Better Luck Tomorrow (2003)

Cynthia Fuchs

To even things up, perhaps, or because he's bored, or because it's so easy, Ben cheats.

Better Luck Tomorrow

Director: Justin Lin
Cast: Parry Shen, Karin Anna Cheung, Jason J. Tobin, John Cho, Laura Esposito, Roger Fan, Sung Kang, Crystal Keith, Jerry Mathers, Ariadne Shaffer, Aaron Takahashi
MPAA rating: R
Studio: MTV Films
First date: 2003
US Release Date: 1969-12-31 (Limited release)

Justin Lin's Better Luck Tomorrow comes packing an enthusiastic MTV ad campaign and loads of hype. This last is mostly a function of Roger Ebert's loud defense of it at Sundance, when one audience member suggested that it offered a "negative" view of Asian Americans. Ebert declared that any film should be able to be what it wants to be, and not worry about community reputations or individual judgments.

Lin's film wants to be a lot of things. It is about Asian American kids living in Orange County and making plans for college. It's about violence and excess, about the kind of search for identity that adolescents perennially assume. It's glib sometimes, and it's a low budget project. It's also a smart and engaging high school movie with more on its mind than who's going to the prom. This much is made clear in the opening scene: Ben (Parry Shen) and his buddy Virgil (Jason J. Tobin) lie in an Orange County backyard, sunning themselves and pondering early admissions ("Ivy Leagues love it, gets 'em all wet"). The conversation is unexceptional, the shot looks down on them from overhead, their faces shiny with sweat.

And then, a phone rings. "Not mine," Virg says. Not Ben's either. They look at one another, startled, as the camera takes other views -- first through tree branches, on an angle, and then, ground level, as they're on their elbows and knees, squirming along the lawn until they find the spot from which the muffled sound emanates. They dig. They find it, buried with a hand, worms all over it. "You never forget the sight of a dead body," says Ben in voiceover. "But then again, I was experiencing a lot of things for the first time. I guess it's just part of growing up."

The camera careens, time-lapsing through the neighborhood, pitched roofs, white exteriors, fences dividing the properties. The frame stops on Ben, in uniform, working the counter at a fast food joint, Employee of the Month, the wall plaque says, every month. A white lady twists her necklace, fretful over what to eat; Ben knows the calories and fat grams in each item. So helpful, so polite. So nice. The lady smiles. "It's not as hard as it looks," he says in voiceover. All you have to do is read the manual. What's important is that it goes on his application, under "extracurricular activities." Ben works hard at getting to the next step, out of Orange County, Princeton maybe. He practices his free throws for the basketball team, keeps careful notes on his progress, volunteers down at the hospital (where he translates Spanish between doctors and patients), and, in order to get a perfect score on his next SATs, he learns vocabulary words: "They say if you repeat something enough times, it becomes part of you."

"Punctilious," reads the screen under Ben as he lies in bed, reciting. "Marked by or concerned about precise exact accordance with the details of codes or conventions."

Ben is just that, obsessed with doing it everything right, following procedure and keeping his head down; it's the best way he's figured to survive high school. He's a good kid, a "model minority" kid. He lusts just a little after a cheerleader named Stephanie Vandergosh (Karin Anna Cheung), but she's already taken, claimed by rich, slightly older Steve (John Cho). When Ben sees that Steve's also "boning some white chick," he's almost driven to tell Stephanie, but no. Ben's too honorable, too shy, and too enamored of her to break the news. "Girls like her," he sighs while the film freezes her face against a block of lockers, "Make you realize that life's not fair."

To even things up, perhaps, or because he's bored, or because it's so easy, Ben cheats: "It started with a pack of baseball cards and then it snowballed. I guess it just felt good to do things that I couldn't put on my college application." As long as these activities are confined to scamming computer warehouses on returns of credit card purchases or even selling cheat sheets to their average-student classmates, Ben and his friends coast. "It's easy as fuck," says Virgil's cousin, Daric (Roger Fan). Their straight As are their "passport to freedom" -- as long as they keep up appearances, the kids can stay out at "study group" until 4am. "The money was really good," Ben admits. "But I don't that's what attracted me the most."

They have good reasons to want to stick it to the system. While Ben thinks (or needs to think) he's on the basketball team because he wants to play, he admits to Daric that he spends most games on the bench. Daric sighs. Ben's a token: "It's obvious that the only reason you're on the team is for cosmetic reasons." It's true, adults are also scamming, to meet requirements, to make their lives easier or more exciting. The film underlines adult hypocrisy and lack of attention by never showing a parent (and the only adult with lines is a science teacher, played by Beaver Cleaver, also known as Jerry Mathers). This isn't to say that Ben and his friends exactly miss any "supervision" that might be offered by adults, but that the film acknowledges, in its visual economy as well as its plotting, the way they understand their lives, their restrictions, obligations, and desires.

Ben takes his accumulating responsibilities seriously -- hamburgers and homework, stealing and scamming. He observes the toll it's taking as he's snorting coke, trying to stay awake. "It's literally a fulltime job to make people believe you're who you're meant to be." That Ben is trying to figure out those expectations, how to resist or conform to them, is BLT's broadest, most conventional "statement." But in its details, its plot structured around an academic decathlon, its concentrated colors and fisheye lenses, the film is invigorating and vivid, anything but conventional.

The style goes to show the kids' sense of pressure and opportunity. Ben's not the only one who notices how hard it is to find himself. In one brief, bracing scene, Steve practices batting (Mr. All American Sports), the camera zooming in and out, then zip-circling him as he observes, "It's a never ending cycle. When you got everything you want, what's left? You can't settle for being happy, that's a fucking trap. You gotta take life into your own hands, do whatever it takes to break the cycle. That's what it is, breaking the cycle." That is what it is, but, as BLT reveals, the cycle is designed to resist breaking: even when you think you're out, you're in; if you're Ben, overachieving and banging on the side, you're caught coming or going.

The kids' escalating violence -- they beat down one adversary at a party, take up guns at another point -- has generated some controversy (this was one of the questions raised at Sundance). The movie insists that such acting out is just more performance, a way to counter U.S. media's Asian male stereotypes (polite and undesiring, "desexualized" or "feminized"), but not so subversive as Ben and Virgil first imagine it. More compellingly, the film offers insights into intra-community class and gender dynamics -- Ben and Steve's competition for Stephanie layers such tensions, neatly.

Still, and as much as they consider her as a prize to be won, Stephanie, an adopted child with her own background and identity questions, has been making decisions all along. That she hasn't made right ones, even for herself, makes her like the guys, but also not -- she has a sense of what's at stake, before Ben does. "You know how you make decisions that lead to other decisions?" she asks him. "And then you realize you don't remember why you made those decisions in the first place?" He nods, breathless. Stephanie, as she must, keeps breathing.

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.