What do you think?
Rate this book
BFI Film Classics
محلۀ چینیها
محله چینیها، فیلم نوآر آمریکایی را پس از سالها از محاق بیرون آورد. یکی از شاهکارهای سینمایی دهه ۱۹۷۰ آمریکا و ساخته و پرداختهٔ مشترک یک ذهن اروپایی (رومن پولانسکی) و یک ذهن آمریکایی (رابرت تاون). پایه گذار نئونوآر آمریکایی و از بدبینانهترین فیلمهای هالیوود که در عین حال نگاهی ستایشگرایانه به عصر طلایی هالیوود دارد و جزئیات آن دوران را با دقتی مثال زدنی، همپای توصیفات ریموند چندلر و دشیل همت به تصویر میکشد.
113 pages, Paperback
First published December 27, 1997
3 people are currently reading
168 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
December 19, 2023
Terrific short but in depth review and superb critique of my second favorite film of all time. (King Kong 1933 version often swaps places with Chinatown as for greatest, most enjoyable film in my estimation).
The author points out particular finer points and inconsistencies in the film. Even for a guy like me who’s seen this film more than any other film (over 25 times I’d estimate), this is an entertaining and enlightening work.
If you too are a Chinatown fanatic you might want to read this.
Recommended.
Can’t end this without mentioning a must-have for movie enthusiasts in general and Chinatown in particular: The Big Goodbye: Chinatown And The Last Years Of Hollywood by Sam Wasson.
The author points out particular finer points and inconsistencies in the film. Even for a guy like me who’s seen this film more than any other film (over 25 times I’d estimate), this is an entertaining and enlightening work.
If you too are a Chinatown fanatic you might want to read this.
Recommended.
Can’t end this without mentioning a must-have for movie enthusiasts in general and Chinatown in particular: The Big Goodbye: Chinatown And The Last Years Of Hollywood by Sam Wasson.
February 5, 2017
Yesterday I watched the movie and read this little book & enjoyed both very much. I should say that in a former life the author was a good friend of mine, but be that as it may, this is one of the best books on film I've come across. Michael does not avoid complex ideas but hardly ever falls into film theory jargon which makes some books in this series unreadable for me. He's always interesting and I'm only sorry he didn't do more of this stuff.
Chinatown is compelling for various reasons, one being its director Roman Polanski who is well-known for escaping three things - the Holocaust as a child in Poland, the murders of the Manson gang in 1969 (they got his wife Sharon Tate but he was in Europe filming), and the American legal authorities in 1977 who wished to put him on trial for the rape of a 14 year old girl. Remarkably, legal actions relating to that case are still wending their way through US and Polish courts and RP has not been able to visit the US since 1977 on pain of immediate incarceration.
Polanski himself acts a memorable bit part in Chinatown - it is he who shoves a knife up Jack Nicholson's nose and splits it, causing him to have to wear a huge bandage over his face for the next 30 minutes of the movie. Well, Jack had just called him a midget. The internet informs me he is 5 feet 4 inches tall. That's probably not relevant.
Chinatown is a metaphor - the film's last scene happens to be literally in LA's Chinese district but that's not relevant. Chinatown means the state of mind where you think you know what's going on but you really don't. What you should do is nothing because if you do anything you'll just make things worse.
Chinatown is compelling for various reasons, one being its director Roman Polanski who is well-known for escaping three things - the Holocaust as a child in Poland, the murders of the Manson gang in 1969 (they got his wife Sharon Tate but he was in Europe filming), and the American legal authorities in 1977 who wished to put him on trial for the rape of a 14 year old girl. Remarkably, legal actions relating to that case are still wending their way through US and Polish courts and RP has not been able to visit the US since 1977 on pain of immediate incarceration.
Polanski himself acts a memorable bit part in Chinatown - it is he who shoves a knife up Jack Nicholson's nose and splits it, causing him to have to wear a huge bandage over his face for the next 30 minutes of the movie. Well, Jack had just called him a midget. The internet informs me he is 5 feet 4 inches tall. That's probably not relevant.
