|
Post by angilasman on Dec 18, 2009 20:24:01 GMT -5
^Ikiru and Seven Samurai are my rotating #1 fav Kurosawa film.
(Red Beard, Throne of Blood, and Dersu Uzala are my rotating #2)
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 18, 2009 23:52:56 GMT -5
With the Kurosawa's though I like the extras, which is the one thing instant viewer doesn't provide.
My current 11 Favorite Films 1. Seven Samurai 2. Ikiru 3. Dersu Uzala 4. Ran 5. Yojimbo 6. Red Beard 7. Sanjuro 8. Stray Dog 9. Rashomon 10. Throne of Blood 11. High and Low
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 18, 2009 23:54:14 GMT -5
I can’t afford to hate people… I haven’t got that kind of time” – WantanabeIkiru (1952)Had this story of a man who learns he has less than a year to live been made in Hollywood, it likely would have been a completely different movie. There would have been much sentiment and pathos, a tearful reconciliation with his son and the protagonist probably would have told his boss off, quit his job and gone on a quest of personal discovery. What Kurosawa offers is less Hollywood and more like Russian literature. He goes light on the sentiment and pathos and mixes in a biting commentary on the state of post war bureaucracy in Japan. The reunion with son doesn’t pan out and the man not only doesn’t quit his job, but creates something meaningful and lasting through it. The director also takes the unique tact (spurned on by his co-writer) and splits his film in two parts, with our protagonist dying off screen in the 1st half. Takashi Shimura stars and it is arguably the most memorable performance of his career. There is gentleness in Shimura that you don’t find in Toshiro Mifune (a great but -dare I say it- an intense over-actor) and that makes him the preferable star for a story like this one. He plays a man named Wantanabe who works for a government agency, a paper pusher who has accomplished little with the job. He’s a widower with a brother who doesn’t really know him and through his own fault, a non-existent relationship with his son. There are several powerful scenes. One, after Shimura learns that he has stomach cancer (in a round about way. In Japan at the time, physicians didn’t tell their patients of their terminal illnesses). He leaves the doctor’s office lost in his own thoughts… when suddenly the silence of the scene is broken by a burst of sound… the city comes to noisy life. The camera pulls back - he’s so very small - life goes on with you and without you. The films follows his quest for meaning and happiness, his failed attempt to repair his relationship with his son and finally, in the 2nd half of the movie -in flashbacks during his funeral- what he did to leave this small corner of his world a little better after he was gone. While Ikiru is wordy and at times Kurosawa does indulge that didactic nature of his (where he tells us what it’s all about), he doesn’t over do it and butts these moments against ones where he doesn’t fill in every detail; there are gaps in the narrative and the back-story that we have to fill in for ourselves. There are also scenes where he allows facial expression alone tell the story. Though I found it uplifting, it isn’t simply a warm and fuzzy tale; the ending doesn’t tie everything up in a nice clean bow. While the lead character finally finds what he’s looking for and does something important… life goes on as it always does. Only one other guy (a co-worker) understands this, but he is helpless to do anything to change the course. The wheel grinds on and nobody opens their eyes… unless they are forced to. This thoughtful meditation on what it is to live a meaningful life is one of the director’s finest pieces. Offering many a lasting image, it is profound and stays with you long after its over. The acting is honest, the direction impeccable (this is the last film where Akira leans on wide angle shots, from here on out telephoto lenses will become his tool of choice). Considering that Kurosawa will follow this with The Seven Samurai… has any filmmaker created back to back masterpieces of this quality before or since?
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 20, 2009 11:37:58 GMT -5
Drunken Angel (1948) Kurosawa considered this his first ‘real’ film, as it is one where he was able to create without a lot of compromise. Occupied forces bedeviled Japanese filmmakers with stringent censorship requirements from 1945 to 52 and though the director had been able to subvert many of these requirements, he felt their influences had tainted his intentions. Even Angel suffered a change in its original ending. (Of note: The Criterion release for this disc includes an insightful feature on censorship).
