tyrant of the classic kind. He was every bit the tyrant as Hitler or Stalin was. Today, however, he is all but revered in China; probably because the people are only getting one side of his history. Yes things have changed considerably since his years in power (he died in 1976) but, as you can see in the news today, China still has some ways to go for complete democracy.

Ebert: Point well-taken. This blog does a good job of spotting my too-facile observations. I suppose I was thinking of Warhol's Mao.

I wonder about any country that'll push its poor out for a $300 million ceremony. They could've used that money to farm some food.

"Did you see our president, tapping his little American flag idly against his knee?"

Did you see our president falling all over himself with some scantily-clad women volleyball players? The man is as embarrassing as his father was.

Thanks Roger. Good observations! As for NBC's coverage, I think it was up-to-par for what is expected here in the U.S. Let's remember, they are NOT a public service. NBC is a company that needs to market the games to make money. That is the American way! So they tape-delayed coverage, no one but critics really care (as the ratings proved on Friday.) One reason I watch the Olympics is too see the features on the athletes and the travel stories on the country. If I wanted to only see sports without any commentary, I'd go to the Games themselves! I'll agree that not all the comments are needed, but overall, I've enjoyed the coverage and look forward to watching more of it!

Dear Roger,

I enjoy your blog immensely and I am very pleased that you chose to comment on this. I believe it was a performance spectacle would be a fair title) unrivaled in history. It made a Pink Floyd concert look like a Punch and Judy show.

Originally, I though I would skip it. I have better things to do on a Friday night and I totally agree with everything Mia Farrow has been saying on the subject. (I applaud Steven Spielberg's decision not to participate. Farrow was right that he would have been the Leni Riefensatahl of his generation. And you, Mr. Ebert are spot-on in your polite comparison to "Triumph of the Will." At the same time, I knew that this moment was an immense source of nationalistic pride for the Chinese and I thought it would be rude to ignore them at this moment.

The Olympics are one of those things that make me think:

What a piece of work is a man? How infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an angel. In apprehension how like a god!

So I figured what the hell. I turned on the TV as the drummers began and called to my girlfriend to join me on the couch. She's Japanese and has many interesting things to say from her perspective about the Chinese world power. I saw sights that amazed me. She saw military precision. I saw humanity united. She saw a waste of money. I got a bit teary-eyed. She got even more cynical. I love her. We both talked about propaganda and Darfur, and when a commercial interrupted to show Olympic athletes eating McDonalds, we both laughed in the face of the true propaganda machine.

The comments above are interesting. I was delighted to read Kenton Larsen'post. I too remembered the image of that unknown rebel in Tiananmen Square and I also thought of those lyrics from Roger Waters's Watching (from the album "Amused to Death" --lyrics to the song can be found here: http://www.lyricsdepot.com/roger-waters/watching-tv.html ). I was singing that song in my head the whole time. Funny that I sang another song from that same album towards the end of Werner Herzog's new "Encounters at the End of the World." (full lyrics here http://www.lyricsdepot.com/roger-waters/amused-to-death.html ). The song, like Herzog in his narration, imagines an extra-terrestrial intelligence discovering earth:

Somewhere out there in the stars
A keen-eyed look-out
Spied a flickering light
Our last hurrah
And when they found our shadows
Grouped around the TV sets
They ran down every lead
They repeated every test
They checked out all the data on their lists
And then the alien anthropologists
Admitted they were still perplexed
But on eliminating every other reason
For our sad demise
They logged the only explanation left
This species has amused itself to death.
No tears to cry, no feelings left
This species has amused itself to death.

Funny how that album even includes Marv Albert, the voice of the NBA, giving a play-by-play (with insipid comments) of a war as if it were a basketball game. "Prescient" indeed, Kenton.

Roger, like most people, I find your insights beyond the realm of film to be utterly fascinating and thought provoking. I feel sorry for someone like Dan and I hope he will take your advice to learn a bit more about our soaring national debt. I'm reminded of a hypothetical question from the late, great Carl Sagan: "What are the Conservatives conserving?" One last comment to Dan directly: I hope you won;t be so harsh on Islamic fundamentalists. One day they will be as plentiful as the Chinese are now. Hopefully we'll all learn to love each other by then.

I saw clips of the opening ceremony on Youtube, very nice indeed. The only thing I saw disturbing was that the whole spectacle was praised by all the media, even though it represented everything wrong with how a nation can treat its people. The performers last night were nothing but cogs in a giant machine, easily replaceable and having no value as an individual.

I know Roger is a typical liberal, who hates the US, thinks we are on the decline, and all the rest, but to claim that US as a nation is on the decline is rather ignorant. The US is still growing and it is growing quickly. Is there a great deal of national debt yes, but is our financial system built upon solid ground? Yes, whereas the Chinese aren't.

I also have to take offense to one of the commentators who honestly tried to compare the US to China because of our history with Native Americans. I would add, that while we committed acts against the Native Americans that are unspeakable, they were warring nations. The "Indians" that gave up were given their own land and autonomy over their lands though, can China make the same claim about their dissident? No. A clear example of this is the situation regarding Tibet.

One more important addition to the discussion: the ceremonies had their own share of "special effects," just for television:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/olympics/2534499/Beijing-Olympic-2008-opening-ceremony-giant-firework-footprints-faked.html

A quick correction for what was otherwise a fascinating article - I really wish I had watched the ceremonies now.

Regarding Chinese holdings of our national debt, the number is a drop in the proverbial bucket. According to the most recent numbers from the Treasury Department (http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt), China holds a hair over $500b of our debt. In the unlikely (impossible?) event they were to call in all the debt, we wouldn't have to close up shop at all.

Regarding the taped "special effects" shown at the Opening Ceremonies. If you listened carefully to NBC commentators, they mentioned that it was a filmed piece, and not "live." Again, NBC (and all broadcasters) are at the mercy of Beijing Broadcasting who controls the images, so it wasn't the "liberal U.S. media" that was manipulating the broadcast!

I haven't made any conscious decision to boycott watching the Olympics. I've just never gotten around to switching on the TV in the past few days. The politicization, the commercialization, and the cheating all conspire to make the event completely uninteresting to me. It's all so phony, in so many different ways.

That said, reading your post makes me regret not having caught that opening ceremony. You have a way of directing your intellectual curiosity, Roger; sometimes in unlikely directions.

Certainly the Olympics have always been a political event, but does it have to be this political. This coverage can't go ten minutes without bringing up extra-sport elements. Okay, I get it, China ain't the best of places human-rights-wise, but all societies are complex, and China, as a nation, is not the same as Chinese as individuals. The prominent place of Zhang Yimou in the ceremony is a perfect illustration of this- an independent artist, making extraordinary, universal work often to the consternation of Chinese Officials (indeed, some of his films have been banned.)

I seem to recall that earlier Olympics had a bit more of a "we are the world" feel than this one. Every time politics is brought up during the coverage, and every time I must suffer through another bathetic NBC "human interst" montage to the exclusion of actual sport I long to curl up with my DVD copy of "Tokyo Olympiad"- from a time when the Olympics seemed much... simpler. Ichikawa gets it right.

http://www.amazon.com/Tokyo-Olympiad-Collection-Jack-Douglas/dp/B00006673O

To my mind it's the greatest sports film ever made.

Regarding commentator David's: "I know Roger is a typical liberal, who hates the US, thinks we are on the decline, and all the rest..."

... what makes you think that Roger hates the US. Even if one expresses disappointment in our behavior as a nation, that does not mean that that person hates the US. Indeed, quite the opposite. Sometimes "tough love" is required." As an analogy, does a parent who properly admonishes a child for doing wrong hate the child? Of course not.

"Their national leader [...] president Hu Jintao, who looked every inch a modern executive in his well-cut suit and quick smile. Did you see our president, tapping his little American flag idly against his knee?"