Chinatown is a metaphor - the film's last scene happens to be literally in LA's Chinese district but that's not relevant. Chinatown means the state of mind where you think you know what's going on but you really don't. What you should do is nothing because if you do anything you'll just make things worse.
December 18, 2024
Wow esse foi um dos melhores BFI Classics que já li, não conhecia o dramaturgo e roteirista Michael Eaton, mas ele sem dúvida soube extrair o melhor do filme do Polanski.
A contribuição que mais gostei aqui e ele dá ênfase no crédito de Poe sobre isso, é que toda estória de detetives é uma corruptela do Édipo de Sófocles (e Chinatown mais ainda), todo detetive de noir tem a resposta debaixo do nariz desde o início, mas não consegue enxergar, no caso do Gittes é visualmente marcado pelo esparadrapo no nariz, mas também se espelha na tragédia do Cross e Evelyn pela via patriarcal. Um pequeno grande livro é uma análise brilhante.
A contribuição que mais gostei aqui e ele dá ênfase no crédito de Poe sobre isso, é que toda estória de detetives é uma corruptela do Édipo de Sófocles (e Chinatown mais ainda), todo detetive de noir tem a resposta debaixo do nariz desde o início, mas não consegue enxergar, no caso do Gittes é visualmente marcado pelo esparadrapo no nariz, mas também se espelha na tragédia do Cross e Evelyn pela via patriarcal. Um pequeno grande livro é uma análise brilhante.
July 6, 2024
«...محلهی چینیها بازتاب تحریفشدهای از جهان در شیشهای تاریک و شکسته نیست؛ تصویر خود دنیای ماست.»
January 18, 2018
Provocative BFI entry, thanks to detailed scene-by-scene analysis of the celebrated neo-noir. Tilts philosophical and anthropological -- van Gennep's 'Rites of Passage' gets a shout-out in the footnotes. IMHO gives too short a shrift to Dunaway's genuinely tragic character and the rather obvious sexual and feminist issues raised by the plot.
May 12, 2016
A good way to revisit this movie when you can't actually see it again. Eaton philosophises just a bit too much for my taste, but that's the nature of this series, I guess. I see Salman Rushdie is the author of the BFI Classics on The Wizard of Oz. That seems a curious combination!
June 20, 2023
This is a compact, ruminative, somewhat discursive essay on Chinatown (1974) that offers convincing insights into the film. There’s virtually no aspect he doesn’t examine — however momentarily. The film’s director and scenarist get serious and illuminating attention. The producer gets his due as well. The studio less so, which is a bit surprising because Chinatown is often heralded as the last great studio production.
Eaton notices patterns, repetitions — which he refers to as “rhymes” — and he is intelligently sensitive to point of view. There is almost no technical aspect he doesn’t touch, however lightly, and he has insightful things to say about cinematography, art direction, and costume design. A bit more about Jerry Goldsmith’s last-minute and mood-defining score would have been welcome (and deserved).
His observations on film noir are scattered throughout the text, but, as his essay is winding down, he writes something so clarifying as to seem obvious. I was annoyed that I hadn’t figured it out myself. It begins on page 56, where he notes that “Film noir is not a genre like the Western or the gangster film, instantly defined by location or the presence of conventional characters. Neither is it, like the detective or love story, defined by a particular pattern of narrative development[.]” Of course!
Depending on one’s level of interest in Chinatown, this can be either a quick read or a deep one. Either way, it is a decidedly pleasurable one.
Eaton notices patterns, repetitions — which he refers to as “rhymes” — and he is intelligently sensitive to point of view. There is almost no technical aspect he doesn’t touch, however lightly, and he has insightful things to say about cinematography, art direction, and costume design. A bit more about Jerry Goldsmith’s last-minute and mood-defining score would have been welcome (and deserved).
His observations on film noir are scattered throughout the text, but, as his essay is winding down, he writes something so clarifying as to seem obvious. I was annoyed that I hadn’t figured it out myself. It begins on page 56, where he notes that “Film noir is not a genre like the Western or the gangster film, instantly defined by location or the presence of conventional characters. Neither is it, like the detective or love story, defined by a particular pattern of narrative development[.]” Of course!
