WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.660 So imagine a movie that checks all of the following 00:00:03.660 --> 00:00:08.179 boxes. First, it's an R -rated 75 -minute neon 00:00:08.179 --> 00:00:11.179 -drenched fever dream centered around the late 00:00:11.179 --> 00:00:14.599 90s club scene. Okay, quite the specific vibe 00:00:14.599 --> 00:00:17.539 right out of the gate. Right. And second, it 00:00:17.539 --> 00:00:20.519 features a mysteriously vanished one -night stand, 00:00:20.859 --> 00:00:23.920 a chaotic search through a massive metropolis, 00:00:24.039 --> 00:00:27.519 and this wildly eclectic cast of characters who 00:00:27.519 --> 00:00:29.699 just keep colliding with each other. Which sounds 00:00:29.699 --> 00:00:31.460 like a pretty standard thriller setup, honestly. 00:00:31.679 --> 00:00:34.159 It does. But third, and this is just to make 00:00:34.159 --> 00:00:36.340 things completely surreal, it is officially classified 00:00:36.340 --> 00:00:39.060 as a Christmas movie. Yeah. That is the part 00:00:39.060 --> 00:00:41.640 that gets me. Welcome to today's deep dive. I 00:00:41.640 --> 00:00:43.320 am incredibly glad you're here with us because 00:00:43.320 --> 00:00:45.920 we have a truly unique piece of media to explore 00:00:45.920 --> 00:00:48.719 today. We really do. It's one of those combinations 00:00:48.719 --> 00:00:50.939 that just makes you do a double take. You just 00:00:50.939 --> 00:00:53.520 don't typically put R -rated rave comedy and 00:00:53.520 --> 00:00:55.560 holiday release in the same sentence. Let alone 00:00:55.560 --> 00:00:57.979 the same cinematic universe. Exactly. But that 00:00:57.979 --> 00:01:00.359 contrast is exactly what makes today's topic 00:01:00.359 --> 00:01:02.920 so compelling for us to dig into. Okay, let's 00:01:02.920 --> 00:01:05.980 unpack this. We are looking at a Wikipedia article 00:01:05.980 --> 00:01:10.819 detailing a somewhat obscure 1999 Hong Kong film 00:01:10.819 --> 00:01:13.900 called Rave Fever. Yeah. You might also see it 00:01:13.900 --> 00:01:16.819 out there referred to as X -Mas Rave Fever or 00:01:16.819 --> 00:01:20.219 by its original Chinese title, Zumo Kuang Rui. 00:01:20.400 --> 00:01:22.319 Now, if you are sitting there listening to this 00:01:22.319 --> 00:01:24.260 and wondering why we're dedicating an entire 00:01:24.260 --> 00:01:27.719 deep dive to a relatively short late 90s comedy 00:01:27.719 --> 00:01:29.640 that you've likely never heard of, hang with 00:01:29.640 --> 00:01:31.599 us. Definitely stick around for this one. Because 00:01:31.599 --> 00:01:33.780 our mission today isn't just to summarize the 00:01:33.780 --> 00:01:35.739 plot of an old movie. We're going to explore 00:01:35.739 --> 00:01:39.200 a fascinating cinematic experiment. This film 00:01:39.200 --> 00:01:42.040 is essentially a bizarre, brilliant little puzzle 00:01:42.040 --> 00:01:45.319 box, and opening it up reveals a ton about how 00:01:45.319 --> 00:01:48.040 stories are constructed and how master filmmakers 00:01:48.040 --> 00:01:50.519 find their voice. That is the perfect framework 00:01:50.519 --> 00:01:52.400 for this, really, because for anyone who loves 00:01:52.400 --> 00:01:54.319 peering under the hood to see how a narrative 00:01:54.319 --> 00:01:57.159 engine actually works, this film is an absolute 00:01:57.159 --> 00:01:59.540 hidden gem. It really is. It was directed by 00:01:59.540 --> 00:02:01.739 Alan Mack. Now, for anyone who follows international 00:02:01.739 --> 00:02:03.890 cinema, That name probably just made your ears 00:02:03.890 --> 00:02:06.109 perk up because Alan Mack is a heavyweight. Oh, 00:02:06.129 --> 00:02:09.110 absolutely. But back in 1999, he was still, you 00:02:09.110 --> 00:02:11.659 know, finding his footing. This project essentially 00:02:11.659 --> 00:02:14.539 serves as an early playground for a filmmaker 00:02:14.539 --> 00:02:17.520 who would eventually go on to fundamentally shote 00:02:17.520 --> 00:02:19.979 modern Hong Kong cinema. You're basically looking 00:02:19.979 --> 00:02:23.400 at the early chaotic sketches of a master architect. 