Hi Roger, funny how the readers who are not happy about this comment read it as an attack on Bush, rather than as an observation of yours on the Chinese people over the American people ("people have the government they deserve", anyone?), although it is very clear in your article. Well, I guess it's easier for me to see it, being Mexican. Just have a look at our President or at any of our governors, senators and congressmen, and at the state of affairs in Mexico... completely detached from each other.

But I see a key difference, though: Bush, as well as Mexican government officials, were elected by the people (well, those of us who bothered to vote, anyway). Hu Jintao was not. Having said that and rereading what you wrote and what I just wrote, are we sure democracy is the right path, always?

It was pretty good but didn't beat Queen at Live Aid in 85...

As a Canadian who has had cable television disconnected for eight years, I found something else to do whilst a good portion of the world was tuned into the spectacle.

My respect for the Chinese people is immense. Their collective journey has ennobled humanity. Unfortunately, I am unable to simply forget Tiananmen Square and the mindless massacre carried out by the Chinese government anymore than I could willfully not consider the blatant abuses of international and human rights law by the two Bush administrations. Nor could I exempt my own beloved country for its disgraceful treatment of our First Nation’s peoples.

To propagate the idea that sport is separate from politics is a misnomer. One can wish the Chinese people a good and safe journey while at the same time actively condemning their government and our own insipid inertia. Thank you Roger for bringing politics into your blog. Of course, by doing so you are in danger of provoking rational thought and injecting integrity into the minds of readers!

To close, I would like to make the observation that I am very much looking forward to the new wave of Chinese filmmakers, evolving as they must be in this proverbial sea of change within and without their country.

Chris

Thank you, Roger, for these excellent insights from yourself and others. I'm sorry I read the blog late, but allow me to point out that the OTHER famous Riefenstahl film is "Olympia", about the 1938 Berlin Olympics that were supposed to be a showcase of Hitler's Germany. If those games were broadcast today, there might be some people who would feel unable to watch them. And those people would miss Jesse Owens, the African-American who became the star of those games, a hero to Americans of color and to everyone else, and a symbolic stick in Hitler's eye.

Remember too the most famous image of the 1968 games in Mexico City? Those two African-American athletes on the podium, giving the black power salute. They aroused controversy in the U.S. for their political statement in a troubled America, but I believe in Mexico they were also read as showing solidarity with the underdog, which in that country meant the hundreds of students massacred just before the games.

What heroic and inspiring moments do we recall from the 1980 Moscow games? Nothing, only the sour righteousness of not showing up and pretending we did something positive--which is essentially a lack of faith in the power of athletics to represent the best of the human spirit against all attempts to control it.

Please remember this: there is something intrinsic about athetics and art that transcends all attempts to co-opt it, control it or annex it to the ideological purposes of fascism (that is, against freedom). Another reader has pointed out that thousands of Americans and other foreigners are "invading" China for the games, some of them with the intention of spreading forbidden truths, and their impact will be immeasurable and beyond the ability of the Chinese government to control. Then there will be the athletes themselves, who by their very nature represent both the achievement of the unfettered individual and the potential of the team. Their very existence and accomplishment tends automatically to undermine any attempt to control the human spirit. That's why attending the games (and perhaps viewing them) is so much better and braver than turning away. You can only confront and challenge power by showing up.

Roger, this isn't related to your post, but seeing as you're still going back to review films you missed, I had to suggest a wonderful title to you, "Dans Paris." I've seen the film several times since it opened last October in Chicago (it's now on dvd), and my affection for it has grown each time. It's a lovely film, and it contains one of the truest depictions of the depression and exaltion that love can lead you to. Much of the aesthetic of the film is rooted in the films of the French "New Wave," and some critics have derided it as a "greatest hits" of those films, but to me it brings to mind the playfulness of Truffaut's best films, and the examination of gender of early Godard while remaining distinct and new. Seeing the film again tonight I felt I had to reccomend it to you, if only for the myriad of films that I wouldn't have seen had it not been for your reviews.

Actually it was NBC program that didn't show Lang Lang in close-up. I happened to watch a clip recorded on Hong Kong TVB. It showed Lang Lang and the cute-like-a-button little girl at the piano going through the first few musical passages as the dancers got into position. NBC missed that part completely. Also during the number, the camera zoomed in to Lang Lang a number of times.

Blame it on NBC's need to show the ads, and perhaps the NBC director's desire to show the full spectacle.

This journal and the attached comments are fascinating, especially as they afford a glimpse into the conflicting ideas held by Mr. Ebert's readers.

As many of the comments covered all my ideas and reactions I have only questions left.

What would an Opening Ceremony from a democratic China look like? Surprisingly similar or somewhat different? Are we reacting to a cultural difference or a political one, or both?

Ideas control people, define cultures, and excuse politics. What ideas, beyond individual freedom, control us? Why are we unable to provide universal health care?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/13/sports/olympics/13beijing.html?hp

It is amusing to me that news agencies are now picking up on the various "fake" elements in the opening ceremony. I added the link about the animation of the fireworks not because I saw it as some sort of revelation, but because I think it made the ceremonies even truer to the nature of spectacle (particularly via television).

And now we have the story of the poor ordinary girl with the best voice and the cute girl who was plunked in to lip-sync. Sure evidence of China's nefarious intent to make the Olympics "perfect" at any costs!

But let's get real here. It is the nature of spectacle -itself- to be fake. It is the grandest form of fakery. Just because thousands of people are really doing those synchronized dances does not make spectacle any less of, well, a spectacle-- a shining, dazzling mirage designed to call into reality other fictions such as nationhood, unity, stability, globalization, etc.

But once again, there seems to be this desire to separate China's version of spectacle from ours. And I'm not so sure.

我是一个中国人，我爱我们国家。不管你们对我们国家又多大的偏见。但是，我爱她！
I am a Chinese and I love our country. Whether you of our country and how much prejudice. However, I love her!

It's really funny to see and post comments here, since I'm a native Chinese living in the "Communist China".

Firstly, Roger, we surely CAN visit your blog in China, and your words are really thoughprovoking. Zhang did a great job, even though I don't fancy him much.

Am I too sensitive to smell the unpleasant atmosphere here towards the Chinese? If so, then fogive me, since I'm a post-70s who experienced the Tiananmen Square thing in my youth and benefited from the fast development of my country. And unfortunately, I'm also among those Chinese who're eager to be accepted by the rest of the world through Olympics. You see, it's hard to not be one, since the majority population here share the same wish.

For those who turn your back against us for what happaned in the past and our government, I don't think it's the wise way to shut your eyes for understanding a country with totally defferent culture. You've already made the same mistake over the Iraqi War, haven't you?

By the way, I DO feel uneasy when I read "The closest sight I have seen to Friday night's spectacle, and I mean this objectively, not with disrespect, is the sight of all those Germans marching wave upon wave before Hitler in "Triumph of the Will." " And of course some of the comments as well. I beg it's never too easy for anyone to see their effort to be compared with something like that. I guess we Easterners are more sensitive.

Despite the Government's element, haven't you guys get the gist of the opening ceremony? There's one important message, quoted from the Confucius. "To meet friends from afar, how happy we are." Forget about the reports, forget about the critics, throw away those colorful glasses, come to China and see by your own eyes.
That ceremony is just kind of invitation for you to find out China by yourself. The true understanding never stay just in the lines of reports from others. It's a tough job to fully understand a different culture, but I'm trying my best. How about you guys? Welcome, my friends.

Ebert: Welcome to you, my friend. It is my impression that China is making a favorable impression on the world through the Olympics. I remember how exciting the first Fifth Generation films seemed to me--"Red Sorghum," for example, and how many great films have come from China since. I hesitated about mentioning "Triumph of the Will," but tried to make it clear I was making an artistic point, not a political one. Yes, we lament the lack of religious freedom, freedom of the press and other freedoms in China, but after Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and the possible lies that led us into Iraq, we have lost the moral high ground. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Speaking of human rights violations (on an admittedly much smaller scale), did the official in charge of the music really have to publicly state that the little girl who actually sang the song was being Debbie Reynoldsed because they wanted a cuter face? I mean, being replaced is bad enough but telling the world that the reason why is because you just aren't that adorable (especially since she appears to be cute as the proverbial button)--that is cold. After hearing that, she must have felt like she had just been run over by a tank.

