Anyway, sometimes in the future we have to discuss if the asian/japanese understanding of cinematic realism is really confrom to our western limited one. Indead, TOKYO BOSHOKU is for Ozu a relaively forced film. But like always he must have had a reason for that. This film had a deep impact on me. Not because I am able to love this ilm as much like EARLY SUMMER, or LATE SPRING or his final stellar masterpiece AN AUTUMN AFTERNOON, but because its construction like a very heavy and very uncomfortable dream. I know this is the most controversial discussed post war film by Ozu but obviously the film by Ozu which ask for a very different reception than any other film by Ozu. That is also the problem I have with Bordwells book OZU AND THE POETIC OF CINEMA where especially this film is much undererrated. It shows the limitation of criticism and scholarship which often believes they have the overlook over such an extremely complex work like Ozus. I have less a problem that not anybody appreciate this film like me or some others. I just insist that there is to much in this film that we can be finished with it to quickly. Especially in the context of Ozus post war film, TOKYO BOSHOKU is unique. Even if I never will put it against his established masterpieces, this film definitely atracts our attention to the dark and gllomy side of Ozus point of view about the world. At least in this point it is an enrichment and proves the sentence, “Ozu made always the same film” as pure nonsense.
This post assumes a familiarity with the film (Spoiler alert):
Having seen this film first in the AWC competition, I just recently re-watched it. I was stimulated to re-visit the film after seeing some of the negative comments about the film here. As an increasing admirer of Ozu’s retrained style, I wondered if any of the above criticisms of the film would be reflected in my second viewing.
Although the story itself does have a bit of melodrama, especially as concerns Akiko and her fate, I found every single scene in this film natural and unforced. I think Ozu is the master of family dynamics and how everyone’s own emotional responses have many unseen impacts on the lives of others. Ozu is true to his own belief that each action we take has unexpected consequences. The mother’s abandonment of her children has created a complex new family dynamic that effects her former husband and her children.
Ozu might be seen here as being a bit more polemical than usual. Perhaps the film’s moral conclusion of the primary importance of both parents on their children’s well-being and emotional maturity is the central theme. In this film, he analyzes the effect of the lack of the key maternal component on her surviving daughters. This is at the core of the drama, but is never over-simplified.
Akiko presents us the negative side of this, by refusing to face the reality of her own very tenuous emotional state, especially in lieu of her abortion. She is rocked by the sudden spectre of her mother’s appearance after so many years of being away from her – and the impact is devastating for her because of her own fragile state. Afterall, her boyfriend has also just abandoned her.
Takako is more mature and resilient, and able to better manage her own emotions relative to her mother. Of course, she has no better understanding of why her mother abandoned her family or any sympathy for her mother. She tells her mother that Akiko’s death was ‘all her fault’. This is true to her own character, which is determined and headstrong.
Ozu presents all this in a way that is faithful to each of the characters – including the mother. I didn’t find any of the scenes with the mother and her daughters in any way forced or unnatural. The mother is unable to in any way connect with her daughters and, indeed, sends one over the edge. She seems to realize this at the end, but still hopes that Takako will ultimately come to forgive her enough to show up at the train station as she leaves.
All of this is presented by Ozu in an almost clinical fashion, with every small scene – especially those in the various parlours and cafes – revealing much through all the undercurrents. In this film, Ozu still reveals the hand of the master, but this time his message is just a little more apparent. The family relationships he analyzes with precision in all his films ring as true here as any other Ozu. He emphasizes in this film the devastating consequences of pursuing one’s own capricious wants – as the mother does. This is clearly seen by Ozu as an inherently negative act that cannot be redeemed. Any other comments?
Singing Mason
My impression was that the mother was a little touched in the head. At any rate, her reaction didn’t strike me as unrealistic.