00:02:23.819 --> 00:02:26.259 Right. You get to see all the wild experimentation 00:02:26.259 --> 00:02:29.419 before the structural rules of his later career 00:02:29.419 --> 00:02:31.860 fully set in. And I love looking at early works 00:02:31.860 --> 00:02:34.199 for exactly that reason. You can see the fingerprints 00:02:34.199 --> 00:02:37.099 all over it. Let's get right into the setup of 00:02:37.099 --> 00:02:39.360 this wild architectural sketch. Let's do it. 00:02:39.770 --> 00:02:41.669 Reading through the material, the plot reads 00:02:41.669 --> 00:02:43.949 like a classic 90s thriller, but it's immediately 00:02:43.949 --> 00:02:47.590 clear that things are slightly off kilter. We're 00:02:47.590 --> 00:02:49.469 introduced to our main character, a guy named 00:02:49.469 --> 00:02:52.069 Don. Good old Don. Yeah. The text describes him 00:02:52.069 --> 00:02:54.830 as a harried yuppie living in Hong Kong. And 00:02:54.830 --> 00:02:56.789 one detail that stands out right away, Don and 00:02:56.789 --> 00:02:59.250 Don, is played by Mark Louie. Now, for those 00:02:59.250 --> 00:03:02.009 who might not know, Mark Louie is actually a 00:03:02.009 --> 00:03:04.889 famously successful cantipop composer. Which 00:03:04.889 --> 00:03:08.830 is huge. Huge. Think of cantipop as this massive, 00:03:08.909 --> 00:03:11.349 highly produced music industry that absolutely 00:03:11.349 --> 00:03:14.669 dominated Asian charts in the 90s. It was basically 00:03:14.669 --> 00:03:17.280 the K -pop of its day. But Louis didn't just 00:03:17.280 --> 00:03:19.919 step in to act in this movie. He composed much 00:03:19.919 --> 00:03:22.439 of the film's music as well. Which is such a 00:03:22.439 --> 00:03:24.259 brilliant choice when you think about it. It 00:03:24.259 --> 00:03:27.439 adds this incredible layer of authenticity to 00:03:27.439 --> 00:03:29.460 the vibe of the film. Oh, for sure. I mean, you 00:03:29.460 --> 00:03:31.460 have a literal chart -topping music composer 00:03:31.460 --> 00:03:35.259 starring as the lead in a movie centered entirely 00:03:35.259 --> 00:03:38.080 around the underground rave scene. And he's providing 00:03:38.080 --> 00:03:42.099 the soundtrack to his own on -screen chaos. It's 00:03:42.099 --> 00:03:44.159 like he's scoring his own bad decisions in real 00:03:44.159 --> 00:03:46.990 time. Exactly. It completely anchors the aesthetic. 00:03:47.129 --> 00:03:48.990 It really blurs the line between the subject 00:03:48.990 --> 00:03:51.750 matter and the production itself. So Dawn, our 00:03:51.750 --> 00:03:54.150 stressed out yuppie, ends up having a one night 00:03:54.150 --> 00:03:57.330 stand with a mysterious woman named Sonia. But 00:03:57.330 --> 00:03:59.930 the inciting incident hits the very next morning. 00:04:00.389 --> 00:04:02.830 Sonia vanishes without a trace. Just gone. She 00:04:02.830 --> 00:04:05.969 is just gone. However, she leaves behind the 00:04:05.969 --> 00:04:09.250 ultimate quintessential 90s artifact. She leaves 00:04:09.250 --> 00:04:12.080 her filofax. Okay. Let's just pause and appreciate 00:04:12.080 --> 00:04:14.060 the gravity of that for a second. Because for 00:04:14.060 --> 00:04:16.160 anyone who might not remember the pre -smartphone 00:04:16.160 --> 00:04:18.980 era, or maybe you were born after it, a Filofax 00:04:18.980 --> 00:04:21.139 wasn't just a simple notebook. It was this thick, 00:04:21.180 --> 00:04:24.699 leather -bound winder with little rings filled 00:04:24.699 --> 00:04:27.560 with custom inserts. It was a person's entire 00:04:27.560 --> 00:04:30.540 existence in physical form. Yes. It held your 00:04:30.540 --> 00:04:32.680 contacts, your daily schedule, your private notes, 00:04:32.740 --> 00:04:36.560 your whole social ecosystem. Losing it was catastrophic. 