This was the first time Toshiro Mifune worked with Kurosawa and the pairing is lightning in a bottle. But lets not forget Takashi Shimura as the title character. His alcoholic physician, treating Yakuza Mifune for tuberculoses, is the hub of the picture. Mifune’s menacing but Shimura is cantankerous and takes no guff. The almost mentor/student relationship and chemistry between the 2 stars is a vital component to its success.
The film does have many trademark touches, and though I enjoyed many of the films that came before it (I think Sanshiro Sugata is a delight) Drunken Angel really does feel more like the Kurosawa we will come to know and love. There’s a palpable atmosphere – I suffer the heat, the stain of disease and the drunken thirst that can’t be quenched. Shimura’s thick bottom lip wetted by the rim of a shot glass. So tantalizingly close to savoring the liquid within. To the bubbling swamp, infested by germ carrying mosquitoes, side by side with a growing city that is teaming with nightlife. This film breathes and draws you into its story.
The ending with a near death Mifune confronting his Yakuza rival has a frantic, unvarnished quality to it. This kind of struggle will be seen in many a Kurosawa film, from Stray Dog to High and Low. The bit with the Yakuza rolling in spilled paint was a last minute inspiration, and this addition sets it apart, makes it memorable. There’s also a Bergmanesque dream sequence. All told, while not up to the quality of his greatest work, Drunken Angel is one of the better examples of what I call his ‘second tier’ successes (artistically speaking).
The Quiet Duel (1949) One of the more obscure Kurosawa films, it wasn’t shown in America until 1979 and then it disappeared again. Thankfully BCI recently gave it a DVD release, and while not at Criterion levels it’s a nice looking disc.
Trying to keep Mifune from being typecast as a gangster, Kurosawa casts him as a doctor who contracts syphilis from a patient he’s operated on. The problem is that Akira might be trying to ‘force’ change on the actor. Toshiro’s physician is too noble and one-dimensional. While it is always great to see Shimura and Mifune together (here they play father and son) their work lacks the full breadth and realness seen in “Drunken Angel”.
It’s not so much that the film is dated (as many offer), I am perfectly able to pull myself back in to a time when this disease was deadly and difficult to treat. It’s that the tone of the film is rather wooden and at the same time, overwrought, like an old TV melodrama in the Dr. Kildare mode. The scenes between Mifune and his weepy ex fiancé are soapy to the point of it being painful to watch.
That’s not to say it’s a complete train wreck. Even weak Kurosawa has something to offer…
There is a third character, a woman who is studying to be a nurse at the clinic. She starts off kind of annoying - a suicidal pregnant woman who is petty and shrill, but she quickly becomes a strength. There is some natural character development with her and she becomes one of Kurosawa’s better, well-rounded female figures.
The opening scene is well directed; the ‘ping’ of rain in a metal pan as the doc operates reminded me of the natural irritating noises heard in Leone’s opening sequence for “Once Upon A Time in the West”. So, there is good to be found despite it being an overall flawed production.
It is said that the director lost interest after censors made him change his ending (the original was downbeat, the doctor goes mad). Whatever the reasons, The Quiet Duel proves that even the greats have their ‘off ‘nights.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 21, 2009 8:54:21 GMT -5
Throne of Blood (1957)Kurosawa’s adaptation of Macbeth anticipates Ran as it is very bleak and utilizes Noh traditions, making for a stylized mix than flummoxed some American moviegoers. It is also one of Kurosawa’s most eerie films as he effectively uses ghosts, witches, flocks of birds and trees moving through the fog to create a creepy atmosphere. And speaking of creepy, Isuzu Yamada in the Lady Macbeth role is icy cold and unemotional. In one scene she glides in and out of a black room like a specter, with no expression on her porcelain features and only the sound of her slithering kimono to fill our ears. It kind of gave me the willies. When she loses her mind her immobile façade cracks into a perverse Noh mask, with exaggerated brow and black lipstick smile –shudder- Toshiro Mifune is super intense as the ruler undone by his ambition and betrayals. That jaw-dropping scene at the end with the hail of arrows surrounding the new Lord… Mifune looks terrified and he said that was no act… those were real arrows they were shooting at him. Now he wore blocks of wood under his Armour and the archers were just off screen and shooting away from him (the telephoto lens made them look closer than they were) but you still have deadly killing implements flying around your unprotected head, showing fear probably did come naturally. Kurosawa shifts the Shakespearian tale to Japan and does so seamlessly. The screen bristles with life and rarely comes off stagy. This is another gem for the director and there’s the added fun of trying to spot the Seven Samurai. 2 will come easy; the 3rd shouldn’t be too hard either. One isn’t cast, and the other 3 pass by quick, 2 of them are unrecognizable as ghostly warriors.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 23, 2009 1:21:55 GMT -5
