I’m not much for lists. Besides, I’ve only seen nine of Kurosawa’s films, all of which I have enjoyed very much, some of course more than others, but all very enjoyable indeed, and don’t think I’ve seen enough to make an informed top five.
If I had to name my most favorite to this point, however, I think I would have to say “Red Beard.” It is the last one I saw, so maybe it does fall within the “last one seen is the best one” theory, but I’m not so sure that is the case here. It’s been nearly a week since I’ve seen it and it still lingers with me. It was such a wonderful movie. What struck me most was that I really don’t think there is anything in “Red Beard” that I haven’t seen done in countless other movies, but I’ve never seen them done so well as in “Red Beard.”
I had seen “The Hidden Fortress” only a couple of days before, and though I liked it very much, it just didn’t compare to “Red Beard” after seeing them both. That’s not a knock on “The Hidden Fortress,” but just to say how incredible I found “Red Beard” to be. And, I was fortunate to see them both on the silver screen.
The Gene Siskel Film Center here in Chicago is in the midst of an Akira Kurosawa series, showing seventeen of his films throughout May and June. I fully intend to take advantage of it. It was a thrill to see the two I did on the big screen, and I look forward to seeing even more. Sadly, I missed “Drunken Angel.” I don’t know if I will be able to see all of the remaining fourteen, but I’m going to give it a shot! This Saturday’s double feature, “Rashomon” and “Ikiru”!
I’ve been a member of The Auteurs for quite a while and have enjoyed it. For a movie information source it ranks right up there with Criterion and IMDB. When I’m interested in a film I like to check out all three sites to get some differing input and points of view on them, something that has worked very well for me.
When I first noticed the name change, I was not at all fazed. I figured it was just a name change, an assumption reinforced with the ubiquitous announcement, “Don’t panic… We just changed our name. …”
But, the site does seem much different. I now find it difficult to navigate the site—to the point where it’s very frustrating. What I’m finding is that when I type in a movie title or director name into the search engine, the results are very top heavy with forum results, lists, and wall posts. Sometimes I have to go several pages into the results to find the main page for that title or director, if I find it at all. I find it very frustrating.
It seems to be that before the name change, to search for a particular title or director that the main page I was looking for was typically the first result, or if not, in the top three.
Do others experience this same frustration? Or, am I suddenly missing something fundamental?
And, please forgive me if this is a redundant topic… But, I did a search to find out if it was already being addressed elsewhere and came up snake eyes.
Okay, it is apparent it’s not just my perception and that there really is something different with how the search engine works—whether it’s attributable to the name change, or not and I just noticed it at the same time as a coincidence.
Jason T. says, “If you type in a director or a movie, the link to the mubi artist page or film page should be the top choice, in my opinion.” I agree. The main page is a springboard to relative topics and discussions and one would find links to most of what shows up in search results anyway. It should be the top choice. It did use to be that simple, but it no longer is.
As an example, not too long ago (at least it seems it wasn’t too long ago) if I typed in “Last Tango in Paradise,” http://mubi.com/films/427 would top the results. Today I went five pages deep and still didn’t come across that link. Hell, The Last Emperor was the fourth result. It was only from there that I found the above link, a recent, unnecessary and frustrating game of hide and seek. And, it used to be as easy as typing “Marlon Brando” to get http://mubi.com/cast_members/4489, or “Bernardo Bertolucci” to get http://mubi.com/cast_members/1865. But now it’s a circuitous endeavor.
Now, those are examples of a film, an actor, and a director with well-established histories. To find this page, http://mubi.com/films/27557, for Le Quattro Volte I was successful only through Google; it was impossible to find it through the Mubi site!
So, something truly is “wonky” here, and it’s not just me. Good to know, and thank you all for confirming that for me. Whew!
But, if a goal for changing things up is to expand traffic to the site, they’re going to need to do something about the search engine. There is no reason to have to find a page by going through the back door or tunneling underground to do it.
My primary reason for starting this topic was to confirm that there was something awry with the search engine, and I accomplished that. Thanks again for all those who chimed in. Looking back at my topic title, I can see that it leaves the door open to other discussions of other possible differences and I hope I didn’t open a can of worms.
Yes! I’m picking it up in Chicago at the Gene Siskel Film Center where it’s playing through May and June. It’s been awesome! It really is a treat seeing these films on the silver screen.
Sadly, I missed Drunken Angel, but I’ve caught the half dozen since, and am bent on catching as many of the next ten as possible—hopefully all of them. I have a membership and take advantage of their Saturday double feature discount, so it’s hell of a bargain too.
Last Saturday was Stray Dog and Throne of Blood. You’ll love it. I can’t wait until next Saturday: Seven Samurai.
A movie unlike anything I’ve ever seen—and really enjoyed—was HOUSE (HAUSU) by Nobuhiko Obayashi. I can’t recommend it enough and look forward to seeing it again. Right now Janus is touring it around North America. From what I can determine, it looks like Criterion will be releasing it this September.
The first thing I thought of when I thought of when I saw this topic was “yes,” because of a shorter version of the Louis Vuitton commercial posted above I recently saw. I don’t know how to embed the video, but here is the link to that version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgQ2Xlb_uIs&feature=related
It played before a movie I saw a couple of months ago, House (Hausu). It seemed like a trailer (and aren’t trailers really commercials, with some trailers definitely possessing cinematic value if only because of the nature of what is being advertised?) for a very interesting, sublime, profound, and visually appealing film. Really, it seemed like the audience was holding its collective breath waiting for title of this film. Then, everyone burst out laughing when the Louis Vuitton name appeared on the screen. It was just so incongruous—the beautiful images and promise of some deep message only to be an ad, and for that ad to be of such a luxurious name brand in a shitty economy, and to be shown before such an off-the-wall Japanese cult film—that it seemed more like an ironic joke rather than a serious ad. But, it did break the ice, and the audience was laughing from that point on through the entire film. And, it was a stunning commercial.
Regardless of the message, it really did have cinematic value, which was likely enhanced by seeing it projected on the silver screen.
I can remember only one other time that I was so struck by an ad before a movie, one that wasn’t a movie trailer. It was in a movie house in Germany, where such things could still be shown: a breathtaking Marlboro Country ad. It was twenty years ago and I can still recall it (and have no recollection whatsoever of the film that followed), so it definitely had an impact. It may have been because of the novelty of seeing that type of ad, but the images were still memorable, which, too, the cinematic appeal may have been enhanced by seeing it in such a larger-than-life medium. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find a good example of that particular Marlboro ad in a short search. It was cool, though.
Those are two personal experiences that make me think, yes, commercials can possess cinematic value.
Oh, yeah, forgot to mention something about another comment here that also interested me, about movies selling themselves. With product placement as it is, from subtle to in-your-face, some movies really can be as much commercial as film. The Transformers movie was blasted, among other things, for merely being a huge advertisement for the new Camaro, as an example.
I got into Italian film for the very same reason, to help learn the language by immersing myself in it. The difficulty with Italian was because of the different dialects—I would pick up a film that said “Italian” and find that it was mostly in the Sicilian dialect, such a difference that it’s almost a completely different language. I don’t know if the dialects in French are as diverse as Italian, but beware.
When using film to learn a language, here is a bit of advice I was given that I found to be very helpful: Make sure to watch it without the subtitles too. It allows you to be more immersed in the language, to listen better, and to assimilate it more.
Also, don’t overlook the special features on a disc. More than just the film, there can be a lot of dialogue in the interviews, documentaries, etc. that are helpful in learning the language.
Last month I came across a nice little piece and a great video to Hopper at the Museum of the Moving Image site. The article ends with saying, “Contrary to what we’d all come to believe, Dennis Hopper is not immortal.” The day of the proof of that has unfortunately arrived.
Just realized there are multiple threads dedicated to Dennis Hopper. In attempt to help consolidate them, please go here for the centralized thread. (Someone there already included a link to the same video.)
I just got back from attending a screening of Seven Samurai at the theater. Magnificent. Simply magnificent. I think this is the fifth time I’ve seen this film, and it really does get better each time. Hell, I just watched it two days ago on DVD because I was so impatient to see it today. Still, that did not diminish today’s viewing pleasure or expectations in the least. I was still enthralled for every moment of it.