00:04:37.040 --> 00:04:39.379 So leaving it behind in a stranger's apartment, 00:04:39.560 --> 00:04:42.339 that is a massive narrative hook. It really is 00:04:42.339 --> 00:04:44.819 the master key to this woman's life. So Dawn, 00:04:45.060 --> 00:04:47.379 armed with this leather -bound external brain, 00:04:47.620 --> 00:04:50.019 attempts to retrace his steps from the night 00:04:50.019 --> 00:04:53.279 before to find Sonia. And this kicks off a wild 00:04:53.279 --> 00:04:55.819 goose chase that introduces us to an incredibly 00:04:55.819 --> 00:04:58.850 tangled web of characters. Very tangled. If you 00:04:58.850 --> 00:05:00.730 try to map out the chain of custody for this 00:05:00.730 --> 00:05:03.129 filofax based on the article, it goes completely 00:05:03.129 --> 00:05:05.949 off the rails almost immediately. First, Dawn 00:05:05.949 --> 00:05:07.970 encounters a woman named Nicole, played by Jamie 00:05:07.970 --> 00:05:11.149 Ong. The article describes Nicole as a sexually 00:05:11.149 --> 00:05:13.410 liberated but potentially untrustworthy woman 00:05:13.410 --> 00:05:16.170 who might or might completely not actually know 00:05:16.170 --> 00:05:18.750 Sonia. She's essentially the first roadblock. 00:05:19.350 --> 00:05:22.029 She introduces the concept of the unreliable 00:05:22.029 --> 00:05:25.000 narrator into Dawn's quest. Right. He thinks 00:05:25.000 --> 00:05:27.560 he's following a breadcrumb trail, but the breadcrumbs 00:05:27.560 --> 00:05:30.579 might be fake. Right. And from there, the fellow 00:05:30.579 --> 00:05:33.660 fact somehow completely transfers out of Don's 00:05:33.660 --> 00:05:35.920 orbit. It ends up in the hands of a journalist 00:05:35.920 --> 00:05:39.519 named Ashley, played by Yo -Yo Mung. Ashley then 00:05:39.519 --> 00:05:42.019 gets tangled up with a handsome but deeply troubled 00:05:42.019 --> 00:05:45.480 guy named Stephen, played by Terrence Yen. And 00:05:45.480 --> 00:05:48.899 get this, Stephen is revealed to be Sonia's former 00:05:48.899 --> 00:05:51.779 lover. So the circle starts to tighten, but notice 00:05:51.779 --> 00:05:53.779 how the perspective has completely shifted away 00:05:53.779 --> 00:05:56.259 from our original protagonist. Really? Dawn is 00:05:56.259 --> 00:05:58.139 practically in the rearview mirror now. Suddenly, 00:05:58.379 --> 00:06:01.399 Ashley, the journalist, suspects foul play. She 00:06:01.399 --> 00:06:02.980 thinks something terrible has happened to the 00:06:02.980 --> 00:06:05.139 missing Sonia, which leads her to cross paths 00:06:05.139 --> 00:06:08.180 with a very peculiar club patron named Gordon, 00:06:08.279 --> 00:06:10.720 played by Sam Lee. Think about how wild that 00:06:10.720 --> 00:06:13.019 progression is. We've gone from a yuppies awkward 00:06:13.019 --> 00:06:15.680 morning after to a journalist's pseudo -murder 00:06:15.680 --> 00:06:18.839 investigation, all linked by a day planner. What's 00:06:18.839 --> 00:06:21.240 fascinating here is how the film handles all 00:06:21.240 --> 00:06:23.620 of this setup. If you just look at those plot 00:06:23.620 --> 00:06:27.480 beats, the mysteriously missing woman, the highly 00:06:27.480 --> 00:06:30.540 suspicious cast of characters, the gritty underground 00:06:30.540 --> 00:06:33.500 rave backdrop. You'd brace yourself for a dark, 00:06:33.540 --> 00:06:35.980 high -octane thriller. Exactly. But the tone 00:06:35.980 --> 00:06:38.439 isn't what you'd expect at all. The source material 00:06:38.439 --> 00:06:41.519 references a review from a site called baens 00:06:41.519 --> 00:06:45.560 .com. Which clarifies this beautifully. The reviewer 00:06:45.560 --> 00:06:48.740 points out that this is absolutely not some sexy, 00:06:48.819 --> 00:06:51.720 highly charged exploration of the HK rave scene. 00:06:51.879 --> 00:06:53.420 Which is kind of what the poster makes it look 00:06:53.420 --> 00:06:55.899 like. Right. But instead, it's actually a fairly 00:06:55.899 --> 00:06:59.680 subdued but very amusing comedy. Wait, a comedy? 00:06:59.879 --> 00:07:02.620 After setting up missing women, potentially untrustworthy 00:07:02.620 --> 00:07:05.139 informants, and foul play? That feels like a 00:07:05.139 --> 00:07:07.459 massive bait and switch. Oh, it is entirely a 00:07:07.459 --> 00:07:09.079 bait and switch, but a very intentional one. 00:07:09.399 --> 00:07:11.740 The review points out that it's a comedy cleverly 00:07:11.740 --> 00:07:14.519 disguised beneath the veneer of a mystery. It 00:07:14.519 --> 00:07:16.560 plays out like the ultimate shaggy dog story. 00:07:16.699 --> 00:07:18.879 Oh, I love those. You know, the type where you 00:07:18.879 --> 00:07:21.139 get dragged through this incredibly long, involved 00:07:21.139 --> 00:07:24.180 narrative with a million intricate details, leading 00:07:24.180 --> 00:07:27.019 you to expect a massive, dramatic payoff. Only 00:07:27.019 --> 00:07:29.120 to have it end in something wonderfully absurd 00:07:29.120 --> 00:07:32.920 or totally anticlimactic. Exactly. The reviewer 00:07:32.920 --> 00:07:35.639 notes that as this mystery unravels, the comedic 00:07:35.639 --> 00:07:38.339 aspects become quite clever and deliver some 00:07:38.339 --> 00:07:41.899 genuinely absurd moments. It's actively subverting 00:07:41.899 --> 00:07:44.220 your expectations of what a club scene mystery 00:07:44.220 --> 00:07:46.699 should be. Here's where it gets really interesting 00:07:46.699 --> 00:07:49.620 because it's not just the tone that's subverting 00:07:49.620 --> 00:07:52.079 expectations. It's the actual physical structure 00:07:52.079 --> 00:07:55.519 of the movie itself. I noticed reading through 00:07:55.519 --> 00:07:58.120 the material that the timeline feels completely 00:07:58.120 --> 00:08:00.370 fractured. You get halfway through, and suddenly 00:08:00.370 --> 00:08:02.250 you're watching the exact same party from a different 00:08:02.250 --> 00:08:05.389 angle. What is Mack actually trying to do here? 00:08:05.589 --> 00:08:08.110 He is playing with the very fabric of how we 00:08:08.110 --> 00:08:11.189 experience a story. To understand this structure, 00:08:11.310 --> 00:08:13.350 the Wikipedia article pulls in some heavy -hitting 00:08:13.350 --> 00:08:15.870 academic analysis. Film scholars have actually 00:08:15.870 --> 00:08:19.410 studied this little comedy. There's an author 00:08:19.410 --> 00:08:22.120 named David Bordwell, who is essentially... a 00:08:22.120 --> 00:08:24.959 giant in the field of analyzing Asian cinema. 00:08:25.360 --> 00:08:27.800 And the article cites his books, Planet Hong 00:08:27.800 --> 00:08:31.079 Kong and Poetics of Cinema. Bordwell categorizes 00:08:31.079 --> 00:08:33.399 Rave Fever as an experiment in what he calls 00:08:33.399 --> 00:08:35.879 a Gen X network narrative. Network narrative. 00:08:35.919 --> 00:08:38.019 Does that mean it just has a really big ensemble 00:08:38.019 --> 00:08:40.440 cast or is there more to the actual architecture 00:08:40.440 --> 00:08:42.159 of it? It's much more than just having a lot 00:08:42.159 --> 00:08:44.759 of actors on screen. In a traditional narrative, 00:08:44.919 --> 00:08:47.440 you follow one hero on one linear journey from 00:08:47.440 --> 00:08:50.379 start to finish. In a network narrative, the 00:08:50.379 --> 00:08:52.299 focus is on a web of interconnected characters 00:08:52.299 --> 00:08:55.240 whose lives intersect, often purely by chance 00:08:55.240 --> 00:08:57.919 or through a specific unifying element. Like 00:08:57.919 --> 00:09:00.679 a lost day planner. Precisely. Bordwell describes 00:09:00.679 --> 00:09:03.580 the film's structure as tracing, crisscrossing 00:09:03.580 --> 00:09:06.279 love affairs. But the brilliant part is how it's 00:09:06.279 --> 00:09:08.799 executed. This approach involves reiterating 00:09:08.799 --> 00:09:10.840 the exact same events we've already seen, but 00:09:10.840 --> 00:09:12.440 showing them from entirely different characters' 00:09:12.559 --> 00:09:14.519 vantage points. Oh, that makes so much sense. 00:09:14.799 --> 00:09:17.340 So when Don the Yuppie experiences the rave, 00:09:17.480 --> 00:09:20.279 we see his slightly overwhelmed version of the 00:09:20.279 --> 00:09:22.799 night. But later in the film, the timeline rewinds, 00:09:22.799 --> 00:09:25.379 and we might see the exact same party from Gordon 00:09:25.379 --> 00:09:28.200 the Club patron's perspective, or Nicole's perspective. 00:09:28.259 --> 00:09:30.980 You hit the nail on the head. And by doing that, 00:09:31.179 --> 00:09:34.019 the narrative radically expands the roles assigned. 00:09:34.519 --> 00:09:36.379 to what would normally just be background extras. 00:09:36.720 --> 00:09:39.000 The guy ordering a drink in the background of 00:09:39.000 --> 00:09:41.720 scene one suddenly becomes the emotional center 00:09:41.720 --> 00:09:45.039 of scene four. It forces the audience to realize 00:09:45.039 --> 00:09:47.659 that everyone is the main character of their 00:09:47.659 --> 00:09:50.470 own story. And the glue holding all these bouncing 00:09:50.470 --> 00:09:53.110 perspectives together is that physical filofax. 00:09:53.570 --> 00:09:55.830 Bordwell actually specifically notes this, pointing 00:09:55.830 --> 00:09:58.490 out that the film uses a circulating filofax 00:09:58.490 --> 00:10:01.110 to connect its party animals. Such a great phrase. 00:10:01.289 --> 00:10:03.309 I just have to say, purely from a screenwriting 00:10:03.309 --> 00:10:04.889 perspective, that is such a brilliant device. 00:10:05.129 --> 00:10:07.470 You take a physical object, one that inherently 00:10:07.470 --> 00:10:09.990 contains schedules, addresses, and personal connections, 00:10:10.230 --> 00:10:12.710 and you physically pass it from person to person 00:10:12.710 --> 00:10:16.009 like a baton in a relay race to literally weave 00:10:16.009 --> 00:10:19.179 these disparate lives together. It's a very tangible 00:10:19.179 --> 00:10:23.179 anchor for a very fluid, chaotic story. And this 00:10:23.179 --> 00:10:26.080 specific style of network storytelling was actually 00:10:26.080 --> 00:10:28.639 having a major moment right around the late 90s. 00:10:28.659 --> 00:10:30.919 Oh, yeah. The source text draws a really clear 00:10:30.919 --> 00:10:33.879 parallel here. Both Bordwell's academic analysis 00:10:33.879 --> 00:10:37.899 and a popular review site called lovekfilm .com 00:10:37.899 --> 00:10:42.039 compare Ray Fever directly to a very famous 1999 00:10:42.039 --> 00:10:46.600 American film called Go. Ah, go. That makes perfect 00:10:46.600 --> 00:10:49.620 sense. That movie also deals with youth culture, 00:10:49.820 --> 00:10:52.700 parties, drug deals gone wrong, and telling the 00:10:52.700 --> 00:10:55.240 same crazy night from three distinct perspectives 00:10:55.240 --> 00:10:57.220 that eventually crash into each other. Exactly 00:10:57.220 --> 00:10:59.399 the same vibe. It was part of that whole post 00:10:59.399 --> 00:11:01.879 -pulp fiction wave of hyperlink cinema. It makes 00:11:01.879 --> 00:11:03.980 total sense that Ray Fever is considered the 00:11:03.980 --> 00:11:06.000 Hong Kong equivalent of that trend. It definitely 00:11:06.000 --> 00:11:08.720 fits that global trend, but Ray Fever is also 00:11:08.720 --> 00:11:10.980 pulling deeply from its own regional cinematic 00:11:10.980 --> 00:11:13.320 roots. The source includes a really insightful 00:11:13.320 --> 00:11:15.919 quote. from author Gina Marchetti, who explains 00:11:15.919 --> 00:11:17.899 that director Alan Mack was experimenting with 00:11:17.899 --> 00:11:20.419 elliptical narratives reminiscent of Hong Kong 00:11:20.419 --> 00:11:23.299 New Wave films. Okay, let's pause there. There's 00:11:23.299 --> 00:11:25.519 a quote in our notes about elliptical narratives, 00:11:25.639 --> 00:11:28.179 and honestly, I hear the word elliptical and 00:11:28.179 --> 00:11:30.399 I immediately think of the gym equipment. What 00:11:30.399 --> 00:11:32.860 does that actually mean for a movie? It's a great 00:11:32.860 --> 00:11:35.879 term. An elliptical narrative is one that intentionally 00:11:35.879 --> 00:11:39.320 leaves things out. It skips over periods of time 00:11:39.320 --> 00:11:42.590 or crucial pieces of information. forcing the 00:11:42.590 --> 00:11:44.590 audience to fill in the blanks themselves. Like 00:11:44.590 --> 00:11:47.070 an ellipsis in grammar. Exactly. Think about 00:11:47.070 --> 00:11:49.330 the punctuation marks, those three little dots 00:11:49.330 --> 00:11:51.889 that mean something has been omitted. It's the 00:11:51.889 --> 00:11:54.169 exact opposite of spoon -feeding the viewer. 00:11:54.769 --> 00:11:57.070 And Marchetti connects this to the Hong Kong 00:11:57.070 --> 00:11:59.490 New Wave, which was this radical movement in 00:11:59.490 --> 00:12:02.250 the 80s and 90s where directors broke all the 00:12:02.250 --> 00:12:04.730 traditional rules of pacing and structure to 00:12:04.730 --> 00:12:07.649 create highly kinetic, sometimes disorienting, 00:12:07.899 --> 00:12:10.240 films okay i see when parts of the story are 00:12:10.240 --> 00:12:12.720 missing or when you're only getting one character's 00:12:12.720 --> 00:12:15.860 highly flawed perspective at a time your brain 00:12:15.860 --> 00:12:19.039 has to actively work to connect the dots it makes 00:12:19.039 --> 00:12:21.919 you a participant in the mystery rather than 00:12:21.919 --> 00:12:24.080 just a passive observer sitting on the couch 00:12:24.080 --> 00:12:26.980 you're forced to lean forward trying to piece 00:12:26.980 --> 00:12:29.379 together the fractured timeline while this leather 00:12:29.379 --> 00:12:31.620 notebook is bouncing around the neon streets 00:12:31.620 --> 00:12:34.960 of hong kong That sounds incredibly engaging, 00:12:35.100 --> 00:12:37.419 especially for a movie that is only 75 minutes 00:12:37.419 --> 00:12:39.659 long. Yeah, the pacing is wild. It must move 00:12:39.659 --> 00:12:42.460 at an absolutely breakneck pace to fit all those 00:12:42.460 --> 00:12:45.679 perspectives into an hour and 15 minutes. Which 00:12:45.679 --> 00:12:48.019 brings us to the overall vibe of the film and 00:12:48.019 --> 00:12:50.639 how this bizarre little experiment was actually 00:12:50.639 --> 00:12:53.820 received by the world. I want to read this description 00:12:53.820 --> 00:12:56.820 from the site, loveakfilm .com, because it paints 00:12:56.820 --> 00:12:58.980 such a vivid picture of what watching this feels 00:12:58.980 --> 00:13:02.659 like. They call Ray Fever a candy -coated confection 00:13:02.659 --> 00:13:05.879 set against a sexy neon -lit backdrop. That is 00:13:05.879 --> 00:13:07.899 incredibly evocative, isn't it? It perfectly 00:13:07.899 --> 00:13:11.200 captures that highly specific late 90s pre -Y2K 00:13:11.200 --> 00:13:15.100 club aesthetic. Bright, saturated colors, thumping 00:13:15.100 --> 00:13:18.120 electronic bass, high energy, a world that feels 00:13:18.120 --> 00:13:20.600 slightly artificial, maybe a bit overwhelming. 00:13:21.100 --> 00:13:23.320 But undeniably fun to look at. A candy -coated 00:13:23.320 --> 00:13:25.620 confection. It just sounds like a blast. So how 00:13:25.620 --> 00:13:28.799 did this neon -lit, Filofax -passing, Gen X network 00:13:28.799 --> 00:13:31.480 narrative actually perform? Let's look at the 00:13:31.480 --> 00:13:33.340 stats we have. Let's see them. It was released 00:13:33.340 --> 00:13:35.480 right in the thick of the holiday season, December 00:13:35.480 --> 00:13:40.179 23, 1999. Hence the alternate title, X Mass Rave 00:13:40.179 --> 00:13:44.860 Fever. It went on to earn 1 ,824 ,000 Hong Kong 00:13:44.860 --> 00:13:47.519 dollars at the box office. But it clearly had 00:13:47.519 --> 00:13:49.860 artistic legs that carried it far beyond just 00:13:49.860 --> 00:13:53.100 its initial quirky holiday run. The article notes 00:13:53.100 --> 00:13:55.240 it was actually presented in competition at the 00:13:55.240 --> 00:13:58.100 2000 Stockholm Film Festival. Which is no small 00:13:58.100 --> 00:14:00.279 feat. Getting accepted into competition at a 00:14:00.279 --> 00:14:02.700 major European film festival like Stockholm is 00:14:02.700 --> 00:14:04.960 a significant validation for a project that could 00:14:04.960 --> 00:14:07.620 have so easily been dismissed by critics as just 00:14:07.620 --> 00:14:10.659 a trendy, superficial teen party movie. Right, 00:14:10.740 --> 00:14:12.720 because on paper it sounds so silly. Exactly. 