And now the review that will get me kicked out of the Kurosawa fan clubThe Bad Sleep Well (1960)Mirroring real life events, Kurosawa explores a corrupt business with secrets it doesn’t want exposed. The director had to walk a tight line and be careful not to bring the real criminals down on his head. Plus he said that he made this too early, as it only got worse in the real world. The Bad Sleep Well is one of the bleakest stories Akira ever told. And while it has a great idea and is well acted, it is ultimately undone by its talky nature and bloated length. I didn’t feel the time pass while watching Seven Samurai or Ikiru, but I feel every bit of the 2 and half hours here. For example: The opening 20-minute wedding sequence is a long-winded bore. Though the director tries to fold in the expansive back-story and character lineup as smoothly as he can, it still comes off stiff and affected. Francis Ford Copola will ape the scene in a smoother manner for his opening sequences in The Godfather (one example where the student exceeds the master) That’s not to dismiss the good moments, especially once Toshiro Mifune -who blames the corporation for the death of his father- sets his plan to bring them to justice, into motion. He’s button down cool and unemotional when he’s playing his part of the dutiful son in law - searing as a blast furnace when he’s seeking his revenge. Mifune brings the film to life every time he’s on and elevates the performances of all who shares the screen with him. Kamatari Fujiwara (Manzo in the Seven Samurai) as mousy Wadda, who used to work for the crooks and now aids Mifune, is especially good. Plus I liked the relationship of the protective brother for his sister. The blurring of good and evil is effective. At one point you start to dislike the Mifune character and feel sympathy for a man he’s pushed to the point of insanity. The scene where he takes this man to the place where his father was forced into committing suicide was nicely directed. Despite these successes TBSW is weighed down by lengthy exposition (oft relayed in an overemotional manner). While the film has its fans, the sludge-like pacing and uneven storytelling proves its downfall for me. Ultimately it’s a good, but flawed production.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 24, 2009 2:50:52 GMT -5
Stray Dog (1949)Kurosawa uses many of the same elements that made Drunken Angel memorable. The oppressive heat, the occupation era and black market setting as well as foes wrestling about in muck (in DA it was paint), which makes them indistinguishable. The story seems a basic police procedural… but of course this being Kurosawa, that’s just a backdrop for a bigger scale social commentary. In it an inexperienced cop named Murikami (Toshiro Mifune) has his gun stolen. The weapon is later used in several crimes that escalate into rape and murder (which increases Mifune’s despair and guilt). Aided by a crafty and wise veteran cop (Takashi Shimura), the two brave the heat and hunt down their man. I remember going into Dog knowing nothing of the film. Unlike other Kurosawa classics such as Ikiru, Seven Samurai and Rashomon, nobody ever mentioned this one. After I’d finished I couldn’t understand how the movie wasn’t universally hailed. This was one of the directors finest to my mind. Like “The Lower Depths”, this is long, but it never felt labored. Even the black market montage that stretched out for 8 minutes, and is criticized by some as excessive, felt right to me. Because it wasn’t made lengthy for lengths sake, or to be arty, nor was it filled with exposition. It instead reveals something about the character. Despite the hardship, despite how impossible the odds, Murikama will never quit. He will push and push and push until he literally can’t stand. So Akira takes his time, lays out his story patiently, though never sacrificing the restlessness that permeates the piece. Cop and killer are seen as similar (the director worked hard to humanize the baddie). The difference as Kurosawa sees it is choice. While circumstances can be horrid, we ultimate make a choice, and have to take responsibility for those choices. The villain Yusa (played by the youngest Samurai in 7 Samurai) chose a path of darkness, while Murikama chose to better himself and strive for the good. The performances are stellar. Mifune and Shimura were one of the best acting tandems in film history. The script was so well written, I loved the dialog in this film and of course the direction, given a Noir style, is without peer. Of Note: Kurosawa originally wrote this as a novel. Kurosawa had his assistant director Ishiro Honda (of Godzilla fame) film the actual black market. Honda hid the camera in a box and walked the streets for hours. The shots of Murikama’s shoes seen from behind… Those were actually Honda’s feet not Mifune’s
