A Guilty Conscience

"As a vehicle for Dayo Wong, a perennially popular Hong Kong stand-up comedian whose film credits are sparse, A GUILTY CONSCIENCE consciously aligns itself to Wong's comedic tonality and eloquence. The whole shebang is about a man with a good conscience fighting against the insurmountable plutocratic pressure and righting his own wrongs, a time-honored road-to-redemption trajectory that no real surprise is primed, even the case itself is self-evident in mid stream via a flashback. What hooks audience is the anticipation to see how those moneyed, callous bastards to be vanquished despite of their insuperable privileges, and Ng's film doesn't disappoint in this regard, in particular when the senior prosecutor (Tse Kwan-Ho, inimitably august and inscrutably righteous) shifts his ground and lays into the culprit, although juridically speaking, some of the elocution smacks of fanfaronade, tailored to create some semblance of a rousing contentment which has been deployed ad nauseam in similar situations, at the end of the day, justice must prevails, and audience feel good about it. In a sense, A GUILTY CONSCIENCE's crowd-pleasing felicity actually mirrors THE SPARRING PARTNER's flinty gaze upon the society's underside, both are justifiable for their own conception, but the latter requests some mettle to forge through." read my full review on my blog: Cinema Omnivore, please google it, thanks.

A Guilty Conscience is a solidly entertaining courtroom drama featuring a strong ensemble cast and Dayo Wong in a dream-come-true leading man role that distinctly showcases his strengths as an actor first, and comedian second. This is a serious legal drama with occasional laughs peppered in and distinctly not a comedy. It's the perfect vehicle for Dayo Wong, who beneath his philosophizing stand-up persona, is a character actor at heart yearning for the perfect role. Now, he's found that role and shines in it. It's a great follow-up to last year's Table For Six, continuing Dayo Wong's recent acting renaissance. Adrian Lam, a government small claims magistrate who is tired of his lowly position, switches careers as a lawyer at his friend's popular law firm. Through gross negligence in his first case, Adrian causes his client Jolene Tsang to be sentenced to 17 years in prison for the manslaughter of her daughter Elsa. When new evidence presents itself, a guilt-ridden Adrian seeks to right his wrongs and applies for a retrial to prove Jolene's innocence. The cast does a great job and works together with synergy. Everybody plays their part well and individually have a moment to shine. Louise Wong, in her second role since playing Anita Mui, was great as the wrongfully accused Jolene, showing promise as an actress. Renci Yeung projects intelligence and makes a convincing young lawyer as Evelyn, Adrian's co-counsel. Tse Kwan Ho adds gravitas as the law-abiding government prosecutor representing the people squaring off against Dayo Wong, setting up an interesting triangular dynamic in the court trial. It's different from the usual prosecution versus defence dynamic. Even Michael Wong, who normally scrapes my ears, made a great villain. Jack Ng Wai-lun, the writer of Anita and Men on the Dragon, makes his directorial debut. He manipulates the audience skilfully through careful management of the tone. Ng sets up the story and characters seriously, putting you into the plight of costing someone a 17 year jail sentence and also, what it feels like to be wrongfully accused of murdering your own child. By the third act, the trial plays like a momentous sports event that has everyone on the edge of their seats. There's a distinct moment where Dayo Wong's lawyer behaves outside of what a lawyer would be able to act in a courtroom trial. This shift doesn't make logical sense, but it makes emotional sense because the audience is 100% behind Wong, rooting for him to win. This is how Jack Ng Wai-lun uses comedy, literally as a force for good to mock the unjust. The laughs release all the built-up emotions and it's satisfying to be a part of it. I recommend seeing it in a theater with a packed audience. There's an air in the climate right now, perhaps from COVID or world news, that is creating a desire to see justice served. A Guilty Conscience satisfies that desire well... in a holiday viewing type way.

Watchable, has a classic commercial enjoyable film structure (the second half of the trial in the theatre when someone applauded wow, to be so exaggerated ...) plot is still relatively dramatic, justice is through the luck of coincidence down to earth, understand the super high box office in Hong Kong, a kind of injustice to hold the gas out in the cinema it (also subtly fit the now hostile to the rich mood may also be good at the mainland box office). Huang Xielin is still good-looking, and Wang Danni Liao Ziyu is more than expected good (Miss Zhong is abominable, but Fish is magnificent). But there are two lines I think are not right: TK persuaded the Fang family army to forgive Lin Lianshui, and Fang Lin persuaded Zeng Jie'er to reappoint them. The content of speech is too male-centred discomfort. Fang, Zeng's feelings or interests are the focus of these two persuasions and should be considered. The dramatic twist is set too quickly, and the case trial is also very brown, forensic, and police matters for lawyers to do, and not many venomous lawyers, but very speech talent. Xie Junhao's role is also a very rigid transformation. More gratifying is Zihua's Cantonese spit clear, slow, and excellent understanding.

It was a shame that this was showing for just one day in one cinema in Oxford UK- as a special for Chinese New Year. I found it very entertaining and think it deserves a wider audience. The plot is highly implausible but grabs your attention, and the theatricality of the courtroom scenes is fun, even if unrealistic. The transformation of the main character from idle, careless lawyer to passionate defender of truth is nicely depicted. There are moments when I laughed out loud, and the ending was very satisfactory. The stranglehold of a few ultra-wealthy Hong Kong families who think they are above the law is well-depicted and the theme of the weak succeeding by cunning against the strong is very satisfying.

