Historical Reflection to be Induced, on Lu Chuan's Nanjing Nanjing

BBC's Michael Bristow sees the mistrust between Chinese and Japanese too deep to be eliminated by a single film. 

The making of the film, and the subsequent public reaction, has revealed just how difficult it will be for the movie to achieve that goal. While it was being filmed, there were disagreements between the Chinese and Japanese actors - and a fight. And since its release the director has received a death threat and a storm of unfavourable comments from angry Chinese film-goers.

Lu Chuan, the director of the film, also reveals his somewhat discreet intention not explicitly reported in China's media, 

The relationship between China and Japan is very unstable. There is too much misunderstanding between each other. It's very important to tell Chinese people that Japanese people are human beings - not beasts.

In another interview reported on Le Monde, Lu Chuan says,

'Les films de guerre chinois sont tous sur le même format, les Chinois sont braves, les Japonais monstrueux. Là, les gens voient tout à coup la réalité, les jeunes surtout réagissent très bien, ils revoient plusieurs fois le film.'

'Ce n'est pas un film sur les Chinois et les Japonais, c'est un film sur les êtres humains dans la guerre. Les sentiments de Kadokawa sont ceux d'un être humain, et son écroulement, celui de la nature humaine. Les soldats se prennent vite pour des dieux, ils ont le pouvoir de vie et de mort, peuvent violer toutes les filles qu'ils veulent.'

'Il n'y a pas de héros dans l'histoire, les héros, c'est du bidon'

Johnny Erling of Welt has observed the coincidence of Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso's visit to Beijing and the release of the film, 

Aber im Vorfeld hatten Diplomaten die Gefahr ausgeräumt, dass die innenpolitischen Handlungen in beiden Ländern zum Eklat führen könnten. Das Verhältnis zwischen den ehemaligen Erzfeinden ist reifer geworden. Es verträgt, dass während Abes Besuch in China zwei große Publikumsfilme über das von Japan in Nanking verbrochene Massaker 1937 gezeigt werden.

Paul Mooney of UAE's the National pays a special attention on the official endorsement of the film. 

Experts hail the approval of the movie by the film bureau, ministry of foreign affairs and the propaganda department, as a turning point in China’s attitude towards Japan, and a sign of a more mature policy. The propaganda department has listed the film among 10 that people should see this year during the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Republic of China. 

A AP report appeared in WP in 2007 quotes comment by Phil Deans, a scholar on Sino-Japanese relations at Temple University's Japan campus. 

Highlighting Japanese atrocities is historically important because it evokes the success of China's ruling communists. 

Call it a historical representation in an contemporary eyes, or contemporary issues reinscribe by historical representations in a film, the relationship between China and Japan seems always weighing heavier than the film itself. It might be helpful to review an old report in Time on making films about Nanjing Massacre, in which, Tim Morrison describes it as 'holding holstage to history', but it might be true, that politicians at both sides have realized that maintaining sound relationship is far more important than that. 

Economist's report on Nanjing Nanjing follows the similar suit. 

The pressing need for a modicum of harmony in which to navigate the financial crisis together may be enough to keep the lid on all that unhappy history.

For Chinese who have seen “City of Life and Death”, what stands out most is its sympathetic portrayal of a Japanese soldier. This is a novel twist for Chinese treatments of the subject, and the film’s official sanction suggests a desire to promote more nuanced views. But the time may not be ripe. Lu Chuan, the film’s director, has received death threats and accusations of being a traitor and a stooge for Japanese revisionists.

Film like Nanjing Nanjing however, is a more positive move, socially speaking, to open debates in the public sphere, so the general audiences will have better understanding  of a historical event from multiple perspectives. Lu Chuan might be accused of relativizing the historical truth through an all embracing view (like a God indeed), treating those Chinese victims as cowards without fighting spirit, especially the two survival persons at the end are more likely to leave such an impression. 

Certainly Lu Chuan is not a savior of the historical truth, as this NYT report quotes Xinhua's story, in which Lu Chuan admitted that 'he had underestimated the capacity and sensitivity of that part of history', but one should not forget that exactly because of such a treatment, in the name of humanity, opens the space for the public to review and examine their own historical sense and their own understanding of humanity in such an unprecedented historical atrosity. 

In this regard, the film is not imposing something to the audience, but inducing them to think. This is actually what's needed now in contemporary Chinese society.