Oops--carry on.

"China is here, big time." Agreed, and what an entrance it made!

This might be a coincidence, sir, but you ended your "Tropic Thunder" review with the phrase "big time" and also began this blog post with the same term. I believe you have "big time" in mind this week, big time!

It reminds me of a Peter Gabriel song I like. Can you guess the title?

In deference to our Chinese commentators, I would like to clarify my comments above by stating clearly that I feel that some of the American press coverage of the Olympics thus far has been nationalist/racist against the Chinese. In fact, I would argue that guilt about our -own- recent atrocities is being worked out on our new Imperial rival (as was common practice with the USSR during the Cold War).

I have been trying to make the point that it is dubious for we the pot to call China the kettle black not just because of Iraq et al, but because of the two countries' shared embrace of spectacle.

Superbowl halftime shows, anyone? Rambo? American Idol? Infinite etc.

More specifically, how about the opening ceremonies for the Atlanta Olympics in 1996, a grand allegory designed to reassure us that the South's appalling history was all over and done with?

That said, what I like about the practice of criticism is the opportunity it gives us to find meaning in culture that goes beyond "wow." Mr. Ebert has pinpointed a very, very important moment of transition in which a new superpower is very visibly asserting its importance to the world. Yes, it is a "welcome," but it is also a "look! here we are!" that invites decoding.

And now, I promise to stop commenting.

Roger:

Love the blog, and this post was especially provocative and interesting. Unfortunately, I missed the opening ceremony - but reading your description was quite informative. While I normally can't stand comments on blogs - the heated back and forths here are actually quite fascinating and instructive even when I disagree.

I just wanted to comment on the one of the comments saying that Mao was widely revered in China. He isn't necessarily revered by all the Chinese - my Chinese tour guide in Xi'an told me that it was mostly peasants and the underclass that still revere Mao. He said that most educated and prosperous Chinese recognize Mao's deplorable crimes as a despot & look upon the Cultural Revolution for example with shame and regret. When my guide was telling me about the Emperor in Xi'an whose terra cotta soldiers are currently being depicted in that bad Jet Li Mummy movie - he said Mao identified with this Emperor since they were both essentially cruel dictators who held no qualms about consolidating and exploiting power.

It was also interesting to hear from a Chinese native from a supposedly communist country speak about a friend who traveled to North Korea as a tourist and report that it was "awful" and how sorry he felt for the people there since it reminded him of the Cultural Revolution. I found that comment both really funny (how bad must it be in North Korea if the Chinese are appalled!) and sad since there's a society that has far more strides to go. If anyone thinks China hasn't made progress - they need to visit it in person. I encourage everyone to go to Beijing especially - where the mixture of the ancient and modern reminded me of Rome - except the Chinese will rule the world again. Whatever you think of the Chinese government's record on human rights, there's no doubt that the Chinese have one of the most impressive civilizations in the world. The sheer scale of Beijing astounded me... and I'm a New Yorker!

Anyway, Roger please continue to write and share your insights and observations on everything including film. I was sad to not to read your coverage of Cannes this year - but hope you go to Toronto and share your thoughts on those films.

Regards,

Chris K

I am a Chinese and immigrated to America. Currently I am back in China to watch the Olympics. It is interesting reading the article and the comments. I just want to make a few points:

1. No nation can improve human rights instantly and be perfect. You have to look at the progress China has made. Human rights improved significantly comparing to 30 years ago. Don't forget how long it takes America to free the slaves and give women voting rights.

2. The giant footsteps did happen in real life.

3. Think of the opening ceremony as a performance. Voice over someone else performance's is not rare in show business.

4. The live show lasted a little over 4 hours. I don't know if you guys saw all of it given the commercials.

5. I am sure people who performed though unpaid were glad to be part of the event. I would. It is once of a life time opportunity.

6. Chinese people do think and feel differently than westerners. Don't make judgment when you only have limited understanding of the people. Not only the government, but also the real people, want to make this a specular show. Don't undermine the will of the people just because something the government did.

Earlier, I posted the following comment:

And you, Mr. Ebert are spot-on in your polite comparison to "Triumph of the Will."

I still stand by that but obviously, neither Roger nor I was comparing the Chinese to the subjects of that film, we are merely responding to the sheer spectacle of so many people acting in unison and the obvious display of statehood, nationalism, etc. I just wanted to clarify this because of the comments from Chinese readers. I meant no offence to the Chinese people. I love the people of China. Hell, I love everybody. Keep in mind that I�m the type of person to call the current US policy of spying on its citizens �fascist� and I have compared the current administration�s erosion of civil liberties after 9/11 to the rise of Nazism after �Kristallnacht.� One of the things I truly love and appreciate about this country is that I can say what I think without worrying about prison. I hope that one day everyone on Earth will have that freedom. Peace!

Just a two more things that might interest you and other readers of this blog if the topic of China/Beijing continues to fascinate (which I'm sure it will)

I'm sort of plugging the work of two friends of mine, but their work is related to this discussion. A friend of my Ben Collier has some photographs being exhibited right now in NY of Beijing in 2005 + 2007 leading up to the construction of various Olympic structures. Ben took some great shots of the many migrant workers, their living quarters, and alot of the construction sites in Beijing. It serves as an interesting "behind the scenes" of what we're all seeing right now. I know you can't visit so here's a link to see some of the pics: http://www.atmgallery.com/artist/workview/1402/7465/1

Also, all this discussion about China reminded me of something that appeared in a book co-written by another friend Steve Hely. Last year, Steve and his friend Vali (who I don't know) embarked on a Ridiculous Race (that's the title of the book) around the world not using airplanes (except Vali cheated many times and flew). Steve went West from LA while Vali went East. Steve was a history major so his commentary on the history and cultures of the various nations he races through is well written and informative. His section on China (and Beijing where he encounters friendly Chinese who want to practice English on him) provides another colorful portrait of the country. Prior to leaving on his journey, he emailed a bunch of academic experts on China asking for insights/highlights. Yale professor and China scholar Jonathan Spence replied with two words "constant change" - I feel like that's the best tag line for China I've encountered yet.

Anyway, hope that didn't seem like a total digression - I think you and your readers would find both sets of work interesting if they are interested in China.

paul,

your comment:

"Obviously it was beautiful, but are you really saying an American or a Russian or a German director wouldn't have been able to do as much with that much money, that much material, manpower, support, and so on? In a stadium built specifically for the event, with the support of the entire nation?"

is ridiculous. How can you compare a hypothetical situation to an actual one, and then give bigger praise to the one that did not happen and likely never will? Every country has its own resources and value, and the ones China put beatifully on display are not available in America.

Unless maybe you hope to gather all those chicago Batman extras and have them retell The Jungle or Black Boy for 2016. Our history is much more practical and would be a stretch to be told as beautifully and sophisticated as the chinese did.

ya ya, human rights aside. we're talking about the spectacle.

Dear Mr. Ebert,

As always your comments are insightful and perceptive. Although I don't watch the Olympics I always had an interest in Chinese culture. I guess Kung Fu-movies do open things up when you're a child.

I was fortunate enough to interview Chen Kaige once, it was in regards to his movie "Together". I asked him about what would happen if individualism and personal freedom would take hold of China, and how long it would take until selfishness and egocentrism started to dominate. His answer was a brief smile and a contemplative "I don't know."

Maybe Lang Lang is a precursor to the answer of that question. But I think it's also a question that America will have to answer on it's own terms. How limitless is your personal freedom and what responsibilities come with it. Or as George Carlin observed, there's a limitless freedom on breakfast cereals and a choice of two when in comes to political parties.

Thanks again for your writings.