Some Hong Kong movies may have their story and scripts written in 2 days, or 3. You know, just a movie out there and people will come see the actors and actresses because there is nothing better to do. This movie is one that has its story and scripts written with a heart. The acting is mostly great. If most people in the world are like this, we indeed have a world that we live our lives and leave this world and think "I thank for the life I have lived for." Dayo Wong entered the "Chinese New Year" movie market, and it originally fit the "well, let's go see a movie because there is nothing better to do" (most of the stores are closed during Chinese New Year). So some of his movies were not that great... but this one is totally different. What a surprise. You have got my respect, Dayo.

This movie is marketed as a movie that make the average Joe (especially if you were a Hong Kong citizen) "feel good". I'd say, to a certain extent, mission accomplished ... but with lots and lots of flaws. It's ironic the protaganist, Dayo Wang's character talks about "Common sense" in the court scenes in this movie, because common sense is exactly what this movie really lacks. A good story should have surprises and twists, that much is true, but the twists gotta be within the boundaries defined by common sense and logic. That is, unfortunately, where this movie fails. It tries SO HARD to create a rich vs poor contrast. And how the rich can literally run the table even in the courthose, to a point all the common sense gets thrown out of the window. But you have to remember, at the end of the day, the entire movie is based on a court case, and the courthouse has rules and governance. How can the prosecutor just flat out asks questions that accuses his own witness? Why would the judge allow the laywers to freely give a 5 min monologue of their own sentiments unrelated to the case? Why is there no order in court? And the case has plenty of holes in it too, common sense is twisted, basic logic is bent, just to create this big contrast between the rich and powerful vs the poor and helpless. The rich use their political power to keep Dayo Wong in police custody, and then at 11th hour he just gave up the name of the PI and the police would let him go? Really? That's it? The movie has the right intentions, it rallys the emotion of the average Joe's in the society who feel so powerless vs. The rich in Hong Kong. It sure has its moments too. Yet at the end of the day, the foundation which the movie tension is built upon is simply way too fictious, it ignores defined court and society laws and procedures, it just feels forced and childish.

When regarding this movie as just a detective/court case story, there is no way that the movie could stand on its own merits given the manner of how the case rolled out. No society would allow such neglect in the police solving a criminal/murder case and such extravaganza in front of the law. Yet, the movie managed to achieved its aim in social commentary notwithstanding the above, potentially overriding flaws, albeit via show and sensation. Sprinkled in with effective humour that does not affect the overall tone, this is a movie that can make you steer clear of all its hiccups and enjoy the story as the movie carries the audience along, which itself is a huge win.

It's a Happy Chinese New Year movie and seems to be meant for fun. The 2.5hrs passed quickly and I didn't nap in the middle which is a mark of a good movie for me. There are gags and chuckles and a chance to see the rich get eaten by us "normal" people. A fight against the ills we suspect the "other side" does, and gives you enough fuel and reason to keep fighting the good fight in this coming new year. Dayo Wong carries the story believably but then when you leave, you wonder, could that really happen? Just take it as fun. The plot has many things that don't make sense but don't worry, you're on the right side!

Contrary to the fun trailers of this movie, the movie itself is quite serious. The main cast consists of many A-list actors and actresses that dazzled in their respective roles. Personally, Michael Fitzgerald Wong caught my attention and outperformed the rest. His role as legal advisor of the Chung family is just so natural. Dayo Wong is more widely known for his roles that have comedic elements. However, it is safe to say that he has done a good job here as the guilty conscience lawyer. Although the plot keeps you eager to follow what happens next, there are times where the storyline becomes a tad too cliché and a bit boring. The unexpected ending is a major highlight, but dampened by the somewhat unrealistic courtroom finale. Honestly, I had expected more from Hong Kong's highest grossing film of all time. It is among one of Hong Kong's greatest courtroom movies, but unfortunately not one of its greatest films.

"Adrian Lam" (Dayo Wong) is a magistrate who doesn't really care about his job. He gets a bit of a shock, though, when his new boss sends him back to the benches where he must, again, actually practice law. It's here, after a night on the booze, that he turns up to defend a woman charged with the negligent homicide of her young son. A combination of his laziness, incompetence and his hangover leaves this woman hung out to dry when one of the witnesses - from whom he didn't get a written deposition - changes his story. Off to jail she goes and into a maelstrom of despair goes he before the guilt starts to kick in, and he decides to get his act together. His co-defending counsel "Evelyn" from the original trial (Renci Yeung) and he decide to try and convince the convicted "Jolene" (Louise Wong) to let them work on an appeal and the remainder of this rather flat courtroom drama follows their efforts. It starts off quite entertainingly, with a bit of a tetchy dynamic between the lawyers and to be fair, Dayo Wong is quite proficient as the bored and rather indolent lawyer. Sadly, though, once the ship is all upright again, the story becomes one of rather predicable family intrigue and power-broking that exposes us to many from a supporting cast that are as unremarkable as the dialogue. The photography has something of a television feature to it and the denouement, though quite lively paced - well you can see that coming from space. At 2¼ hours it is also far too long with just not enough meat on the story to sustain it. Perhaps a more judiciously cut edit and a few fewer side-stories might have made it more of a watchable "Perry Mason" style drama, but as it is - I was a bit bored by the end.