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 26, 2009 1:35:13 GMT -5
Dursu Uzala (1975)Back in the day when I was first going through Kurosawa's filmography -- this was a difficult one to get a hold of and it was one of the last finds for me. Not that I was too enthused about it - despite it winning the Oscar for best foreign film, the trailers and descriptions didn’t entice me. I mean it’s basically about 2 guys who wander around the woods and become friends, and it runs for 2 and half hours on this premise. And yet it works, it works beautifully. And that came as a shock to a lot of folks. After all… “Red Beard” had received mixed notices; there was the debacle of “Tora! Tora! Tora!” And a suicide attempt after the failure of “Dodes’ka-den”. Many felt the director was done, that he had nothing great left in him. Boy, were they wrong. Kurosawa had a tough time finding backing and it’s appropriate that he would make a Russian film. An admirer of their writers – many have called Kurosawa the most ‘western’ of Japanese directors. To be more specific, he was actually the most Russian. His screenplays reflective of their style, he even filmed Dostoyevsky’s “The Idiot”. This Tolstyian adaptation of the memoirs of Vladimir Arseniev (a 20th-century explorer who mapped much of the krai territory of the Russian Far East) tells the story of the friendship that develops between Arseniev (Yuri Solomin) and a nomadic Goldi hunter named Desu Uzala (Maksim Munzuk, who is absolutely brilliant in the role). In a career filled with so much intensity, sound and fury…. Kurosawa constructs his most sedate meditation. This is a quiet movie, even in scenes where they duo is lost with the frozen night approaching, or when Dersu becomes trapped on a raft heading for the rapids… it maintains a kind of spiritual grace. The first half is the strongest – At first Captain Arseniev’s men see their guide Dersu as an eccentric who’s good for a laugh. Slowly though, they discover what Arseniev knew from the start… that there is something special and beautiful about this man. His skill, kindness and wisdom about nature soon quiets their mocking laughter. The second half tells of the friends meeting up years later, and pretty much replays the same scenario but with a bitter slant as Dersu is getting older and is unable to survive the wild. I feel the film would have been better served had Kurosawa simply eliminated this second part. It doesn’t reveal anything new; the first half pretty much spells it out when Dersu tells the Captain that he was not made for the city. We know intuitively that Dersu’s way of life is dying and that he will die with it. Still, despite the repetition and that we are showed what we already know to be true, there are memorable scenes. Especially at the end, when the Captain stands stunned as his friend is buried. There is no resolution, we don’t know the hows and whys behind his death (what happened to his new gun?) and that’s haunting. Dersu was a triumph for the director and restored his reputation. Interestingly, one of the men who helped Kurosawa get back on his feet was Roger Corman, who bought the rights for American distribution through his “New World Pictures” Notes: I still can’t figure out why the Captain didn’t just buy Dersu a pair of glasses at the end? I don’t know if that was explained the memoirs.. Dersu was superstitious and it’s possible he would have refused them but during the city scenes I was like… “Buy some damn glasses!” lol
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Dec 30, 2009 2:10:41 GMT -5