Kind regards

Serge Zehnder

I'm a normal Chinese woman. I'm working in a company as you guys, make a living uneasily, complain much about society or government, or my company, or my parents...I'm happy with a surprise my firend make, happy to see beautiful things.. I live here normally as you. I really did not feel any human rights issue. The situation in China is not good, but not bad either. I saw the change of my country by my own eyes. I appreciate what our people and our government did in these years, although there was also wrong things they did. But how can i expect a people or a government always do right?

For the some people above who said that during the struction of Bird nest, a photographer shot a lot workers in bad living condition. Yes, there are many many poor people in China. I never visit USA, i don;t know if there are no poor people in USA? Of course American have lot of poor people, it is same to the other countries in the world. If we only can build new building untill there no poor people exsit? of course no.

People in your westen country always mentioned 3 things here:

DO NOT JUDGE CHINA BY YOUR WESTEN MIND.
WE DO THINK IN A DIFFRENT WAY.
YOU ARE NOT THE STANDARD OF THE WORLD.
COLLECTIVE INCLINE HABIT IS NOT MADE BY CHINA COMMUNIST PARTY, BUT MADE BY CHINESE PEOPLE FROM THOUSANDS YEARS AGO, STEP BY STEP.
DON'T ALWAYS THINK CHINESE COMMUNIST PART DO WRONG AND BAD THINGS TO PEOPLE. HOW CAN SHE STAND HERE FIRMLY FOR SO LONG? THERE SHOULD BE SOME REASONS!
YOU COME HERE AND LIVE AMONG NORMAL USUAL PEOPLE, YOU WILL SEE SOMETHING NEW FOR YOUR MIND. YOU WILL SEE ANSWERS.

Frustratingly, the United States is becoming more communist day by day. Obama wants to make that even moreso with nationalized healthcare, among other ways of increasing government control over our economy and daily lives. The United States's economy is not in trouble soley due to President Bush, but due to American's lack of self-respect and responsibility. Americans, by large, are unwilling to face life without government insurance (healthcare, unemployment insurance, etc.)

Our dollar means nothing when the government can (and does) simply print more of it when it wants/needs to. This creates inflation. Neither presidential candidate wants to solve this. Too difficult to do when the major banks have so much control over our government. Our current allowance of banks to create imaginary money with their loans (and the government backing [read: tax payers] their high risk loans) also causes the inflation.

There are lots of problems. It is too bad that we are faced with electing a socialist or a fascist. Neither option looks too good. Hayek was right. We, like Great Britain was at his time, are on a nasty slippery slope towards communism. Its all because people no longer want to take responsibility for their own lives.

By the way, many Chinese people and I really respect the IRAQ ATHLETE in 2008 Olimpic.
The audiance gave them big applause in ceromeny.
When 2 athlete came to boat compete, they even have no their team shirt, they ware their own shirt....
The American democoracy brellience light Iraq people.

I will Iraq people insist on their hope, their country will be stronger and stronger, rich like before.

"People in your westen country always mentioned 3 things here:"

Sorry, i miss typing the 3 things
Human right ---- No country can make it perfect on instant time, just similar saying like a Chinese comment above. And furthermore, China has her own way to complish it.
Tianan Men square ---- Pls. check Jeff's words
Tibet - It is of course a part of China, don;t understand why you think it is a country. You thought is produced by your country's media. I suggest you to read this: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/14/8287/

Hello "Normal Chinese Woman"-

I am an American and Chicagoan. This is my third year living and working in China (Changchun, Shenzhen and Guangzhou).I teach at a University in China. Your opinion regarding many American's views on China are quite valid. It would nice if people kept their opinion about a foreign country like China to themselves- UNTIL THEY ACTUALLY HAVE SET FOOT INSIDE THE COUNTRY!

China has a rich and varied 5,000 year history and is much more then the stereotypes we receive in the U.S.: ping-pong, chopsticks, "silk-and-swords" movies and kung-fu on the television.

Eva:

You say, "No country can make human rights perfect." That's true.

The difference is that some people in the world are free to protest their government's actions without fear of getting run down by their own government's tanks. And, sadly, you're right: China is not alone in this regard.

Freedom of speech, movement, religion, politics, the right to have as many kids as you like, the right to protest: that's taken for granted in some countries. Is it in yours?

In many countries, capital punishment has been against the law since the 1970s or earlier. In China, the number of people killed every year is a state secret. Aren't you curious about that number? Wouldn't you like to know how many people your country puts to death every year and why?

Would you like an Internet connection that allows you to read about the Tiananmen Square massacre, or are you happy having it blocked? Have you heard of the unknown rebel, or is it better that you don't "for the good of society?"

Let's add China's treatment of migrant workers, organ harvesting, privacy, a cozy relationship with the Sudanese government...can you talk about these things with your neighbor, or not? Can you ask your government about them, or not?

"How can "she" (the Communist Party) stand here so firmly for so long?" you ask. Through fear, intimidation, and a populace that believes it's only "Chinese values," I'm afraid.

I love ya Roger but come on!

"Their national leader is no longer the cartoonish Mao, but president Hu Jintao, who looked every inch a modern executive in his well-cut suit and quick smile."

Such admiration. Now compare to the disgust with which you refer to the President of the United States.

"Did you see our president, tapping his little American flag idly against his knee?"

President Bush was elected through majority vote by the free peoples of the United States of America. Hu Jintao presides over an oppressive Communist regime with an abysmal human rights record but that's cool, he has fine tailored suits.

Come back to Earth.

Ebert: Funny. I thought Al Gore won the majority vote, even despite the fraud in Florida.

Having read these comments, I am not sure if Americans can truly understand the Chinese perspective. But I am also not sure that the Chinese can understand our thought processes, either. Or maybe I just don't understand it. In the US, we are reared (and indeed our culture is saturated in) the rights of the individual and the difference ONE person can make. To some extent, this way of thinking is valid. To try to then understand a culture (an ancient culture) that does not hold the individual in such esteem is so foreign, it almost defies comprehension. Please don't misunderstand me: I mean no disrespect to either China or America. Both nations have their troubles and embarrassments on the world stage. As Roger said, we here in the USA no longer hold the moral high ground, if we ever did.

Take the two little girls, the singer and the actor. One has a lovely voice; the other is beautiful. If I am understanding this correctly, in China, people would look at this and say, "well, if we use both, we get the best of both." and proceed to do so. I assume that each girl is proud to have done her part (I'm taking the parents' word for it, as I would for an American girl). But that same situation wouldn't occur in America. We are the opposite extreme. We would continue to search and find A girl who not only sang like an angel, but looked like one too. We would find her, I have no doubt.

I don't think that either method is superior to the other. There are advantages and disadvantage to both. In the Chinese way, two girls get to share the glory (although the specter of the singer being left as unknown does raise its head. The media took care of that one); the Games get the best of both and China's image is polished (indeed, those girls may well say that the glory is all China's and none of theirs. So be it.)

In the American way, the Horatio Alger story gets another play in that one lucky/ talented/pretty girl gets the glory and America's image is polished. But in keeping with that, the media would do background stories on this girl, recording studios and perhaps Hollywood would come calling. The girl is guaranteed major TV spots at least for a short while. (For all I know, the Chinese girls will also be interviewed on Chinese TV etc).

In BOTH of this countries, the way of thinking about the world, individualism vs group-ism(?), is reinforced by the use of these children. The Games are not supposed to be political, but with such different approaches to cultural identity, how can they not be? So, some Americans will say that the Opening Ceremonies have been Milli-Vanilli'ed; some Chinese will deplore the "patronization" of the West-and no mutual understanding will be found. I am willing to admit that the use of the two girls while not something I would choose, is still a valid and correct choice for this culture. Gosh, that sounds patronizing. It's not meant to. What I'm trying to say is that since the construct of thought is so alien, the consequences of that thought (and action, ie the use of 2 girls) is not the same as it would be in America. The singer is not left out or shunted aside while the actor gets the fame and praise. (although the thought nags me of what if the press hadn't broken the story? Would we ever have known about the 7 year old? She's cute as can be, btw).