The DVD on a good television provides a wonderful picture. It’s much crisper, clearer, and more consistent than seeing it on film (and I can’t even imagine what it would be like on Blu-ray!). But it still can’t beat the experience of seeing it at the theater. Even with the graininess and imperfections, including the projectionist having to adjust the focus on occasion, there is just something more pleasingly romantic about seeing a film—especially one this remarkable—on the silver screen. It may just be those imperfections, as well as the grandness of scale of the image, that add to the allure of the theater
Also, it was fun to see it with a crowd and to share their reactions to what happens on the screen. When watching it alone the humorous scenes elicit a chuckle or two, but with a crowd those chuckles turn into giggles and giggles into guffaws. There are also the gasps and the moments of spellbound silence.
A testament to how great this film is how it doesn’t feel like an epic-length feature. It is well paced, one scene flows into another, and the story just rolls along. I’ve thought before that Kurosawa films are more about simply enjoying the journey rather than reaching a destination. I don’t think any film, even of Kurosawa’s, epitomizes that sentiment in the way Seven Samurai does.
I just watched Redux a few weeks ago with the marker on because it had been so long since I’ve seen it that I wasn’t sure if I would even be able to tell what was different.
It was okay, I don’t hate it, but I can definitely see the issues people who don’t like it have with it. The French plantation scene was okay, but do think it slowed things down a little bit unnecessarily. The scene with the abandoned Playboy Playmates really emphasized the craziness and insanity of the war, but I think that case was already pretty well made. This biggest issue I had with this scene was that it was so far out there that it required just a little too much suspension of disbelief. I thought it was kind of funny when Willard stole Kilgore’s surfboard, but can agree that it was a childish act that somewhat diminishes his intensity; and Kilgore flying helicopters up and down the river pleading for the return of the surfboard seemed to diminish his toughness. I did like the scene with Willard in the metal cell if only because it gave Kurtz a little more screen time.
Yeah, it was okay, but I think to really put it on the scale and weigh it carefully, it would tilt more to: better without the changes. I think I will have to watch it again in the original to confirm.
Yojimbo (1961, Kurosawa): 10/10
Great hero, action, adventure, and humor all mixed together very well make for a fun and entertaining movie. I’ve seen this movie several times, even twice in the last week, and find it just clips along and holds my interest from beginning to end every time.
The Bad Sleep Well (1960, Kurosawa): 8/10
A very intriguing story, well shot and well told, that is layered, suspenseful, and gripping, with unpredictable twists and turns. I would have rated it higher, but it did drag a bit in the last quarter. This was my first time seeing this film and I was more than pleased with it.
Side note: I was surprised to learn after catching both of these flicks earlier today that they were made only a year apart. In Yojimbo, Toshiro Mifune has a much fuller face and a more weather-worn appearance, as opposed to a smoother-faced, slimmer, and much more youthful appearance in The Bad Sleep Well from a year before. The differences seem greater than a single year and make up can account for. He wore each, very disparate, role like a glove. I find I am as fascinated with, intrigued by, taken with, and impressed by Mifune and his roles as I am with Kurosawa and his films—the range, richness, and variety in both cases.
The first person who springs to my mind is Marky Mark, but he seems to be more the way of the Fresh Prince, putting the music in the past altogether. I liked him best in The Departed. He was such a dick and I laugh my ass off every time I see it.
I doubt you don’t so much mean television appearances, either, but “Miami Vice” was good for this type of thing. I most remember the appearances by Phil Collins, Glenn Frey, Sheena Easton, and the Nuge, vague as those memories are.
There’s Deborah Harry in Videodrome. Not necessarily an Oscar-worthy performance, but it’s certainly a fun movie to revisit from time to time, and not one easily forgotten.
After searching the memory banks a little more, I came up with Sting. I’m not talking about Dune, either. I must not have seen the entire movie because I remember very little of it, so think I only saw bits of it and that was more than enough. What I’m really thinking about is Brimstone & Treacle. Anyone else remember that flick? I remember catching that late at night on cable when I was still pretty young. It was sick and twisted and disturbing. It may have fit more with Sting’s punk image at the time, but not so much any more.
I’ve chatted with a few people before, after, or during the intermission at the cinema many times, but only very briefly—no relationship, platonic or otherwise. It’s certainly not outside the realm of possibilities. After all, everyone is there for the same thing, pretty much—to watch that film—and there’s that commonality that could lead to some sort of friendship extending beyond the walls of the theater. But, for the most part, from what I’ve seen, people pretty much keep to themselves or the group they came with and leave the theater right away.
Now, sporting events are a different breed altogether. They’re more like weddings than going to the cinema. During the film, there’s no real opportunity for interaction. During a sporting event, you’ve got hours to spend chatting/bullshitting with the people around you (not many high fives or chest bumps with people you barely know at the movie house), there’s alcohol flowing, and people are generally more outgoing. Often there’s time spent in the bars before and/or after. And, if the people around you just aren’t your style, you can move. Much greater chance of “hooking up” at a sporting event, especially if they have a cheap beer night.
My favorite is from Chet in Noah Baumbach’s Kicking and Screaming. “How do you make God laugh? Make a plan.” It seems to fit in a lot of situations. But, it mostly gets dumbfounded looks rather than a chuckle or a laugh. Doesn’t keep me from trying it over and over though.
I also like, from the same character, “And I’m paraphrasing myself.” Same response. Oh well.
I read the book and watched the film a few months ago, in quick succession so the lines between the two are a little blurry.
I think Billy’s illness is more a result of him being a victim of other people’s illnesses. He is thirty-one years old and has never been allowed to mature. His mother is the one with the issue, not wanting her baby boy to become a man, for whatever number of possible reasons, and preventing his growth through oppression and repression.
Nurse Ratched is an accomplice in keeping Billy in a perpetual state of adolescence. Her issue is that she needs to be in control—of everything. Her desire in the ward is not to actually help any of the men get better, but to simply keep them under her rule. If there weren’t sick men in her care, there would be no reason for her to be. She and Billy’s mother are close friends and Nurse Ratched uses her position to keep Billy in check, both as a favor to Billy’s mother and because it is in line with her desires. Billy is a voluntary patient. In order to keep him from growing, his mother has convinced him he is sick and he is checked in to the ward where Nurse Ratched is better able to keep Billy repressed, using her relationship with his mother to manipulate him with guilt.
Throughout the story, McMurphpy’s antics help the men progress in their own ways, to assert themselves and to free themselves from the psychological oppression. This of course upsets Ratched. Once Billy loses his virginity he finally becomes a man in a way. He is more self-assured as a result and even loses his stutter. Ratched uses guilt, reminding him of his mother and questioning what she would think of him now. It works—too well. Billy has tasted the freedom, was reigned back in, knew he couldn’t return once he had been freed, and knew of only one escape route.
Nurse Ratched is a very feminine figure, physically. In the novel the men debate her sexuality. They can tell she has a remarkable body, but could any of them imagine actually having sex with her? I’ve always tended to think of her as asexual. Regardless, she does repress her sexuality. If it’s to repress some sort of latent lesbianism, that’s a possibility. Any such undertones in the movie I see as more a mark of misandry, her deep-seated hatred of men, and just being more congenial to women in general as a result. But that don’t mean she ain’t a dyke, I s’pose. I think what really causes her to repress her sexuality is as a means to maintain her domination. If the men saw her as a sexual being, she would lose some of her power and control over them, something that can’t be compromised at any expense. In the novel, when her breasts are exposed in the altercation with McMurphy, her sexuality is exposed and that is part of her downfall.
I think the film and the book are both great. This is one odd occurrence where the novel and the film differ significantly but neither one suffers greatly for it. Really, in this case, it’s hard for me to say one is better than the other. I think they compliment each other very well and are made better as a result of the other. The novel has more depth and reading it can bring a fuller understanding to the film, and the film brings these characters to life better than many film adaptations do. Somewhere I had read a debate about just how evil of a villain Nurse Ratched was. For those who saw only the film, people were not quite as convinced. To read the novel, there is little to doubt the insidious power and control she wields, not only over the patients but the staff and administration. In the novel Nurse Ratched’s character seems even more insidious when recalling Louise Fletcher’s icy stare and cold manner. Same for McMurphy, the novel gives him more depth, but reading the novel is so much better when he has Nicholson’s voice and animation.