Ran (1985)Upon its release, I remember the title spoken with reverence, as if something mythic had descended from the Heavens. Ran was the buz, you had to see it, and once you did you were compelled to discuss it. Akira Kurosawa, the aging master, no longer made films with the same frequency he did in the 50s. And with the time he spent writing, developing and trying to convince the studio to produce this epic, everyone knew deep down that this was the last time we’d see him create a film of such scope. Ran was a different epic from the one he made 30 years earlier. The Earthy vibrancy and humor of “7 Samurai” was missing and replaced with a remote coldness, beautiful to look at, but also ceaselessly ugly. Kurosawa, who had left some light on in the past, was without mercy – the guilty as well as the innocent, suffer. God is absent and man, left to his own devises seems helpless to resist his tendency toward total destruction. The director took his original story, began in the early 70s, and folded in Shakespeare’s “King Leer”. An old leader divides up his kingdom between his 3 sons, and thus sets the stage for the ruin of all of them. As secrets, vengeance and ambition spiral into madness and violence. Kurosawa placed it in Japan’s past, but used the tale to speak of our present. He based it on Noh Theater; even had the old man’s face made up like a mask. Ran is painterly, metaphorical, real and nightmarishly unreal. Unlike past samurai tales where we were brought in tight into the action, Akira often pulls the camera back in extreme, single angle long shots. Despite the action, it points us into the director’s future because it’s talky, he uses 20 minutes, with very little movement, to set up the story. Later on, he’ll keep returning his camera to the old king and his fool (the man’s lone companion after his sons burn down his castle and leave him wandering the desert in a state of madness), in scenes that repeat themselves and serve neither the narrative nor the theme. They are only there because the director liked the interplay between the two. This could have spelled disaster except for the fact that sensei was still sensei, the master. Somehow he ties it all together, makes it work, and makes it a masterpiece. Apart from the intimate, didactic moments, he and his associate director Ishiro Hondo (the director of Godzilla) filmed scenes of grandiose sweep and movement. Legions of men and horses fill the landscapes; a castle was built… and then destroyed spectacularly. In some sequences, hue and tone meld to the point where armies become dapples of sun washed color. The action is stark, over the top, nasty, theatric… a bombardment of conflicting style. The score runs against type for Kurosawa, with a fully orchestrated . score that is striking in its haunting tones, especially during the siege of the 3rd castle. Performances are steady, Mieko Harada as Lady Kaede is cool, calculated and though Tatsuya Nakadai as Lord Hidetora doesn’t have the full bloodied humanity of a Toshiro Mifune, he is very good at bringing to life a man who can be brash, ill tempered and later, hollowed out and lost. The battle really comes down to these two figures, though the script wisely doesn’t overplay that aspect --- The old man who foolishly gave up control and a woman who patiently waited for this day and takes full advantage of it.Ran is considered by many to be Kurosawa’s greatest (Though a great film, I don’t place it that high). It is often stunning simply to watch, I mean literally watch at as if it were a moving painting. Though disappointingly no DVD, not even Criterion’s last release which promises extensive cleanup, has been able to provide a crisp, clean copy. Though the colors do pop, it is marred by graininess in darker scenes -- is the original negative in that poor a shape already? A remastering is essential. Until then this aint bad and memories of the breath taking cinematography seen in theaters will have to suffice. Note: Right before Criterion could release this on bluray, Lionsgate swooped in and bought the rights.... Kurosawa fans aren't confident LG will do the Bluray justice. I guess we'll see
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 3, 2010 16:55:14 GMT -5
Do’des kadan (1970) Kurosawa had suffered through one setback after another since the release of Red Beard, blame it on Hollywood - an aborted attempt to film “Runaway Train” in America and his firing from “Tora, Tora, Tora!” (which included the usual Hollywood smear campaign in these cases) had set the director into an emotional tailspin, which he would not recover from with this, his first color film, and a box-office and critical failure.
Akria has spent his career filming the real and gritty, this time he tries to get arty and it backfires. The title comes from a sound a young mentally challenged man makes, while he imagines himself a conductor on a trolley. He’s just one of many colorful figures to be found in this shantytown. The problem is that he, like most of them, are not really fully flesh and blood people. They are broad caricatures, used with a heavy hand to manipulate the viewer’s emotions. You get a battleaxe who looks just like a battleaxe should, complete with cig hanging precariously from her lips. Her kind hubby, who apparently works for the Ministry of Funny Walks… and his ailment doesn’t inspire compassion, but laughter because it’s so overdone and carton-like.