This is getting long, so I'll just add this: I read some defensiveness here from the Chinese posters and that saddens me. I can understand its presence, but the criticisms from Westerners and the defensiveness only detract from the Games. I do have a thought for the Chinese, though: you say China is not like the West. Ok. But so much of the West seems to be desired and sought after in China, it is hard to see how individualism cannot also be imported there (not saying it should be, rather that it would be just as a matter of course). You ask for understanding and patience, and that is reasonable and admirable; where is your understanding and patience re Western thought?

Roger! I love most of your movie reviews! And in my opinion, you ought to stick to that please. Although of course, one can't help getting political in this business.

Let me give some perspective here. I am a 20 year old from India (which just won its first ever individual gold at the Olympics. A country with a billion people! I wonder what Michael thinks of that), and in this country and China, the new blinding and punishing pace for economic growth has been long set. And there is little chance, if any at all, that the great western debate of individualism against collectivism will ever garner enough attention to produce a dent on it. In this country, if you stand and wonder, the modern executive in his well-cut suit and quick smile will walk all over you. And mind you, there are a couple of billion of Hu Jintoa look-alikes here. The debates are purely abstract here, the mere indulgence of a few couch intellectuals. And I am afraid, I am one among them.

But let us not kid ourselves to what modern America really stands for. The great concepts of individualism might have originated and flourished in theory, but if you really look at the country, and if you look at it from my perspective - of a boy exposed to all that America of television and pop culture (although of course it is foolish to form opinions before setting foot in a country like a gentleman pointed out before), America isn't awfully individualistic. Yes, individual freedoms are a world apart in America and India as compared to China. Yes, we can go in front our government buildings and protest. Yes, we can surf anything we want on the internet. But isn’t it just as hard to bring change in our countries as it is in China? Just as hard to do what you really want to? Because to survive in America and to survive in India, the celebrated individual has to pander to a profoundly collectivist society. The difference between America and China is not equal to the difference between individualism and collectivism. Fundamentally, both are collectivist societies with capitalist economies. The difference is that America is apologetic about it. And China just isn’t.

China’s human rights record is abysmal. There is no getting away from that fact. The Olympics should never have found its way into mainland China. But now that it is there, did we really expect anything other than an extravagant show of collectivism? Whatever are we surprised at? The brilliantly choreographed show? I am not.

I wish some country in the future that hosts the Olympics has the sanity to produce an opening ceremony that all people of Earth can identify with. One that really appreciates all those things human beings care about fundamentally about life on this planet. One without fire crackers even.

And Roger, my apologies that you had to attend Catholic grade school.

I'm a Canadian that has been working in China for over four years, so I have a pretty educated perspective on Chinese culture. Here's what I hope everybody in the West can understand about the Chinese culture, things that are undeniably and inarguably true.

1) Chinese people know more about the West than the people in West know about China. I hope that most of the posters here critical of China are educated enough about the actual conditions in China to making those criticisms. I think that ignorance leads to a lot of the misunderstandings (or is what I wrote just completely redundant....) Most Chinese people lead a reasonably comfortable life, especially in cities, and have certainly made more progress in average quality of life in the last 30 years than probably any huge country has in the history of the world over a similar 30 year time span.

2) China is a huge country and home to just as great a diversity of culture and opinion as America is. One of the things that infuriates me on the internet (and in real life too I suppose) is how people will act/post differently depending on who they think their audience is. Believe me when I say that nobody in the world was more outraged than Chinese people when the evidence of official corruption leading to suppression and greater death tolls in Sichuan. But Chinese people insist on presenting a united front to foreigners and, when confronted by foreign criticism seem only capable of pointing out America's faults and otherwise responding defensively. By the same token, Americans love to point out how superiour their own system of freedom of the press and democracy are whenever they think that Chinese people will read it, but, in forums about the internal affairs of American politics, will readily admit the numerous great flaws in the system; flaws that led to the Iraq war and other errors.

What I'm trying to say here is that Chinese people are no different than Americans, Canadians, or anyone else. Everything that China has done and is doing is a perfectly natural human action that is a perfectly natural response to the unique situation they are in. Of course their society emphasises collectivism; primary school classrooms are filled with 50 students, middle and high schools have 70-80. You think a teacher that has to deal with that many kids is going to want to deal with 50-80 'individuals'? It's impossible, believe me, I've tried, and I'm not the only one who has failed. You want to teach 80 kids anything at all and you have to emphasize the virtues of working together as a group towards the shared goal of a positive classroom culture; you have to emphasize discipline, and you have to teach those kids to subordinate their selfish desires for personal attention and personal achievement. It's just not like in the West where every child's personal needs can be taken into account. There are too many kids and not enough time, so collectivism is the natural consequence. You put 80 kids to a class in America and I guarantee you that in 20 or 30 years when that generation grows up, the cultural situation will be very similar to China.

I'm not placing a value judgement on this situation either. It's undeniable, for example, that Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, and the rest of the CCP has done a way better job of running China for the last decade than Bush et al has done for America, democracy or not.

The real enemy is nationalism, and the insistence of people on dividing themselves into 'us' and 'them'. This might have been a useful trait in humanity's past when different societies were competing with each other in small, isolated incidents, but in the future, with our technology and our massive needs for resources, I think this will be the biggest hurdle we, as human beings, will have to overcome. What I'm saying is that people need to put aside their nationalism, their instinctive fear and hatred for 'them', and start to realise that all of us are 'us'. Only in that spirit of mutual respect, and more importantly, trust, can humanity hope to solve the huge problems facing us today.

I have similar feelings towards China (and its films, especially "Farewell, my Concubine" and "Raise the Red Lantern") and yet I wonder why it is. This piece reads more like diplomacy than criticism. It is politically convenient to me as a Westerner that the Chinese be Communists, because it involves a a total revision of traditional values towards more mercantile and pragmatic aims, which is far less difficult or time-consuming than having to deal with a billion Buddhists, or a billion Christians, or a billion Muslims, with whom you cannot possibly negotiate. Easier to deal with traders than philosphers, or to interpret all their philosophies as trades. Communism as an ideology seems less intractable, as if we could simply abandon the philisophical divide and start debating ways and means of bettering ourselves.

The idea that the Chinese are not really Communists is a persistent observation in all the commentary I have read, to the point where I am starting to wonder if it is not wishful thinking. We're convinced that China is steadily improving its democracy and that we can effectively negotiate with them, after all, they have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by improving their human rights standards. But they don't, not exactly, not nearly in any way that is meaningful in 2008. Why the eternal optimism? Why the thought that if we just learn more, engage more, couch our phrases correctly, will China respond as we hope?

I can understand the appeal, the aesthetics, the history, the strange and beautiful language (the strange and beautiful women). I think it would be easy and wonderful to be seduced by China, especially in those astonishing moments where out of its straight-jacket of I-don't-know-how-many years of tradition, real art starts to emerge.

What, I ask, of the soul of China, the element that first possessed it to wage war on itself, to launch a revolution, to fight tooth and nail over ideas as much as land or bread. Where does that figure into our calculations?

I don't feel at quite such a distance as I might have. I live near a troupe of Chinese international students: they ride bicycles and smile and wave and inspire me with feelings of bliss. I work with two Chinese people. Parts of Sydney could be mistaken for China, and it makes me doubt the fidgety assertion we have that countries are defined by borders (and the massive efforts to try and maintain the illusion); The Chinese press is, I am told, the largest ethnic media in the country. There have even been reports that there are 1000 odd Chinese spies in Australia, an idea you doubt, until you think about it, and then you wonder.

Ebert: Funny. I thought Al Gore won the majority vote, even despite the fraud in Florida.