00:14:12.820 --> 00:14:14.899 But getting that nod shows that the international 00:14:14.899 --> 00:14:17.299 film community recognized the complex structural 00:14:17.299 --> 00:14:19.740 experiments Mac was playing with beneath that 00:14:19.740 --> 00:14:21.860 candy -coated surface. And the fans still seem 00:14:21.860 --> 00:14:24.059 to appreciate it today. Reviewers on the site 00:14:24.059 --> 00:14:27.159 cityonfire .com gave it really solid retrospective 00:14:27.159 --> 00:14:30.559 scores, an 8 .5, a 7, and an 8 out of 10. For 00:14:30.559 --> 00:14:33.799 a super -noosh 1999 film, that is an impressive 00:14:33.799 --> 00:14:36.320 legacy of goodwill. People clearly remember it 00:14:36.320 --> 00:14:39.649 fondly. They do. But if we connect this to the 00:14:39.649 --> 00:14:42.669 bigger picture, the true legacy of Rave Fever 00:14:42.669 --> 00:14:45.389 isn't necessarily the movie itself. It's what 00:14:45.389 --> 00:14:47.909 the movie launched. The source text provides 00:14:47.909 --> 00:14:50.490 a filmography at the bottom for director Alan 00:14:50.490 --> 00:14:53.250 Mack. And this is where the story of this little 00:14:53.250 --> 00:14:56.950 75 minute comedy gets truly massive. Yeah, I 00:14:56.950 --> 00:14:59.629 was looking at this list earlier and it is genuinely 00:14:59.629 --> 00:15:02.190 mind blowing to see where he went from here. 00:15:02.309 --> 00:15:04.250 It really is a masterclass in career evolution. 00:15:04.700 --> 00:15:08.519 This 1999 comedy was the training ground. Just 00:15:08.519 --> 00:15:12.519 three years later, in 2002, Alan Mack co -directed 00:15:12.519 --> 00:15:15.299 a film called Infernal Affairs. Infernal Affairs. 00:15:15.480 --> 00:15:17.360 For anyone listening who doesn't know, that is 00:15:17.360 --> 00:15:19.820 widely considered one of the greatest, tightest 00:15:19.820 --> 00:15:22.159 crime thrillers ever made in any language. Absolutely. 00:15:22.259 --> 00:15:24.220 It's the movie that Martin Scorsese eventually 00:15:24.220 --> 00:15:26.860 remade into The Departed, which won Best Picture. 00:15:27.039 --> 00:15:29.700 Exactly. And when you look closely, the filmography 00:15:29.700 --> 00:15:32.879 shows how Mack took the complex, multi -perspective, 00:15:32.879 --> 00:15:34.700 cat -and -mouse narrative structures he was playing 00:15:34.700 --> 00:15:37.279 around with in Rave Fever and elevated them into 00:15:37.279 --> 00:15:39.559 high -stakes life -or -death drama. That makes 00:15:39.559 --> 00:15:42.259 perfect sense. Infernal Affairs is entirely about 00:15:42.259 --> 00:15:45.159 dual perspectives. a cop undercover in The Mob, 00:15:45.299 --> 00:15:47.259 and a mobster undercover in The Police Force. 00:15:47.519 --> 00:15:49.860 He went on to make the entire Infernal Affairs 00:15:49.860 --> 00:15:52.559 trilogy. Then he directed the massive street 00:15:52.559 --> 00:15:56.340 racing hit Initial D in 2005. He spearheaded 00:15:56.340 --> 00:15:58.559 the incredibly tense Overheard Thriller franchise 00:15:58.559 --> 00:16:01.779 parts 1, 2, and 3, and he's still working at 00:16:01.779 --> 00:16:04.120 the absolute top of his game, directing major 00:16:04.120 --> 00:16:07.500 complex films like The Procurator in 2023. So 00:16:07.500 --> 00:16:09.580 what does this all mean for you listening to 00:16:09.580 --> 00:16:11.039 this right now? I think it highlights a really 00:16:11.039 --> 00:16:13.360 beautiful truth about the creative process that 00:16:13.360 --> 00:16:16.820 we often overlook. Early experimental low budget 00:16:16.820 --> 00:16:19.379 projects like a quirky R -rated comedy about 00:16:19.379 --> 00:16:22.279 a missing club kid and a lost planner are rarely 00:16:22.279 --> 00:16:24.159 just stepping stones to be forgotten. No, they're 00:16:24.159 --> 00:16:26.139 essential. They are the essential laboratories 00:16:26.139 --> 00:16:28.840 where master creators figure out their signature 00:16:28.840 --> 00:16:31.440 style. Without the low stakes experimentation 00:16:31.440 --> 00:16:34.480 of tracing that circulating filifax and rave 00:16:34.480 --> 00:16:37.389 fever, Alan Mack might. never have developed 00:16:37.389 --> 00:16:39.870 the intricate narrative muscles required to pull 00:16:39.870 --> 00:16:42.070 off the legendary, multi -layered storytelling 00:16:42.070 --> 00:16:45.129 of a masterpiece like Infernal Affairs. It's 00:16:45.129 --> 00:16:47.370 all connected. You have to learn how to juggle 00:16:47.370 --> 00:16:49.610 three balls before you can juggle flaming swords. 00:16:49.970 --> 00:16:51.990 That is a vital takeaway. You don't start out 00:16:51.990 --> 00:16:54.269 building a cathedral. You start by figuring out 00:16:54.269 --> 00:16:56.789 how different, oddly -shaped blocks fit together 00:16:56.789 --> 00:16:59.679 in a much smaller playground. Mac was testing 00:16:59.679 --> 00:17:01.460 the limits of how much information he could withhold 00:17:01.460 --> 00:17:03.720 from the audience, how many perspectives he could 00:17:03.720 --> 00:17:06.359 balance, and how a single object could tie a 00:17:06.359 --> 00:17:09.559 universe together. Well said. To recap our journey 00:17:09.559 --> 00:17:12.140 today, we started with a harried yuppie, a one 00:17:12.140 --> 00:17:14.059 -night stand, and a forgotten leather notebook. 00:17:14.569 --> 00:17:17.990 From there, we traced a wildly absurd shaggy 00:17:17.990 --> 00:17:21.069 dog mystery across the candy -coated, neon -lit 00:17:21.069 --> 00:17:24.569 backdrop of late 90s Hong Kong. We unpacked the 00:17:24.569 --> 00:17:26.529 academic weight of the Gen X network narrative 00:17:26.529 --> 00:17:28.890 with its elliptical storytelling. And finally, 00:17:28.970 --> 00:17:31.349 we watched a young director use this bizarre 00:17:31.349 --> 00:17:34.029 little Christmas movie to sharpen the skills 00:17:34.029 --> 00:17:36.109 that would eventually redefine global cinema. 00:17:36.869 --> 00:17:39.289 It is a lot of weight for a 75 -minute comedy 00:17:39.289 --> 00:17:41.529 to carry, but it carries it with absolute style. 00:17:41.769 --> 00:17:44.349 It certainly does. And as we wrap up this deep 00:17:44.349 --> 00:17:45.930 dive, I want to leave you with a final lingering 00:17:45.930 --> 00:17:48.730 question to mull over. We spent a lot of time 00:17:48.730 --> 00:17:50.329 talking about the brilliant narrative device 00:17:50.329 --> 00:17:53.349 of the circulating field facts, how that one 00:17:53.349 --> 00:17:56.809 physical object held people's entire lives and 00:17:56.809 --> 00:17:59.690 connected all these disparate 1999 party animals. 00:17:59.849 --> 00:18:02.599 The ultimate external brain. Right. So if a filmmaker 00:18:02.599 --> 00:18:04.920 were trying to create a network narrative like 00:18:04.920 --> 00:18:08.380 this today, what modern everyday object would 00:18:08.380 --> 00:18:11.480 be the new Filofax? What single tangible item 00:18:11.480 --> 00:18:14.180 could seamlessly pass from a yuppie to a club 00:18:14.180 --> 00:18:16.859 kid to an investigative journalist unlocking 00:18:16.859 --> 00:18:19.140 their crisscrossing lives and deepest secrets 00:18:19.140 --> 00:18:21.440 along the way? Oh, that is a fantastic question 00:18:21.440 --> 00:18:24.400 to chew on. Is it a borrowed portable phone charger? 00:18:24.539 --> 00:18:28.339 A lost smartwatch? A rideshare driver's dashcam 00:18:28.339 --> 00:18:31.059 memory card? I love it. Thank you so much for 00:18:31.059 --> 00:18:32.720 joining us on this deep dive today. We hope you 00:18:32.720 --> 00:18:34.779 enjoyed exploring the hidden architecture of 00:18:34.779 --> 00:18:37.220 this 90s gem. Keep questioning the structure 00:18:37.220 --> 00:18:39.220 of the stories you watch, keep looking for those 00:18:39.220 --> 00:18:41.519 hidden connections, and keep exploring the media 00:18:41.519 --> 00:18:44.039 you consume every day. We will see you next time.