Do’des comes off like some failed experiment. There’s an other-worldliness that breeds sterility, and gives it the air of something trying too hard to impress. I could never really care for these people and their plight because everything feels so damned calculated and mechanical. Still, we are talking a Kurosawa film and there are worthy moments. Kurosawa uses his pallet like a character. Color is carefully attached to each character, much the way music was used on Seven Samurai. A nice bit where a father and son build a kitschy house in their imaginations is well done, in their world the skylines are often painted. At times the script is allowed to outshine the surrealism – As in the scene when a deplorable man who raped and impregnates his daughter (in law or something like that) – his wife knows what he’s done and slowly plants the seed that the cops are on to him… while Kurosawa is still manipulating us (and not cleverly) it was good to see that rat bastard squirm and come unglued and finally run in panic.
So, despite this being one of Kurosawa’s worst, it’s not like it’s Coleman Francis bad (hell, if Coleman had directed this, we’d wonder how he suddenly became a genius!)
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 7, 2010 1:40:09 GMT -5
High and Low (1963)While watching this I couldn’t help but think of the card game sequence in Casino Royale. There are more than a few folks who find that scene boring, even the Rifftrax gang poked fun at it. The director himself spoke about having to slot in bits of action to keep people’s minds from wandering. But you know, I was the opposite. I didn’t need the heart stoppage bit or the fight scene (other than they lead to some nice moments between Bond and Vesper) I wanted to get back to the card game. Because I like quiet intensity, I like psychological intensity; I enjoyed the mind games more than the fight scenes. I thought of this sequence because I’m not sure the modern audiences who hated the card game, will find much pleasure in High and Low. It’s intense, but it’s more of that psychological, quiet intensity. Hell, for nearly an hour you don’t leave the protagonists house. It’s mostly guys sitting around talking on the phone and discussing the ransom… that’s not exactly high octane scorching material. And yet, I found it compelling, nail biting. An adaptation of an Ed McBain novel about a kidnapping, H&L is fuel by Toshiro Mifune’s forceful performance. In the opening we get a business meeting. They talk about ladies hats and shoes like it was life and death –an interesting contrast for what’s to come. The scene establishes the kind of gambling, hard working man Mifune is. It also establishes that he’s put everything he owns into taking over the company. This is important because during the course of the film he will have to make a choice. And if he chooses the life of a child –not his- it will set him into ruin. Kurosawa builds tension, but he does so carefully, methodically and without sacrificing the characterization. He’s detailed; right down the steps the cops are taking to tracking down the villains. Of course he goes beyond the noir detective roots and expands this into a social commentary about class structure. With choice being the focus. Mifune’s character might be rich but he wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He worked - from the bottom up. And even after he is set into ruin, he will fight and claw his way back on top again. To me that is the big difference: The bad guy whines and does nothing but cause hurt. The good guy grit his teeth and sought to better himself. You’re life might be crap but it’s your choice how you deal with that crap. Mifune has never been better; he’s pitch perfect and full of nuance. Takashi Shimura has a small role (he looks much better here than in Sanjuro, I wonder if he was ill on that one?) it’s too bad he didn’t play the lead cop as this would have been an acting tour de force. Tatsuya Nakadai (best known and very good as the old Lord in Ran) is fine in that role, but I’ve always found him a bit bland. He lacks Mifune’s fiery charisma and Shimura’s warmth. This is one of my favorite films from the director. It is long and it is detailed but it held my interest beginning to end.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 13, 2010 1:56:52 GMT -5
Hidden Fortress (1958)This is another delightful 2nd tier film, made famous to modern audiences when George Lucas admitted to using his bots in Star Wars; in the same way Akira did the 2 fools in Fortress. The plot concerns a Samurai general (Toshiro Mifune) who ushers a tomboyish Princess and her gold across enemy lines, with the help of 2 bumbling, untrustworthy peasants. The screenplay is arguably the funniest Kurosawa ever filmed. I received more than a few hearty laughs from the bickering peasants, played by Minoru Chiaki (The woodcutting Samurai in Seven Samurai) and Kamatari Fujiwara (a farmer in that same film). Mifune is as good as ever and only Misa Uehara as the princes gives a weak performance. Oh, she’s a cutie pie all right. Easy on the peepers, even with those Vulcan eyebrows - but her voice was piercing… shrill. Strange as it might sound, I find it difficult to enjoy even a cute actor when they are making my ears bleed. HF features several striking visual & aural sequences: Ala, Mifune on horseback engaged in combat with 2 other riders. And that bit with our group trying to evade detection in the woods. It was eerie to hear that mournful horn, moments before scores of samurai emerge from smoke-like fog in the dense forest. Fortress is lighter Kurosawa in tone, along the lines of a Sanjuro. And it is one that I enjoyed even more this time around. The 2 hours and 19 minutes sailed by quickly and enjoyably. My only complaint would be with the lack of great extras on the Criterion release (no commentary, no documentary).