Wow, what a thrill! You actually responded to my comment with an Ebert-esque quip! I'm humbled. This puts me in the same league as the late distinguished Gene Siskel and the plucky Richard Roeper. Well, maybe more like the oafish fill-in Harry Knowles. In any case, I couldn't be happier.

And you're right, Al Gore did "win" the inconsequential popular vote back in 2000. Bush however did win twice a majority of electoral votes which is what I was referring to. It also just happens to be the system by which we elect the President in this, the greatest country on Earth.

You're still the greatest though. I appreciate you responding and I wish you the best. I'm looking forward to your glorious return to television.

Wow, I still can't get over it!

Everything that China has done and is doing is a perfectly natural human action that is a perfectly natural response to the unique situation they are in.

Nic Hautamaki, i totally agree your above views. Those guys never been in china just stop acting as a professional consultant for democracy and human rights!

Eva, I support you too....

Kenton: I have expected the people like you with the mind like you will appear here. You are a typical USA or western people with typical western people's mind. Why it is typical? Because i met so many people like you and said the similar saying. Really similar! I met so many that i wonder why some many people think the same but incorrect things on China... Finally i got an answer: You people are Brainwashed by your government...hehe...brainwash.. this is the word you are used to use for Chinese people. It's funny that from our view you are brainwashed, from your view we are brainwashed...you got something here? You mentioned some typical things that you westen people like to scold China:

1） TIAN AN MEN square, (again... i'm really tired and boring and impatient for this. Tank... yeah yeah... you saw many vidoes in your country... which published by your media...) ----- it's long story and a lot to say.. i really don't want to repeat again. And i think it is useless to say them to you, because you will not belive me, because you will think the info i got is false, you will think i was brainwashed... based on this word, you have set us to an unfair discussion basement. ... it will start a long long much much point to support my view... I'm tired for this and i stop here. i suggest you watch Jeff Mathew's interview.

2) Freedom of Speech ----- Yes, that's right, but situation is much better than years ago.

3) Religion This is what I‘m really confused...why you always think we have no religion freedom? Here, in China, we're freely to believe in the religion we choose, (Much free than thousand years ago, hundreds years ago, ) in every city of China, including Xingjiang and Tibet. YES, TIBET. You don't believe? Just go there and see by your own eyes. The people with different religion live here peacefully. Buddhism, Daosim, Christinsim......Not including Falun (wheel) gong fu, which was forbidden by government. That is a crazy and nonsense no basement so called Breathing excersise, it is not a\ religion, it is .... can not describe..

4)Capital Punishment???
This is my 1st time to see you people take it to criticize China.
Set capital punishment or not, i think it is a country's choice. Can a country be criticized by this issue?
Nowadays people put to death not scerectly, but by trial. Why you think it is secret? In my life and my friends, friend;s friends... and... I never heard a people is pusnished to death secretly, by screct police maybe? Secrect police is more comfort for your mind, you are used to hear this words already?
Maybe you can asked the American people here who work in China, if they met this kind of story?
I heard that FBI always catch people like mouse secrectly.. I heard it from American movie, i did not visit USA anway. Hehe..everyday if i watch TV, watch the law program, I can see some people who killed other people, i think some of them maybe put to death.
You know how many people.... oh yeah ... you have chanel to get true information, what we got are always false...

I don't like such arrogant mind who think they know all truth, the people who think and live different, need to be saved by them....

I just stop here... people talked a lot for these.
Read this link: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/14/8287/

People, please give China more time and leave them improve by their own way!

The Triumph of the Will reference cannot be taken too far, of course, but one thing is for sure: Like that astonishing film, the astonishing opening ceremony will be judged as much on events subsequent to it as on its own features.

The propaganda element in the performance replaced communist orthodoxy with the nationalist force of thousands of years of history. And as one perceptive journalist pointed out, the entire show lacked any semblance of humor. That should tell us something.

I have a queasy feeling that one day Zhang Yimou will wake up and discover that the force of Chinese history has turned him from a brilliant pioneering filmmaker into a tainted artist used (and misrepresented) by the tyrants of the day. This kind of dupe also has a very long history in China. Zhang must know this, yet he proceeded with the show. He's either a blind optimist or a horrid sellout. Hey, I was one of about 32 Westerners who saw The Story of Qiu Ju, so I vote for the former.

Spielberg was right to bail out. The cynical conduct of the IOC and the Chinese government during the Games thus far have lived down to expectations, and that's not even factoring in Tibet, Xinjiang, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Myanmar and North Korea. Add Chinese smooching with Russia and the "Olympic spirit" is turned into a laughable slogan.

I love your reviews, Mr Ebert, especially when I disagree with them. In this case, on the issue of China, I differ, too. Whatever the state or conduct of the United States, the way the Chinese government conducts itself cannot be rationalized nor whitewashed by Olympic baubles, though that is exactly what it will attempt after these Games are over.

Oh, and PS, in my experience the Chinese who use moral relativism to rationalize government brutality are NEVER the same Chinese who have been brutalized by the government.

Roger,

Thanks for the provacative discussion. I would like to correct your notion of the 'unpaid' performers -- apparently many of them actually are in the Chinese Army. Hence, the weeks of practice and long hours are a product of their military, not volunteers.

I was torn about the production. The initial drum sequence was a bit scary, and I found the goose-stepping military haunting in its memories of the Nazis. Then there were beautiful and eloquent passages of amazing beauty. Complex, and a mixed bag for me, just like China itself.

"The inconsequential popular vote"...

My faith in mankind and common sense is hoping the adjective "inconsequential" was used to indicate that, UNFORTUNATELY, winning the popular vote doesn't mean you win the election. It couldn't possibly mean that popular vote is intrinsically meaningless. Right? Right?

Although I have been reading your entries for some time, this is my first time posting a response. I want to first declare a resounding "well-said" on your observations about the opening ceremony. Zhang Yimou, with a near infinite supply for a budget, created an opening ceremony that provoked feelings and emotions for me beyond the special-effects visual level. I found myself coming across the same thoughts and opinions you yourself have written. To say it was amazing is an understatement. China can pride themselves on relying on Zhang Yimou to create an live cinematic event that re-establishes China's place in the world. A terrific journal entry Roger, I'm very thankful you took the time to post your thoughts.

P.S. - Immediately the next day I decided to check out Zhang Yimou's "Raise The Red Lantern" to begin my marathon of his films. I won't let the Beijing opening ceremony be my only observation of Yimou's genius.

Wow, what a thrill! You actually responded to my comment with an Ebert-esque quip!

The above comment by Tom Crook reminds me of Mr Ebert's review of The Squid and the Whale, and the following particular passage:

Walt informs Sophie a book is Kafkaesque and Sophie says, "It's written by Franz Kafka. It has to be." Point, match and game.

If you know what I mean...

By the way, the exchange between Sophie and Walt I recounted in my previous comment was Jim Emerson's favourite piece of dialogue of 2005. I had to double check, hence the double post.

And, no, I have no idea why I remember these things.

The Sydney Olympic Opening Ceremony brings back rather horrifying memories of lawnmowers and clotheslines and kangaroos-on-bikes and a little girl in a pink fairy dress suspended in the air. Were there people dressed as thongs, or did I imagine that in a nightmare? The only element that had any aesthetic integrity or system were the Indigenous performers, and I am not trying to be cute or political in saying so, it is one of the common themes of our "cultural export" and one reason they feature so prominently in Australian cinema. Collectively I think my country has a deeply under-developed aesthetic sense and is vulnerable to kitsch; the Chinese have no such problem and the spectacle is startling and beautiful, as I would have expected.

"Farewell, my concubine" is a film close to my heart and I think the reason such an odd emphasis works so well in it is that Chinese opera and Chinese communism are both so dependent upon fetishism. The Opera troupe in the film is not an analogy to an authoritarian system but an example of one.