Depending on one’s level of interest in Chinatown, this can be either a quick read or a deep one. Either way, it is a decidedly pleasurable one.
April 12, 2025
Pretty easy to read and short but insightful book about one of my favourite films. Aside from giving a bit of background about the noir and detective genres, the author goes through the movie pretty much scene by scene and explains what is going on, pointing out the minor details that have a place in the narrative, with a little bit about the production on the way. I didn't love the writing style - too many parentheses at times, and some humor that doesn't really land. There is a new section at the end about the Two Jakes, and I had to quickly go and watch that film before finishing the book, but the section didn't contain too many spoilers it turns out. I'm interested to find out what other books in this series are like - I've picked up Altman's 3 Women so far.
November 29, 2021
The BFI Film Classics series lets each author decide what they are going to write about on the given film. This entry on the Robert Towne-penned and Roman Polanski-directed Chinatown is structured as a scene-by-scene description of the film. Along the way, Eaton examines the film’s characters through the lens of Joseph Campbell-inspired pseudoanthropology. Perhaps the author thought this was deep stuff, but it doesn’t really illuminate Chinatown at all and quickly becomes tiresome. The book had some small value in explaining how Polanski made some changes in Townes’ screenplay, but otherwise I’m still on the lookout for a decent treatment of Chinatown.
April 8, 2019
گیتس : همیشه دونستن حقیت لازم نیست، میتونه خیلی سودمند نباشه
June 27, 2025
محلهٔ چینیها را نمیتوان تنها یک نوار معمایی یا یک داستان کارآگاهی کلاسیک دانست. همانقدر که دربارهٔ رمزگشایی یک جنایت است، دربارهٔ مواجهه با فاجعهایست که در لایههای پنهان شهر، قدرت، خانواده و حافظه جمعی دفن شده.
«جیک گیتس» با بازی جک نیکلسون، یک کارآگاه خصوصیست که با اعتمادبهنفس و نگاه حسابشده وارد پروندهای ساده به نظر میرسد—خیانت. اما آنچه کشف میکند، چیزیست بسیار بزرگتر، پیچیدهتر، تاریکتر: فسادی سیستماتیک، درهمتنیدگی شهوت و قدرت، و خط قرمزهایی که نه قانون، که وجدان را میلرزاند.
محله چینیها نماد همان ناحیهٔ ممنوعهٔ ذهن ماست؛ جایی که آدمها وانمود میکنند چیزی نمیفهمند، چون فهمیدن، سنگینتر از نادانیست. فیلم بهطرزی بیرحمانه نشان میدهد که چگونه لایهلایهی حقیقت، چنان در هم پیچیدهاند که افشاگری، تنها راهیست به سوی فروپاشی بیشتر، نه رستگاری. همانقدر که گیتس تلاش میکند بفهمد، بیشتر در گلولای حقیقت فرو میرود، تا آنجا که معنای عدالت خودش را میبازد.
فیلم با ظرافت از استعارههای روانی بهره میبرد—پدرسالاریِ ویرانگر، تجاوز پنهان، و شهری که زیر خاک خشک و ترکخوردهاش، هم خون جاریست و هم آب؛ آب بهعنوان عنصر حیات، و همزمان، عنصر سلطه. فای داناوی در نقش زنی زخمی، نمایندهٔ نسلیست که در سکوت، بار هولناکی را به دوش میکشد—نه برای رهایی، بلکه برای بقا.
پایان فیلم، یکی از تلخترین پایانهای تاریخ سینماست. نه بهخاطر خشونت، بلکه بهخاطر پذیرشِ نومیدی. آنجا که میگویند:
"Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."
جاییست که منطق راه به جایی نمیبرد. جاییست که حقیقت، همیشه دیر پیدا میشود و وقتی پیدا میشود، فقط ویرانهای به جا میماند.
محلهٔ چینیها یک تراژدی مدرن است. دربارهٔ سقوط آرامِ اخلاق، دربارهٔ شکست فرد در برابر قدرت، و دربارهٔ عادت انسان به «نادیدن»—حتی وقتی همهچیز، درست مقابل چشمانش اتفاق میافتد.
