Product Details

• Actors: Liya Ai, Peiqi Liu, Zhijun Ge, Haiyan Zhang, Zhenguo Yan
• Directors: Xiaowen Zhou
• Format: Color, NTSC
• Subtitles: English
• Rating: NR (Not Rated)
• Number of tapes: 1
• Studio: Hallmark Home Entertainment
• VHS Release Date: February 11, 1997
• Run Time: 95 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• ASIN: 6304296169
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,795 in Video (See Bestsellers in Video)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #2 in	Video > Art House & International > Asian Cinema > China
  #2 in	Video > Art House & International > By Original Language > Chinese

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent Film, May 3, 2001

By A Customer

I thought this movie gave an excellent contrast of post and pre communist China country society. The incredible difference between the (former) village elders values and his young wifes values is shown through her desire for a TV larger than her neighbors and his to add another story to the house (material was cheap for a second story and labor was practically free while the television had to be imported). I definitely recomend this film to anyone who wants a change in story and genre.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A misunderstood film, May 8, 2007

By	ReadWriteSwim "RWS" - See all my reviews

To really appreciate the subtle mastery of this film, a working knowledge of Taoist thought is helpful. The idea that our lives become polluted and complicated by desire and not understanding our "inner nature" puts it in the proper perspective. In this light, technology is questionable (consider the menchanical noodle maker that destroys a man's hand, and the subsequent failure of the truck to get him to a hospital), and economic "progress" creates an unwholesome society (Ermo experiences life in the impersonal city). So the film really sticks it to the complications created by the shift to consumerism.

It's also a magnificent character study w/ the title character. Her ambition and intense pride make this a tragedy in the Aristotelian sense. This is certainly not "hilarious" as the cover quote promises!

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Biggest Television, October 26, 2003

By	Christopher B., Vogler "fangkuifu" (Omaha, NE USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

While Ermo is a film that may be labeled anti-consumerism, it is likely only a reaction to the growth of capitalism in a country that still maintains some Communistic ideological values. The film likely serves as a warning to the Chinese population that says, "Beware of materialism, if it is your number one value then there will be consequences." The film's message is relatively easy to ascertain.

How is the movie not anti-capitalist? While Ermo, the village woman who is at the heart of the story, is consumed by the accumulation of money, she does not accumulate it simply to purchase capital. Neither is she all that selfish, since her accumulation of money is for the goal of purchasing a television for her son. However, it's her motivation for buying the television which should be analyzed.

The want for the television is really just an allegorical tool used to represent materialism. Since China has loosened the restrictions on private ownership of business and invigorated the stifling atmosphere that held back individual enterprise, its population is experiencing a growth in materialism. Under these circumstances, many people are turning to things that inflate their sense of individualism--i.e. status symbols.

This movie seems to be in response to this trend. However, more specifically it attacks the tendency for women, in particular, to neglect their households in favor of earning more money and buying more things. From my Western viewpoint, this at first seems sexist. A movie like this would never be made in the U.S. for that reason alone. But upon further review, I feel it is more than that. The movie is simply a reminder that a person cannot have it all. Value systems necessitate that things be placed in greater or lesser standing in relation to their importance to the individual. The problem then arises, can providing things for your family be a replacement for providing time? The answer is explicitly answered in the movie.

Ermo places her position in jeopardy for her materialistic goal. She neglects her family's needs and her own physical wellbeing in the process. Even her happiness is forgone, and for what? The true trap of materialism is that once you've obtained your object, it fails to give you the happiness that was anticipated. There are two responses to this phenomenon, either the person will look for another object to work toward, or they will become depressed and seek fulfillment through another means. The only hope is that it will dawn on people that materiality is an illusion...and that what is really important is relationship to those around you and to yourself.