When I saw it at sixteen I sided with Deiyi, both as a pretty little boy who resembles a girl, or as an elegant young transvestite man. More recently I felt my sympathy more with Gong Li's character, but on reflection they are both living the life of a prostitute, the difference is that Xiaolou acknowledges it and tries to rescue the latter but not the former. Deiyi's rage and seemingly petty betrayal arise from the fact that his sacrifices and his plight have gone unappreciated. When he slips and says "I am by nature a boy, not a girl." it is because he means it. What struck me seeing it again was that breaches in conformity are dealt with by violence, as in the scene where Xiaolou punishes Deiyi by hurting his mouth. The suicides seemed melodramatic to me and a fault in the film, but then I considered it more and can see the truth of it: an authoritarian system is appeased by a kind of blood economy.

Ali, I get what you're saying and I actually thought of that after I posted it. I regretted it for a minute before I slowly became to accept it. Now that I've read your comments I think I'm starting to love it.

One consistent retort that the Chinese has about criticism coming from the West (which is not to say that there's no non-Western criticism; there's plenty, just less heard) is that they've done nothing that the Western countries in their rise to power hadn't done before. Communism after all was a product of the West. Human rights? There's War on Terror and hundreds of years of brutal colonialism. The environment? Look at the island nation of Naru. Political freedom? Is there any intelligence and common sense left in the American democratic process? Maybe once but it has long been replaced by wealth and ideological warfare (it's a tragedy that everyone aspires to the American dream but falsely assume that the people already living that dream don't mind their having a share...what, are the Earth's resources infinite?).

Are China and Russia destined to go through the same mistakes that served the Western nations so well? How can one alcoholic help another? First he has to quit.

"In my hardcopy of the SunTimes you further critique W's impatient body language even though we now know Bush had just learned of Russian attacks on Georgia and had to sit next to the thug who ordered the war for three hours."--AConn

That's a joke, right? Because that very concerned man found plenty of time to clown around with Misty May on the "beach." He simply has the attention span of a gnat.

Oh and to the person who said NBC didn't show Putin: it did. And they showed Mr. and Mrs. Bush leaning forward in amiable chat with "that thug" during the opening ceremonies.

Is it not possible to understand the sheer enormity of accomplishment that the Opening Ceremonies was without degenerating into political bickering? The idea that 2016 people can move as one is an overwhelming achievement, military training or not. And the brilliance of mind and vision it took to even conceive of something like that blows me away!

It was awful in the truest sense of the word.

I totally agree with those who made a comment that China should be recognized. In watching the recent Olympic coverage, I was a bit disappointed with the way some US media covered it. Here's why-

-Saturday morning --- I was looking forward to reading the NY Times headline. I was hoping it would praise China...but instead, the only story that I found about the Olympics headlined "China TRIES to impress the world." I could not believe how negative NY Times was about it! They could not admit China did a great job. I was watching Nightly News with Brian Williams and their intern in China was in tears because she was so happy about her country's achievement. America is so blessed already. Chinese people worked hard for this event and it was not recognized. What's wrong with giving them the spotlight for a few weeks.

- In the Yahoo tally, they were counting the medals so that US would be on top, but in reality, the Gold medals mattered more, which China had.

- Lastly, during Friday morning (olympics opening), I was able to watch part of the Olympics live through Skype. NBC did not show the whole ending which showcased the amazing fireworks all over the city.

Bottomline is, media here is really filtering and making China look so bad. Looking at all the human rights violation, etc... But, the US government is also partaking in violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Guantanamo human rights violation. As the adage goes, people should look within themselves before casting the first stone.

I'm viewing these comments from shenzhen/guangdong/china. Generally, the government doesn't filter message in foreigne language. If you want to know the real thing about china, you'd better learn some chinese and chinese history. The news and reports of the mass media of the western coutries are often misleading and have to be politically correct.
To some extent, china is a totalism country, but we have to be like that. If you read our history, you will find a lot of invasions: from the northen nomad, the tibetan barbarians(yes,the tibetans), the pirates from Japan, and later the western colonists. So there must be some totalism and collectivism to keep us alive. If canada is as powerfull as russia, the USA will also be a totalism country.
Things happening in china are not so obsurd as the western reportors reported. The residents who lived in the arena area did not have a choice to move or not, yes, but they are well compensated, and they will get extremly cheap apartment in other districts of beijing.
In fact, most of the land issues are due to the greed of the farmers which claim too much compensation from government and whose land itself is redistributed to them by the government after the latest civil war. In such a developing country, china just do not have the resouce to please every one, or we'll become another india, lacking every kind of infrastructure.
I hope we can understand each other better, welcome to china.

With all the (justifiable) accolades heaped on Zhang Yimou's artistic accomplishments, he is no hero. While some of his early films that presented China with frank grittiness were banned, many Chinese intellectuals regard his 2002 film "Hero" (released in 2004 in the US) as a sellout that legitimates authoritarian totalitarianism in the name of "unification." Without "Hero," there would not have been the Opening Ceremonies.

I must of course thank you for interpreting America to me for over a decade; I have never hated America and you are one of the reasons. I truly believe diplomacy occurs at all levels of society rather than simply the political sphere, and occurs most profoundly and honestly between private citizens.

This website makes me feel like a correspondent in my own country, which is a positive acquirement, not a negative one. It makes me think carefully about how I portray my country, thinking I ought put domestic politics and petty squabbles behind me and simply speak of what is. It is a good use for the journalism degree I completed; it seemed for a little while that I was studying it for reasons of serendipity, but now I think the best of life is made of serendipity. As a matter of honour I wont anymore try and use it for a professional edge, only to record and document my feelings and observations.

Australia's isolation is the most profound element of our existence and our cultural and linguistic difference between our Asian neighbours renders us more isolated, unecessarily so. I live on the divide between city and country; going for a stroll around campus today (also my home) I was conscious of the deep beauty of the landscape, my 100 yr old agricultural college like a graveyard and a garden, and I cherished the isolation for all that it is worth. I feel like young Lermontov exiled in the caucasus.

It was only ten years ago that One Nation, then the third force in Australian politics, gained notoriety when it declared that we were going to be "swamped by Asians". Now our current, popular Prime Minister, a US-China diplomat, speaks Mandarin. Despite his minimalist approach to office, he did significantly make a speech in China, to a Chinese audience, in their native language, on human rights questions. The distance and occasional surprising intimacy Australia has with Asia both arise from the logic of our place in the world, and we feel the present with a sense of loss of the past and of an estranged future. I think Australians tolerate our PM's Asia focus in a way they would not have ten years ago, thinking how proud and secure they would be should their children be able to speak Mandarin too.

I read "The Quiet American" for the first time recently and it was so wonderfully written and relevant to me it seemed to wash over me like a drug. I feel, like Fowler, that in the past my heart has moved me to betray my own principles, to get involved when I ought to have cultivated my own detachment. Even though he goes to Vietnam only with suicidal desires, his growing and unforced expertise and love, compels him to act. The real issues to me are not individualism and collectivism (simply twin ideological delusions, to be eased away) but peace and security and the craft of whether and how to realise it: to do nothing, or everything.

My career goal is to work doing the house-keeping work of refugee law: the administrative work, the individual case advocacy, the day-to-day problems and solutions; the stapling, photo-copying, telephony. I don't think you can do this at the same time as being a political advocate for the cause. My attitude to work is becoming almost Taoist.

In the life of a refugee the thrill of escape ultimately dissolves into loneliness in the new world, and they call a place like the immigration centre where I work and ask if we can help bring them their family, their spouse. Certainly refugees come from China but they come from all over the world. I don't want to be too hard on geo-political borders; the maintenance of my country, and the West, as places of refuge and liberty, requires that we take steps to defend our imaginary lines.

I think of one of Courtney Love's songs, again, for how I feel: Chaos, bring the pitiful to me.

Refugees are by definition non-conformists. Their stories are often heroic, coming from a conviction their their life as it is is intolerable and the fortitude to try and alter their conditions. They are the survivors of the world.

For me: I will study literature the rest of my life, as I have always done. I will learn a language. I will take a lover, a wife, at my convenience - or I wont, it doesn't matter. I will have children, or I wont, it doesn't matter. I feel like I have resolved finally that question mark that always seemed to hover above my head, formed a commitment to the better part of myself.

Ebert: Tarkovsky's "Nostalgia" is about the ineffable longing of refugees for their homeland.

I will certainly look into "Nostalgia". I thought "Nowhere in Africa" was a beautiful film about the lives of refugees, delving deep into the richness and emotions of their experience. It imposes an urgency on a story which I might have expected would have been made of lulls and emptiness. A relief to see a German interpretation of Africa that isn't Riefenstahl. Caroline Link has a sensitive, empathetic approach, full of sensuality and care.

After a certain point the longing for the homeland ceases; though the country changes, it remains fixed in their minds. Children of refugees from more conservative countries often find themselves with less freedom than they had in their own countries, to move about and interact with their friends, precisely because their parents are careful of the potential for the abuse of freedom and a more sexually liberal society. As new entrants they depend heavily on their immediate family in a way they would not in their home country. Yet freedom is what they most value; not having to consider what your society would think each time you go out; then educaton for their children.

A recent documentary on Australian television had an extraordinary scene where a Sudanese woman, carrying a green environment bag on the top of her head, speaks to one of a group of nosy small-town locals, asking her if she was going to attend a meeting: "To have a talk about your culture." I laughed (cackled) and was pleased when the Sudanese woman declined to attend: this is the correct response to such a statement. They held the meeting without her, at pains over the gender roles of the newly arrived immigrants. Yes Sudan isn't a post-feminist society, but we need to walk before we can run. They don't need to fear for their lives in Australia, that is the fundamental thing. Dinka is a lovely, soothing language.

A line in "The Last Emperor" brought me to tears recently. Johnson says to the emperor as young man: "The British will offer you asylum. I'm sure they will." Though Australia is a British colony I honestly feel further from it than most countries in the world (Asia, the Middle East), and yet this I understand, that Britain would look kindly upon a young Royal buffeted by history. It is at the precise point in the film where it ceases to be the most astonishing film you've ever seen and the narrative fall over, a structure probably dictated by the life-choices of Pu Yi. It is at this point his life has the most poignance and he might have gone to Oxford university as he hoped and become someone else.

Or the simple wonder of English interpreted through Chinese voices and grammar. His Mother says: "Do you remember my face?" and I am overcome. The Chinese students that live near me use expressions like "I have an exam. I am very scary, yes? Very scary!" I was advised by an Asian friend not to correct them (a former lover if you want to know), to let them be cute. I think this is right; working in immigration I have come to accept different variations on my own language, different structures, accents, emphasis, even words.

Having spoken to Falun Gong members (other law students) I was struck by their antipathy towards the Chinese Communists ("pure evil") and by the sense of concern that they invite. They seem a little too vehement, afraid, haunted as much by their inner life as outward persecution. This isn't a criticism, to use an Ebertism, but an observation.

Ebert: I loved "Nowhere in Africa," showed it at Ebertfest.

"The real issues to me are not individualism and collectivism (simply twin ideological delusions, to be eased away) but peace and security and the craft of whether and how to realize it: to do nothing, or everything."

I completely agree Solomon! It amazes me that otherwise totally sane people get so polarized when they hear these two words uttered. It has almost become like 'if you are not with us, you are against us.' And now where did we hear that before?

I often think totalitarianism or dictatorship is in fact nothing but individualism gone wrong, the individualism of the dictator. Democracy is the best political system that humanity has. But when millions of ignorant and propaganda-swayed folk choose our governments, how very different does democracy become from dictatorship? I think the concept of democracy has to evolve. I don’t know into what. But anything political that becomes stagnant will rot.

The constitutions of the U.S. and my country (India) proclaim that every man is born equal. Perhaps not. No man is born equal. But men should merely have equal rights and access. If we fundamentally understand that, maybe we could bridge individualism and collectivism.

I was also in awe watching the opening ceremony last week, but today I found out about the price to pay for such incredible performance. Check out this article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080819/ap_on_re_as/oly_china_performers__sacrifices;_ylt=Aq9KQ1eCMQ1lk_oq4k32YKhvaA8F

I feel like journalists keep overanalyzing the artistic choices made by Zhang Yimou when they describe it as an assertion in favor of collectivism. I don't think this is a case of cult of collectivity. When Mr. Brooks of the New York Times analyzed the opening ceremony similarly as a display in favor of collectivism, he received a lot of backlash. I think Zhang was just trying to make a choice that was aesthetically pleasing, and this was a way to include many volunteers in the opening ceremony and have a chance to be on TV. I don't know that he would be deliberately and consciously make the choice to make a statement about collectivism.

Anonymous: I am both an individual and part of a collective. How could I consider myself anything else? Another example. I consider myself both a progressive and a conservative. What rational person would turn this into a choice between opposites? I am repressive and liberal in (until proven otherwise) equal measure.

I also meant it when I use the concept "ease away". I look at ideologies, even things like racism, as symptoms of inner tension. It sounds Freudian but I suspect my distaste for conflict stems from my feelings towards my parent's divorce (and that is all I think is necessary to say about these kinds of things), projected on to the wider world, full of endlessly tense situations. At heart is the conviction that no-one in the world is my enemy, they just operate on the mistaken belief that I am their enemy. Hence even the deepest wounds seem impersonal and anger in others unprofessional. The world tries to change people like me, subject us to their various brands of conformity, through provocation. What was it Dershowitz said about a peace that withstands provocation?

Perhaps it's a little too late to post now about the opening ceremonies... But it's sure interesting to watch the opening ceremonies and then watch London's short performance during the closing ceremonies.

For sure, you can view the opening ceremonies from the collective vs individual perspective, but I have to say that I felt that china's version (and I don't remember athen's or sydney's so i'm comparing it to london's brief performance number) is more reflective of the olympic spirit.

I think one of the prevailing Olympic themes is that ordinary people (albeit athletcially gifted), regardless of gender, upbringing, race, religion, etc, can go on to achieve incredible things. For the most part, while watching the opening ceremonies, I felt more of a connection with the performers than I did with the english performers. I felt like I could be there and perform with them (if I had practiced), whereas with the english performers, short of rewriting my teenage years, I would never be able to perform on stage with them. And that's why I enjoyed the opening ceremonies: it was about ordinary people, who with hard work and perserverence, accomplish extraordinary things, which is sorta what the Olympics are to me.

I think you should go back and do a review of Curse of the Golden Flower, which I believe you didn't get to review.

Watch in on Blu Ray by the way, which is the best way to watch it.

in fact,all budget for Olympic ceremony, includ open and closed,about only 100 million acording to zhang yimou's reports

I guess that most of those rebuking human rights problem of China may have never been to China or once visited China two decades ago.
I am sorry your mindset about Chinese and China was set by your "democratic" media that like to cater to your mind to earn readship.

What a hell the "democracy" did and is still doing in Iraq! American are the most serious human rights abuser on this planet. Can democracy stop the bloody blasts in Iraq?!

Great insight, and farsight too. We are a bankrupt nation now.

I just want to know why Americans still be confident to criticise oher country, especially Human rights. I still remember, once upon a time, USA invaded China together with France,UK, Japan..........., I wonder why didn't your grand-grand -grand-grandfather tell you about that.

I am chinese from China mainland. As I see it, China is not the same
as what you thought it to be. There's no absolute democracy but Heaven. The US is really stronger and richer than China, but, please don't forget the bitter tears of millions of black slaves.
As a chinese saying goes: the cost of a successful General are thousands of bodies of soldiers.

As to the Tibet, it belongs to China without any debate. why did some
Americans prefer to believe in a few Buddhist instead of 1.3billion
Chinese people? so, what does democracy stands for? majority or minority?

Still, I want to write more, but I don't have a good command of English, however, most chinese ppl are trying their best to learn English well in order to tell you the naked truth