The Kurosawa retrospective continues, and I continue to be delighted. The more I see of Kurosawa’s films the more impressed I become. Dersu Uzala is the biggest departure from what I have become accustomed to because it is not set in Japan, nor does it feature any of the faces I’ve become familiar with, most notably neither Toshiro Mifune or Takashi Shimura. This film seems to be one that really shows Kurosawa’s heart in his work. I enjoyed every moment of it and am very pleased to have seen it, especially on the big screen.
It is a story of a Russian soldier and Chinese hunter who develop a deep friendship in early twentieth century Siberia. Visually, it is a fascinating film, depicting all the seasons in their majestic beauty and grand fury. I especially enjoyed a scene where Kurosawa captures the two men, the sun, and the moon on the screen together. Emotionally, it is a strong film inviting the audience into the profound relationship of the two men.
Yet another Saturday afternoon Kurosawa double-feature:
Dodes’Ka-Den (Kurosawa, 1970, 149 min.) 8/10
I’ve come to regard Kurosawa films to be as much, or more, about enjoying the journey than reaching a particular destination. Dodes’Ka-Den epitomizes this sentiment more than any other of his films I’ve seen if only because here there is no particular destination; it’s all about the journey, a glimpse into life in an impoverished, make-shift village whose citizens are little more than society’s flotsam and jetsam washed up on a junkyard shore, with no distinct plot or climax.
We experience the lives of the inhabitants through episodic tales of their personal plights. One of the fascinating creatures in this surreal world is a young man with a fascination for trolley cars. Mentally slow, he is content in his own illusory world. His passion for trolleys is apparent in the collage of childish trolley car drawings wallpapering his home, and most evident with the trolley car he owns and operates on a strict schedule. In the morning he gives the car a white-glove inspection, making mental notes to admonish the maintenance staff for their neglect. The thing is, this vehicle exists only in his imagination. Yet, as he performs his inspection and prepares the trolley for the day’s service, Kurosawa punctuates his pantomimes with actual sounds, bringing the illusion to life for the audience. The movie derives its title from the boy’s onomatopoetic chant, “_Dodes’ka-den, dodes’ka-den, dodes’ka-den_,” increasing in tempo as the car increases speed. The boy is blissfully ignorant of the ridicule his dream world provokes from the children about town, and that is his charm.
The village hub is fountain that is merely a spigot sticking up from the ground. Here women gather daily, observing the comings and goings of their neighbors, their commentary full of gossip. From here we get to know a patchwork of individuals and families, each rife with their own issues, populating this squalid village. Their stories are humorous, ponderous, somber, sordid, and heartbreaking.
Dodes’Ka-Den is quite a departure from most of Kurosawa’s other works. Even so, I enjoyed it very much. It is a long film, to be sure, but it had a mellow pacing that was pleasant and never dragged. Though some of its content was depressing and despairing I also found within it nuggets of charity and hope. Such is life. I am happy to have experienced this film that seems for the most part to be relegated to the shadows of Kurosawa’s “greater” works. It was a pleasant couple of hours spent at the cinema on a rainy afternoon.
Sanjuro (Kurosawa, 1962, 96 min.) 8/10 Sanjuro is another episode in the wanderings of the drifting masterless samurai introduced to the world the year before in Yojimbo. Like it’s predecessor, it is full of action, adventure, and doses of humor, very much a fun and entertaining cinematic ride at the theater. Toshiro Mifune is just as marvelous in his role as Sanjuro this time around, too, now offering his services to a group of nine young men who have become unwitting pawns in a political power play. With his help and guidance they work their way through their predicament despite themselves. Adding to Sanjuro’s challenge is the presence of an aristocratic woman who admonishes against excessive and unnecessary violence. Her presence lends a humorous note to the film with her annoying naïveté, but Sanjuro sees her wisdom and learns a little from her.
Sanjuro stands very well on its own, not just a sequel, and I enjoy it a great deal, but I give the edge to Yojimbo, where the character Sanjuro is a little fresher and the story a little more compelling. Though I may give a little more to Yojimbo, my greatest preference is to enjoy the two of them together! I almost think it’s a shame that there weren’t more episodes in the adventures of this sleepy and insouciant ronin, but it may be a case of less being more, without the pitfalls of this serial character becoming watered down and his adventures more cliched as can often happen when a good idea is taken too far.
One thing I noticed more in Sanjuro than I typically do when watching a film, is how remarkable the camerawork is. I’m no film scholar; I just enjoy movies and can tell when something is good without necessarily noticing the technical aspects of what makes it so good. Here, some of that is more evident to a groundling like me. Many of the scenes are intricately blocked out and chroregraphed to show all the faces of the nine bumbling young men Sanjuro has taken under his wing, even in dynamic scenes. There is the final scene where this is evident, but even more so in an earlier scene where Sanjuro is lounging on a hay cart, lazily offering his sage advice. The camera is below the cart, yet through the slats we can see Sanjuro and the nine young men, all their faces visible, framed in and around the spaces of the cart. As Sanjuro rises, so does the camera, moving as the men move yet keeping them all visible. It may be a fundamental thing to many who prowl and contribute to this forum, but it was a wow! moment for me to notice and appreciate a technical component of a film so well and artfully done with so many actors.
A digression about meteorological coincidence:
As anyone familiar with Kurosawa knows, rain is his favorite recurring character in his films. In the past six weeks I have caught a dozen of his films at the theater as part of the touring AK100 retrospective. Many, if not most, of my visits to the theater have been accompanied with rain. I have not needed an umbrealla because the rain falls during the movie, the streets and sidewalks wet when I step out afterward. It’s as if the onscreen rain invites actual rain outisde. Not true, of course, but a happy coincidence to notice, one that adds to the pleasurable experience of going to Kurosawa’s films, and one hard not to notice because of its greater prevalence in the past few weeks. It looks possible again this afternoon, when I plan to see Kagemusha.
Twenty-nine of them? Very cool. Only seventeen of them are playing here, so gotta say I’m more than a little jealous. I just walked in the door from Kagemusha. Wonderful, of course. That makes a baker’s dozen at the film center so far, and I have enjoyed every one of them!
Of them all, I would say Seven Samurai is a must. I have it on DVD and, frankly, the picture is crisper, clearer, and richer than in the theater. I watched the DVD on a Thursday and went to see the film screening that Saturday where it was just, well, better. C’mon, it’s Seven Samurai—gotta do it. (Of what I’ve seen so far, I have five on DVD, which I watched soon before or after the screening. In all cases, the picture quality was better on DVD, but the theater experience was more gratifying.)
Dersu Uzala was magnificent—highly recommended.
I have to wait until next week to see Ran. I watched the DVD a couple of weeks ago and was very impressed. I can only imagine how spectacular and more impressive it will be on the silver screen.
I think color and scale benefit most on the big screen. If I really had to prioritize, after the above three, I would put wide-screen color first, followed by wide-screen black and white, color, and black and white.
I do have a warning though: to see one is to want to see them all. At first I tried to prioritize, thinking I would catch a couple I have on disc and a couple I’ve never seen before. I missed the first one, Drunken Angel, but caught the second in the series, The Hidden Fortress, one I had yet to see. I was hooked! Who knows when an opportunity like this will come again. I just had to see them all after seeing one, so I adjusted my expenses to do so (a film center membership as a birthday gift and double feature discounts has helped greatly). Thus far I’ve made it and I only have three left. My only regret is missing Drunken Angel. (I’ve since caught it on a download, but still…)
Anyway, good luck. Whatever you do see, you will not be disappointed.
Four Kurosawa flicks at the theater in four days—I’d call that a damn good weekend by any stretch.
Kagemusha (Akira Kurosawa, 1980, 162 min.) 9/10
Today I finally saw Kagemusha for the first time, a film I’ve been wanting to see for a few years now—and it was all the better for seeing it on the big screen.
I loved it. It’s epic in every sense of the word. The story is intriguing, the color lush and lovely, the acting great, the cinematography marvelous. The only thing that keeps me from giving it a perfect ten is because it seemed a little complex in the beginning. The film helped by using subtitles to introduce the characters and their relationships, but that seems an intrusive way to make things clear. I was a little overwhelmed at first, apprehensive that I wouldn’t keep things straight and lose my way through the film, but things became clearer as events unfolded. I’m sure I will appreciate it more on repeated viewings, which there are sure to be. Seven Samurai was much the same for me, initially feeling a little lost trying to keep all the characters straight, but after seeing it several times it’s like visiting old friends again.