|
|
|
Post by reaperg on Jan 13, 2010 10:20:41 GMT -5
If I may, you got the peasants mixed up -- Chiaki played one of the Seven, Fujiwara was the farmer.
BTW, Chiaki was the father of "Godzilla vs. Megalon" star Katsuhiko Sasaki. I love how it all ties together.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 13, 2010 23:52:19 GMT -5
You know I knew that (especially since I name them in previous reviews), I've had this in my word file for a week but I never did go and switch it and then spaced it off. But I didn't know that bit of trivia. Interesting. And Roxanne from that film was in Dodes
BTW - Deep Discount has Criterions on sale right now.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Jack on Jan 15, 2010 1:17:23 GMT -5
No Regrets For Our Youth (1946)From Criterion’s Synopsis: In Akira Kurosawa’s first film after the end of World War II, future beloved Ozu regular Setsuko Hara gives an astonishing performance as Yukie, the only female protagonist in Kurosawa’s body of work and one of his strongest heroes. Transforming herself from genteel bourgeois daughter to independent social activist, Yukie traverses a tumultuous decade in Japanese history.This is a film with a political backdrop, set to a love triangle. It involves a young frivolous woman who later reassesses her life and hungers to do something meaningful. There are 2 men who love her. One is named Itokawa, and he’s a boring guy who plays it safe and toes the company line. The other, Noge (played by Sanshiro Sugata’s Susumu Fujita) is a political firebrand. He’s a man who’ll risk everything to keep Japan from destroying itself. This was a frustrating film for the director as he was forced (by the scenario review committee) to rewrite the script and was under the watchful eye of the occupation censors. Kurosawa wrote in “Something Like An Autobiography”… “The second draft of the script for NO REGRETS was a forced rewrite of the story, so it became somewhat distorted. This shows in the last twenty minutes of the film. But my intention was to gamble everything on that last twenty minutes. I poured a feverish energy into those two thousand feet and close to two hundred shots of film. All of the rage I felt toward the Scenario Review Committee went into those final images.”And those final 20 minutes made the American occupation forces happy, as Kurosawa mentions that they became very engrossed by the end and applauded when the light came on. Politically it’s a difficult one… I initially attempted to cover the issues addressed in the film, and wound up with something so long and tangled that it gave me a headache and I ditched the idea of that write-up. Basically: Akira wasn’t allowed specifics; he could only talk about fascists in general terms and throw the word “freedom” around like a football. Kurosawa felt that winning the war would have ultimately hurt Japan and he was angry with leaders who forced his country into a conflict they couldn’t win. Plus, allying themselves with the likes of Hitler and Mussolini was like making a pact with the devil (he wasn’t the only one who felt this – even Yamamoto urged his superiors not to engage the US in this war). There are a lot of shades of gray we could explore here; we could also speak of things that came to light in the past 10 years that Kurosawa wasn’t privy too. But again, it’s too much and I’m rambling even with this quick synopsis. The movie itself is well told, with a compelling socio/political story and well drawn characters. Setsuko Hara as Yuki is outstanding and immediately squashes the idea that Kurosawa couldn’t film interesting female personalities. We watch her change from carefree and spoiled, to happy, troubled and ultimately steadfast in her resolve. There are times when you can see Akira’s youthful experimental side come to the fore. Though I thought some of these flourishes were interesting, as when we get a quick montage of Yuki’s many inner feelings (displayed through still poses) when Noge makes his return – still, it is ostentatious and we’d rarely catch the director indulging himself in this manner in the future. I think it’s a good movie; and though there was interference that keeps us from knowing what kind of film Kurosawa could have made. What we have is well told and fascinating.
|
|