Summons to Death (1967: Lo Wei: Hong Kong)

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

Do you notice it is harder to do a review on a film you think is OK as opposed to one that you think is either great or dross?

Several posts on Kung Fu Cinema (KFC) tout this as an underrated gym. After watching this I wonder where that film was. It does have its moments of interesting scenes and unintentional camp. It was semi-competent, though a bit sluggish in its plot. It reminded me a bit of Our Man Flint (1966) which probably inspired it somewhat (though takes on the Bond/spy formula were in vogue as Mission Impossible and Matt Helm in The Silencers also came out in 1966 and the Shaw Brothers had already had a couple of spy films directed by Lo Wei.) Though apparently the main source for it was a book by Fang Lung-hsiang which I am curious about but have not been able to find.*

It starts off with shapely Ying Nian (Fanny Fan Lai in a variety of splendorous sartorial styles) seducing a warlord who happens to have a treasure map hidden in his locket. However, she only steals one of the maps when there was actually two. Why the warlord keeps both of them in different compartments in his locket and why when she steals she does not close the locket? We will ignore that and go on. They later get attacked by other pirates. These pirates have to be the cleanliest and most un-pirate pirates I have ever seen led by the director Lo Wei as Gin Te-biu. They have matching uniforms (well so do the warlord’s cronies.) How smart was it to raise pirate flags before attempting to attack a ship? I guess there is no coast patrol around to see those flags or the exploding artillery. Anyways, Gin Te-biu gets the second map.

A few years later Gin comes back to Hong Kong to visit his cronies (get the gang back together), find his sister Mei Li (Tina Chin-fei) who is in a circus and get the treasure. However Gin is double crossed by one of his associates and ends up in jail. In one of the more unbelievable plot points: Mei Li ends up thinking that Tang Liu aka The Owl (Tang Ching) has an item for her at the Blue Pool Night Club (guess who owns this place – Ying Nian who has the other map.) This starts a cat-and-mouse game of both sides trying to get both maps to find the treasure with a few additional people interfering as well. Interesting note (to me) all three main actors here and the director Lo Wei earlier worked on another spy thriller Angel with the Iron Fists (1967).

The fight scenes shown here are a brawling type, especially earlier on between the pirates, but nothing special. Some fisticuffs (sometimes under-cranked) and Judo from Tang Ching (who being a feminist has no problem fighting a woman) and some Judo from Ting Chin as well that I liked more than the earlier mass fight. There is something hilarious about standing wrist-locks that result in the other combatant to flip to the ground. It is telling that the action scenes are more influenced by James Bond movies than anything else like wuxia or Kung Fu.

The set design and its use of color are some of the high points of the film. When Shaw Brothers did stage work at this time period it looked great. The interiors of The Owl’s abode especially reminded me of Our Man Flint with hidden compartments to help with dressing, though the most memorable aspects are the head massaging real arms in the wall and him French-kissing the face-statue to get a cigarette. I also liked the amount of exterior shots of Hong Kong. The acting was fine. But overall, especially when you watch the film more than once the amount of plot problems are noticeable. It has the typical Bond mistake where you wonder why put the protagonists in an escape predicament, reminding me of Oldboy, when you could have just killed them. I will forgive them for that though, especially compared to the end where they just kicked out the box which they could have done in the first place. But ultimately I found too many mistakes and a story that was too languid in its pacing and a lackluster ending to recommend this to too many people other than Shaw Brothers fans. You would be better off seeing a James Bond movie or the first Flint film.

The back description of the R3 IVL is misleading. The image on the back is not in the movie so it’s most likely a still and/or from the lobby card. Special Features are Trailers: Angel With The Iron Fists, The Singing Killer, Temptress Of A Thousand Faces and The Black Butterfly and Movie Information with Movie Stills, Original Poster, Production Notes (which is mostly worthless) and Biography & Selected Filmography. There are subtitles for both English and Traditional Chinese. The Mandarin track is mono and the picture is anamorphic.

* Former KFC member Mark (Hi Mark) had asked about the name of the book here, but there was no reply.

Tags: cheating, Derek Flint, gambling, gwailo dancer, James Bond, Judo, Matt Helm, mind-control, pirates.

Sources:
The Lucid Nightmare Review: He likes it way more than I do, but this is a good read with reference to other Shaw Brothers films. I do not think that all the “camp” here is intended. The Owl really seems more like a chaste Chang Cheh character than a swinger in this film. Some good images on the film though (probably did not need the captions.)
The Spinning Image Review: States music was from You Only Live Twice.
A Pessimist Is Never Disappointed Review: Has a link to Durian Dave’s site for Fanny Fan. Also mentions music from You Only Live Twice.
You Only Live Twice Soundtrack: I have not been able to match up this with what I have in the movie so far.
Hotel Merlin (shown in movie). According to this source it was demolished in 1982.

Questions/Comments:
If you recognize any of the music, other than You Only Live Twice, please post.
If you find any books or magazines that mention of this in any detail please post here. I have found very little information on this movie.
If you have any knowledge about the book this movie was based on please post.
I am probably missing some sources for this film both Shaw Brothers and abroad. Please post if you can recognize anything I have not mentioned.
The face changing mask reminds me of Mission Impossible (1966). I’m trying to think of other films/TV series which used this before 1967.
What the heck does The Owl do for a living?

[Markgway]

Do you notice it is harder to do a review on a film you think is OK as opposed to one that you think is either great or dross?

That's so true.

What the heck does The Owl do for a living?

Comedian? I hear he's a real hoot!

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

Do you notice it is harder to do a review on a film you think is OK as opposed to one that you think is either great or dross?

That's so true.

What the heck does The Owl do for a living?

Comedian? I hear he's a real hoot!

Ow, ow, ow, oh that hurt.

I just kept plugging away at this to get it done. What's funny is that the first link under sources has a review that is so positive (If not wrong on several parts) that I wonder what film was he watching (same comment I made about some posters on KFC.) Rewatching it I really don't feel that The Owl is a swinger or straight for that matter. It takes him to be drugged to even really hit on Fanny Fan (hmmm, might put that in the review.)

Still looking for that book the film is based on.

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

Mark have you seen this (has anyone seen this)? I also just found that I have a copy of The Golden Buddha (1966: Lo Wei) which I probably should have watched before this.

[Markgway]

Mark have you seen this (has anyone seen this)?

Yeah, I gave it **.

Wasn't terribly impressed.

I also just found that I have a copy of The Golden Buddha (1966: Lo Wei) which I probably should have watched before this.

I gave that one **½.

[HungFist]

Do you notice it is harder to do a review on a film you think is OK as opposed to one that you think is either great or dross?

That's so true.

Mixed bags tend to be the easiest to review. Great or terrible films sometimes have the problem that you only have good / bad things to say, which doesn't make a very interesting review. Well, for mini-reviews it doesn't matter, but for long ones, yes.

But yeah, I do get what you're saying.

[Masterofoneinchpunch]

Do you notice it is harder to do a review on a film you think is OK as opposed to one that you think is either great or dross?

That's so true.

Mixed bags tend to be the easiest to review. Great or terrible films sometimes have the problem that you only have good / bad things to say, which doesn't make a very interesting review. Well, for mini-reviews it doesn't matter, but for long ones, yes.

But yeah, I do get what you're saying.

Mixed bags are easy as long as there are highs and lows. When I meant by OK was films that were there are no large highs or lows. I agree where reviews just concentrate on highs or only lows can make an uninteresting read. I also feel that when doing a longer review one should look for both the good and bad in a film. Reviews with too much hyperbole (not counting poor writing skills) are the ones I tend to dislike the most.