I’ve seen some complaints that it is too long. I see there are two versions of this film. I saw the 162 minute version and thought it was paced very well. I only got a couple of hours sleep last night and was hesitant of going to see it this afternoon for fear I would catch myself dozing during such a long movie. Despite being dog tired I was enrapt through the entire film, never found it dragging, and was surprised for the end to arrive so seemingly soon. I couldn’t imagine it being any longer without suffering, however, so I wonder if those who feel it was too long maybe saw the 180 minute version.
Kagemusha seems to be compared quite a bit to Ran. I saw Ran on DVD a few weeks ago and was duly impressed. I didn’t imagine Kagemusha being able to surpass it, but after today I believe I would give the edge to Kagemusha. Ran has a very theatrical and melodramatic flair, which is to be expected because of its foundations in Shakespeare’s King Lear (of which I admittedly have only cursory knowledge). The betrayals, double crosses, madness, bold colors and stripes to identify the sons and their birth rank, and poetic justices heightens the awareness of its stage lineage and fantasy feel. Those things are certainly part of its appeal, but the story depicted in Kagemusha gives an impression of actual historical events, a greater sense of reality, even with its fantastical dream sequence. Kagemusha seems to be more epic, in particular the scene of the advancing army, the camera following along with the horses then rising up and pulling away and the battlefield aftermath. The ending also is more climactic.
Really it’s a matter of preference. It is very hard to say one is better than the other. One thing I’m well aware of when it comes to Kurosawa’s films is that I’m given much more to the recency effect, so that preference has a great chance of changing once I see Ran again next week.
Billy’s mother does exist. It’s much clearer in the novel. My memory is a little fuzzy, but from what I recall, Mrs. Bibbit and Nurse Ratched are long-time friends, I think even neighbors, so Billy has probably known Nurse Ratched since he was very young.
Billy’s issues stem from his mother’s insecurities. I don’t remember if it is through a memory or a visit paid by his mother where Billy reminds her of his age and her response is something along the lines of, “Do I look like the mother of a thirty-one year old man?” Her efforts, with Nurse Ratched’s help, to keep Billy from becoming an adult is her fear of getting old, and remaining young by keeping her son a child.
Ratched’s horribleness extends beyond the confines of the ward. Someone mentioned her being manipulative and bully as a sign of weakness is true. She needs to wield power over others in order to feel better about herself. There is a story about her delivering a food package to needy neighbors. On the surface it is an act of charity, but beneath it was the feeling she wasn’t doing it out of generosity but to have others indebted to her. I don’t remember the specifics, but I remember reading that and thinking how awful it would be the people on the receiving end of her gift: to accept it would be to feel belittled in some way, and to turn it down would be ungrateful. Either way, she held the upper hand.
Fanny and Alexander is by far my favorite Bergman film, though granted I’ve only seen a handful. I have the Criterion box set and have watched the television version and all the supplements, everything but the theatrical version. I enjoy the longer version so much that I have never been able to bring myself to watch the shorter. I get so taken up with the Ekdahl family that I can’t imagine missing a bit of it. It has become a tradition for me to watch it every year during the holidays.
The beauty of the television version is that it was originally conceived as television program and is broken into distinct episodes, so it is suited for viewing over multiple sittings and one shouldn’t be put off by the length.
This all holds true for Scenes from a Marriage too. Well, except that it can’t be my favorite because F&A is, but it’s damn good. Oh yeah, and instead of a holiday viewing tradition, it is tradition to watch it just after I get divorced. Fortunately, I suppose, I’ve only watched it once (so far).
Maverick, I’m in Chicago. My favorite haunt is the Gene Siskel Film Center. I used to live walking distance from it and it was incredibly convenient. I suppose it is still walking distance, but not for these lazy bones, so it’s just a short train ride now. Next month they are showing 8 1/2, which was my introduction to the Criterion Collection, which opened up a whole new world of film to me, so I’m really looking forward to that. Their next big series is QT, comprised of 15 films; his, those that influenced him, and those he influenced. I’m sure I won’t get as obsessive about that as I did Kurosawa, but it made me realize that with the exception of Grindhouse, I haven’t seen any of his films on the big screen, so might have to check out one or two others; probably Pulp Fiction and/or Reservoir Dogs and maybe True Romance. Grindhouse was a treat, and it has never been released on DVD, so I may give that another look-see.
There are a few other movies houses in town too, but they’re not as convenient as the Siskel, and don’t show the sheer quantity of films, so haven’t ventured to them yet. I may soon when Godard’s Breathless plays at one of them. I think that would be great to see on the big screen.
I’ve only lived here a year and a half. Where I was before, the closest venue of anything like this was over fifty miles away, and their selection didn’t hold a candle. I’ve been like a kid in a candy shop!
Yes, do see Dersu Uzala if you can. I’ve put some remarks in the “Last movie you saw and rate it” thread on the last four I’ve been to, if you wanna check ‘em out; they may help you in your decision. They’re very recent, so I think they’re all still on the last page, Dersu included.
Maybe I should put this in “Post a song your are currently listening to” because it is something that is playing right now, coincidentally, as I came across this thread. A couple weeks ago I set the iPod to run all songs on random, no skipping, to see if I could get through all of them. Some pretty crazy stuff, almost long forgotten has come up, some of them bringing up fond memories (isn’t it crazy, and wonderful, how music can do that?).
I don’t know if I would call it my favorite album any more, but once upon a time many, many, many moons ago it most certainly was. Does anyone out there remember Jeff Wayne’s Musical Version of the War of the Worlds?
I loved that thing as a kid. I would play it over and over, damn near wearing the vinyl out, and would pour over the artwork in the booklet, even copying and imitating it. A few years ago I came across a CD version of it and just had to have it after nearly forgetting about it. Some of the songs can still send shivers down my spine.
What I enjoyed about The Hidden Fortress was how different it was from Star Wars. I don’t think there’s been much, if anything, written about The Hidden Fortress that doesn’t mention Star Wars since 1977, and I must admit it was that relationship that most compelled me to the theater in the first place.
I enjoyed The Hidden Fortress very much on its own merits. I enjoyed recognizing the elements used in Star Wars, too, but was most glad that they weren’t terribly many, that Star Wars wasn’t merely a retelling of this story in an outer space setting, that once upon a time George Lucas did have imagination. In light of how he shit upon it all with the prequels, it was nice to be reminded of that.
On a side note, with the Quentin Tarantino series coming to town, Once Upon a Time in the West isn’t among them. That’s a bit of a surprise.
KNDY, I agree. I’ve tried countless times, but just can’t bring myself to it. Whenever I try, I end up watching the longer version. One of these days…
I suppose I should apologize to the OP. The request was for info from those who have seen both versions, and I haven’t. But, dammit, the long version is that good!
Favorite Kurosawa flicks? about 3 years ago
I’m not much for lists. Besides, I’ve only seen nine of Kurosawa’s films, all of which I have enjoyed very much, some of course more than others, but all very enjoyable indeed, and don’t think I’ve seen enough to make an informed top five.
If I had to name my most favorite to this point, however, I think I would have to say “Red Beard.” It is the last one I saw, so maybe it does fall within the “last one seen is the best one” theory, but I’m not so sure that is the case here. It’s been nearly a week since I’ve seen it and it still lingers with me. It was such a wonderful movie. What struck me most was that I really don’t think there is anything in “Red Beard” that I haven’t seen done in countless other movies, but I’ve never seen them done so well as in “Red Beard.”
I had seen “The Hidden Fortress” only a couple of days before, and though I liked it very much, it just didn’t compare to “Red Beard” after seeing them both. That’s not a knock on “The Hidden Fortress,” but just to say how incredible I found “Red Beard” to be. And, I was fortunate to see them both on the silver screen.
The Gene Siskel Film Center here in Chicago is in the midst of an Akira Kurosawa series, showing seventeen of his films throughout May and June. I fully intend to take advantage of it. It was a thrill to see the two I did on the big screen, and I look forward to seeing even more. Sadly, I missed “Drunken Angel.” I don’t know if I will be able to see all of the remaining fourteen, but I’m going to give it a shot! This Saturday’s double feature, “Rashomon” and “Ikiru”!
Go to Comment
The new Mubi site: Has more changed than just the name? almost 3 years ago
I’ve been a member of The Auteurs for quite a while and have enjoyed it. For a movie information source it ranks right up there with Criterion and IMDB. When I’m interested in a film I like to check out all three sites to get some differing input and points of view on them, something that has worked very well for me.
When I first noticed the name change, I was not at all fazed. I figured it was just a name change, an assumption reinforced with the ubiquitous announcement, “Don’t panic… We just changed our name. …”
But, the site does seem much different. I now find it difficult to navigate the site—to the point where it’s very frustrating. What I’m finding is that when I type in a movie title or director name into the search engine, the results are very top heavy with forum results, lists, and wall posts. Sometimes I have to go several pages into the results to find the main page for that title or director, if I find it at all. I find it very frustrating.
It seems to be that before the name change, to search for a particular title or director that the main page I was looking for was typically the first result, or if not, in the top three.
Do others experience this same frustration? Or, am I suddenly missing something fundamental?
And, please forgive me if this is a redundant topic… But, I did a search to find out if it was already being addressed elsewhere and came up snake eyes.
Go to Comment
The new Mubi site: Has more changed than just the name? almost 3 years ago
Okay, it is apparent it’s not just my perception and that there really is something different with how the search engine works—whether it’s attributable to the name change, or not and I just noticed it at the same time as a coincidence.
Jason T. says, “If you type in a director or a movie, the link to the mubi artist page or film page should be the top choice, in my opinion.” I agree. The main page is a springboard to relative topics and discussions and one would find links to most of what shows up in search results anyway. It should be the top choice. It did use to be that simple, but it no longer is.
As an example, not too long ago (at least it seems it wasn’t too long ago) if I typed in “Last Tango in Paradise,” http://mubi.com/films/427 would top the results. Today I went five pages deep and still didn’t come across that link. Hell, The Last Emperor was the fourth result. It was only from there that I found the above link, a recent, unnecessary and frustrating game of hide and seek. And, it used to be as easy as typing “Marlon Brando” to get http://mubi.com/cast_members/4489, or “Bernardo Bertolucci” to get http://mubi.com/cast_members/1865. But now it’s a circuitous endeavor.
Now, those are examples of a film, an actor, and a director with well-established histories. To find this page, http://mubi.com/films/27557, for Le Quattro Volte I was successful only through Google; it was impossible to find it through the Mubi site!
So, something truly is “wonky” here, and it’s not just me. Good to know, and thank you all for confirming that for me. Whew!
But, if a goal for changing things up is to expand traffic to the site, they’re going to need to do something about the search engine. There is no reason to have to find a page by going through the back door or tunneling underground to do it.
My primary reason for starting this topic was to confirm that there was something awry with the search engine, and I accomplished that. Thanks again for all those who chimed in. Looking back at my topic title, I can see that it leaves the door open to other discussions of other possible differences and I hope I didn’t open a can of worms.
Go to Comment
any one else going to AK/100? almost 3 years ago
Yes! I’m picking it up in Chicago at the Gene Siskel Film Center where it’s playing through May and June. It’s been awesome! It really is a treat seeing these films on the silver screen.
Sadly, I missed Drunken Angel, but I’ve caught the half dozen since, and am bent on catching as many of the next ten as possible—hopefully all of them. I have a membership and take advantage of their Saturday double feature discount, so it’s hell of a bargain too.
Last Saturday was Stray Dog and Throne of Blood. You’ll love it. I can’t wait until next Saturday: Seven Samurai.
Enjoy!
Go to Comment
If I were to ask you to recommend a film that is totally unlike any I would have seen... almost 3 years ago
A movie unlike anything I’ve ever seen—and really enjoyed—was HOUSE (HAUSU) by Nobuhiko Obayashi. I can’t recommend it enough and look forward to seeing it again. Right now Janus is touring it around North America. From what I can determine, it looks like Criterion will be releasing it this September.
Go to Comment
Can a commercial have "cinematic value"? almost 3 years ago
The first thing I thought of when I thought of when I saw this topic was “yes,” because of a shorter version of the Louis Vuitton commercial posted above I recently saw. I don’t know how to embed the video, but here is the link to that version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgQ2Xlb_uIs&feature=related
It played before a movie I saw a couple of months ago, House (Hausu). It seemed like a trailer (and aren’t trailers really commercials, with some trailers definitely possessing cinematic value if only because of the nature of what is being advertised?) for a very interesting, sublime, profound, and visually appealing film. Really, it seemed like the audience was holding its collective breath waiting for title of this film. Then, everyone burst out laughing when the Louis Vuitton name appeared on the screen. It was just so incongruous—the beautiful images and promise of some deep message only to be an ad, and for that ad to be of such a luxurious name brand in a shitty economy, and to be shown before such an off-the-wall Japanese cult film—that it seemed more like an ironic joke rather than a serious ad. But, it did break the ice, and the audience was laughing from that point on through the entire film. And, it was a stunning commercial.
Regardless of the message, it really did have cinematic value, which was likely enhanced by seeing it projected on the silver screen.
I can remember only one other time that I was so struck by an ad before a movie, one that wasn’t a movie trailer. It was in a movie house in Germany, where such things could still be shown: a breathtaking Marlboro Country ad. It was twenty years ago and I can still recall it (and have no recollection whatsoever of the film that followed), so it definitely had an impact. It may have been because of the novelty of seeing that type of ad, but the images were still memorable, which, too, the cinematic appeal may have been enhanced by seeing it in such a larger-than-life medium. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find a good example of that particular Marlboro ad in a short search. It was cool, though.
Those are two personal experiences that make me think, yes, commercials can possess cinematic value.
Go to Comment
Can a commercial have "cinematic value"? almost 3 years ago
Oh, yeah, forgot to mention something about another comment here that also interested me, about movies selling themselves. With product placement as it is, from subtle to in-your-face, some movies really can be as much commercial as film. The Transformers movie was blasted, among other things, for merely being a huge advertisement for the new Camaro, as an example.
Go to Comment
Looking for French Films... almost 3 years ago
I got into Italian film for the very same reason, to help learn the language by immersing myself in it. The difficulty with Italian was because of the different dialects—I would pick up a film that said “Italian” and find that it was mostly in the Sicilian dialect, such a difference that it’s almost a completely different language. I don’t know if the dialects in French are as diverse as Italian, but beware.
When using film to learn a language, here is a bit of advice I was given that I found to be very helpful: Make sure to watch it without the subtitles too. It allows you to be more immersed in the language, to listen better, and to assimilate it more.
Also, don’t overlook the special features on a disc. More than just the film, there can be a lot of dialogue in the interviews, documentaries, etc. that are helpful in learning the language.
Go to Comment
Is there an art to making a good trailer and if so where has it disappeared to? almost 3 years ago
Trailer For Every Oscar-Winning Movie Ever
Go to Comment
Dennis Hopper Obituary by Roger Ebert almost 3 years ago
Last month I came across a nice little piece and a great video to Hopper at the Museum of the Moving Image site. The article ends with saying, “Contrary to what we’d all come to believe, Dennis Hopper is not immortal.” The day of the proof of that has unfortunately arrived.
Make sure to check the video, it’s very well done: The Middle Word in Life
Go to Comment
Dennis Hopper Obituary by Roger Ebert almost 3 years ago
Just realized there are multiple threads dedicated to Dennis Hopper. In attempt to help consolidate them, please go here for the centralized thread. (Someone there already included a link to the same video.)
Go to Comment
Thoughts on Seven Samurai almost 3 years ago
I just got back from attending a screening of Seven Samurai at the theater. Magnificent. Simply magnificent. I think this is the fifth time I’ve seen this film, and it really does get better each time. Hell, I just watched it two days ago on DVD because I was so impatient to see it today. Still, that did not diminish today’s viewing pleasure or expectations in the least. I was still enthralled for every moment of it.
The DVD on a good television provides a wonderful picture. It’s much crisper, clearer, and more consistent than seeing it on film (and I can’t even imagine what it would be like on Blu-ray!). But it still can’t beat the experience of seeing it at the theater. Even with the graininess and imperfections, including the projectionist having to adjust the focus on occasion, there is just something more pleasingly romantic about seeing a film—especially one this remarkable—on the silver screen. It may just be those imperfections, as well as the grandness of scale of the image, that add to the allure of the theater
Also, it was fun to see it with a crowd and to share their reactions to what happens on the screen. When watching it alone the humorous scenes elicit a chuckle or two, but with a crowd those chuckles turn into giggles and giggles into guffaws. There are also the gasps and the moments of spellbound silence.
A testament to how great this film is how it doesn’t feel like an epic-length feature. It is well paced, one scene flows into another, and the story just rolls along. I’ve thought before that Kurosawa films are more about simply enjoying the journey rather than reaching a destination. I don’t think any film, even of Kurosawa’s, epitomizes that sentiment in the way Seven Samurai does.
Go to Comment
Apocalypse Now Redux almost 3 years ago
I just watched Redux a few weeks ago with the marker on because it had been so long since I’ve seen it that I wasn’t sure if I would even be able to tell what was different.
It was okay, I don’t hate it, but I can definitely see the issues people who don’t like it have with it. The French plantation scene was okay, but do think it slowed things down a little bit unnecessarily. The scene with the abandoned Playboy Playmates really emphasized the craziness and insanity of the war, but I think that case was already pretty well made. This biggest issue I had with this scene was that it was so far out there that it required just a little too much suspension of disbelief. I thought it was kind of funny when Willard stole Kilgore’s surfboard, but can agree that it was a childish act that somewhat diminishes his intensity; and Kilgore flying helicopters up and down the river pleading for the return of the surfboard seemed to diminish his toughness. I did like the scene with Willard in the metal cell if only because it gave Kurtz a little more screen time.
Yeah, it was okay, but I think to really put it on the scale and weigh it carefully, it would tilt more to: better without the changes. I think I will have to watch it again in the original to confirm.
Go to Comment
OT- BIRTH CONTROL IS SINFUL IN THE CHRISTIAN MARRIAGES AND ALSO ROBBING GOD OF PRIESTHOOD CHILDREN!!! almost 3 years ago
You can spend $135 for this book (marked down from $150), or you can read some very entertaining reviews of the book — for free. Funny stuff.
Go to Comment
Last movie you saw and rate it almost 3 years ago
Today’s Akira Kurosawa double-feature:
Yojimbo (1961, Kurosawa): 10/10
Great hero, action, adventure, and humor all mixed together very well make for a fun and entertaining movie. I’ve seen this movie several times, even twice in the last week, and find it just clips along and holds my interest from beginning to end every time.
The Bad Sleep Well (1960, Kurosawa): 8/10
A very intriguing story, well shot and well told, that is layered, suspenseful, and gripping, with unpredictable twists and turns. I would have rated it higher, but it did drag a bit in the last quarter. This was my first time seeing this film and I was more than pleased with it.
Side note: I was surprised to learn after catching both of these flicks earlier today that they were made only a year apart. In Yojimbo, Toshiro Mifune has a much fuller face and a more weather-worn appearance, as opposed to a smoother-faced, slimmer, and much more youthful appearance in The Bad Sleep Well from a year before. The differences seem greater than a single year and make up can account for. He wore each, very disparate, role like a glove. I find I am as fascinated with, intrigued by, taken with, and impressed by Mifune and his roles as I am with Kurosawa and his films—the range, richness, and variety in both cases.
Great stuff!
Go to Comment
Singers Acting and How They Fare almost 3 years ago
The first person who springs to my mind is Marky Mark, but he seems to be more the way of the Fresh Prince, putting the music in the past altogether. I liked him best in The Departed. He was such a dick and I laugh my ass off every time I see it.
I doubt you don’t so much mean television appearances, either, but “Miami Vice” was good for this type of thing. I most remember the appearances by Phil Collins, Glenn Frey, Sheena Easton, and the Nuge, vague as those memories are.
There’s Deborah Harry in Videodrome. Not necessarily an Oscar-worthy performance, but it’s certainly a fun movie to revisit from time to time, and not one easily forgotten.
After searching the memory banks a little more, I came up with Sting. I’m not talking about Dune, either. I must not have seen the entire movie because I remember very little of it, so think I only saw bits of it and that was more than enough. What I’m really thinking about is Brimstone & Treacle. Anyone else remember that flick? I remember catching that late at night on cable when I was still pretty young. It was sick and twisted and disturbing. It may have fit more with Sting’s punk image at the time, but not so much any more.
Go to Comment
Meeting people at the cinema? almost 3 years ago
I’ve chatted with a few people before, after, or during the intermission at the cinema many times, but only very briefly—no relationship, platonic or otherwise. It’s certainly not outside the realm of possibilities. After all, everyone is there for the same thing, pretty much—to watch that film—and there’s that commonality that could lead to some sort of friendship extending beyond the walls of the theater. But, for the most part, from what I’ve seen, people pretty much keep to themselves or the group they came with and leave the theater right away.
Now, sporting events are a different breed altogether. They’re more like weddings than going to the cinema. During the film, there’s no real opportunity for interaction. During a sporting event, you’ve got hours to spend chatting/bullshitting with the people around you (not many high fives or chest bumps with people you barely know at the movie house), there’s alcohol flowing, and people are generally more outgoing. Often there’s time spent in the bars before and/or after. And, if the people around you just aren’t your style, you can move. Much greater chance of “hooking up” at a sporting event, especially if they have a cheap beer night.
Go to Comment
FILMS YOU REFERENCE OR QUOTE IN EVERYDAY LIFE almost 3 years ago
My favorite is from Chet in Noah Baumbach’s Kicking and Screaming. “How do you make God laugh? Make a plan.” It seems to fit in a lot of situations. But, it mostly gets dumbfounded looks rather than a chuckle or a laugh. Doesn’t keep me from trying it over and over though.
I also like, from the same character, “And I’m paraphrasing myself.” Same response. Oh well.
Go to Comment
NURSE RATCHED: ASEXUAL? LESBIAN? NEITHER? almost 3 years ago
I read the book and watched the film a few months ago, in quick succession so the lines between the two are a little blurry.
I think Billy’s illness is more a result of him being a victim of other people’s illnesses. He is thirty-one years old and has never been allowed to mature. His mother is the one with the issue, not wanting her baby boy to become a man, for whatever number of possible reasons, and preventing his growth through oppression and repression.
Nurse Ratched is an accomplice in keeping Billy in a perpetual state of adolescence. Her issue is that she needs to be in control—of everything. Her desire in the ward is not to actually help any of the men get better, but to simply keep them under her rule. If there weren’t sick men in her care, there would be no reason for her to be. She and Billy’s mother are close friends and Nurse Ratched uses her position to keep Billy in check, both as a favor to Billy’s mother and because it is in line with her desires. Billy is a voluntary patient. In order to keep him from growing, his mother has convinced him he is sick and he is checked in to the ward where Nurse Ratched is better able to keep Billy repressed, using her relationship with his mother to manipulate him with guilt.
Throughout the story, McMurphpy’s antics help the men progress in their own ways, to assert themselves and to free themselves from the psychological oppression. This of course upsets Ratched. Once Billy loses his virginity he finally becomes a man in a way. He is more self-assured as a result and even loses his stutter. Ratched uses guilt, reminding him of his mother and questioning what she would think of him now. It works—too well. Billy has tasted the freedom, was reigned back in, knew he couldn’t return once he had been freed, and knew of only one escape route.
Nurse Ratched is a very feminine figure, physically. In the novel the men debate her sexuality. They can tell she has a remarkable body, but could any of them imagine actually having sex with her? I’ve always tended to think of her as asexual. Regardless, she does repress her sexuality. If it’s to repress some sort of latent lesbianism, that’s a possibility. Any such undertones in the movie I see as more a mark of misandry, her deep-seated hatred of men, and just being more congenial to women in general as a result. But that don’t mean she ain’t a dyke, I s’pose. I think what really causes her to repress her sexuality is as a means to maintain her domination. If the men saw her as a sexual being, she would lose some of her power and control over them, something that can’t be compromised at any expense. In the novel, when her breasts are exposed in the altercation with McMurphy, her sexuality is exposed and that is part of her downfall.
I think the film and the book are both great. This is one odd occurrence where the novel and the film differ significantly but neither one suffers greatly for it. Really, in this case, it’s hard for me to say one is better than the other. I think they compliment each other very well and are made better as a result of the other. The novel has more depth and reading it can bring a fuller understanding to the film, and the film brings these characters to life better than many film adaptations do. Somewhere I had read a debate about just how evil of a villain Nurse Ratched was. For those who saw only the film, people were not quite as convinced. To read the novel, there is little to doubt the insidious power and control she wields, not only over the patients but the staff and administration. In the novel Nurse Ratched’s character seems even more insidious when recalling Louise Fletcher’s icy stare and cold manner. Same for McMurphy, the novel gives him more depth, but reading the novel is so much better when he has Nicholson’s voice and animation.
Go to Comment
Last movie you saw and rate it almost 3 years ago
Dersu Uzala (Kurosawa, 1975, 144 minutes) 9/10
The Kurosawa retrospective continues, and I continue to be delighted. The more I see of Kurosawa’s films the more impressed I become. Dersu Uzala is the biggest departure from what I have become accustomed to because it is not set in Japan, nor does it feature any of the faces I’ve become familiar with, most notably neither Toshiro Mifune or Takashi Shimura. This film seems to be one that really shows Kurosawa’s heart in his work. I enjoyed every moment of it and am very pleased to have seen it, especially on the big screen.
It is a story of a Russian soldier and Chinese hunter who develop a deep friendship in early twentieth century Siberia. Visually, it is a fascinating film, depicting all the seasons in their majestic beauty and grand fury. I especially enjoyed a scene where Kurosawa captures the two men, the sun, and the moon on the screen together. Emotionally, it is a strong film inviting the audience into the profound relationship of the two men.
Go to Comment
Last movie you saw and rate it almost 3 years ago
Yet another Saturday afternoon Kurosawa double-feature:
Dodes’Ka-Den (Kurosawa, 1970, 149 min.) 8/10
I’ve come to regard Kurosawa films to be as much, or more, about enjoying the journey than reaching a particular destination. Dodes’Ka-Den epitomizes this sentiment more than any other of his films I’ve seen if only because here there is no particular destination; it’s all about the journey, a glimpse into life in an impoverished, make-shift village whose citizens are little more than society’s flotsam and jetsam washed up on a junkyard shore, with no distinct plot or climax.
We experience the lives of the inhabitants through episodic tales of their personal plights. One of the fascinating creatures in this surreal world is a young man with a fascination for trolley cars. Mentally slow, he is content in his own illusory world. His passion for trolleys is apparent in the collage of childish trolley car drawings wallpapering his home, and most evident with the trolley car he owns and operates on a strict schedule. In the morning he gives the car a white-glove inspection, making mental notes to admonish the maintenance staff for their neglect. The thing is, this vehicle exists only in his imagination. Yet, as he performs his inspection and prepares the trolley for the day’s service, Kurosawa punctuates his pantomimes with actual sounds, bringing the illusion to life for the audience. The movie derives its title from the boy’s onomatopoetic chant, “_Dodes’ka-den, dodes’ka-den, dodes’ka-den_,” increasing in tempo as the car increases speed. The boy is blissfully ignorant of the ridicule his dream world provokes from the children about town, and that is his charm.
The village hub is fountain that is merely a spigot sticking up from the ground. Here women gather daily, observing the comings and goings of their neighbors, their commentary full of gossip. From here we get to know a patchwork of individuals and families, each rife with their own issues, populating this squalid village. Their stories are humorous, ponderous, somber, sordid, and heartbreaking.
Dodes’Ka-Den is quite a departure from most of Kurosawa’s other works. Even so, I enjoyed it very much. It is a long film, to be sure, but it had a mellow pacing that was pleasant and never dragged. Though some of its content was depressing and despairing I also found within it nuggets of charity and hope. Such is life. I am happy to have experienced this film that seems for the most part to be relegated to the shadows of Kurosawa’s “greater” works. It was a pleasant couple of hours spent at the cinema on a rainy afternoon.
Sanjuro (Kurosawa, 1962, 96 min.) 8/10
Sanjuro is another episode in the wanderings of the drifting masterless samurai introduced to the world the year before in Yojimbo. Like it’s predecessor, it is full of action, adventure, and doses of humor, very much a fun and entertaining cinematic ride at the theater. Toshiro Mifune is just as marvelous in his role as Sanjuro this time around, too, now offering his services to a group of nine young men who have become unwitting pawns in a political power play. With his help and guidance they work their way through their predicament despite themselves. Adding to Sanjuro’s challenge is the presence of an aristocratic woman who admonishes against excessive and unnecessary violence. Her presence lends a humorous note to the film with her annoying naïveté, but Sanjuro sees her wisdom and learns a little from her.
Sanjuro stands very well on its own, not just a sequel, and I enjoy it a great deal, but I give the edge to Yojimbo, where the character Sanjuro is a little fresher and the story a little more compelling. Though I may give a little more to Yojimbo, my greatest preference is to enjoy the two of them together! I almost think it’s a shame that there weren’t more episodes in the adventures of this sleepy and insouciant ronin, but it may be a case of less being more, without the pitfalls of this serial character becoming watered down and his adventures more cliched as can often happen when a good idea is taken too far.
One thing I noticed more in Sanjuro than I typically do when watching a film, is how remarkable the camerawork is. I’m no film scholar; I just enjoy movies and can tell when something is good without necessarily noticing the technical aspects of what makes it so good. Here, some of that is more evident to a groundling like me. Many of the scenes are intricately blocked out and chroregraphed to show all the faces of the nine bumbling young men Sanjuro has taken under his wing, even in dynamic scenes. There is the final scene where this is evident, but even more so in an earlier scene where Sanjuro is lounging on a hay cart, lazily offering his sage advice. The camera is below the cart, yet through the slats we can see Sanjuro and the nine young men, all their faces visible, framed in and around the spaces of the cart. As Sanjuro rises, so does the camera, moving as the men move yet keeping them all visible. It may be a fundamental thing to many who prowl and contribute to this forum, but it was a wow! moment for me to notice and appreciate a technical component of a film so well and artfully done with so many actors.
A digression about meteorological coincidence:
As anyone familiar with Kurosawa knows, rain is his favorite recurring character in his films. In the past six weeks I have caught a dozen of his films at the theater as part of the touring AK100 retrospective. Many, if not most, of my visits to the theater have been accompanied with rain. I have not needed an umbrealla because the rain falls during the movie, the streets and sidewalks wet when I step out afterward. It’s as if the onscreen rain invites actual rain outisde. Not true, of course, but a happy coincidence to notice, one that adds to the pleasurable experience of going to Kurosawa’s films, and one hard not to notice because of its greater prevalence in the past few weeks. It looks possible again this afternoon, when I plan to see Kagemusha.
Go to Comment
Kurosawa - What to See ? almost 3 years ago
Twenty-nine of them? Very cool. Only seventeen of them are playing here, so gotta say I’m more than a little jealous. I just walked in the door from Kagemusha. Wonderful, of course. That makes a baker’s dozen at the film center so far, and I have enjoyed every one of them!
Of them all, I would say Seven Samurai is a must. I have it on DVD and, frankly, the picture is crisper, clearer, and richer than in the theater. I watched the DVD on a Thursday and went to see the film screening that Saturday where it was just, well, better. C’mon, it’s Seven Samurai—gotta do it. (Of what I’ve seen so far, I have five on DVD, which I watched soon before or after the screening. In all cases, the picture quality was better on DVD, but the theater experience was more gratifying.)
Dersu Uzala was magnificent—highly recommended.
I have to wait until next week to see Ran. I watched the DVD a couple of weeks ago and was very impressed. I can only imagine how spectacular and more impressive it will be on the silver screen.
I think color and scale benefit most on the big screen. If I really had to prioritize, after the above three, I would put wide-screen color first, followed by wide-screen black and white, color, and black and white.
I do have a warning though: to see one is to want to see them all. At first I tried to prioritize, thinking I would catch a couple I have on disc and a couple I’ve never seen before. I missed the first one, Drunken Angel, but caught the second in the series, The Hidden Fortress, one I had yet to see. I was hooked! Who knows when an opportunity like this will come again. I just had to see them all after seeing one, so I adjusted my expenses to do so (a film center membership as a birthday gift and double feature discounts has helped greatly). Thus far I’ve made it and I only have three left. My only regret is missing Drunken Angel. (I’ve since caught it on a download, but still…)
Anyway, good luck. Whatever you do see, you will not be disappointed.
Go to Comment
Last movie you saw and rate it almost 3 years ago
Four Kurosawa flicks at the theater in four days—I’d call that a damn good weekend by any stretch.
Kagemusha (Akira Kurosawa, 1980, 162 min.) 9/10
Today I finally saw Kagemusha for the first time, a film I’ve been wanting to see for a few years now—and it was all the better for seeing it on the big screen.
I loved it. It’s epic in every sense of the word. The story is intriguing, the color lush and lovely, the acting great, the cinematography marvelous. The only thing that keeps me from giving it a perfect ten is because it seemed a little complex in the beginning. The film helped by using subtitles to introduce the characters and their relationships, but that seems an intrusive way to make things clear. I was a little overwhelmed at first, apprehensive that I wouldn’t keep things straight and lose my way through the film, but things became clearer as events unfolded. I’m sure I will appreciate it more on repeated viewings, which there are sure to be. Seven Samurai was much the same for me, initially feeling a little lost trying to keep all the characters straight, but after seeing it several times it’s like visiting old friends again.
I’ve seen some complaints that it is too long. I see there are two versions of this film. I saw the 162 minute version and thought it was paced very well. I only got a couple of hours sleep last night and was hesitant of going to see it this afternoon for fear I would catch myself dozing during such a long movie. Despite being dog tired I was enrapt through the entire film, never found it dragging, and was surprised for the end to arrive so seemingly soon. I couldn’t imagine it being any longer without suffering, however, so I wonder if those who feel it was too long maybe saw the 180 minute version.
Kagemusha seems to be compared quite a bit to Ran. I saw Ran on DVD a few weeks ago and was duly impressed. I didn’t imagine Kagemusha being able to surpass it, but after today I believe I would give the edge to Kagemusha. Ran has a very theatrical and melodramatic flair, which is to be expected because of its foundations in Shakespeare’s King Lear (of which I admittedly have only cursory knowledge). The betrayals, double crosses, madness, bold colors and stripes to identify the sons and their birth rank, and poetic justices heightens the awareness of its stage lineage and fantasy feel. Those things are certainly part of its appeal, but the story depicted in Kagemusha gives an impression of actual historical events, a greater sense of reality, even with its fantastical dream sequence. Kagemusha seems to be more epic, in particular the scene of the advancing army, the camera following along with the horses then rising up and pulling away and the battlefield aftermath. The ending also is more climactic.
Really it’s a matter of preference. It is very hard to say one is better than the other. One thing I’m well aware of when it comes to Kurosawa’s films is that I’m given much more to the recency effect, so that preference has a great chance of changing once I see Ran again next week.
Go to Comment
NURSE RATCHED: ASEXUAL? LESBIAN? NEITHER? almost 3 years ago
Billy’s mother does exist. It’s much clearer in the novel. My memory is a little fuzzy, but from what I recall, Mrs. Bibbit and Nurse Ratched are long-time friends, I think even neighbors, so Billy has probably known Nurse Ratched since he was very young.
Billy’s issues stem from his mother’s insecurities. I don’t remember if it is through a memory or a visit paid by his mother where Billy reminds her of his age and her response is something along the lines of, “Do I look like the mother of a thirty-one year old man?” Her efforts, with Nurse Ratched’s help, to keep Billy from becoming an adult is her fear of getting old, and remaining young by keeping her son a child.
Ratched’s horribleness extends beyond the confines of the ward. Someone mentioned her being manipulative and bully as a sign of weakness is true. She needs to wield power over others in order to feel better about herself. There is a story about her delivering a food package to needy neighbors. On the surface it is an act of charity, but beneath it was the feeling she wasn’t doing it out of generosity but to have others indebted to her. I don’t remember the specifics, but I remember reading that and thinking how awful it would be the people on the receiving end of her gift: to accept it would be to feel belittled in some way, and to turn it down would be ungrateful. Either way, she held the upper hand.
Go to Comment
Which version of Fanny & Alexander do you prefer? almost 3 years ago
Fanny and Alexander is by far my favorite Bergman film, though granted I’ve only seen a handful. I have the Criterion box set and have watched the television version and all the supplements, everything but the theatrical version. I enjoy the longer version so much that I have never been able to bring myself to watch the shorter. I get so taken up with the Ekdahl family that I can’t imagine missing a bit of it. It has become a tradition for me to watch it every year during the holidays.
The beauty of the television version is that it was originally conceived as television program and is broken into distinct episodes, so it is suited for viewing over multiple sittings and one shouldn’t be put off by the length.
This all holds true for Scenes from a Marriage too. Well, except that it can’t be my favorite because F&A is, but it’s damn good. Oh yeah, and instead of a holiday viewing tradition, it is tradition to watch it just after I get divorced. Fortunately, I suppose, I’ve only watched it once (so far).
Go to Comment
Kurosawa - What to See ? almost 3 years ago
Maverick, I’m in Chicago. My favorite haunt is the Gene Siskel Film Center. I used to live walking distance from it and it was incredibly convenient. I suppose it is still walking distance, but not for these lazy bones, so it’s just a short train ride now. Next month they are showing 8 1/2, which was my introduction to the Criterion Collection, which opened up a whole new world of film to me, so I’m really looking forward to that. Their next big series is QT, comprised of 15 films; his, those that influenced him, and those he influenced. I’m sure I won’t get as obsessive about that as I did Kurosawa, but it made me realize that with the exception of Grindhouse, I haven’t seen any of his films on the big screen, so might have to check out one or two others; probably Pulp Fiction and/or Reservoir Dogs and maybe True Romance. Grindhouse was a treat, and it has never been released on DVD, so I may give that another look-see.
There are a few other movies houses in town too, but they’re not as convenient as the Siskel, and don’t show the sheer quantity of films, so haven’t ventured to them yet. I may soon when Godard’s Breathless plays at one of them. I think that would be great to see on the big screen.
I’ve only lived here a year and a half. Where I was before, the closest venue of anything like this was over fifty miles away, and their selection didn’t hold a candle. I’ve been like a kid in a candy shop!
Yes, do see Dersu Uzala if you can. I’ve put some remarks in the “Last movie you saw and rate it” thread on the last four I’ve been to, if you wanna check ‘em out; they may help you in your decision. They’re very recent, so I think they’re all still on the last page, Dersu included.
Go to Comment
BEST THINGS EVER! almost 3 years ago
Happy endings.
Go to Comment
Favourite Albums almost 3 years ago
Maybe I should put this in “Post a song your are currently listening to” because it is something that is playing right now, coincidentally, as I came across this thread. A couple weeks ago I set the iPod to run all songs on random, no skipping, to see if I could get through all of them. Some pretty crazy stuff, almost long forgotten has come up, some of them bringing up fond memories (isn’t it crazy, and wonderful, how music can do that?).
I don’t know if I would call it my favorite album any more, but once upon a time many, many, many moons ago it most certainly was. Does anyone out there remember Jeff Wayne’s Musical Version of the War of the Worlds?
I loved that thing as a kid. I would play it over and over, damn near wearing the vinyl out, and would pour over the artwork in the booklet, even copying and imitating it. A few years ago I came across a CD version of it and just had to have it after nearly forgetting about it. Some of the songs can still send shivers down my spine.
Go to Comment
Kurosawa - What to See ? almost 3 years ago
What I enjoyed about The Hidden Fortress was how different it was from Star Wars. I don’t think there’s been much, if anything, written about The Hidden Fortress that doesn’t mention Star Wars since 1977, and I must admit it was that relationship that most compelled me to the theater in the first place.
I enjoyed The Hidden Fortress very much on its own merits. I enjoyed recognizing the elements used in Star Wars, too, but was most glad that they weren’t terribly many, that Star Wars wasn’t merely a retelling of this story in an outer space setting, that once upon a time George Lucas did have imagination. In light of how he shit upon it all with the prequels, it was nice to be reminded of that.
On a side note, with the Quentin Tarantino series coming to town, Once Upon a Time in the West isn’t among them. That’s a bit of a surprise.
Go to Comment
Which version of Fanny & Alexander do you prefer? almost 3 years ago
KNDY, I agree. I’ve tried countless times, but just can’t bring myself to it. Whenever I try, I end up watching the longer version. One of these days…
I suppose I should apologize to the OP. The request was for info from those who have seen both versions, and I haven’t. But, dammit, the long version is that good!
Go to Comment