«جیک گیتس» با بازی جک نیکلسون، یک کارآگاه خصوصیست که با اعتمادبهنفس و نگاه حسابشده وارد پروندهای ساده به نظر میرسد—خیانت. اما آنچه کشف میکند، چیزیست بسیار بزرگتر، پیچیدهتر، تاریکتر: فسادی سیستماتیک، درهمتنیدگی شهوت و قدرت، و خط قرمزهایی که نه قانون، که وجدان را میلرزاند.
محله چینیها نماد همان ناحیهٔ ممنوعهٔ ذهن ماست؛ جایی که آدمها وانمود میکنند چیزی نمیفهمند، چون فهمیدن، سنگینتر از نادانیست. فیلم بهطرزی بیرحمانه نشان میدهد که چگونه لایهلایهی حقیقت، چنان در هم پیچیدهاند که افشاگری، تنها راهیست به سوی فروپاشی بیشتر، نه رستگاری. همانقدر که گیتس تلاش میکند بفهمد، بیشتر در گلولای حقیقت فرو میرود، تا آنجا که معنای عدالت خودش را میبازد.
فیلم با ظرافت از استعارههای روانی بهره میبرد—پدرسالاریِ ویرانگر، تجاوز پنهان، و شهری که زیر خاک خشک و ترکخوردهاش، هم خون جاریست و هم آب؛ آب بهعنوان عنصر حیات، و همزمان، عنصر سلطه. فای داناوی در نقش زنی زخمی، نمایندهٔ نسلیست که در سکوت، بار هولناکی را به دوش میکشد—نه برای رهایی، بلکه برای بقا.
پایان فیلم، یکی از تلخترین پایانهای تاریخ سینماست. نه بهخاطر خشونت، بلکه بهخاطر پذیرشِ نومیدی. آنجا که میگویند:
"Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."
جاییست که منطق راه به جایی نمیبرد. جاییست که حقیقت، همیشه دیر پیدا میشود و وقتی پیدا میشود، فقط ویرانهای به جا میماند.
محلهٔ چینیها یک تراژدی مدرن است. دربارهٔ سقوط آرامِ اخلاق، دربارهٔ شکست فرد در برابر قدرت، و دربارهٔ عادت انسان به «نادیدن»—حتی وقتی همهچیز، درست مقابل چشمانش اتفاق میافتد.
July 28, 2011
This short book is an incredibly quick read (I took about 2, 2.5 hours). And it has some really good insights into a tremendously complex movie. However, Eaton has two stylistic tendencies that aren't quite redeeming--his insider references and his presentation of philosophical precepts as givens. Also, to take Eaton at his word, Chinatown is seemingly a perfect movie that deals with all important cultural, philosophical, and filmic concerns of the 1930s and 1970s in one brilliantly constructed package.
Eaton probably wrote this book for an audience already keenly familiar with the dynamics and personalities of early 1970s Hollywood. I say this because he often refers to people in a way that suggests the names should be meaningful, but Eaton doesn't explain what meaning the names should have. This is particularly trueof the first section of the book where he discusses the background and making of Chinatown.
The other thing Eaton tends to do is make broad sweeping philosophical claims, such as about the meaninglessness of life and events, or the randomness of time. These claims support points he makes in his analysis, but as philosophical presuppsitions they are far from accepted wisdom.
Eaton probably wrote this book for an audience already keenly familiar with the dynamics and personalities of early 1970s Hollywood. I say this because he often refers to people in a way that suggests the names should be meaningful, but Eaton doesn't explain what meaning the names should have. This is particularly trueof the first section of the book where he discusses the background and making of Chinatown.
The other thing Eaton tends to do is make broad sweeping philosophical claims, such as about the meaninglessness of life and events, or the randomness of time. These claims support points he makes in his analysis, but as philosophical presuppsitions they are far from accepted wisdom.
May 21, 2012
the backgrounding is good. the exposition is vulgar, overwrought & pretentious; lapsing into "sociological perspicacity", "dramaturgical essence of the premise" & "capitalist commodity fetishistic social relationships".
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews