Akira Kurosawa
Dec 9, 2017 8:07:21 GMT -8
Post by Noah on Dec 9, 2017 8:07:21 GMT -8
I just re-watched Rashomon recently. I've been doing a run through of every one of Kurosawa's movies in order. I still like it, but I like it much less than many of his less famous films. In fact, I like it less than the one that immediately preceded it, Scandal. It contains no character of the depth or interest of Hiruta, and none of the many subtle details that made that film so enjoyable from a writer's perspective. Scandal was also extremely funny, an aspect of Kurosawa's work that, at least in my limited experience of commentary on him, is underappreciated. He was an extremely good writer of comedy. I certainly agree with with all that the visuals are stunning. In particular, I love the wide shot of Tajomaru on his horse, the passing breeze that lifts the woman's veil, the way the samurai and woman enter and exit Tajomaru's filed of vision, and the shot of Tajomaru and the samurai fighting, in which their swords enter the frame pointed at each other (the woman in the middle of the shot) before they do. But I agree with some of unkinhead's criticism. The stories themselves weren't of so much interest to me on rewatch, because I just kind of hate everybody in the movie. The framing device of the woodcutter and the priest, which is entirely added by Kurosawa, works okay for me. I can see why the priest would be so horrified by what happened. A dead man, a man with no earthly motivation, still lied. The ending, about keeping faith in humanity, can be read it two ways, however. On the surface, it softens the tone of the movie. But the character of the priest is such that as the movie goes along he clings to beliefs that keep being refuted. We don't know what happens after the movie ends, or how the woodcutter treats his own children. At the same time, the guy who stole the child's kimono is lying to himself. "Anyone else would have done it" is what you say when you don't want to hear criticism because you can't really refute it. It's still a kind of justification. Not, "I don't care," but "Society authorizes me." So I think what Kurosawa is saying is that thinking people are fundamentally bad or fundamentally good is a mistake. But then again, that's what I think, so there's always the danger I'm reading into it falsely what I think.
The entire framing device with the priest and woodcutter looking back is not in the source story, In a Grove, by Ryunosuke Akutagawa. Kurosawa's script was re-written together with the author of the original script, Shinobu Hashimoto. That draft was based more closely on the Akutagawa story, which actually had fewer individual narratives. The woodcutter's final story, where he steals the knife, was entirely added by Kurosawa. There were minor changes to the individual stories, and one major change in that the woman kills Takehiro in her account in Akutagawa's original. This account comes from Kurosawa's autobiography in the chapter on Rashomon, and of course having read Akutagawa's original story. The theft of the kimono and the reason for it resembles a theft in Akutagawa's story Rashomon, which is otherwise unrelated in plot, although it does give the setting for the frame story.
In any case, I greatly enjoy the visuals and music in Rashomon, and I was hooked by the narrative the first time through. On rewatch, becoming familiar with both the original story and the movie again, I am less compelled by the plot, but still think the visuals and audio/visual atmostphere are awesome. Overall, I prefer several earlier Kurosawa movies, including Scandal, Drunken Angel, Stray Dog, and No Regrets for Our Youth.
I've also seen a few other Japanese movies since I started this thread, including Sansho the Bailiff, which I thought was wonderful. It's probably my favorite non-Kurosawa Japanese film so far. No Ozu yet, but it's in the works, as is Kobayashi's The Human Condition and Kwaiden. The 1950s in Japanese cinema was certainly a golden age. Curious how those things come about.
And to continue that theme, it's easy to interpret the rescue of the baby as the (prophetic) new dawn of the country, as it moved from a barbaric, fascist expansionism to a more peaceful, hopeful (if insular) entity. In that moment, Kurosawa tempers or refutes the nihilism of the previous accounts. I gather that's not in the source story, so that's also consistent with the auteurist stamp that was then being recognised by European audiences (note how Shimura's character walks past us so we can't follow (the future is up to them) and leaves the rain and the ruined gate behind, as artefacts of the past, where they belong). I also realise that his script is cropped down in its number of accounts from the source, paring it neatly down to assailant, target, victim and witness - a fifth take would have presented a fifth vice, and so on, but they're evidently unneccessary. That's also consistent with auteur theory and marks a narrative economy in line with that of its editing rhythms.
In any case, I greatly enjoy the visuals and music in Rashomon, and I was hooked by the narrative the first time through. On rewatch, becoming familiar with both the original story and the movie again, I am less compelled by the plot, but still think the visuals and audio/visual atmostphere are awesome. Overall, I prefer several earlier Kurosawa movies, including Scandal, Drunken Angel, Stray Dog, and No Regrets for Our Youth.
I've also seen a few other Japanese movies since I started this thread, including Sansho the Bailiff, which I thought was wonderful. It's probably my favorite non-Kurosawa Japanese film so far. No Ozu yet, but it's in the works, as is Kobayashi's The Human Condition and Kwaiden. The 1950s in Japanese cinema was certainly a golden age. Curious how those things come about.